Try 10 focused Series 7 questions on Customer Accounts, with explanations, then continue with the full Securities Prep practice test.
Series 7 Customer Accounts questions help you isolate one part of the FINRA outline before returning to a mixed practice test. The questions below are original Securities Prep practice items aligned to this topic and are not copied from any exam sponsor.
| Item | Detail |
|---|---|
| Exam | FINRA Series 7 |
| Official topic | Function 2 — Opens Accounts After Obtaining and Evaluating Customers’ Financial Profile and Investment Objectives |
| Blueprint weighting | 9% |
| Questions on this page | 10 |
A registered representative completes a customer investment profile to support a suitability determination. Which choice best describes the primary purpose of this profile?
Best answer: C
Explanation: An investment profile captures core facts (e.g., objectives, risk tolerance, time horizon, liquidity needs) to evaluate suitability.
The customer investment profile is used to gather and document key customer-specific information so the representative can make appropriate suitability judgments. It focuses on facts like the customer’s financial situation, objectives, risk tolerance, time horizon, and liquidity needs. That documented profile becomes the basis for evaluating whether a recommendation fits the customer.
A customer investment profile is a fact-finding and documentation tool that helps a registered representative understand the customer and make recommendations that are suitable. The profile captures the core components used in suitability analysis: the customer’s financial situation, investment objectives, risk tolerance, time horizon, and liquidity needs. By organizing these items in one place, the firm can evaluate whether a proposed product or strategy reasonably aligns with what the customer can afford, what they are trying to achieve, and how much risk and illiquidity they can accept. The profile supports consistency and supervisory review, but it does not promise performance outcomes or replace required customer authorizations.
A customer opens a new brokerage account at an introducing broker-dealer that uses an unaffiliated clearing firm. Due to an e-delivery error, the customer did not receive the firm’s initial privacy notice. The registered representative submits the new account information (including SSN and account details) to the clearing firm so the account can be opened and trades can be processed.
Under Regulation S-P, what is the most likely outcome?
Best answer: A
Explanation: Disclosing nonpublic personal information to a clearing firm for servicing/processing is generally permitted without opt-out, but the firm still must provide the initial privacy notice.
Regulation S-P permits sharing nonpublic personal information with an unaffiliated clearing firm when needed to service the account and process transactions. That type of disclosure generally does not require giving the customer an opt-out opportunity first. However, failing to provide the initial privacy notice is a compliance problem that must be corrected as soon as practicable.
Regulation S-P requires broker-dealers to provide customers an initial privacy notice when establishing a customer relationship, describing the firm’s information-sharing practices and how it safeguards nonpublic personal information (NPI). Separately, Reg S-P limits disclosure of NPI to unaffiliated third parties, typically requiring an opt-out opportunity for certain types of sharing (such as marketing-related sharing).
Disclosures that are necessary to effect, administer, or enforce a transaction requested by the customer—or to service the customer’s account (for example, sharing account-opening data with an unaffiliated clearing firm)—are generally permitted without first obtaining an opt-out election. Even so, the firm must still deliver the initial privacy notice promptly and maintain safeguards to protect the information.
A registered representative is preparing to recommend a security to a retail customer. The product would be suitable based on the customer’s investment profile, but it has higher costs than reasonably available alternatives and would pay the firm more compensation. In general, which choice best reflects the purpose of Regulation Best Interest (Reg BI) in this recommendation process?
Best answer: A
Explanation: Reg BI is designed to raise the standard above suitability by requiring reasonable care and a best-interest recommendation that does not put the firm first.
Reg BI’s purpose is to strengthen the recommendation standard for retail customers beyond basic suitability. It emphasizes the care obligation: the representative must use reasonable diligence and care to understand the recommendation and consider costs and alternatives, and the recommendation cannot put the firm’s interest ahead of the customer’s.
Regulation Best Interest is intended to improve the quality of broker-dealer recommendations to retail customers. At a high level, it focuses on the care obligation: before recommending a security or strategy, the representative should understand the product, evaluate reasonably available alternatives (including costs), and have a reasonable basis to believe the recommendation is in the customer’s best interest. The standard is higher than simply being “suitable,” and it does not allow a recommendation that places the firm’s or representative’s interests ahead of the retail customer’s.
A common test is whether higher compensation or higher costs are driving the recommendation when a reasonably available, lower-cost alternative could better serve the customer’s objectives.
Which account authorization permits a registered representative to place trades in a customer’s account without obtaining prior approval for each transaction, but does not allow withdrawals or transfers of funds or securities?
Best answer: C
Explanation: It allows discretionary trading (within the authorization) but does not permit moving cash or securities out of the account.
Limited trading authorization (often called limited power of attorney) gives the representative authority to execute trades without contacting the customer each time. It is limited to trading decisions and does not extend to withdrawing, transferring, or otherwise disbursing assets from the account. Moving assets generally requires broader authority, such as full POA, and must be properly documented.
The core distinction among common account authorizations is whether the person is authorized only to trade, or also to move assets. A limited trading authorization permits the authorized person (often the registered representative) to enter orders in the customer’s account without obtaining time-of-trade approval for each transaction, subject to the scope and limitations on file. It does not permit withdrawals, checks, wires, journal transfers, or other disbursements of funds or securities.
By contrast, broader authority (such as full power of attorney) can include the ability to disburse or transfer assets, depending on how the document is written and accepted by the firm. Documents like corporate resolutions and trust agreements are used to evidence who is authorized to act for an entity account, not to define a “trade-only” authorization for an individual customer account. The key takeaway is that trading authority is narrower than disbursement authority.
A long-time retail customer suddenly begins requesting frequent outgoing wires to unrelated third parties and insists on depositing a check payable to a different person into the account. When asked for additional information about the source and purpose of funds, the customer refuses and becomes evasive.
Which action by the firm is NOT appropriate?
Best answer: A
Explanation: A customer waiver does not override the firm’s obligation to restrict activity when suspicious or unverifiable account activity is present.
Firms may restrict trading or refuse transactions when activity appears suspicious or when required information cannot be obtained. Having a customer sign a hold-harmless letter does not eliminate the firm’s supervisory and compliance responsibilities. The firm should instead take risk-based steps such as restricting the account, refusing questionable deposits, and escalating to AML/compliance.
The core concept is that a broker-dealer can restrict trading, refuse certain activity, or close an account when the firm identifies red flags (e.g., unusual third-party wires, attempted third-party check deposits, or a customer refusing to provide reasonable information to verify the legitimacy of activity). In these situations, the firm’s obligation is to follow its supervisory and AML controls, which can include restricting the account and declining transactions that cannot be reasonably vetted.
A “hold-harmless” or waiver signed by the customer does not relieve the firm of its duty to supervise and manage risk; it is not a substitute for reviewing suspicious activity and applying account controls.
Key takeaway: when the facts suggest potential illicit or improper use of an account, firms should control or stop activity and escalate internally rather than rely on customer acknowledgments.
A broker-dealer wants to share a file containing customers’ nonpublic personal information with a nonaffiliated marketing firm. The firm has already delivered the required initial privacy notice and offered an opt-out, and it will exclude any customer who opted out. If the firm has 2,400 retail customers and 18% have opted out, how many customers’ records may be included? (Round to the nearest whole customer.)
Best answer: B
Explanation: Regulation S-P requires honoring opt-outs before sharing NPI with a nonaffiliated marketer, so only the 82% who did not opt out may be included.
Because the file is being shared with a nonaffiliated third party for marketing, the firm must limit disclosure to customers who did not opt out after receiving the initial privacy notice and opt-out opportunity. With 18% opting out, 82% remain eligible. Applying 82% to 2,400 customers results in 1,968 records that may be included.
Regulation S-P restricts a broker-dealer’s disclosure of nonpublic personal information (NPI) to nonaffiliated third parties. When disclosure is for marketing (rather than a servicing/processing type exception), the firm must provide an initial privacy notice and a reasonable opportunity to opt out, and then it must honor those opt-outs by excluding those customers’ NPI from the shared file.
Compute eligible customers:
\[ \begin{aligned} \text{Not opted out} &= 1 - 0.18 = 0.82\\ \text{Eligible records} &= 2{,}400 \times 0.82 = 1{,}968 \end{aligned} \]The key is that the opt-out percentage is removed from the customer count before any NPI is shared with the nonaffiliated marketer.
A customer wants to let their adult child place trades in the customer’s non-discretionary brokerage account. Which statement is most accurate?
Best answer: D
Explanation: Third-party trading authority requires the customer’s written authorization, and the firm must keep that authorization in its account records.
Allowing someone other than the customer to place orders is third-party trading authorization. Firms are expected to have the customer’s written authorization identifying the authorized person and to retain that document as part of the customer’s account records. This supports supervision and helps demonstrate that orders from the third party were properly authorized.
For a non-discretionary account, trades generally require the customer’s authorization on each order, unless the customer grants another person authority to place orders. When a customer adds a third-party trader, the firm is expected to obtain the customer’s written authorization (typically identifying the authorized person and the scope of authority) and keep it with the account documentation.
Written authorization is also important because it creates an auditable record for supervision and helps prevent disputes about whether trades were authorized. This differs from time-and-price discretion (a limited, order-specific flexibility) and from full discretionary authority over the account, which has additional approval and documentation expectations.
The key point is documenting and retaining customer authorizations when someone else is permitted to act on the account.
A long-time retail customer who has historically made small, domestic investments calls with an urgent request to liquidate most of her account and wire the proceeds to a new bank account in the name of an unrelated third party overseas. When the registered representative asks for documentation of the relationship and an explanation of the purpose of the transfer, the customer refuses and demands the firm “just send it today.” Under these facts, what is the single best action the firm should take?
Best answer: B
Explanation: A firm may restrict activity when instructions raise fraud/AML concerns and the customer refuses to provide information needed to validate the request.
The request is a significant change from the customer’s prior activity and includes a third-party overseas wire, and the customer refuses to provide reasonable information to verify the transfer. In that situation, the firm may restrict account activity (especially disbursements) while it verifies instructions and escalates the matter through supervisory/compliance channels. This best balances customer service with the firm’s obligation to manage fraud and money-laundering risk.
Firms are permitted (and often required by policy) to restrict trading or disbursements, refuse a specific transaction, or even close an account when customer instructions create material risk and the firm cannot reasonably verify the legitimacy of the activity. Here, several red flags exist: an urgent liquidation, a new destination, a third-party payee, an overseas wire, and the customer’s refusal to provide documentation or a reasonable explanation. The prudent, customer-facing decision is to place a temporary restriction—typically a hold on the disbursement—while escalating to appropriate supervisors/compliance for review and verification. If the customer continues to refuse required information, the firm can maintain the restriction and may choose to terminate the relationship consistent with firm policy. The key takeaway is that “long-time customer” status does not override the firm’s obligation to control suspicious or unverified activity.
A 52-year-old customer has $180,000 in a former employer’s traditional 401(k) and wants to move it to your firm while keeping the money tax-deferred. He says the plan can either send a check payable to him or send a check directly to the new custodian.
What is the best next step for the registered representative?
Best answer: B
Explanation: A direct rollover to a traditional IRA keeps the funds tax-deferred and avoids issues associated with a distribution paid to the customer.
The customer’s goal is to keep the 401(k) assets tax-deferred, so the workflow should be to establish a traditional IRA designed to receive rollovers and then request a direct rollover. A direct rollover is made payable to the new custodian (often FBO the customer), reducing the risk of taxes, withholding, or missed deadlines that can arise when funds are paid to the customer.
The core concept is choosing the correct retirement account type and distribution method to preserve tax deferral. A former employer’s traditional 401(k) can generally be rolled into a traditional (rollover) IRA without creating a current taxable event if the movement is done as a direct rollover.
Best practice sequence is:
This aligns the customer’s stated objective (tax-deferred continuation) and avoids the operational and tax complications of having the check made payable to the customer.
A customer will be overseas for six months and wants her nephew to place trades in her existing brokerage account while she is gone. Her main constraint is that the nephew must not be able to withdraw cash or transfer securities out of the account. Which statement best describes the primary limitation/tradeoff of using a limited trading authorization for this setup?
Best answer: D
Explanation: A limited trading authorization allows order entry only and does not permit disbursements, transfers, or changes to account ownership.
A limited trading authorization is designed to let a named person place buy and sell orders without giving them control over assets leaving the account. The key tradeoff is that it is intentionally narrow: it does not allow disbursements, transfers, or changes to ownership/registration, so those actions still require the customer’s approval.
The core concept is matching the customer’s goal to the correct account authorization. A limited trading authorization (also called limited trading authority) lets an authorized person enter trades in the customer’s account, but it does not give them the power to move money or securities out of the account or change the account’s ownership/registration. That limitation is exactly what the customer wants here: trading help while preventing withdrawals or transfers.
In contrast, a full power of attorney can include broader powers (such as requesting disbursements or transfers) if granted, which would conflict with the customer’s constraint. The takeaway is that “trading only” authority addresses execution needs without granting asset-removal authority.
Use the Series 7 Practice Test page for the full Securities Prep route, mixed-topic practice, timed mock exams, explanations, and web/mobile app access.
Use the Series 7 Cheat Sheet on SecuritiesMastery.com when you want a compact review before returning to the FINRA Series 7 Practice Test page.