<<< Go to start <<<
Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
A statement, issued by the Social Security Administration’s Office of the Inspector General on 12 September 2001, explained:
“Stansberry & Associates Investment Research, LLC (Stansberry) of Baltimore, Maryland, has agreed to pay a $55,000 civil monetary penalty to the Social Security Administration (SSA), SSA Inspector General Patrick P. O’Carroll, Jr. announced. Stansberry, a subsidiary of Agora, Inc., has also voluntarily ceased promotion of its “Get Social Security No Matter What Your Age” publication, removed all reference to “insiders” at SSA on its company website, and taken steps to disable all active links to these materials.
“According to its website (www.stansberryresearch.com), Stansberry “is an independent investment research firm, with subscribers in more than 100 different countries.” Stansberry claims to have approximately 315,000 paid, active, unique subscribers, and another 500,000 readers who subscribe to various free e-letters and other Stansberry publications.
“The SSA Office of the Inspector General (OIG) contacted Stansberry after learning that Stansberry was promoting its “Get Social Security No Matter What Your Age” publication by claiming to have “insiders” at SSA as a source of some of its information. The SSA OIG informed Stansberry that its characterization of its SSA contacts as “insiders” violated Section 1140 of the Social Security Act (the Act). While not admitting that it violated Section 1140 of the Act, Stansberry agreed to pay a civil monetary penalty to settle the claim.”
Stansberry caught in the act
The inspector general’s office also explained that section 1140 prohibits the use of the Social Security Administration’s name and symbols in advertisements or promotions in a way that gives a false impression that the agency approved of the material or that the subject has some official connection. In this case, the believed that the characterization of Stansberry’s SSA contacts as “insiders” falsely implied that the information was not available to the public. The claimed “insider” information was, in fact, available to anyone upon request.
<<< Go to start <<<
Page 2 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
Brian Deer | November 2013