On March 5, the Securities Exchange Commission’s Division of Investment Management issued a no-action letter (the No-Action Letter) relating to the treatment of a Reserved Powers Trust as a non-US person by a non-US investment adviser in relying on the foreign private adviser exemption in section 203(b)(3) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the Advisers Act).
Continue Reading SEC Issues No Action Letter on Treatment of Reserved Powers Trust as Non-US Person by Non-US Investment Adviser for Registration Exemption

On August 26, the Securities and Exchange Commission adopted amendments to the definitions of “accredited investor” in Rule 501(a) and “qualified institutional buyer” in Rule 144A under the Securities Act of 1933 (Securities Act). The amendments expand the definition of accredited investor, a principal test to determine eligibility for participation in private capital markets, even if they do not meet specified income and net worth tests. Amendments to the qualified institutional buyer definition similarly expand the list of eligible entities under that definition. The amendments were adopted generally as proposed with no significant changes. The proposed amendments were previously covered in the December 20, 2019 edition of the Corporate & Financial Weekly Digest.
Continue Reading SEC Amends the Definitions of “Accredited Investor” and “Qualified Institutional Buyer”

On June 15, Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Jay Clayton made a public statement (Statement) covering several topics related to Regulation Best Interest (Reg BI) and Form CRS. Chairman Clayton confirmed that the compliance date for Reg BI and Form CRS will be June 30, 2020 and emphasized the SEC’s focus on issues related to Main Street investors, including the creation of a new investor-focused resource to assist such investors with reviewing the Form CRS and researching firms and financial professionals.
Continue Reading SEC Chairman Clayton Provides Public Statement Regulation Best Interest and Form CRS

On December 18, the Securities and Exchange Commission voted to propose amendments (the Proposal) to the definition of “accredited investor” for purposes of private placements under Regulation D and the definition of “qualified institutional buyer” in Rule 144A under the Securities Act of 1933. The Proposal is intended to update and improve the definitions of those terms in order to more effectively identify both institutional and individual investors with the sophistication to participate in private capital markets transactions. In the SEC’s press release announcing the Proposal, SEC Chairman Jay Clayton noted that, “The current test for individual accredited investor status takes a binary approach to who does and does not qualify based only [on] a person’s income or net worth. Modernization of this approach is long overdue.” As highlighted in the fact sheet included in the press release, the Proposal would, among other things:
Continue Reading SEC Announces Proposed Amendments to the Definitions of “Accredited Investor” and “Qualified Institutional Buyer”

On November 4, the Securities and Exchange Commission extended temporary no-action relief to firms that are regulated in the United States in connection with their efforts to comply with the research provisions of the European Union’s Markets in Financial Instruments Directive II (MiFID II). Under the extension, the SEC staff will not recommend enforcement action

On November 4, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced that it voted to propose amendments to modernize the rules under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (Advisers Act) addressing investment adviser advertisements and payments to solicitors. According to the SEC, the “proposed amendments to the advertising rule (Rule 206(4)-1 under the Advisers Act) would replace the current rule’s broadly drawn limitations with principles-based provisions,” and would permit the use of testimonials, endorsements and third-party ratings, subject to certain conditions. The proposed rule also would include tailored requirements for the presentation of performance results based on an advertisement’s intended audience.
Continue Reading SEC Proposes Changes to the Advertising and Cash Solicitation Rules for Investment Advisers

On October 31, Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. (ISS) filed suit against the Securities and Exchange Commission in the US District Court for the District of Columbia, challenging the guidance that the SEC issued in August 2019 regarding the applicability of the federal proxy rules to proxy advisors such as ISS. The SEC’s guidance was previously discussed in the August 23, 2019 edition of Corporate & Financial Weekly Digest.
Continue Reading ISS Files Suit Against SEC for Proxy Voting Advice Guidance

On July 11, the Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations (OCIE) of the Securities and Exchange Commission issued a Risk Alert to provide investment advisers and other market participants with information concerning many of the most common deficiencies that OCIE staff has found in recent examinations of investment advisers’ compliance with their best execution obligations under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Advisers Act”). The Advisers Act best execution obligation requires an investment adviser to execute securities transactions for clients in such a manner that the client’s total costs, or proceeds in each transaction, are the most favorable under the circumstances taking into consideration the full range and quality of a broker-dealer’s services including, among other things, the value of research provided as well as execution capability, commission rate, financial responsibility, and responsiveness to the investment adviser. Furthermore, an investment adviser should periodically evaluate the execution quality of broker-dealers executing their clients’ transactions.
Continue Reading OCIE Issues Risk Alert on Compliance Issues Related to Best Execution by Investment Advisers

On June 5, the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Division of Investment Management staff (Staff) updated its “Staff Responses to Questions About the Custody Rule” (Custody Rule FAQs). The Custody Rule FAQs address questions regarding Rule 206(4)-2 of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, the “Custody Rule.” The update to the Custody Rule FAQs specifically addressed concerns regarding the Staff’s February 2017 Guidance Update titled: “Inadvertent Custody: Advisory Contract Versus Custodial Contract Authority” (Guidance Update). The Guidance Update indicated that investment advisers may inadvertently have custody (Inadvertent Custody) of client assets due to provisions in a separate custodial agreement entered into between its advisory client and a qualified custodian that allow the investment adviser to instruct the custodian to disburse, or transfer, client funds or securities.
Continue Reading SEC Releases Updates to Custody Rule Frequently Asked Questions

On June 12, the staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Division of Investment Management updated its Frequently Asked Questions on Form ADV and IARD. Much of the additional guidance relates to amendments to Part 1A of Form ADV made by the SEC in 2016. Investment advisers will need to comply with these amendments beginning