Try 10 focused Series 66 questions on Laws and Ethics, with explanations, then continue with the full Securities Prep practice test.
Series 66 Laws and Ethics questions help you isolate one part of the NASAA 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 | NASAA Series 66 |
| Official topic | Topic IV - Laws, Regulations, and Guidelines Including Prohibition on Unethical Business Practice |
| Blueprint weighting | 45% |
| Questions on this page | 10 |
A state-registered investment adviser gives a prospective client its Form ADV Part 2A brochure. The brochure discloses this annual fee schedule: 0.90% on the first $250,000 of assets under management and 0.70% on amounts over $250,000.
If the client plans to place $200,000 under management, which statement best reflects the annual fee disclosed for that client and the high-level purpose of Form ADV?
Best answer: C
Explanation: $200,000 is entirely in the 0.90% tier ($200,000 \(\times\) 0.009 = $1,800), and Form ADV serves as the adviser’s required registration and disclosure document.
Because $200,000 is below the $250,000 breakpoint, the disclosed annual fee is 0.90% of $200,000, or about $1,800. Form ADV is the investment adviser’s required registration/disclosure filing (including the brochure) that helps clients and regulators understand the adviser’s services, fees, and conflicts.
Form ADV is the core registration and disclosure document for an investment adviser. It is filed (through the IARD system) and includes narrative disclosure in the brochure (Part 2A) that clients use to evaluate the adviser’s services, fees, and conflicts of interest.
Applying the disclosed schedule to $200,000:
The key takeaway is that Form ADV is used for adviser registration and client/regulatory disclosure, not for securities offering registration or broker-dealer capital reporting.
An investment adviser posts a social media ad for a new quantitative strategy. The ad includes a chart labeled “Back-tested results (2014–2023)” and states, “This strategy would have returned 18% annually with lower volatility than the S&P 500.” The strategy has been offered to clients only since January 2024 and has a short live track record.
Which additional action best complies with broad fiduciary and fair-disclosure standards when using this back-tested performance in the ad?
Best answer: A
Explanation: Hypothetical/back-tested results must be presented with prominent, balanced disclosure to prevent them from being misleading.
Back-tested performance is hypothetical and can be misleading because it may reflect assumptions, model choices, and market data that were not available or not used in real time. A compliant approach is to make the hypothetical nature prominent and provide balanced disclosures about how the results were produced and their limitations. The communication must also avoid suggesting the returns were actually achieved by clients.
Back-tested (hypothetical) performance can mislead because it is produced by applying a model to historical data with the benefit of hindsight; results can be highly sensitive to assumptions (inputs, rebalancing rules, transaction costs, survivorship bias, curve-fitting). Under broad standards requiring fair and non-misleading communications, an adviser that uses hypothetical performance should implement controls and disclosures designed to prevent overstatement.
High-level expectations include:
The key takeaway is that a generic caution alone is not enough if the overall message could still imply real, achieved performance.
An investment adviser representative (IAR) is paid a higher bonus for bringing in clients who enroll in the firm’s managed account program, which uses proprietary model portfolios. She posts on social media: “Get truly independent advice—no incentives, no hidden compensation. Our model has a proven track record of outperforming the market.” She wants to boost the post using the firm’s advertising budget.
What is the primary ethical/compliance risk that must be addressed before this communication is used as an advertisement?
Best answer: A
Explanation: Advertising must be fair and balanced, disclose material conflicts, and avoid promissory or unsubstantiated performance claims.
The post presents the IAR as having “no incentives” while she is paid more for enrolling clients in a specific program, which is a material conflict that must be disclosed and not mischaracterized. It also claims outperformance without providing a reasonable basis and appropriate, non-misleading presentation. Under general advertising principles, both conflict disclosure and claim substantiation are core requirements.
Advertising by an investment adviser must be fair and balanced and must not omit material facts needed to make the statements not misleading. Here, the IAR’s higher bonus for enrolling clients in a proprietary managed program is a material compensation incentive; stating “no incentives” and “no hidden compensation” is a misrepresentation and an omission of a conflict that a client would consider important. In addition, claiming a “proven track record of outperforming the market” requires substantiation and presentation that is not cherry-picked or promissory. The communication should be revised to accurately describe compensation arrangements and conflicts, and any performance-related claim should have a reasonable basis with clear, non-misleading disclosures.
An investment adviser plans to run a social media ad for a new quantitative strategy that shows a chart of “10-year back-tested performance” and a prominent “hypothetical annualized return” figure. The ad is intended for retail investors and will link to an account-opening page, so the firm wants to reduce the chance the presentation misleads while keeping the ad short.
Which compliance decision best satisfies these constraints?
Best answer: C
Explanation: Hypothetical performance is easily misleading, so clear, prominent disclosures plus pre-use review and support for assumptions are generally expected controls.
Back-tested or hypothetical performance can overstate what an investor could have achieved because it may rely on assumptions, benefit from hindsight, and ignore real-world frictions. A retail-facing social media ad that links to account opening should therefore pair any hypothetical results with prominent disclosures that explain the limitations and key assumptions. Firms are also expected to implement controls such as pre-use review and retention of the basis for calculations.
The core risk with hypothetical/back-tested performance is that it can look like real, attainable results even though it may be built using hindsight, optimized inputs, selective time periods, and assumptions about trading, costs, taxes, liquidity, and execution. Because those features can materially change outcomes, advisers generally should not treat a simple legend as enough—especially in a short-form, retail-facing ad designed to drive account opening.
A high-level, reasonable approach includes:
A generic “past performance” disclaimer alone does not address why hypothetical results can be misleading.
A state-registered investment adviser receives a written notice from the state securities Administrator stating the office is conducting an investigation. The notice requests specific client account records and asks the firm’s investment adviser representative to appear for on-the-record testimony next month.
What is the best next step for the firm’s chief compliance officer?
Best answer: A
Explanation: In an Administrator investigation, the firm must cooperate with records requests and testimony and should preserve and produce responsive materials.
State Administrators have broad investigative tools, including requiring records and compelling testimony. When an investigation notice requests documents and on-the-record testimony, the appropriate compliance workflow is to preserve responsive records and cooperate with the request (often coordinating through compliance counsel). Obstructing, delaying, or conditioning cooperation on a court case is inconsistent with the duty to cooperate.
Under the Uniform Securities Act, a state securities Administrator can investigate potential violations by using tools such as records requests (inspection/production), subpoenas, and compelling testimony under oath. When a firm receives a written investigative request, the compliance priority is to preserve and produce responsive records and to make requested personnel available for testimony, while coordinating internally (and with counsel) to ensure the response is complete and accurate. The Administrator does not need to file a formal complaint before seeking documents or testimony in an investigation. The key takeaway is to cooperate and avoid any action that could be viewed as obstruction or an unethical business practice.
A state securities Administrator is investigating an investment adviser for suspected misappropriation of client funds and falsified account statements. Which of the following actions is NOT within the Administrator’s authority under the Uniform Securities Act?
Best answer: B
Explanation: Criminal prosecution is brought by the courts through the appropriate prosecutor, not by the Administrator.
Administrators have broad civil and investigative powers, including investigating suspected violations, seeking court orders to halt misconduct, and working with prosecutors and law enforcement. However, the Administrator does not personally prosecute crimes. Criminal cases are pursued by the appropriate prosecuting authority in court based on the evidence gathered.
Under the Uniform Securities Act, a state securities Administrator can investigate potential violations (including compelling testimony/records), take administrative actions, and go to court to seek remedies such as an injunction to stop ongoing misconduct. When facts suggest criminal wrongdoing, the Administrator can refer the case and cooperate with the state attorney general, district attorney, or other law enforcement agencies. The key distinction is that the Administrator is a securities regulator with civil/administrative enforcement tools and access to the courts, but criminal prosecution itself is handled by the criminal justice system through the appropriate prosecutor and the courts.
In the context of civil liability under state securities law, what does the term “statute of limitations” refer to?
Best answer: D
Explanation: It sets the outside window to sue (often tied to the sale or discovery of the violation), and missing it can eliminate the remedy.
A statute of limitations is the legal deadline for bringing a civil claim. It matters because even a strong case can be dismissed if filed too late. In securities cases, the clock is commonly tied to when the transaction occurred and/or when the wrongdoing was (or should have been) discovered.
The core concept is that civil remedies are not open-ended: the statute of limitations establishes how long a claimant has to start a lawsuit. Timing matters because courts can bar the action once the limitations period runs, regardless of the underlying merits. In securities-related claims, limitations rules often measure time from a triggering event such as the sale/transaction date and may also incorporate a discovery concept (when the fraud or violation was discovered or reasonably should have been discovered). The practical takeaway is that potential plaintiffs must act promptly, and registrants should understand that late-filed claims may be defensible on procedural grounds even before reaching the facts.
A retail customer alleges her broker-dealer placed unauthorized trades. The customer’s account agreement (e-signed at opening) includes a predispute clause requiring customer disputes to be resolved by arbitration.
Which dispute-resolution outcome best matches this fact pattern?
Best answer: B
Explanation: A valid predispute arbitration agreement typically means the customer dispute is resolved in arbitration rather than a court trial.
Predispute arbitration clauses are commonly used in customer brokerage agreements and generally require disputes to be resolved through arbitration instead of a court trial. Arbitration is typically binding, with limited grounds to challenge an award.
Arbitration, mediation, and court actions are different paths for resolving customer disputes. When a customer has agreed in advance (in an account agreement) to arbitrate disputes with a broker-dealer, the dispute is generally directed to arbitration rather than being litigated in court. Arbitration is typically binding on the parties, and courts generally will not retry the merits of the case once an award is issued.
Mediation, by contrast, is a negotiated settlement process and is generally nonbinding unless the parties reach and sign a settlement agreement. A state securities administrator may bring enforcement actions (for example, seeking injunctions or penalties), but the administrator is not the forum that adjudicates a private customer’s damages claim like a court or arbitration panel would.
The key takeaway is that a valid arbitration agreement usually controls the dispute forum.
A state securities Administrator’s office is triaging new investor complaints for potential enforcement referral. Which complaint is most appropriately classified as a high-priority matter because it suggests investor harm and a possible pattern of misconduct (rather than a routine service or suitability dispute)?
Best answer: B
Explanation: Multiple similar complaints plus possible conversion and an unrecorded product are fraud red flags that warrant prompt enforcement triage.
Administrators prioritize complaints that indicate potential fraud, conversion, or other serious violations—especially when multiple, unrelated investors report similar conduct. Instructions to pay an agent personally for an off-book “investment,” combined with no record on statements, suggests misuse of funds and a potentially unregistered or fictitious product. That combination signals elevated investor harm and a repeatable scheme requiring enforcement attention.
Complaint intake is often triaged by looking for “red flags” that point to securities-law violations and immediate investor harm. Higher-priority referrals typically involve allegations such as misappropriation/conversion of client funds, forged or unauthorized transactions, unregistered offerings being sold to the public, false statements, or repeated complaints about the same individual or practice.
Here, multiple unrelated clients describe the same payment instruction (make checks payable to the agent personally) and there is no custodied position or statement record. That fact pattern suggests off-book activity and possible conversion or a fraudulent offering, which is the kind of misconduct an Administrator would likely escalate quickly for investigation.
Which statement about a Regulation D private offering is most accurate?
Best answer: D
Explanation: Regulation D provides a registration exemption for certain private offerings, not an exemption from resale limits or antifraud liability.
Regulation D is a federal safe harbor that can let an issuer sell securities without registering the offering with the SEC. However, investors typically receive “restricted” securities with resale limitations, and the issuer and its representatives remain subject to federal and state antifraud standards.
Regulation D is commonly used for private placements. The key high-level point is that it is a registration exemption (or safe harbor) for the offering, not a free pass from other investor-protection rules. Securities sold in a Reg D private offering are generally “restricted,” meaning they cannot be freely resold into the public market without meeting an exemption or registration for the resale. Also, regardless of whether an offering is registered or exempt, antifraud rules apply: statements to investors must not be materially false or misleading, and material facts generally must be disclosed. Accredited investor status matters under certain Reg D pathways, but it does not mean every Reg D purchaser must be accredited and it does not eliminate antifraud obligations.
Use the Series 66 Practice Test page for the full Securities Prep route, mixed-topic practice, timed mock exams, explanations, and web/mobile app access.
Use the Series 66 Cheat Sheet on SecuritiesMastery.com when you want a compact review before returning to the NASAA Series 66 Practice Test page.