This Note analyzes the legislative history of the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the Banking Act of 1933 to ascertain whether Congress may have intended to include modern instruments such as high-yield time deposit savings certificates - items utilized today as alternative investment vehicles to minimize the effects of double digit inflation and interest rates. This Note examines the split among the circuits which have attempted to reconcile statutory language and congressional intent with the practicalities of the modern complex financial marketplace in determining whether promissory notes, including certificates of deposit, are securities. This Note concludes that Congress did not intend to cover certificates of deposit within the scope of the securities acts. Furthermore, in view of the potential over-regulation of the banking industry, courts should not stretch the statutory definition of a security to afford an additional jurisdictional means for aggrieved certificate holders to be heard before the federal bench.
Mitchell S. Berkey,
Bank Certificates of Deposit: Notes Not in Tune with Securities Regulation,
10 Fordham Urb. L.J. 469
Available at: http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/ulj/vol10/iss3/4