Avenue Securities' $300K FINRA Fine: Paid Influencers

Updated October 2026. First published February 2025.

In January 2025, FINRA censured Avenue Securities LLC and fined it $300,000 over social media posts by influencers who promoted the firm in Brazil (AWC No. 2021072581901). Avenue also agreed that a senior manager who is a registered principal would certify within 180 days that the firm had fixed the problems, with a narrative and exhibits to show it. It neither admitted nor denied the findings.

Avenue is a Miami firm with about 40 registered representatives that offers self-directed online trading, mostly to Brazilian residents who want to buy U.S. securities. It doesn't open new accounts for U.S. residents. The case came out of a FINRA examination of how firms acquire customers through social media, the same subject as the M1 Finance and TradeZero cases. Those posts cover the basics: when a paid influencer's post becomes the firm's own retail communication, and how forum posts are reviewed. This one covers what Avenue's case adds. The influencers were paid by a foreign affiliate, they posted in Portuguese, and the firm's own procedures already required principal approval of ads.

How the Program Worked

From January 2020 through March 2023, an Avenue affiliate arranged with about 25 influencers, all based in Brazil, to promote Avenue and its affiliated companies to retail investors in Brazil. The affiliate paid each one a fixed monthly fee for content that promoted the Avenue brand, including the firm's products and services. Each influencer had a unique referral link. Customers opened and funded more than 19,000 new accounts through those links.

Avenue, through its affiliates, helped guide what the influencers said. One agreement listed the topics a series of posts had to cover, such as starting a portfolio by investing in the U.S. The firm also gave influencers a set of "Conduct Rules" with sample lines, including one telling viewers that investing a dollar in the North American market might mean saving money.

FINRA treated the posts as retail communications of the firm under Rule 2210, citing the tests in Regulatory Notices 10-06 and 17-18: a third party's post is the firm's if the firm paid for it or helped prepare it, or endorsed it. Nothing in the order turns on which company paid the fee, on the fee being a flat monthly amount instead of a payment per account, or on the language of the posts. The quotes in the AWC are FINRA's translations from Portuguese.

What the Posts Said

FINRA found the posts weren't fair and balanced, or made promissory or misleading claims. The AWC gives examples:

One video told viewers that real estate investment trusts pay a dividend every month, always. Other posts suggested certain securities would guarantee dividend income and didn't mention the risks.
Another linked praying in English to blessings and returns in dollars from the world's best stock exchange.
Posts used hashtags such as #GetRich, #Millionaire, and #ExtraIncome.
Several promoted specific registered ETFs without the disclosures that Securities Act Rule 482 requires in fund advertisements.
Some encouraged viewers to buy crypto assets without explaining that they could lose everything they put in.
Some called Avenue free, completely free of charge, or zero fee, without saying that some fees may apply or linking prominently to the fee schedule.
Many didn't identify themselves as paid advertisements.

A Procedure That Never Reached the Posts

Avenue's written procedures already required a principal to review and approve retail communications before use. They didn't say when an influencer's post counts as a retail communication of the firm. So nothing routed the posts to a principal.

The results follow from that one gap. From January 2020 through March 2023, no registered principal approved the influencers' static video posts before they went up. The firm kept no records of the influencers' communications or the dates they were used, which Rule 2210(b)(4) and Exchange Act Rule 17a-4(b)(4) require. From January 2020 through February 2021, it didn't review influencers' posts in interactive forums either. FINRA found violations of Rule 2210(b), Rule 4511, and Section 17(a) of the Exchange Act, plus a supervision violation under Rule 3110.

In March 2023, Avenue changed its system to require principal approval of influencer content before use and began keeping records of those reviews.

What to Check in an Influencer Program

Write down, in your communications procedures, that posts by paid or guided influencers are the firm's retail communications. Name who routes them to a principal and when.
Count payments from affiliates. If an affiliate pays influencers on your behalf, the program is yours to supervise.
Treat the brief you give influencers as a draft ad. Avenue's sample lines and required topics were part of what tied the posts to the firm.
Make sure the principal who approves a post can read it. If influencers post in a language your principals don't read, arrange a translation before approval, not after.
Keep the approved version, the date of first and last use, and the approving principal's name for each post, as Rule 2210(b)(4) requires.
Check fee claims and fund ads against a list: no unqualified "free," a link to the fee schedule, Rule 482 language for any fund, and a clear label that the post is paid.

If your firm markets to investors outside the U.S., read this order next to your affiliate agreements. The structure Avenue used, with a foreign affiliate paying local influencers, didn't change which rules applied.

This post is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For guidance on specific regulatory obligations, consult your counsel or compliance advisor.