Under the <u>Uniform Securities Act</u>, the threshold where a State-registered adviser is considered to have taken custody of client funds if it charges prepaid advisory fees, is: <u>$500, 6 months or more in advance of rendering services.</u>
<u />
If an advisor either physically possesses or has the legal right to take possession of money or securities belonging to its clients, then it has custody. The term "custody" has been expanded by the rule's revisions to cover situations in which an adviser's related person holds custody of client assets in conjunction with the adviser's advisory services. If an investment adviser's connected broker-dealer holds client assets as a qualified custodian in conjunction with advising services, the investment adviser would be deemed to have custody of those assets.
Consultants may be considered to have taken ownership of customer funds as defined by NASAA when a nationally registered investment manager acknowledges $500 (or more) in advanced consulting fees, 6 months prior to the anticipation of performing services. While the Advisers (Investment) Act of 1940 did not apply to government-registered advisors, it is worth noting that it may have set the maximum at $1,200 among Federal Covered advisors.
To know more about State-registered adviser refer to:
brainly.com/question/17199787
#SPJ4
After taking $45 billion in taxpayer funding to remain afloat, Citibank spent $50 million on a new private jet. this action was: unethical
What was the intention of taxpayer funding?
The taxpayer funding means that Citibank was granted a funding relief with taxes paid by the taxpayers to avert a collapse of the bank and to ensure the wider economy is not impacted negatively by the failure of a "too big to fail bank" such as the Citibank
The fact that funds meant to keep the bank liquid and to be able to continue smooth operations by having the required cash to meet obligations and they were diverted meant that directors at Citibank have acted unethically.
Find out more about government intervention on:brainly.com/question/13921660
#SPJ1
The answer is $91,500.
Working:
Total expenses per year = 18900+7650+1475+2350 = $30,375
Expenses less of grant per year = $30,375- 7500= $22,875 (this represents his annual expenditure on college with the grant)
To find out his expenditure for all four years of college = $22,875 x 4 = $91,500.
Answer:
Income statement is prepared and attached with this answer please find it.
Explanation:
Income statement of both years is made using the ratios / percentage of each element. For example the cost of goods sold is calculated as $585,600 (960,000 x 61.0%) by multiplying the sales value to the respective percentage of cost of goods sold in 2019, which 61.0%. Same as for the 2018 figure.
<span>Since real GDP goes up by 1% and price level goes up by 3%, nominal GDP must go up by 3%. This is because real GDP is measured based off a base year's prices, but nominal GDP is not encumbered by such a price basis. Since the price level goes up by 3% (and 3/1 is 3), then nominal GDP goes up by 3% as well since the real GDP level only goes up by 1%.</span>
