The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a “pay-to-play” case against Goldman Sachs and one of its former investment bankers, Neil M.M. Morrison. The SEC alleges that Goldman and Morrison made undisclosed campaign contributions to then-Massachusetts state treasurer Timothy P. Cahill while he was a candidate for governor.
The case was brought under the Municipal Securities Rule on pay-to-play: MSRB Rule G-37. The SEC’s investment adviser/private fund rule on pay to play, Rule 206(4)-5, is based closely on that MSRB rule.
The SEC’s order found that Goldman Sachs did not disclose any of the contributions on MSRB forms and did not keep records of the contributions in violation of MSRB rules.
Goldman Sachs agreed to settle the charges by paying $7,558,942 in disgorgement, $670,033 in prejudgment interest, and a $3.75 million penalty. This is the largest fine ever imposed by the SEC for Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board pay-to-play violations. The SEC’s case against Morrison continues.
According to the SEC’s order against Goldman Sachs, Morrison worked in the firm’s Boston office and solicited underwriting business from the Massachusetts treasurer’s office beginning in July 2008. Morrison was substantially engaged in working on Cahill’s political campaigns. Before joining Goldman Sachs, between January 2003 and June 2007, Morrison was employed by the Massachusetts Treasurer’s Office, which included positions as the first deputy treasurer, chief of staff and assistant treasurer, reporting directly to Cahill.
Morrison participated extensively in Cahill’s gubernatorial campaign, often during working hours from his Goldman Sachs office, and used Goldman Sachs resources (such as phones, e-mail and office space). The SEC claims that Morrison’s use of Goldman Sachs work time and resources for campaign activities constituted valuable in-kind campaign contributions to Cahill that were attributable to Goldman Sachs and disqualified the firm from engaging in municipal underwriting business with certain Massachusetts municipal issuers for two years after the contributions.
While Morrison was an employee and working on the Cahill campaign, Goldman Sachs participated in 30 prohibited underwritings with Massachusetts issuers and earned more than $7.5 million in underwriting fees.
According to the complaint, this seems like an egregious violation of the pay-to-play rules. It does highlight that items beyond cash contributions could be considered a “contribution” under the pay-to-play rule.
We would not consider a donation of time by an individual to be a contribution, provided the adviser has not solicited the individual’s efforts and the adviser’s resources, such as office space and telephones, are not used….
A covered associate’s donation of his or her time generally would not be viewed as a contribution if such volunteering were to occur during non-work hours, if the covered associate were using vacation time, or if the adviser is not otherwise paying the employee’s salary
Sec Release IA-3403 page 46 and footnote 157 (.pdf)
From a compliance perspective, the question is how to value the use of time in the office, email, and phone usage. I suppose you can add up long distance charges. For employees you can use their hourly rate to determine time spent. For Morrison, it appears that even using a very conservative measurement of his time and the Goldman resources, the value would be many times in excess of the $250 limit under the MSRB rule. (The SEC limit is $350 if you can vote for the person.)