The SEC\u2019s recent enforcement action serves as a reminder that the Marketing Rule extends well beyond performance results and testimonials. On September 4, 2025, the Commission announced its first Marketing Rule case under newly appointed Chair Paul Atkins, charging Meridian Financial, LLC for statements on its website that claimed the firm refused all conflicts of interest. However, the firm’s own Form ADV disclosed several such conflicts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The SEC concluded that Meridian lacked a reasonable basis to support its marketing claim\u2014a violation of Rule 206(4)-1(a)(2)\u2014and also cited recordkeeping and compliance program failures under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. Although Meridian primarily advised individuals, the issues identified apply equally to private fund advisers and institutional managers. The firm agreed to a $75,000 civil penalty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
To help you make sense of what this means for you and your clients, read the full article from our friends at SEC3<\/sup><\/a> here<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The SEC\u2019s recent enforcement action serves as a reminder that the Marketing Rule extends well beyond performance results and testimonials. On September 4, 2025, the Commission announced its first Marketing Rule case under newly appointed Chair Paul Atkins, charging Meridian Financial, LLC for statements on its website that claimed the firm refused all conflicts of … Continue reading When Marketing Meets Compliance: Lessons from the SEC\u2019s First Marketing Rule Case<\/span>