On October 7th, 2020, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) announced the rescheduled date of its 2020 national compliance outreach seminar for investment companies and investment advisers. This program is intended to help Chief Compliance Officers and other senior personnel at investment companies and investment advisory firms enhance their compliance programs. The SEC’s Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations (OCIE), Division of Investment Management (IM), and the Asset Management Unit (AMU) of the Division of Enforcement jointly sponsor the compliance outreach program. The national seminar will be held virtually on the afternoon of Thursday, November 19th, 2020 via a live webcast from the SEC’s Washington, D.C., headquarters from noon until 4:50 p.m. EST. Continue Reading
Asset managers commonly engage regulatory compliance consultants to aid them in addressing regulatory requirements and implementing compliance programs. The work of those compliance professionals can be drawn into SEC enforcement actions in various contexts. See, e.g., ZPR Investment Mgmt. Inc. v. SEC (compliance consultant resigned when advice not followed and testified in proceeding). One such context is when a fund manager asserts reliance on advice of the compliance consultant as a defense to fraud charges. Earlier this year, a district court opinion addressed that very issue. Although the opinion received little attention, it could have major implications if its analysis is broadly adopted. Continue Reading
New rules in Europe concerning sustainability-related disclosures in the financial sector will come into force from March 2021. Our UK regulatory specialists summarize the key aspects of the new ESG rules which will impact a wide range of financial services participants, including non-EU (i.e. U.S. fund managers) that market funds in the EEA.
Just as U.S. regulators are wrestling with the question of how to regulate cryptocurrencies and digital assets, as reported here, the same questions are being asked in the UK. Some have been answered with refreshing clarity; some remain much more opaque.
As with any new technology or asset, there are different spheres of legal and regulatory influence to consider. At the most basic, what is it? (a.k.a. Can I steal it? And can I recover it?). The next level is typically regulatory – Who regulates it? How it is regulated? How are the public and markets protected?
How any jurisdiction answers these questions will have a material impact on the way private firms and others within the asset management industry deal with, and consider potential investments in, crypto assets. Continue Reading
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently approved amendments to the definition of an accredited investor found in Rule 501(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 that will facilitate the ability of funds and other issuers to raise capital through private placements. Several commenters on the SEC’s proposed rule cautioned that a rise in civil litigation and regulatory actions would likely result from what would be generally perceived as a broadening of the accredited investor standard. Noting these concerns, the SEC’s adopting release cited a recently completed analysis by the agency’s staff of publicly available information on SEC litigation against Regulation D issuers which found that there were relatively few SEC civil court cases involving private placements over the 2009-2019 period compared to the total number of private placement filers. Time will reveal which of these arguments will prove to be correct.
Read the full client alert for a full discussion of these new revisions to the accredited investor standard and how they will affect private fund sponsors going forward.
On August 18, 2020, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), which is the primary regulator and administrator of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), issued a statement on enforcement of the BSA. The requirements of the BSA typically apply to financial institutions, but in certain circumstances the Act applies to nonfinancial businesses and individuals. Continue Reading
A cyber breach can have serious legal, financial, and reputational consequences for a fund sponsor, as described in our previous post. As such, cybersecurity threats must be treated as business risks, not just a potential IT problem. Senior management at fund sponsors should take the lead to ensure that the sponsor is taking appropriate actions to protect itself against cyber risks. There are several steps that senior management can guide the fund sponsor to take to prevent breaches from occurring and to mitigate the impact when they do occur. Continue Reading