Featured Stories
FEC Issues Digest for Week of Sept. 28 - Oct. 2, 2026
WASHINGTON, Oct. 3 -- The Federal Election Commission issued the following weekly digest:
* * *
Commission meetings and hearings
No open meetings or executive sessions were scheduled this week.
* * *
Advisory Opinions
Request Received and Extension of Time
Advisory Opinion Request 2026-03 (https://www.fec.gov/data/legal/advisory-opinions/2026-03/) (Montana Libertarian Party) On October 2, the Commission made public an advisory opinion request from the Montana Libertarian Party. The requestor asks the Commission to confirm their status as a state committee of a political party under the Federal
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Oct. 3 -- The Federal Election Commission issued the following weekly digest:
* * *
Commission meetings and hearings
No open meetings or executive sessions were scheduled this week.
* * *
Advisory Opinions
Request Received and Extension of Time
Advisory Opinion Request 2026-03 (https://www.fec.gov/data/legal/advisory-opinions/2026-03/) (Montana Libertarian Party) On October 2, the Commission made public an advisory opinion request from the Montana Libertarian Party. The requestor asks the Commission to confirm their status as a state committee of a political party under the FederalElection Campaign Act and Commission regulations. The Commission will accept written comments on the request during the 10-day period following publication of the request (no later than October 13). The Commission also received an extension of time to respond to the advisory opinion request until after the restoration of quorum.
* * *
Litigation
Campbell v. FEC (Case No. 26-10849) On September 29, the parties filed a Stipulation of Dismissal Without Prejudice in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, and on September 30, the district court issued an Order of Dismissal Without Prejudice.
Lewicki v. FEC (Case No. 24-2505) On September 30, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued a Memorandum Opinion denying the Commission's partial motion to dismiss and motion for summary judgment.
* * *
Outreach
On September 30, Commissioner Dara Lindenbaum discussed campaign finance disclosure rules and the role of the Commission with a delegation from Latin America visiting the United States as part of the State Department's International Visitor Leadership Program (IVLP).
On September 30, the Commission hosted FECFile and reporting webinars for candidate committees.
On October 1, the Commission issued the Statistical Summary of 18-Month Campaign Activity of the 2025-2026 Election Cycle.
* * *
Upcoming educational opportunities
October 7, 2026: The Commission is scheduled to host FECFile and reporting webinars for PACs and party committees.
For more information on upcoming training opportunities, see the Commission's Trainings page.
* * *
Upcoming reporting due dates
October 15: October Quarterly Reports are due. For more information, see the 2026 Quarterly Reporting schedule.
October 20: October Monthly Reports are due. For more information, see the 2026 Monthly Reporting schedule.
October 22: 12-Day Pre-General Election Reports are due. For more information, see the 2026 Pre- and Post-General Reporting schedule.
* * *
Additional research materials
Contribution Limits: In addition to the current limits, the Commission has posted an archive of contribution limits that were in effect going back to the 1975-1976 election cycles.
Federal election results are available. The data was compiled from the official vote totals published by state election offices.
FEC Notify: Want to be notified by email when campaign finance reports are received by the agency? Sign up here.
The Combined Federal State Disclosure and Election Directory is available. This publication identifies the federal and state agencies responsible for the disclosure of campaign finances, lobbying, personal finances, public financing, candidates on the ballot, election results, spending on state initiatives, and other financial filings.
The Presidential Election Campaign Fund Tax Checkoff Chart provides information on balance of the Fund, monthly deposits into the Fund reported by the Department of the Treasury, payments from the Fund as certified by the FEC, and participation rates of taxpayers as reported by the Internal Revenue Service. For more information on the Presidential Public Funding Program, see the Public Funding of Presidential Elections page.
The FEC Record is available as a continuously updated online news source.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.fec.gov/updates/week-of-september-28-october-2-2026/
FCC Issues Daily Digest for Oct. 2
WASHINGTON, Oct. 3 -- The Federal Communications Commission issued the following Daily Digest (Vol. 45, No. 190) on Oct. 2, 2026:
* * *
THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE DATED AND RELEASED TODAY:
PUBLIC NOTICES
Report No: REPORT NO. PN-1-261002-01. Released: 2026-10-02. APPLICATIONS. MB. DOC-425551A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425551A1.pdf) DOC-425551A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425551A1.txt)
Report No: SAT-02042. Released: 2026-10-02. SATELLITE LICENSING DIVISION AND SATELLITE PROGRAMS AND POLICY DIVISION INFORMATION - SAT - ACCEPTED FOR FILING. SB. Contact:
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Oct. 3 -- The Federal Communications Commission issued the following Daily Digest (Vol. 45, No. 190) on Oct. 2, 2026:
* * *
THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE DATED AND RELEASED TODAY:
PUBLIC NOTICES
Report No: REPORT NO. PN-1-261002-01. Released: 2026-10-02. APPLICATIONS. MB. DOC-425551A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425551A1.pdf) DOC-425551A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425551A1.txt)
Report No: SAT-02042. Released: 2026-10-02. SATELLITE LICENSING DIVISION AND SATELLITE PROGRAMS AND POLICY DIVISION INFORMATION - SAT - ACCEPTED FOR FILING. SB. Contact:ICFSinfo@fcc.gov. DOC-425555A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425555A1.pdf) DOC-425555A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425555A1.txt)
Report No: REPORT NO. PN-2-261002-01. Released: 2026-10-02. ACTIONS. MB. DOC-425552A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425552A1.pdf) DOC-425552A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425552A1.txt)
Released: 2026-10-02. EX PARTE PRESENTATIONS AND POST-REPLY COMMENT PERIOD FILING IN PERMIT-BUT-DISCLOSURE PROCEEDINGS RECEIVED ON 10-1-26. OMD. Contact: Kenneth Hill, 202-418-7521. DOC-425554A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425554A1.pdf) DOC-425554A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425554A1.txt)
Report No: REPORT NO. PN-3-261002-01. Released: 2026-10-02. PLEADINGS. MB. DOC-425553A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425553A1.pdf) DOC-425553A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425553A1.txt)
Report No: SAT-02043. Released: 2026-10-02. SATELLITE LICENSING DIVISION AND SATELLITE PROGRAMS AND POLICY DIVISION INFORMATION - SAT - ACTIONS TAKEN. (DA No. 26-1062). SB. Contact: ICFSinfo@fcc.gov. DA-26-1062A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1062A1.pdf) DA-26-1062A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1062A1.txt)
* * *
SPEECHES
TRUSTY ITSO ASSEMBLY REMARKS. OMR OCOT. Trusty ITSO Assembly Remarks. DOC-425560A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425560A1.docx) DOC-425560A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425560A1.pdf) DOC-425560A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DOC-425560A1.txt)
* * *
ADDENDA: THE FOLLOWING ITEMS, RELEASED OCTOBER 1, 2026, DID NOT APPEAR IN DIGEST NO. 189:
PUBLIC NOTICES
Released: 2026-10-01. STREAMLINED RESOLUTION OF REQUEST TO ACTIONS BY THE UNIVERSAL SERVICE ADMINISTRATIVE. (DA No. 26-1025). (Dkt No 02-6 09-197 21-450 06-122 18-213 02-60). WCB. Contact: James Bachtell, 418-2694. DA-26-1025A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1025A1.docx) DA-26-1025A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1025A1.pdf) DA-26-1025A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1025A1.txt)
Released: 2026-10-01. WIRELINE COMPETITION BUREAU ANNOUNCES EFFECTIVE DATE OF NETWORK AND SERVICES MODERNIZATION RULES AND ISSUES GUIDANCE ON CONTENTS OF TECHNOLOGY TRANSITIONS DISCONTINUANCE NOTICES . (DA No. 26-1061). (Dkt No 25-208 25-209 26-214). WCB. DA-26-1061A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1061A1.docx) DA-26-1061A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1061A1.pdf) DA-26-1061A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-1061A1.txt)
* * *
TEXTS
AMENDMENT OF SECTION 73.3555(E) OF THE COMMISSION'S RULES, NATIONAL TELEVISION MULTIPLE OWNERSHIP RULE, REPORT AND ORDER. The Commission voted to repeal its 39% national television multiple ownership rule and replace it with a granular, case-by-case review. . (Dkt No 17-318). Action by: the Commission. Adopted: 2026-08-06 by R&O. (FCC No. 26-53). MB. FCC-26-53A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-53A1.docx) FCC-26-53A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-53A1.pdf) FCC-26-53A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-53A1.txt) FCC-26-53A2.docx FCC-26-53A2.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-53A2.pdf) FCC-26-53A2.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-53A2.txt) FCC-26-53A3.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-53A3.docx) FCC-26-53A3.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-53A3.pdf) FCC-26-53A3.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-53A3.txt) FCC-26-53A4.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-53A4.docx) FCC-26-53A4.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-53A4.pdf) FCC-26-53A4.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-53A4.txt)
MODERNIZING THE 911 FRAMEWORK. The FCC adopts a Notice of Inquiry exploring modernization of the 911 framework to ensure the public can continue to effectively and reliably access emergency services in this era of rapid technological change.. (Dkt No 26-197). Action by: the Commission. Comments Due: 2026-11-16. Reply Comments Due: 2026-12-15. Adopted: 2026-09-30 by NOI. (FCC No. 26-63). PSHSB. Contact: Daniel Spurlock. FCC-26-63A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-63A1.docx) FCC-26-63A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-63A1.pdf) FCC-26-63A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-63A1.txt) FCC-26-63A2.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-63A2.docx) FCC-26-63A2.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-63A2.pdf) FCC-26-63A2.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-63A2.txt) FCC-26-63A3.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-63A3.docx) FCC-26-63A3.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-63A3.pdf) FCC-26-63A3.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-63A3.txt)
MODERNIZING THE COMMISSION'S NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT RULES, REPORT AND ORDER AND FURTHER NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING. In this R&O, the Commission adopts a series of permitting reforms that will modernize the agency's approach to National Environmental Policy Act regulations. The FNPRM seeks additional comment on the agency's National Historic Preservation Act framework.. (Dkt No 25-217). Action by: the Commission. Adopted: 2026-09-30 by R&O. (FCC No. 26-64). WTB. FCC-26-64A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-64A1.docx) FCC-26-64A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-64A1.pdf) FCC-26-64A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-64A1.txt) FCC-26-64A2.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-64A2.docx) FCC-26-64A2.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-64A2.pdf) FCC-26-64A2.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-64A2.txt) FCC-26-64A3.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-64A3.docx) FCC-26-64A3.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-64A3.pdf) FCC-26-64A3.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-64A3.txt) FCC-26-64A4.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-64A4.docx) FCC-26-64A4.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-64A4.pdf) FCC-26-64A4.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-64A4.txt)
SATELLITE SPECTRUM ABUNDANCE; SPECTRUM ABUNDANCE FOR WEIRD SPACE STUFF; EXPANDING USE OF THE 12.7-13.25 GHZ BAND FOR MOBILE BROADBAND OR OTHER EXPANDED USE; SHARED USE OF THE 42-42.5 GHZ BAND; USE OF SPECTRUM BANDS ABOVE 24 GHZ FOR MOBILE RADIO SERVICES . Order Will Unleash Spectrum Abundance for New and Untapped Uses.\r\n \r\n. (Dkt No 25-180 26-54 22-352 23-158 14-177). Action by: the Commission . Adopted: 2026-09-30 by R&O/NPRM. (FCC No. 26-65). SB. FCC-26-65A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-65A1.docx) FCC-26-65A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-65A1.pdf) FCC-26-65A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-65A1.txt) FCC-26-65A2.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-65A2.docx) FCC-26-65A2.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-65A2.pdf) FCC-26-65A2.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-65A2.txt) FCC-26-65A3.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-65A3.docx) FCC-26-65A3.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-65A3.pdf) FCC-26-65A3.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-65A3.txt)
RULES AND REGULATIONS IMPLEMENTING THE TELEPHONE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT OF 1991. Modernizes TCPA rules to empower consumers to stop specific categories of robocalls without inadvertently stopping the important informational calls they do want. Seeks comment on further improvements suggested by consumer groups and industry stakeholders.. (Dkt No 02-278). Action by: the Commission. Adopted: 2026-09-30 by ORDER. (FCC No. 26-67). CGB. FCC-26-67A1.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-67A1.docx) FCC-26-67A1.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-67A1.pdf) FCC-26-67A1.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-67A1.txt) FCC-26-67A2.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-67A2.docx) FCC-26-67A2.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-67A2.pdf) FCC-26-67A2.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-67A2.txt) FCC-26-67A3.docx (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-67A3.docx) FCC-26-67A3.pdf (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-67A3.pdf) FCC-26-67A3.txt (https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/FCC-26-67A3.txt)
* * *
Original text here: https://www.fcc.gov/edocs/daily-digest/2026/10/02
SEC Sanctions Latch Inc. Over Revenue Recognition Failures, Financial Overstatements
WASHINGTON, Oct. 2 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued an Order Instituting Cease-and-Desist Proceedings Pursuant to Section 8A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Making Findings, and Imposing a Cease-and-Desist Order (File No.: 3-22767) against Latch Inc.
The action resolves administrative proceedings against the Missouri-based maker of smart access hardware and software for multi-family residential properties. Latch agreed to a cease-and-desist order and a $1,000,000 penalty following regulatory findings of improper revenue accounting
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Oct. 2 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued an Order Instituting Cease-and-Desist Proceedings Pursuant to Section 8A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21C of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Making Findings, and Imposing a Cease-and-Desist Order (File No.: 3-22767) against Latch Inc.
The action resolves administrative proceedings against the Missouri-based maker of smart access hardware and software for multi-family residential properties. Latch agreed to a cease-and-desist order and a $1,000,000 penalty following regulatory findings of improper revenue accountingpractices.
Latch transitioned from a private entity to a publicly traded corporation in June 2021 through a merger with a special purpose acquisition company. The transaction provided Latch with approximately $450 million in cash proceeds. However, financial filings provided to regulatory authorities and prospective investors during the merger contained materially inflated figures. The misstatements persisted in subsequent quarterly and annual submissions made as a public entity.
In December 2024, Latch submitted restated figures revealing widespread overstatements across multiple periods. Reported revenue for 2019 was originally recorded at $14,887,000 but was adjusted down to $7,187,000, representing a 107% overstatement. Revenue for 2020 was reported as $18,061,000 and adjusted down to $12,995,000, a 39% overstatement. For 2021, reported revenue of $41,360,000 was adjusted down to $27,613,000, a 50% overstatement. Financial periods into 2022 also required correction, including the third and fourth quarters of 2021, which were overstated by 63% and 61% respectively.
Regulatory findings highlighted an aggressive sales culture that prioritized meeting internal volume targets over proper accounting standards. Sales personnel frequently arranged nonstandard terms to entice distributors--known as channel partners--to accept hardware shipments ahead of actual customer demand.
These arrangements were memorialized in side agreements that were not shared with accounting teams. Terms included unconditional return rights, extended payment terms, shipments without active projects, and free storage offerings. In one instance in December 2020, Latch recognized $147,000 in revenue for hardware shipped under an undisclosed side agreement allowing full returns if a building project failed to proceed. The distributor returned the hardware six months later. In another case from March 2021, Latch improperly booked $474,000 in revenue; under restated accounting, approximately $350,000 of that total belonged in mid-2023 or later.
Latch also lacked sufficient internal controls to assess collectability and determine accurate transaction prices. Latch recognized nearly $5.7 million in revenue from a single partner while receiving only $0.3 million in actual cash payments, despite growing overdue balances. Additionally, Latch routinely failed to obtain sell-through pricing data from distributors to calculate proper variable pricing discounts, relying instead on non-binding letters of intent.
An internal audit committee investigation initiated in mid-2022 led to a complete reconstruction of Latch's books. Finalizing the restatements required two and a half years and involved reviewing thousands of transactions. Latch replaced almost its entire workforce, including management, and installed experienced accounting professionals.
Without admitting or denying the findings beyond jurisdiction, Latch consented to cease and desist from future violations of antifraud, reporting, books and records, internal controls, and proxy provisions of federal securities laws. The $1,000,000 penalty will be paid in four equal quarterly installments of $250,000.
-- Vidhi Gianani, Targeted News Service
* * *
Latch Inc. is based in Olivette, Missouri.
* * *
URL: Latch Inc.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/admin/2026/33-11450.pdf
SEC Commissioner Uyeda Issues Remarks on Proposed Amendments to the Custody Rules
WASHINGTON, Oct. 2 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following remarks by Commissioner Mark T. Uyeda:
* * *
Statement on Proposed Amendments to the Custody Rules
Oct. 1, 2026
Safeguarding client assets is one of the fundamental investor protections in our regulatory framework against the potential misuse, misappropriation, or loss of client assets. At the same time, our regulations must provide both robust investor protection and operational practicality. Rules that are unworkable in practice will not protect investors but merely provide the illusion of protection.
With
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Oct. 2 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following remarks by Commissioner Mark T. Uyeda:
* * *
Statement on Proposed Amendments to the Custody Rules
Oct. 1, 2026
Safeguarding client assets is one of the fundamental investor protections in our regulatory framework against the potential misuse, misappropriation, or loss of client assets. At the same time, our regulations must provide both robust investor protection and operational practicality. Rules that are unworkable in practice will not protect investors but merely provide the illusion of protection.
Withthe emergence of new asset classes and the market development of supporting infrastructure, now is an opportune moment to revisit our custody rules. The core tenets of custody, such as asset segregation and proper controls, remain as true today as when custody rules were first adopted. However, the mechanics of applying these principles will inevitably look different as technology evolves. Asset segregation for paper certificates sitting in bank vaults versus assets recorded on a distributed ledger cannot look the same, even if the underlying principle is identical. The existing legal framework for custody still bears the imprint of a bygone era when custody meant safekeeping paper documentation,[1] and that framework has been adjusted modestly over time to accommodate the modern securities markets and, more recently, digital assets. It is time for a fresh look.
Today's proposal is not the Commission's first attempt in recent years to update the custody rules. In 2023, the Commission proposed amendments to the custody rule (the "2023 Proposal").[2] Although I supported the issuance of the 2023 Proposal as a means to trigger public discussion on the future of custody safeguards, I was critical of how the 2023 Proposal went to great lengths to construct a "no-win" scenario for crypto assets even if advisers tried complying in good faith.[3] The 2023 Proposal would have required advisers to maintain crypto assets with a qualified custodian, while simultaneously casting doubt on whether any qualified custodian could demonstrate exclusive control over those assets. Compounding the problem, Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 121[4] had already effectively deterred companies from safeguarding crypto-assets by forcing on-balance sheet recognition of crypto-assets. The net effect was a proposal that told advisers to use custodians that, for practical and accounting reasons, were largely unavailable or unwilling to serve in that capacity.
Today's proposal presents a workable path to compliance without compromising the protections the custody rules are designed to provide[5].
Self-Custody
For novel crypto assets, self-custody by an adviser or fund may be the only available option when no qualified custodian is willing or able to hold those assets. The proposal recognizes this reality, while also recognizing that self-custody creates an inherent conflict of interest and an adviser's fiduciary duty still applies when it holds client crypto assets. Rather than ignore that tension or prohibit self-custody outright and leave advisers with no compliant path, the proposal permits self-custody in circumstances where an adviser determines that no qualified custodian is available, subject to guardrails. These include safeguarding expertise, cybersecurity protections, annual reviews, internal reporting, account statements, and disclosures to clients.
State-Chartered Trust Companies
Today's proposal would also add state-chartered trust companies as permitted custodians for crypto assets, subject to certain conditions. State-chartered trust companies have become important participants in the crypto custody ecosystem. By providing clarity on the specific requirements and conditions these entities must meet, the proposal helps ensure that client assets held with state-chartered trust companies are adequately safeguarded, while giving advisers, funds, and custodians greater flexibility and certainty about how to structure these arrangements.
Custody Modernization
Finally, the proposal includes a number of modernization measures that are long overdue. Among them, the proposal would:
* update the circumstances in which regulated funds may use broker-dealers as custodians;
* exclude authorized discretionary trading from the Advisers Act custody rule subject to conditions that limit executions to designated client accounts and prohibit transfers to accounts controlled by the adviser or related persons; and
* provide an exception from the independent verification requirement for an adviser that has custody solely because of a standing letter of authorization.
Taken together, this proposal reflects an approach that considers both the imperative of safeguarding client assets and the practical realities advisers, funds, and custodians face in an ever-changing market.
I thank the staff in the Divisions of Investment Management and Economic and Risk Analysis, the Office of the General Counsel, and the many other offices that have contributed to this rulemaking.
[1] Even those rules on safeguarding paper certificates had limits, as shown during Hurricane Sandy in 2012, when flooding destroyed or damaged approximately 1.7 million certificates at a custodian. See Matt Jarzemsky, End Looming for Paper Certificates, Wall Street Journal (Mar. 12, 2013), available at https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324096404578356734175546650?st=x7xPfR.
[2] Safeguarding Advisory Client Assets, Release No. IA-6240 (Feb. 15, 2023) [88 FR 14672 (Mar. 9, 2023)].
[3] Mark T. Uyeda, Statement on Proposed Rule Regarding the Safeguarding of Advisory Client Assets (Feb. 15, 2023), available at https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/speeches-statements/uyeda-statement-custody-021523.
[4] Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 121, Release No. SAB 121 (Mar. 31, 2022). The statements in staff accounting bulletins are not rules or interpretations of the Commission, nor are they published as bearing the Commission's official approval. They represent interpretations and practices followed by the Division of Corporation Finance and the Office of the Chief Accountant in administering the disclosure requirements of the Federal securities laws.
[5] Adviser and Regulated Fund Custody Rules; Crypto Custody Rules, Release Nos. IA-7023, IC-36353 (Oct. 1, 2026).
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/speeches-statements/uyeda-statement-proposed-amendments-custody-rules-100126
SEC Charges Mississippi Man With Fraud in Alleged Marijuana Company Investment Scheme
WASHINGTON, Oct. 2 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release:
* * *
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Thomas J. Moore, III, No. 1:26-cv-00286-LG-BWR (S.D. Miss. filed Sept. 30, 2026)
On September 30, 2026, the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Thomas J. Moore, III, a resident of D'Iberville, Mississippi, with misappropriating approximately $1.94 million from approximately 20 individuals in connection with a medical marijuana business Moore primarily owned and controlled.
According to the SEC's complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Oct. 2 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following litigation release:
* * *
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Thomas J. Moore, III, No. 1:26-cv-00286-LG-BWR (S.D. Miss. filed Sept. 30, 2026)
On September 30, 2026, the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Thomas J. Moore, III, a resident of D'Iberville, Mississippi, with misappropriating approximately $1.94 million from approximately 20 individuals in connection with a medical marijuana business Moore primarily owned and controlled.
According to the SEC's complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court forthe Southern District of Mississippi, between at least December 2021 and August 2024, Moore raised approximately $4.94 million from investors to whom he offered and sold equity interests in Mississippi Green Oil, LLC, a Prentiss, Mississippi-based medical marijuana company that he established in or around December 2020, and represented to investors that he would use their money to develop Mississippi Green Oil's business. As alleged, Moore spent approximately $1.94 million of investor funds on personal expenses unrelated to the business of Mississippi Green Oil including jewelry and travel. Moreover, the complaint alleges that Moore also told investors that they would receive short-term profit distributions commensurate with their equity interests but Moore failed to pay investors any distributions. The complaint further alleges that Moore failed to disclose to prospective investors and investors the existence of various related lawsuits filed by other Mississippi Green Oil investors alleging, among other things, failure to return their principal and pay promised distributions.
The SEC's complaint charges Moore with violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. The SEC seeks a permanent injunction, a conduct-based injunction, disgorgement with prejudgment interest, and a civil penalty against Moore.
The investigation was conducted by Cecilia Danger and supervised by Jessica M. Weissman, Fernando Torres, and Stephanie N. Moot, all of the SEC's Miami Regional Office. The litigation will be led by Michael Mikulic under the supervision of Russell Koonin.
* * *
Resources
* SEC Complaint (https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/complaints/2026/comp26663.pdf)
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sec.gov/enforcement-litigation/litigation-releases/lr-26663
SEC Chairman Atkins Issues Remarks on Proposal to Address the Custody of Crypto Assets Under the Investment Advisers Act and the Investment Company Act
WASHINGTON, Oct. 2 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following remarks by Chairman Paul S. Atkins:
* * *
Statement on Proposal to Address the Custody of Crypto Assets Under the Investment Advisers Act and the Investment Company Act
Oct. 1, 2026
Today, the Commission proposed to close a gap that has left investment advisers and funds guessing how to effect lawful custody of an asset class that their clients increasingly demand. This is another significant step toward bringing our regulatory frameworks into the modern era and fulfilling our commitment to cement the United States
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Oct. 2 -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued the following remarks by Chairman Paul S. Atkins:
* * *
Statement on Proposal to Address the Custody of Crypto Assets Under the Investment Advisers Act and the Investment Company Act
Oct. 1, 2026
Today, the Commission proposed to close a gap that has left investment advisers and funds guessing how to effect lawful custody of an asset class that their clients increasingly demand. This is another significant step toward bringing our regulatory frameworks into the modern era and fulfilling our commitment to cement the United Statesas the crypto capital of the world.
Since the advent of Bitcoin in 2008, the crypto asset market has grown from a niche curiosity into a multi-trillion-dollar asset class to which investors actively seek exposure. Unfortunately, our rules and regulations have not kept pace. To that end, today's proposal would provide a clear regulatory framework for the custody of crypto assets, giving investment advisers and funds a compliant pathway where none existed before--and replacing the grey of uncertainty created by custody rules crafted for a bygone era.
Many areas of the custody rules under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and Investment Company Act of 1940 predate the internet; they were designed to protect the assets of advisory clients and regulated funds from loss, theft, misuse, and misappropriation. Notably, they contemplate the custody and safekeeping only of traditional assets - an untenable situation in the 21st century.
A key protection in the current rules is the required use of permitted custodians. However, with newly developed crypto assets, custodial capabilities may lag an asset's deployment by many months. That is a substantial problem, one which today's proposal intends to solve. In doing so, we will further modernize our regulatory framework, and we will help ensure the United States remains the global leader in crypto innovation for decades to come.
In addition to the proposed crypto-specific custody framework, the proposal would also implement a number of long-needed modernizations of the current investment adviser and regulated fund custody rules. These provisions have not been amended for decades. Therefore, this proposal seeks to ensure that they are fit for purpose and better address current industry practices and feedback.
Today's proposed crypto custody framework is not an isolated initiative. It is another element of a comprehensive crypto asset regulatory approach. It began with ending regulation by enforcement. In December 2025, Commission staff issued a no-action letter to the Depository Trust Company regarding DTC's voluntary securities tokenization pilot program. And in January 2026, Commission staff issued a statement on tokenized securities that provided a clear tokenization taxonomy for the marketplace.
The Commission followed with an interpretation regarding which crypto assets are securities and when crypto assets may cease to be subject to investment contracts. In April, Commission staff published a statement regarding broker-dealer registration implications for certain user interfaces utilized to prepare transactions in tokenized securities. And in August of this year, we proposed Regulation Crypto Assets, which would create a tailored offering regime for certain investment contracts involving crypto assets. Most recently, we introduced an Innovation Exemption, providing a cabined pathway to facilitate the trading of tokenized NMS stock.
These efforts acknowledge that blockchain technology holds the potential to modernize the financial system, and that onchain markets should not be relegated offshore or forced into ill-fitting regulatory models. That said, our work is not finished. More regulatory proposals are on the horizon, and I look forward to continuing to help President Trump cement the United States as the crypto capital of the world.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/speeches-statements/atkins-crypto-custody-100126-statement-proposal-address-custody-crypto-assets-under-investment-advisers-act-investment-company
CPSC Issues Recall Alert Involving Metal Wire Bristle Grill Brushes
WASHINGTON, Oct. 2 -- The Consumer Product Safety Commission issued the following recall alert:
* * *
Name of Product: Metal Wire Bristle Grill Brushes
Hazard: Small metal wire bristles can detach from the brushes and stick to the grill or food, posing an ingestion hazard and risk of serious internal injuries that could require surgery.
Remedy: Refund
Recall Date: October 01, 2026
Units: About 4,477,655
Consumer Contact: Walmart toll-free at 800-925-6278 from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. CT Monday through Friday, or online at www.walmart.com/help or https://corporate.walmart.com/recalls or www.walmart.com
... Show Full Article
WASHINGTON, Oct. 2 -- The Consumer Product Safety Commission issued the following recall alert:
* * *
Name of Product: Metal Wire Bristle Grill Brushes
Hazard: Small metal wire bristles can detach from the brushes and stick to the grill or food, posing an ingestion hazard and risk of serious internal injuries that could require surgery.
Remedy: Refund
Recall Date: October 01, 2026
Units: About 4,477,655
Consumer Contact: Walmart toll-free at 800-925-6278 from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. CT Monday through Friday, or online at www.walmart.com/help or https://corporate.walmart.com/recalls or www.walmart.comand click on "Product Recalls" at the bottom of the page for more information.
Recall Details
Description: This recall involves certain Walmart Expert Grill metal wire bristle grill brushes. The brushes have black plastic or stainless-steel handles. Some brushes come with metal scraper attached. The following model numbers are included in this recall and can be found on the product packaging or a sticker/tag attached to the brush: [View table in the link at bottom.]
Remedy: Consumers should stop using the recalled grill brushes immediately and contact Walmart for a full refund or a credit for use at any Walmart store or Walmart.com. Consumers will be asked to return their recalled brushes to Walmart or discard them.
Incidents/Injuries: None reported.
Sold At: Walmart and online including Walmart.com from January 2021 through August 2026 for between $1 and $28.
Importer(s): Walmart, Inc. of Bentonville, Arkansas
Manufactured In: China
Recall number: 27-010
* * *
Original text here: https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/2027/Walmart-Recalls-Over-4-4-Million-Expert-Grill-Brushes-Due-to-Ingestion-Hazard