02-13-2019, 10:11 AM
This Congressional Research Service paper by a legislative attorney offers a good primer, but is no substitute for legal advice:
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS21127.pdf
Insider trading cases are some of the most difficult to bring from the standpoint of the DOJ, as proving the requisite intent to deceive under Rule 10b-5 is often difficult, and typically requires obtaining a damaging admission from a defendant, co-defendant, or cooperating witness. That said, my general rule of thumb is, if there's even a shadow of a doubt that the activity in question could run afoul of state or federal regs, don't do it. No trade is worth paying a team of defense attorneys up to $1,000+ per hour for an indeterminate period of time.
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS21127.pdf
Insider trading cases are some of the most difficult to bring from the standpoint of the DOJ, as proving the requisite intent to deceive under Rule 10b-5 is often difficult, and typically requires obtaining a damaging admission from a defendant, co-defendant, or cooperating witness. That said, my general rule of thumb is, if there's even a shadow of a doubt that the activity in question could run afoul of state or federal regs, don't do it. No trade is worth paying a team of defense attorneys up to $1,000+ per hour for an indeterminate period of time.