Table of Contents
SERIES 7 | SERIES 24 | FINANCIAL REGULATION COURSES
FINRA Rule 11100 is the foundational scope rule of the entire Uniform Practice Code — the provision that defines which transactions fall within the Code's coverage, which categories of transactions are excluded, how the scope of any individual Uniform Practice Code rule may be expanded or narrowed, what happens when a party fails to deliver securities or fails to pay on settlement date, and the universal CUSIP number requirement that applies across the Code's documentary infrastructure.
The rule operates through four lettered paragraphs: paragraph (a) establishes the general scope — all over-the-counter secondary market transactions between members, including restricted securities under Securities Act Rule 144(a)(3), are subject to the Code except for five enumerated categories of excluded transactions; paragraph (b) establishes that any individual Uniform Practice Code rule may expand or limit paragraph (a)'s general scope of coverage if that rule specifically so provides; paragraph (c) establishes the non-cancellation principle for failed deliveries and failed payments, directing parties to the FINRA Rule 11810 buy-in and FINRA Rule 11820 sell-out remedies rather than treating non-performance as automatically voiding the contract, and establishing liability for damages from default; and paragraph (d) establishes the mandatory CUSIP number requirement on the Uniform Transfer Instruction Form, Uniform Delivery Ticket, and Uniform Comparison or Confirmation.
FINRA Rule 11100 was last amended by SR-FINRA-2010-060 and SR-FINRA-2010-030, both effective December 15, 2010, as part of the Uniform Practice Code's transfer into the Consolidated FINRA Rulebook. Seven selected notices are associated — 83-69, 84-46, 84-68, 84-73, 91-63, 96-14, and 10-49.
FINRA Rule 11100 sits within the 11000 Uniform Practice Code as its first substantive rule, immediately following FINRA Rule 11000's series marker.
The rule's amendment history extends back to January 1, 1973, with subsequent amendments effective January 13, 1977, April 7, 1978, November 9, 1982, March 18, 1983, and January 1, 1985, followed by SR-NASD-95-53 effective January 29, 1996, SR-NASD-97-06 effective April 9, 1997, and the two December 2010 amendments that transferred the rule into the FINRA framework.
FINRA Rule 11100(a) establishes the Uniform Practice Code's general scope in sweeping terms — all over-the-counter secondary market transactions in securities, including restricted securities as defined in Securities Act Rule 144(a)(3), between members are subject to the Code's provisions, encompassing the rights and liabilities of the members participating in the transaction and those operational procedures that affect the day-to-day business of members.
This is an intentionally broad opening statement — the default rule is that the Uniform Practice Code applies to the entire universe of inter-member over-the-counter secondary market activity.
The explicit inclusion of restricted securities as defined in Securities Act Rule 144(a)(3) is notable — it confirms that securities subject to Rule 144's resale restrictions are not thereby excluded from Uniform Practice Code coverage merely because of their restricted status.
The operational mechanics of comparing, confirming, and delivering a restricted security between members remain governed by the Uniform Practice Code's general framework even though the security itself carries transfer restrictions under the securities laws.
Against this broad general scope, FINRA Rule 11100(a) then carves out five categorical exclusions.
The first exclusion — FINRA Rule 11100(a)(1) — removes transactions compared, cleared, or settled through the facilities of a registered clearing agency, except to the extent the clearing agency's own rules provide that other organizations' rules shall apply. This is the most significant exclusion in practical terms, since it removes the overwhelming majority of modern equity and corporate debt transaction volume from the Uniform Practice Code's direct application — National Securities Clearing Corporation's continuous net settlement system processes the vast bulk of equity transactions, and those transactions are governed by NSCC's own rules rather than by the Uniform Practice Code directly. The exception within the exception — except to the extent that the rules of the clearing agency provide that rules of other organizations shall apply — preserves a pathway for Uniform Practice Code provisions to remain operative even for clearing-agency-processed transactions where the clearing agency's rules expressly defer to them.
The second exclusion — FINRA Rule 11100(a)(2) — removes transactions in securities exempted under Exchange Act Section 3(a)(12). Section 3(a)(12) exempts specific categories of securities from various Exchange Act provisions, including certain government and government-agency securities, and this exclusion confirms that transactions in those exempted securities fall outside the Uniform Practice Code's coverage.
The third exclusion — FINRA Rule 11100(a)(3) — removes transactions in municipal securities as defined in Exchange Act Section 3(a)(29). Municipal securities transactions are governed by the separate regulatory framework administered by the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board, and this exclusion ensures the Uniform Practice Code does not create overlapping or conflicting operational requirements for municipal securities transactions that the MSRB's own rules already address.
The fourth exclusion — FINRA Rule 11100(a)(4) — removes transactions in redeemable securities issued by companies registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, with an important carve-back: the Code shall apply to secondary market transactions between members in any security issued by a registered investment company classified as a unit investment trust under Investment Company Act Section 4. This creates a nested structure — mutual funds and other redeemable investment company securities are generally excluded because their primary transaction mechanism is direct redemption with the fund itself rather than secondary market trading between members, but unit investment trust securities — which do trade in genuine secondary markets between members in a manner analogous to other securities — are brought back within the Code's coverage for those secondary market transactions. The provision further clarifies that redemptions of securities directly by the trustee of the unit investment trust are not transactions between members for purposes of this subparagraph — meaning the direct redemption transaction itself remains outside Uniform Practice Code coverage even for unit investment trusts; it is only genuine member-to-member secondary market activity in UIT securities that the Code covers.
The fifth exclusion — FINRA Rule 11100(a)(5) — removes transactions in Direct Participation Program securities as defined in FINRA Rule 2310, except as otherwise provided in this Code. Direct Participation Programs — limited partnership interests in real estate, oil and gas, equipment leasing, and similar programs — have historically traded, to the extent they trade at all, through specialized secondary market mechanisms quite different from standard equity or debt securities, and this exclusion reflects that operational reality while preserving the except as otherwise provided qualifier that allows specific Uniform Practice Code rules — most notably FINRA Rules 11580 and 11581 governing the transfer of limited partnership securities and limited partnership transfer forms within the FINRA Rule 11500 series — to bring DPP securities back within scope for the specific operational mechanics those rules address.
FINRA Rule 11100(b) establishes a meta-principle governing the relationship between the general scope of paragraph (a) and the scope of any individual rule within the Uniform Practice Code — the scope of coverage contained in paragraph (a) may be expanded or limited in any Rule of this Code if specifically provided therein.
This provision gives the Uniform Practice Code a layered scope architecture. FINRA Rule 11100(a) establishes the default — the general universe of transactions the Code covers and the categorical exclusions from that universe. But any specific rule within the Code may depart from that default in either direction — expanding coverage to bring in transactions or securities that paragraph (a) would otherwise exclude, as FINRA Rules 11580 and 11581 do for Direct Participation Program limited partnership securities under the FINRA Rule 11100(a)(5) except as otherwise provided in this Code language, or limiting coverage to apply only to a narrower subset of transactions than paragraph (a)'s general scope would otherwise reach, as many of the specialized delivery and units-of-delivery rules within FINRA Rules 11300 through 11650 do by their nature — applying only to the specific security types or transaction circumstances each rule addresses.
This layered architecture means that determining whether a specific Uniform Practice Code provision applies to a specific transaction requires examining both FINRA Rule 11100(a)'s general scope and exclusions and the specific provision's own scope language — a provision's own terms control over the general scope framework when the provision specifically addresses the scope question.
FINRA Rule 11100(c) establishes one of the most fundamental operational principles in the entire Uniform Practice Code — that a failure to perform a securities contract does not, by itself, cancel that contract. In trades between members, failure to deliver the securities sold, or failure to pay for securities as delivered, on or after the settlement date, does not effect a cancellation of the contract.
This non-cancellation principle has profound practical implications. If a selling member fails to deliver securities on settlement date, the contract remains in force — the buying member does not automatically walk away from the trade simply because delivery did not occur on schedule. Similarly, if a buying member fails to pay for securities that have been delivered, the contract remains in force — the selling member cannot simply treat the trade as void because payment was not received on time.
Instead of automatic cancellation, FINRA Rule 11100(c) directs the parties to specific remedial mechanisms — the remedy for the buyer or seller is provided for by FINRA Rules 11810 and 11820 respectively, unless the parties mutually consent to cancel the trade. FINRA Rule 11810's buy-in procedures provide the buying member's remedy when the selling member fails to deliver — the buying member may, following the procedures and notice requirements of FINRA Rule 11810, purchase the securities elsewhere and hold the original selling member liable for any cost difference. FINRA Rule 11820's sell-out procedures provide the selling member's remedy when the buying member fails to pay or take delivery — the selling member may, following FINRA Rule 11820's procedures, sell the securities elsewhere and hold the original buying member liable for any difference.
The unless the parties mutually consent to cancel the trade qualifier preserves the parties' freedom of contract — nothing in FINRA Rule 11100(c) prevents the buyer and seller from agreeing between themselves to simply cancel the trade rather than proceeding through the buy-in or sell-out mechanism, but absent such mutual agreement, the default rule is that the contract survives the failure to perform and the prescribed remedial mechanism applies.
The final sentence of paragraph (c) establishes the liability and timing framework for damages — in every such case of nondelivery of securities, the party in default shall be liable for any damages which may accrue thereby, and all claims for such damages shall be made promptly. This establishes both the substantive liability principle — the defaulting party bears the cost of its default — and a procedural promptness requirement for damage claims, reflecting the Uniform Practice Code's general emphasis on the rapid resolution of settlement failures rather than allowing claims to languish and complicate the orderly functioning of the market.
FINRA Rule 11100(d) establishes a brief but operationally fundamental requirement — the CUSIP number must be used on the Uniform Transfer Instruction Form, Uniform Delivery Ticket, and the Uniform Comparison or Confirmation. CUSIP numbers — the standardized nine-character alphanumeric identifiers assigned to securities by the CUSIP Service Bureau — are the universal identification mechanism that allows market participants across the entire securities industry to identify a specific security unambiguously regardless of the issuer's name, the security's specific terms, or any other identifying information that might vary in how it is recorded by different parties.
By mandating CUSIP number usage on three specific standardized documents — the Uniform Transfer Instruction Form used in connection with account transfers and registered security transfers discussed throughout the FINRA Rule 11500 series, the Uniform Delivery Ticket used in connection with the physical or book-entry delivery process discussed throughout FINRA Rule 11300, and the Uniform Comparison or Confirmation used in the trade confirmation process under FINRA Rule 11200 — FINRA Rule 11100(d) ensures that the CUSIP number functions as the common identifier threading through every stage of the Uniform Practice Code's transaction lifecycle, from initial trade confirmation through delivery through any subsequent transfer documentation. This CUSIP requirement is foundational infrastructure for the entire Uniform Practice Code's operational coherence — without a universal security identifier appearing consistently across these standardized forms, the comparison, delivery, and transfer processes that the rest of the Code governs would be vulnerable to the kind of identification ambiguity and mismatch errors that CUSIP numbers were specifically developed to eliminate.
FINRA Rule 11100's amendment history — extending back to an effective date of January 1, 1973, with subsequent amendments in 1977, 1978, 1982, 1983, and 1985, followed by SR-NASD-95-53 effective January 29, 1996, SR-NASD-97-06 effective April 9, 1997, and the two December 2010 amendments — reflects the rule's character as a foundational scope provision that has been progressively refined as the securities markets, clearing infrastructure, and regulatory framework evolved over more than five decades. The seven selected notices associated with the rule — 83-69, 84-46, 84-68, 84-73, 91-63, 96-14, and 10-49 — span from the early 1980s through the 2010 Consolidated FINRA Rulebook transition, reflecting guidance issued at each stage of the rule's evolution as new categories of securities, new clearing arrangements, and new regulatory exemptions required corresponding adjustments to the Uniform Practice Code's scope provisions.
The two December 2010 amendments — SR-FINRA-2010-060 and SR-FINRA-2010-030, both effective December 15, 2010 — represent the most recent substantive changes, occurring as part of the broader transfer of the Uniform Practice Code from the NASD rulebook into the Consolidated FINRA Rulebook alongside FINRA Rule 11000's adoption discussed in that rule's entry. No amendments have occurred to FINRA Rule 11100 since December 2010.
FINRA Rule 11100 connects to FINRA Rule 11200 — whose Uniform Comparison or Confirmation is one of the three documents subject to FINRA Rule 11100(d)'s CUSIP requirement. It connects to FINRA Rule 11300 — whose Uniform Delivery Ticket is the second document subject to that CUSIP requirement, and whose delivery framework operates within the scope FINRA Rule 11100(a) establishes. It connects to FINRA Rule 11500 generally and to FINRA Rules 11580 and 11581 specifically — whose Uniform Transfer Instruction Form is the third document subject to the CUSIP requirement, and whose limited partnership transfer provisions represent the except as otherwise provided in this Code expansion of FINRA Rule 11100(a)(5)'s Direct Participation Program exclusion. It connects to FINRA Rules 11810 and 11820 — the buy-in and sell-out remedies that FINRA Rule 11100(c) designates as the operative response to failed delivery and failed payment respectively. And it connects to FINRA Rule 2310 — whose Direct Participation Program definition FINRA Rule 11100(a)(5) incorporates by reference for purposes of that exclusion.
FINRA Rule 11100 is tested on the Series 7 and Series 24 examinations as the scope rule for the entire Uniform Practice Code — the provision defining what transactions the Code covers, what it excludes, and the fundamental non-cancellation and CUSIP requirements that apply across the Code's operation.
The key points to retain are these: FINRA Rule 11100(a) subjects all over-the-counter secondary market transactions between members — including Rule 144(a)(3) restricted securities — to the Uniform Practice Code, except five categories: transactions compared, cleared, or settled through a registered clearing agency unless the clearing agency's rules defer to other organizations' rules; transactions in securities exempted under Exchange Act Section 3(a)(12); transactions in municipal securities under Exchange Act Section 3(a)(29); transactions in redeemable Investment Company Act securities, except that unit investment trust secondary market transactions between members remain covered while direct trustee redemptions do not; and transactions in Direct Participation Program securities under FINRA Rule 2310, except as otherwise provided in the Code; FINRA Rule 11100(b) allows any individual Uniform Practice Code rule to expand or limit paragraph (a)'s general scope if that rule specifically so provides, creating a layered scope architecture; FINRA Rule 11100(c) establishes that failure to deliver securities or failure to pay for delivered securities on or after settlement date does not cancel the contract — the buyer's remedy is the FINRA Rule 11810 buy-in and the seller's remedy is the FINRA Rule 11820 sell-out, unless the parties mutually consent to cancel, and the defaulting party is liable for damages with claims to be made promptly; FINRA Rule 11100(d) requires the CUSIP number on the Uniform Transfer Instruction Form, Uniform Delivery Ticket, and Uniform Comparison or Confirmation; and the rule was last amended December 15, 2010 through SR-FINRA-2010-060 and SR-FINRA-2010-030, with seven selected notices spanning from 1983 through 2010 — 83-69, 84-46, 84-68, 84-73, 91-63, 96-14, and 10-49.
