Agency's First-Ever Web Site Devoted Exclusively to Investor Education

Washington, D.C., Oct. 22, 2009 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today launched its first-ever Web site devoted exclusively to investor education, providing investors with in-depth information and "top tips" on how to invest wisely, plan for the future, and avoid being scammed.

By visiting www.investor.gov, investors can access information in a user-friendly format that is specifically tailored to their needs. The site includes sections specifically for those just getting started investing, for those saving for a child's education, and for those planning for retirement. It also has a detailed "Seniors Care Package" section for senior citizens and caretakers.

In a welcome video on the new site, SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro says, "Investing information is available from thousands of online resources — some good, some not so good. Through Investor.gov, we are adding our own online voice to provide investors with unbiased and factual investing information."

Chairman Schapiro adds, "You'll find resources that can help you analyze your current holdings or even check the background of a registered financial professional."

Investor.gov also offers a section exclusively in Spanish, targeting the millions of Spanish-speaking investors in the United States. The "En Español" portion presents information about what to do if an investor feels that he or she has been a fraud victim, as well as a Spanish-language podcast explaining the history and functions of the SEC.

The site will be further enhanced with additional investor education resources in the coming weeks and months.

"Investor.gov will help you if you are invested in the market, are considering investing, or care for a relative who has retirement savings," said Lori Schock, Director of the SEC's Office of Investor Education and Advocacy. "Investor.gov provides an extensive collection of investor education materials, tools, calculators, checklists, as well as valuable investor alerts."

* * *

Investor.gov is the latest in a series of social media initiatives undertaken by the SEC. On the home page at www.sec.gov, visitors can sign up to receive information and instant e-mail alerts on more than 80 topics of interest to investors as well as other market participants. The agency also reaches investors online through other social media channels such as Twitter and YouTube:

• Investor Information: www.twitter.com/SEC_Investor_Ed
• News Releases and Alerts: www.twitter.com/SEC_News
• Enforcement Actions: www.twitter.com/SEC_Actions
• Careers at the SEC: www.twitter.com/SEC_Jobs
• You Tube channel: www.YouTube.com/SEC_Views

Washington, D.C., Oct. 22, 2009 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced that it will hold its annual forum on small business capital formation on November 19 at its Washington, D.C., headquarters.

The SEC forum will include both roundtable and breakout group sessions that are expected to focus on the economic recovery and the SEC's "accredited investor" definition for private and limited offerings. The roundtable participants and full agenda for the forum will be announced at a later date and posted on the SEC Web site.

"Since 1982, this annual event has served as an important way for the SEC and its staff to interact with the small business community and exchange ideas about how best to improve small business capital formation," said Gerry Laporte, Chief of the SEC's Office of Small Business Policy.

The all-day forum will begin at 9 a.m. ET, and roundtable sessions will be webcast on the SEC's Web site. During the breakout group sessions in the afternoon, participants will work together to formulate specific policy recommendations. The breakout group sessions will not be webcast, but those who cannot attend in person can still participate through a telephone conference call. Those wishing to participate in a forum breakout group, whether in person or by telephone conference call, need to register onlineby November 16, 2009.

The SEC is looking for suggestions on specific topics to be discussed at the forum and for recommendations to be considered by the forum breakout groups. Suggestions and recommendations can be e-mailed to the SEC's Office of Small Business Policy at SmallBusiness@sec.gov. Questions about the forum also may be sent to that e-mail address, or call (202) 551-3460 for more information.

Litigation Release No. 21182/ August 21, 2009

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Darrel West and Own My Travel, LLC, Defendants, and Professionally Assisted Marketing, Inc., Relief Defendant, Case No. 6:09-CV-1419 (M.D. Fla.)(August 14, 2009)

SEC Charges Florida Operator of Multi-Million Dollar Fraudulent Pyramid Scheme

The United States Securities and Exchange Commission announced that on August 14, 2009 it filed a civil injunctive action against a Florida resident and a company he controlled alleging that they conducted a multi-million dollar fraudulent pyramid scheme and lured investors with false promises of passive monthly income.

The SEC alleges that Darrel West and Own My Travel, LLC defrauded investors by offering and selling unregistered securities in the form of “Passport” memberships in a travel club that purportedly offered discount travel. The complaint alleges that the defendants raised over $6 million from investors nationwide.

According to the complaint, the defendants misrepresented Own My Travel as a legitimate multi-level marketing company when it was actually a fraudulent pyramid scheme premised on the sale of memberships and thus destined to collapse, leaving investors with substantial losses. The complaint also alleges that West and Own My Travel misled investors about Own My Travel’s business structure and how it generated revenue, the future commissions investors would purportedly receive on a monthly basis, the risks associated with the Own My Travel investment, and West’s failures running a similar predecessor company.

The SEC's complaint, filed in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, alleges that West and Own My Travel violated Sections 5(a), 5(c), and 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 permanent injunctive relief against the defendants, disgorgement with prejudgment interest, and civil money penalties. The complaint also seeks disgorgement plus pre-judgment interest from the relief defendant, Professionally Assisted Marketing, Inc., a telemarketing company that the complaint alleges recruited new investors on behalf of existing Own My Travel investors.

SEC Complaint in this matter

“Auto-Surfing”: What You Need to Know

In the world of marketing, people often get compensated — with cash or free products and services— for doing fairly easy things, like sampling new ice-cream flavors, filling out surveys, or allowing a firm to monitor the television shows you watch or the websites you visit.  While some “money for nothing” opportunities may be perfectly legitimate, others can turn out to be frauds.

“Auto-surfing” is a form of online advertising that purportedly generates advertising revenue for companies that want to increase traffic to their websites.  The premise behind auto-surfing is that companies that advertise on the Internet are willing to pay to increase traffic to their web sites.  These companies hire an auto-surf firm or “host,” which in turn pays individual web surfers to view certain websites on an automatically rotating basis.  The more sites the individual visits, the more money he or she stands to earn.

While auto-surfing may sound easy and appealing — and risk-free — there can be a hitch.  Some auto-surf programs require their surfers to pay to participate, although perhaps not initially.  When you first sign up to auto-surf, the firm might assign a limited number of sites for you to visit and pay you accordingly.  Once you’ve made a modest amount of money, the firm might encourage — or even require — you to purchase a “membership” so that you can maximize your earnings.  The program will promise high — often double or triple digit — returns on your investment in the program, often within days or weeks of joining.

The line you’ll hear is that the more you click, the more you collect.  But the reality is that any scheme that requires you to pay to participate — and promises handsome rewards in no time at all for little to no effort on your part — bears many of the hallmarks of a “Ponzi” or pyramid scheme.  These schemes look deceptively legitimate because the fraudsters behind them typically use money coming in from new recruits to pay off early stage investors.  But eventually the pyramid will collapse when it gets too big.  It’s simply not possible to “rob-Peter-to-pay-Paul" forever.

The SEC warns investors to be wary of any sort of “get rich scheme quick” scheme — and to be especially leery of opportunities that require you to pay to play.  Before you pay a dime to make extra cash in your spare time, be sure to do a little due diligence:

• If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Compare promised yields with current returns on well-known stock indexes.  Any investment opportunity that claims you’ll get substantially more could be highly risky — and that means you might lose money.

• Check out the company before you invest. Contact the secretary of state where the company is incorporated to find out whether the company is a corporation in good standing.  Also call your state securities regulator to see whether the company, its officers, or the promoters of the opportunity have a history of complaints or fraud.  If a supposedly upright business lists only a P.O. box, you'll want to do a lot of work before sending your money!

• Steer Clear of Testimonials. Watch out if the company’s promotional materials, contain “testimonials” from supposedly satisfied customers, especially if all the “testimonials” are full of praise.

• "Guaranteed returns" aren't. Every investment carries some degree of risk, and the level of risk typically correlates with the return you can expect to receive.  Low risk generally means low yields, and high yields typically involve high risk.  If your money is perfectly safe, you'll most likely get a low return.  High returns represent potential rewards for folks who are willing to take big risks.  Most fraudsters spend a lot of time trying to convince investors that extremely high returns are "guaranteed" or "can't miss."  Don't believe it.

For more information on investing wisely and avoiding costly mistakes, please visit the Investor Information section of the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov/investor.shtml.

http://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/autosurf.htm

Click here to view the original article along with the SEC's disclaimer

SEC v. Matthew D. Weitzman, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Civil Action No. 09 CV 5353 (JSR) (S.D.N.Y. June 10, 2009)

SEC Charges New York-Based Investment Adviser for Stealing Client Funds

The Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") today charged an investment adviser who lives in Armonk, N.Y., for orchestrating a scheme in which he stole more than $6 million in investor funds for his own personal use, in some instances victimizing clients who were terminally ill or mentally impaired.

The SEC alleges that Matthew D. Weitzman sold securities in clients' brokerage accounts and illegally funneled their money to a bank account that he secretly controlled. While Weitzman spent the money on a multi-million dollar home, cars, and other luxury items, he provided false account statements to clients often showing inflated account balances and securities holdings. Weitzman also submitted to a broker-dealer phony letters from clients that purported to authorize the money transfers. When clients questioned Weitzman about the transfers they did not authorize, he misrepresented that he was withdrawing their funds to make legitimate investments.

According to the SEC's complaint, filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, Weitzman is the co-founder and a principal of AFW Wealth Advisors, the business name for AFW Asset Management, Inc., a registered investment adviser located in Purchase, N.Y., with an office in Natick, Mass. Weitzman also served as AFW's compliance officer.

The SEC alleges that Weitzman either sold securities held in the clients' accounts or redeemed shares held in money market funds in order to acquire cash for the unauthorized transfers, because the clients' brokerage accounts at the broker-dealer generally did not hold more than a minimal amount of cash. He also siphoned money from clients' Individual Retirement Accounts. Once he had the looted funds under his control in the AFW bank account, Weitzman either withdrew the clients' funds or transferred the money directly into one of his personal bank accounts.

According to the SEC's complaint, Weitzman in some instances misappropriated funds from AFW clients who were unlikely to be scrutinizing their account statements. For example, Weitzman misappropriated a total of approximately $430,000 in a series of unauthorized transfers from a client who was terminally ill. Weitzman later misappropriated $85,000 in two separate unauthorized transfers from the account of the client's widow. Furthermore, the SEC alleges that Weitzman targeted an elderly couple with compromised mental capacities, misappropriating approximately $400,000 of their money.

The SEC's complaint charges Weitzman with violating Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Sections 206(1) and 206(2) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, and with aiding and abetting violations of Section 204 and Rules 204-2(a)-3 and 204-2(a)(7) also of the Advisers Act. The complaint seeks a permanent injunction, disgorgement of ill-gotten gains plus prejudgment interest, financial penalties, an asset freeze, a sworn accounting, an order prohibiting the destruction of documents, and a requirement that Weitzman notify the SEC and obtain approval of the court before he files for bankruptcy protection.

Weitzman agreed to settle the SEC's claims and, without admitting or denying the allegations, consented to the entry of a judgment that will grant the SEC the full relief that it seeks, but will defer the determination of the financial amounts of the settlement until a later date. The agreement to resolve the SEC's action is subject to approval by the court.

The SEC's investigation is continuing.

SEC Complaint

http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2009/lr21078.htm

Washington, D.C., June 9, 2009 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged two California men and two companies they control for conducting an $80 million Ponzi scheme that targeted Korean-American investors with false promises of extraordinarily high returns from foreign currency (forex) trading.

The SEC alleges that Peter C. Son, of Danville, Calif., and Jin K. Chung, of Los Altos, Calif., lured approximately 500 investors in the United States, South Korea, and Taiwan into their investment scheme in which funds were not traded in the forex market as claimed, but instead used to pay cash "returns" to certain investors in Ponzi-like fashion. They also misappropriated investor money for their own personal use, including mortgage payments on Son's multi-million dollar home. The SEC is seeking an emergency court order to freeze the defendants' assets.

"Son and Chung portrayed themselves and their companies as highly successful in the forex industry, while in reality the tremendous forex trading profits they claimed did not exist," said Marc Fagel, Director of the SEC's San Francisco Regional Office. "They placed ads in Korean-language newspapers and used sales agents to target Korean-Americans in typical affinity fraud fashion as they preyed on the trust within close-knit communities."

According to the SEC's complaint, filed in federal district court in San Francisco, Son and Chung operated their scheme through SNC Asset Management, Inc. (SNCA) and SNC Investments, Inc. (SNCI), which maintained offices in Pleasanton, Calif., and New York City. Son and Chung promised investors spectacular annual returns of up to 36 percent from forex trading, and told investors that SNCA had generated 50 percent profits from such trading each year since 2003.

The SEC alleges that Son and Chung faked SNCA's supposed forex trading profits, providing investors with monthly account statements showing fictitious returns. Son and Chung drained SNCA's and SNCI's bank accounts as their Ponzi scheme was collapsing and transferred investor funds to accounts they controlled overseas. In addition to paying Son's mortgage, investor funds were used to provide capital infusions to SNCI and pay Son's wife a salary for which she did no work.

Among other emergency relief for investors, the SEC seeks court orders prohibiting the defendants from engaging in future violations of the antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws; freezing their assets and compelling them to return overseas assets to the U.S.; and requiring them to disgorge their ill-gotten gains and pay financial penalties.

Son appeared in federal court in Oakland, Calif., yesterday on federal criminal charges. Separately today, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission announced civil fraud charges against Son, Chung, SNCA, and SNCI.

The SEC acknowledges the assistance of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Northern District of California, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and the National Futures Association.

# # #

For more information, contact:

Marc J. Fagel
Regional Director, SEC's San Francisco Regional Office
(415) 705-2449

Michael S. Dicke
Associate Regional Director-Enforcement, SEC's San Francisco Regional Office
(415) 705-2458

http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2009/2009-131.htm

Securities and Exchange Commission v. John S. Morgan, Marian I. Morgan, Morgan European Holdings ApS a/k/a Money Talks, Inc., ApS, Stephen E. Bowman, Bowman Marketing Group, Inc., and Thomas D. Woodcock, Jr., Case 8:09-CV-01093-RAL-EAJ

SEC OBTAINS EMERGENCY RELIEF AGAINST ALLEGED PERPETRATORS OF PRIME BANK SCHEME

The Securities and Exchange Commission announced that, on June 11, 2009, it filed a civil action in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida against Morgan European Holdings ApS, a/k/a Money Talks, Inc. ApS ("MEH"), John Morgan, Marian Morgan, Bowman Marketing Group, Inc. ("BMG"), Stephen E. Bowman, and Thomas D. Woodcock, Jr., for allegedly soliciting investments in fictitious prime bank trading programs. MEH is based in Denmark and in Sarasota, Florida, where John Morgan and Marian Morgan also reside. BMG is located in Omaha, Nebraska, where Bowman resides. Woodcock is a resident of Rockwall, Texas.

The Complaint alleges that, during 2006 and 2007, the defendants raised millions of dollars from investors to participate in a fictitious investment program involving the trading of financial instruments among top financial institutions. The defendants told investors that their principal was guaranteed or never placed at risk. However, according to the Complaint, the defendants used investor funds for various undisclosed purposes, including Bowman's gambling expenses, mortgage payments by the Morgans, and Ponzi payments to some investors. The SEC claims that John Morgan, Marian Morgan, and Stephen Bowman have continued to lull investors into remaining complacent by promising the imminent payment of their principal and returns. None of the relevant offerings was registered with the Commission, nor were any of the defendants registered as a broker-dealer or associated with a registered broker-dealer.

The Complaint claims that, based on this conduct, all of the defendants violated Sections 5(a), 5(c) and 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act") and Rule 10b-5 thereunder. The Complaint also claims that John Morgan, Marian Morgan, Bowman, and Woodcock violated Exchange Act Section 15(a). On the Commission's motion, the Court issued a Temporary Restraining Order, Asset Freeze and Other Equitable Relief ("Order") on June 11, 2009. Among other things, the Court's Order froze the assets of defendants John Morgan, Marian Morgan, MEH, Bowman, and BMG, wherever located, which are derived from, or reasonably traceable to, any investor funds. A hearing for a preliminary injunction has been set for June 25, 2009.

http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2009/lr21082.htm

U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Litigation Release No. 21083 / June 12, 2009
Accounting and Auditing Enforcement Release No. 2990 / June 12, 2009

Securities and Exchange Commission v. Blackout Media Corporation and Sandy Winick, United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Civil Action No. 09 CV 5454 (GBD)
SEC CHARGES PENNY STOCK COMPANY AND CANADIAN CITIZEN WITH ILLEGAL STOCK DISTRIBUTION THROUGH CORPORATE SPINOFFS

The Securities and Exchange Commission today filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York against penny stock company Blackout Media Corporation, formerly known as First Canadian American Holding Corporation ("First Canadian"), and its former principal Sandy Winick, a resident of Toronto, Canada. The SEC alleges that First Canadian and Winick engaged in a scheme to create publicly traded companies through illegal distribution of the securities of more than 50 First Canadian subsidiaries.

The SEC's complaint alleges that from April 2002 to May 2004, First Canadian spun off 59 subsidiaries through unregistered distribution of their securities to shareholders. As alleged in the complaint, these spinoffs had no legitimate business purpose and were instead a means to create publicly traded companies without providing the disclosure required by registration. According to the complaint, while conducting the spinoffs, First Canadian never filed periodic reports with the Commission, and made no meaningful disclosure about the financial and business operations of First Canadian or any of the subsidiaries. The complaint alleges that while First Canadian "reported" the spinoffs on Forms 8-K and proxy statements on Schedule 14A, these filings failed to disclose the true nature of the spinoff transactions and that Winick had control over 16.5% of First Canadian's stock through his wife, his friends, and affiliated entities.

The complaint further alleges that, as a result of the spinoffs, Winick assembled an inventory of public company shells for sale and later sold many of them. In addition, the complaint alleges that Winick traded in the shares of some of these companies and profited by at least $3.2 million from 2004 through 2007.

The SEC's complaint charges Blackout Media and Winick with violating Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange Act") and Rule 14a-9 thereunder. The complaint also charges Blackout Media with violating, and Winick with aiding and abetting violations of, Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act and Rules 12b-20, 13a-1, 13a-11, and 13a-13 thereunder; and Winick with violating Sections 13(d) and 16(a) of the Exchange Act and Rules 13d-1 and 16a-3 thereunder.

The Commission seeks permanent injunctions and civil penalties against Blackout Media and Winick, and seeks from Winick an accounting, disgorgement, a penny stock bar, and the surrender of all stock he owns or controls in the companies spun off by First Canadian or their successors.

Also today, the Commission filed an action in the Northern District of California alleging fraud and registration violations against one of the companies First Canadian spun off, Pearl Asian Mining Industries, Inc. (now known as ZNext Mining Corporation), and its principal, Elvira Gamboa (also known as Pearl Asian). SEC v. ZNext Mining Corporation, Inc. and Elvira G. Gamboa, Civil Action No. CV 09-2611 (VRW) (N.D. Cal.); LR-21084 (June 12, 2009).

The Commission acknowledges the assistance of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) and the Ontario Securities Commission.

http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2009/lr21083.htm

SEC Charges Attorneys for Fraudulent Legal Opinions Used by Promoters in Pump-and-Dump Scheme

Washington, D.C., May 5, 2009 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged two California-based attorneys as well as a California corporation and its owner for preparing and issuing fraudulent legal opinions involving unregistered stock that enabled promoters and others to sell shares in an illegal pump-and-dump scheme.

The SEC alleges that attorneys Albert J. Rasch, Jr. and Kathleen R. Novinger together with Sandra B. Masino and her company 144 Opinions, Inc. drafted and executed at least 24 legal opinion letters that fraudulently induced the removal of restrictive legends on unregistered shares of Mobile Ready Entertainment Corp. As a result, certificates representing more than 22 million shares of Mobile Ready were sold to the public in violation of Rule 144, which governs the conversion of restricted stock that otherwise cannot be sold to the public. The SEC previously charged Mobile Ready and two of its officers in connection with the fraudulent pump-and-dump scheme that was made possible, in part, by the bogus opinion letters.

"The market relies on lawyers to act as gatekeepers who exercise their function in good faith," said Katherine S. Addleman, Regional Director of the SEC's Atlanta Regional Office. "As alleged in our complaint, these defendants disregarded the investing public by operating a legal opinion mill of fraudulent letters that misrepresented critical facts and cited to non-existent documents."

The SEC's complaint, filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, alleges that after the fraudulent letters were prepared and issued, Masino and 144 Opinions made further false statements to a transfer agent to induce the removal of the restrictive legends on the respective shares of Mobile Ready. The fraudulent legal opinion letters contained false and misleading statements about the origin of the securities at issue, the existence of adequate public information concerning Mobile Ready, the existence of agreements between Mobile Ready and the relevant shareholders, and the applicability of Rule 144 promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933 to the restricted shares identified in each of the Mobile Ready Legal Opinions.

Mobile Ready, headquartered in Alpharetta, Ga., is a non-reporting, publicly-traded company that claims to market software applications for mobile devices and was previously quoted on the Pink Sheets under the symbol MRDY. Rasch and Masino each reside in Costa Mesa, Calif., Novinger resides in Cypress, Calif., and 144 Opinions was formerly headquartered in Newport Beach, Calif., before it became administratively dissolved.

The SEC's complaint alleges that the defendants violated the registration and antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws, Sections 5(a), 5(c) and 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's complaint also seeks permanent injunctions against future violations; disgorgement of ill-gotten gains plus prejudgment interest from Rasch and Masino; imposition of financial penalties against Rasch, Novinger and Masino; and an order permanently prohibiting defendants from participating in any offering of penny stock.

# # #

For more information, contact:

Katherine S. Addleman, Regional Director
William P. Hicks, Regional Trial Counsel
M. Graham Loomis, Assistant Regional Director
SEC's Atlanta Regional Office
404-842-7600

http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2009/2009-103.htm

Washington, D.C., April 30, 2009 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced that in fiscal year 2010 the fees that public companies and other issuers pay to register their securities with the Commission will be set at $71.30 per million dollars. In addition, the fees applicable to most securities transactions will be fixed at $12.70 per million dollars.

The Commission determined these new rates in accordance with the procedures required under the Investor and Capital Markets Fee Relief Act. Accordingly, the Commission consulted with both the Congressional Budget Office and the Office of Management and Budget regarding the annual adjustment. These adjustments do not affect the amount of funding available to the Commission.

A copy of the Commission's order, including the calculation methodology, is available at http://www.sec.gov.

Background

The Investor and Capital Markets Fee Relief Act requires that the Commission make annual adjustments to the rates for fees paid under Section 6(b) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Sections 13(e), 14(g), and 31 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Specifically, the Commission must set rates for the fees paid under Section 6(b) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 31 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 to levels that the Commission projects will generate collections equal to annual targets specified in the Act. The targets in the Fee Relief Act for fiscal years 2009 and 2010 are as follows:

Effective Oct. 1, 2009, or five days after the date on which the Commission receives its fiscal year 2010 regular appropriation, whichever date comes later, the Section 6(b) fee rate applicable to the registration of securities, the Section 13(e) fee rate applicable to the repurchase of securities, and the Section 14(g) fee rates applicable to proxy solicitations and statements in corporate control transactions will increase from $55.80 per million dollars to $71.30 per million dollars. The Section 6(b) rate is also the rate used to calculate the fees payable with the Annual Notice of Securities Sold Pursuant to Rule 24f-2 under the Investment Company Act of 1940.

In addition, effective Oct. 1, 2009, or 30 days after the date on which the Commission receives its fiscal year 2010 regular appropriation, whichever date comes later, the Section 31 fee rate applicable to securities transactions on the exchanges and certain over-the-counter markets will decrease from $25.70 per million dollars to $12.70 per million dollars. The assessment on security futures transactions under Section 31(d) will remain unchanged at $0.0042 for each round turn transaction.

The Office of Interpretation and Guidance in the Commission's Division of Trading and Markets is available for questions on Section 31 at (202) 551-5777, or by e-mail at tradingandmarkets@sec.gov.

The Commission will issue further notices as appropriate to keep the public informed of developments relating to the effective dates of the fee rates under Section 6(b), Section 13(e), Section 14(g), and Section 31. These notices will be posted at the Commission's Internet Web site at http://www.sec.gov.

# # #

http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2009/2009-100.htm