> "I wonder if it's going to be considered a loophole that will be closed or an abuse. I suppose it could be either." This is addressed in the notes at the bot

> "I wonder if it's going to be considered a loophole that will be closed or an abuse. I suppose it could be either." This is addressed in the notes at the bottom of the article: > "Specifically, as the SEC says: All orders for multiple accounts beneficially owned or controlled by the same person or entity, and all sub-accounts of a person or entity’s master account, must be aggregated when determining whether the 390-order threshold has been exceeded by that person or entity. If in fact Behruz Afshar controlled both Fineline and Makino, then he should have aggregated them, and by pretending that Shahryar was the sole owner of Makino the twins evaded that requirement. "