简体中文
繁體中文
English
Pусский
日本語
ภาษาไทย
Tiếng Việt
Bahasa Indonesia
Español
हिन्दी
Filippiiniläinen
Français
Deutsch
Português
Türkçe
한국어
العربية
Abstract:In the midst of growing regulatory scrutiny on financial influencers and their interactions with investment platforms, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has accused Fundrise Advisors, LLC of violating cash solicitation rules by enlisting social media influencers to attract clients without providing requisite disclosures, reflecting a broader trend of global regulatory efforts addressing such practices.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has levelled allegations against Fundrise Advisors, LLC, asserting that the Washington-based investment advisory firm contradicted the nation's regulations pertaining to cash solicitation. The SEC disclosed this Tuesday that Fundrise Advisors engaged over 200 social media influencers and digital newsletter publishers to actively attract clients to its investment platform in a manner that did not encompass the necessary compliance with required disclosures as mandated by the law.
A focal point of the SEC's observations was Fundrise's informational brochure, which was lacking in the specified disclosures. Notably, the contractual arrangement between the investment company and the influencers conspicuously omitted any reference to these essential disclosures. Nevertheless, the regulatory body acknowledged that Fundrise had reached an accord to bring closure to the case by agreeing to remit a civil penalty amounting to $250,000.

Moreover, in tandem with this resolution, the SEC has reported that Fundrise has consented to both a cease-and-desist directive and a formal censure. However, it is important to note that the company neither admitted to nor refuted the regulator's findings.
Elaborating on the details, the SEC expounded, “Fundrise consented to the entry of the SEC's order finding that the firm willfully violated the compliance and former cash solicitation provisions of Section 206(4) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and Rules 206(4)-3 and 206(4)-7 thereunder.”
Recently, regulatory bodies across major global financial markets have turned their gaze toward what has become known as 'finfluencers'—financial technology influencers. Last month, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) in the United Kingdom unveiled its intent to fortify measures against unauthorized and non-compliant financial promotions. Concurrently, the FCA intends to refine its guidelines for social media use, aiming to ensure more effective adherence when financial entities publicize their products or services online.
This thematic concern extends beyond the U.K. Partnering with prominent social media influencer Sharon Gaffka and the FCA collaborated with the Advertising Standards Authority to launch a campaign discouraging 'finfluencers' from endorsing illicit 'get rich quick' schemes. Similarly, the Cyprus Securities and Exchange Commission embarked on an investor protection initiative in response to promoting intricate and high-risk investment products through social media, often endorsed by celebrities. This campaign raised questions regarding the 'gamification' of retail investments.
Parallelly, as early as 2021, the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) sounded a cautionary note against 'finfluencers', underscoring that many were dispensing unlicensed financial counsel within the nation. ASIC emphasized that only entities and individuals holding an Australian Financial Services (AFS) license were sanctioned to provide financial advice to investors.

Disclaimer:
The views in this article only represent the author's personal views, and do not constitute investment advice on this platform. This platform does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness and timeliness of the information in the article, and will not be liable for any loss caused by the use of or reliance on the information in the article.

Are your fund withdrawal requests pending at Fizmo Fx Markets? Do you get scammed of your hard-earned capital? Has your forex trading account been blocked by the broker for no reason? These trading issues are no longer a surprise for traders, as many of them have highlighted these on broker review platforms online. In this article, we will share some reviews of Fizmo Fx Markets 2025. Read on!

Do you witness only fund losses while trading via the Mekness platform? Does the Saint Lucia-based forex broker block your account while earning profits? Haplessly waiting for the support but nothing comes out from the broker’s end? These are nothing new for this forex broker as it constantly receives flak from traders for its illegitimate acts. Broker review platforms are flooded with negative comments from traders. In this article, we will share some reviews of Mekness.

Protect your investments in the Philippines with WikiFX, the trusted forex scam checker app that helps traders verify brokers and avoid fraud.

Is MultiBank Group the right broker for you in 2025? In the busy world of online brokers, this question matters more than ever. This review gives you a clear, fair, and complete answer by looking at the main parts that matter most to traders. We will check how safe the broker is by looking at its rules from different countries. We will break down its costs and compare account types to show you the real price of trading. Finally, we will look at the trading experience, from how well the platform works to how many different things you can trade. Our 2025 study shows MultiBank Group as a well-regulated broker with good ECN account prices, but it has some weak spots in teaching materials. Our goal is to give you the detailed, expert information you need to decide if this broker fits your money goals and how much risk you want to take.