Thomas A. Vigil

(CRD #3269058, Saunderstown, Rhode Island)

April 29, 2025 – An AWC was issued in which Vigil was assessed a deferred fine of $10,000, suspended from association with any FINRA member in all capacities for 12 months, and ordered to pay deferred restitution, plus interest, to customers in the amount of $25,436. Without admitting or denying the findings, Vigil consented to the sanctions and to the entry of findings that he recommended variable annuity exchanges to member firm customers without having a reasonable basis to believe the recommendations were suitable. The findings stated that Vigil recommended that the customers exchange their existing variable annuity for an L-share variable annuity with a four-year surrender period that was paired with a Guaranteed Minimum Withdrawal Benefit rider. Vigil did not conduct or document any assessment of the suitability of his recommendation and failed to conduct a comparative analysis of the benefits, fees, and costs of the surrendered and replacement variable annuities. In all instances, Vigil incorrectly stated in his documentation of the exchanges that the replacement variable annuity was lower in fees when, in fact, the replacement annuity caused customers to increase their base expenses. As a result of these recommendations, Vigil’s customers collectively paid $25,436 in additional costs. Further, Vigil failed to consider the loss of a tax advantaged method for taking withdrawals that was available with customers’ existing variable annuity but not the replacement that he recommended. The findings also stated that Vigil recommended that customers purchase variable annuities without having a reasonable basis to believe the recommendations were suitable. Vigil recommended the customers purchase an investment-only variable annuity with a liquidity option by using qualified funds from their existing individual retirement accounts (IRAs). Vigil did not have a reasonable basis to believe that the customers would benefit from the features of an investment-only variable annuity, which charged additional fees. Vigil also failed to accurately assess the cost of the liquidity rider and other fees associated with the purchase recommendations, which caused the customers to incur greater fees than those of their respective IRAs. Further, Vigil did not have a reasonable basis to believe that the investment only variable annuity purchases were suitable based on the customers’ investment profiles and investment objectives associated with his recommendations. Vigil did not consider whether a customer, based on their age, would be subject to tax penalties if the customer took early withdrawals from the annuity. The findings also included that Vigil made negligent misrepresentations and omissions of material fact in contravention of Section 17(a)(2) of the Securities Act when recommending variable annuity transactions. Vigil submitted customer-facing annuity disclosure forms that were required by his firm in connection with annuity exchanges in which he made the transactions appear more favorable than they actually were. In all instances, Vigil negligently misrepresented on the form to the customer and the firm that he was recommending a B-share annuity when the application was for the more expensive L-share annuity. As a result, Vigil also negligently misrepresented the fees and riders for the replacement variable annuity. Further, Vigil negligently misrepresented that the replacement annuity costs, and rider fees were lower than the surrendered annuity, when the replacement annuity costs were actually 50 basis points higher than the surrendered annuity. With respect to the customers who purchased investment-only variable annuities, Vigil negligently misrepresented that the additional variable annuity purchases offered a “standard” death benefit when the product did not offer any guaranteed death benefit. Vigil also negligently omitted the cost by leaving the cost of the liquidity rider blank on one of the purchase applications. FINRA found that Vigil forged a customer’s variable annuity application by photocopying her signatures from her first annuity application onto her second application. Although the customer approved of the purchase, she was not aware of, and did not consent to, Vigil photocopying her signatures. The suspension is in effect from May 5, 2025, through May 4, 2026. (FINRA Case #2020065124801) If you have suffered losses as a result of Thomas A. Vigil's act and/or actions, we would like to hear from you. We are currently investigating claims on behalf of clients who have suffered significant losses in their portfolios that are managed by Thomas A. Vigil. The Schwartz Law Firm represents investors in claims against financial advisors and their firms. If you have questions about your potential claim or need assistance from an investment fraud lawyer, please contact us at 866-618-0545 or email Matthew Schwartz directly at mschwartz@tslfirm.com.