Wash. Rev. Code » Title 21 · Chapter 21.20
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 21.20.450 (2026)

Administration of chapter—Rules and forms, publication—Cooperation with other state and federal authorities

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) The administration of the provisions of this chapter shall be under the department of financial institutions. The director may from time to time make, amend, and repeal such rules, forms, and orders as are necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter, including rules defining any term, whether or not such term is used in the Washington securities law. The director may classify securities, persons, and matters within the director's jurisdiction, and prescribe different requirements for different classes. No rule, form, or order may be made unless the director finds that the action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest or for the protection of investors and consistent with the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of this chapter. In prescribing rules and forms the director may cooperate with the securities administrators of the other states and the securities and exchange commission with a view to effectuating the policy of this statute to achieve maximum uniformity in the form and content of registration statements, applications, and reports wherever practicable. All rules and forms of the director shall be published.
(2) To encourage uniform interpretation and administration of this chapter and effective securities regulation and enforcement, the director may cooperate with the securities agencies or administrators of one or more states, Canadian provinces or territories, or another country, the securities and exchange commission, the commodity futures trading commission, the securities investor protection corporation, any self-regulatory organization, any national or international organization of securities officials or agencies, and any governmental law enforcement or regulatory agency.
(3) The cooperation authorized by subsection (2) of this section includes:
(a) Establishing a central depository for licensing or registration under this chapter and for documents or records required or allowed to be maintained under this chapter;
(b) Making a joint license or registration examination or investigation;
(c) Holding a joint administrative hearing;
(d) Filing and prosecuting a joint civil or administrative hearing;
(e) Sharing and exchanging personnel;
(f) Sharing and exchanging information and documents; and
(g) Formulating under chapter 34.05 RCW, rules or proposed rules on matters such as statements of policy, guidelines, and interpretative opinions and releases.
[ 1994 c 256 s 24; 1993 c 472 s 15; 1979 ex.s. c 68 s 33; 1979 c 158 s 86; 1975 1st ex.s. c 84 s 25; 1959 c 282 s 45.]

Notes:

Findings—Construction—1994 c 256: See RCW 43.320.007.
Effective date—1993 c 472: See RCW 43.320.900.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1983–2008 · leading case: Halleran v. Nu West, Inc., 123 Wash. App. 701 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Halleran v. Nu West, Inc., 123 Wash. App. 701 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 5× “Halleran claims RCW 21.20.450 indicates a clear legislative intent that the Securities Division has a duty to enforce the Securities Act to protect investors and defines investors as a particular class.”
Halleran v. Nu West, Inc., 98 P.3d 52 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 5× “[18] The only reference to the protection of investors in RCW 21.”
Ives v. Ramsden, 174 P.3d 1231 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). “RCW 21.20.450(1). In a consent order, DFI found that Ramsden had engaged in dishonest and unethical practices because he recommended unsuitable investments and borrowed money from Ives.”
Ives v. Ramsden, 142 Wash. App. 369 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). “RCW 21.20.450(1). In a consent order, DFI found that Ramsden had engaged in dishonest and unethical practices because he recommended ■unsuitable investments and borrowed money from Ives.”
State v. Stephan, 671 P.2d 780 (Wash. Ct. App. 1983). “While the word "rule" also appears throughout RCW Title 21 in reference to the authority of the director, his or her authority to make rules is established in RCW 21.20.450: The administration of the provisions of this chapter shall be under the department of licensing.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 21.20.450(1) — 4 cases
Halleran v. Nu West, Inc., 123 Wash. App. 701 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “Halleran claims RCW 21.20.450 indicates a clear legislative intent that the Securities Division has a duty to enforce the Securities Act to protect investors and defines investors as a particular class.”
Halleran v. Nu West, Inc., 98 P.3d 52 (Wash. Ct. App. 2004). “[18] The only reference to the protection of investors in RCW 21.”
Ives v. Ramsden, 174 P.3d 1231 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). “RCW 21.20.450(1). In a consent order, DFI found that Ramsden had engaged in dishonest and unethical practices because he recommended unsuitable investments and borrowed money from Ives.”
Ives v. Ramsden, 142 Wash. App. 369 (Wash. Ct. App. 2008). “RCW 21.20.450(1). In a consent order, DFI found that Ramsden had engaged in dishonest and unethical practices because he recommended ■unsuitable investments and borrowed money from Ives.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.