FINRA censured and fined Raymond James & Associates (CRD 705), a St. Petersburg, Florida firm, in an AWC issued August 18, 2026. The case concerns fractional shares that come from dividend reinvestment. Without admitting or denying the findings, the firm consented to findings that it failed to report fractional share transactions.
The findings state that Raymond James & Associates let customers take part in a dividend reinvestment program, or DRIP. The program automatically reinvests dividends from designated securities into more shares of the same security. As a result, customers at times end up holding fractional share positions.
That outcome is common with dividend reinvestment. A dividend payment rarely buys an exact number of whole shares.
The reporting issue arose when those positions left an account. When a client sold a DRIP position, or moved it through the Automated Customer Account Transfer Service (ACATS), the firm split it. It routed the whole share portion out for execution, acting as agent. At the same time, it exchanged the fractional portion for cash automatically, acting as principal.
FINRA found that the firm did not report approximately 2.56 million of those principal liquidations. The missing reports involved the FINRA/Nasdaq Trade Reporting Facility and the Over-the-Counter Reporting Facility. The firm treated the liquidations as journal entries, not trades. Because of that, it also did not pay the regulatory transaction fees tied to them.
The AWC also covers supervision at Raymond James & Associates. FINRA found that the firm did not establish and maintain a supervisory system reasonably designed to meet its trade reporting rules. In particular, the firm did not conduct any supervisory reviews specific to fractional share transactions.
Trade reporting cases often turn on how a firm's systems label a transaction. When we look at findings like these, we start with how the firm booked the activity. A journal entry and a trade carry different obligations.
BrokerCheck shows earlier regulatory matters for Raymond James & Associates. In each, the firm consented to sanctions and findings without admitting or denying them. The most recent, dated January 30, 2023, carries case number 2019061061201.
On December 8, 2022, in matter 2021-02-23-00034, the firm consented to findings about options orders. It failed to make and maintain accurate and complete records for over five thousand options orders it handled manually.
A matter dated October 20, 2022 (2018058633501) involved changes to the account name or designation on more than 7,500 equity orders. According to the findings, the firm and an affiliated company did not have a qualified and registered principal authorize them. A former registered representative at the affiliate changed designations between a customer's account and his own. The findings stated that the unapproved changes resulted in losses for one customer of approximately $100,000.
On October 7, 2020, in matter 2018057742301, the firm consented to findings about its work as a remarketing agent for variable rate demand obligations. It sent interest rate reset results to the MSRB's SHORT system. In certain instances, however, the submissions left out the minimum denomination or maximum interest rate. Most of those instances related to its acquisition of another broker dealer's book. The firm failed to report the minimum denomination in 2,925 submissions.
The oldest matter, dated November 6, 2019 (2018058041101), involved 529 savings plans. FINRA found the firm lacked a supervisory system and written procedures reasonably designed to supervise representatives' share-class recommendations to 529 plan customers.
FINRA censured Raymond James & Associates and fined the firm $125,000 in FINRA Case #2023078630201. The firm must also comply with the undertaking set out in the AWC.
Brokerage firms have a duty to supervise the brokers who work for them. If Raymond James & Associates handled your account and you have questions, Soreide Law Group can go over it with you. Call (888) 760-6552 or contact us online. Because these claims go to FINRA arbitration rather than a local court, we handle them for investors nationwide. We work on a contingency fee basis. Here is how FINRA arbitration works.
This post summarizes public FINRA records, including BrokerCheck, as of October 24, 2026. In a FINRA Letter of Acceptance, Waiver and Consent, the respondent settles without admitting or denying the findings. FINRA may also update or correct these records after that date.
Steven Graham (CRD 1977736) denies the allegations in a pending customer claim filed on August 11, 2026. The disclosure names Western International Securities as the firm, and the claim involves corporate bonds. No arbitrator has ruled on it. His BrokerCheck report also lists a settled bond dispute and a federal court matter from earlier years.
A claim filed on September 11, 2024 names Thomas Hamlin (CRD 2208505) over a 10% Senior Unsecured Note in iCap Fund III. Every disclosure on his BrokerCheck report involves an iCap private placement and names Somerset Securities as the firm. Each one settled, and a settlement is not an admission of wrongdoing.
Peter Po's most recent settlement came on June 28, 2026, when a corporate bond claim settled for $40,000. Po (CRD 3106974) appears in several settled customer disputes over corporate and high-yield bonds. The disclosures name NI Advisors or California Securities as the firm, and each matter ended in a settlement, not a finding.
Phone:
Fax: 1-954-760-6553
Email: [email protected]