From: Paul Rhodes
August 8, 2005
Jonathan G. Katz
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street, NE Washington, DC 20549-9309
The proposed NASD Rule 2821 is unneccessary and it provides no substantial additonal protection to consumers. I am a career Agent and Registered Representative, this business is my livelihood. I am writing to you because this proposed Rule creates redundancy.
People who engage in misleading sales practices should be aggressively prosecuted. NASD rules already contain suitability requirements that apply to all sales of securities including variable annuities. If regulators really want to protect consumers, appropriate enforcement of the existing sutabiltiy rule rather than adopting a new rule is the logical answer.
Furthermore, the requirement for review by a principal found in the proposed rule appears to present a bias against these products. Just as importantly, my job is to make sure my recommendations fit my Client's needs, in every recommendation I make. I have nearly 18 years of success in this business because I base these recommendations on first hand information direct from my Clients. These requirements could lead to constant second guessing of my advice and recommendations and could lead to significant increases in merit less litigation.
Sir, information available to me shows that claims by NASD of problems regarding variable annuities are not founded. It may truly be that this proposal is a "solution in search of a problem". Comments to the NASD overwhelmingly pointed out the lack of basis for this rule. For these reasons, I urge the SEC to disapprove NASD proposed Rule 2821.
Thank you for your consideration of my views regarding this matter.
Paul Howard Rhodes