|Author||Topic: Clarification about ethics.|
|In the Standards of Practice Handbook,on page # 9 there are two statements which are contradictory(to my knowledge).I will write the statements as they are:
1)"Member resides in LS country,does business in MS country;MS law applies".
2)"Member resides in LS country,does business in MS country;LS law applies,but it states that law of locality where business is conducted governs.".
LS = less strict securities laws and regulations than Code and Standards.
MS = more strict securities laws and regulations than Code and Standards.
I want to know what is going on here with this two statements. Any help would be highly appreciated.
|They appear to say the same thing. The second statement is saying that in the more strict country you are to follow laws in the country WHERE THE BUSINESS TAKES PLACE (in this case the MS country) so you go with the law in the MS country (more strict that the Code).|
|Thumb Rule - The most stringent laws apply. (When no conditions attached)
Resides in LS , Works in MS No conditions - MS applies
Resides in LS , Works in NS , Law of the work place applies - Code and standards (Atleast)
Resides in LS , Works in MS , Law of the work place applies - Law of the work place applies - MS
Resides in MS , works in LS , law of the work place applies - LS applies but it being less strict than Codes and standards , The Code and standards apply and not LS.
MS or Code and standards, the powerful of two in whatever scenario/