SEC adopts regulation systems compliance and integrity

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 4-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Burns ◽  
Georgia Bullitt ◽  
Howard Kramer ◽  
Jack Habert ◽  
James Doench
Keyword(s):  
Cyber Security ◽  
Financial Services ◽  
Periodic Review ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Security Issues ◽  
Market Participants ◽  
Investment Companies ◽  
Policies And Procedures ◽  
Investment Advisers

Purpose – To explain the requirements of Regulation Systems Compliance and Integrity (“Regulation SCI”) and the new responsibilities of organizations defined as “SCI entities.” Design/methodology/approach – Explains the purpose of Regulation SCI, the responsibilities of SCI entities, systems covered by the rules (“SCI systems”), and specific obligations of SCI entities, including the establishment and periodic review of policies and procedures, compliance with the Exchange Act, designation of “responsible SCI personnel,” appropriate corrective action in response to “SCI events,” notification of systems changes, annual “SCI reviews,” business continuity and disaster recovery testing, and recordkeeping and filing. Discusses future implications for SCI Entities and other market participants. Findings – Regulation SCI launches a broad and extensive overlay of rules and guidance to address systems capacity and integrity issues that have increasingly affected the securities markets. The adoption of this regulation suggests that there will continue to be increased scrutiny by the SEC, FINRA and other regulators of the automated systems and related policies and procedures of all market participants. Practical implications – SCI entities will need to devote considerable attention and resources not just to prevent incidents where possible, but also to establish systems for ensuring thorough compliance and well-documented and reasonable follow-up actions where necessary. All market professionals – including broker-dealers, investment advisers, pension funds and investment companies – should study the new regulation and consider adopting appropriate policies and procedures to address operating as well as cyber security issues with respect to their own critical operating technology. Originality/value – Practical guidance from experienced financial services lawyers.

SEC publishes guidance on mutual fund distribution and sub-accounting fees

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 39-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Adelfio ◽  
Paul J. Delligatti ◽  
Jason F. Monfort
Keyword(s):  
Mutual Funds ◽  
Mutual Fund ◽  
Financial Services ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Investment Management ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Enforcement Action ◽  
Policies And Procedures ◽  
Practical Guidance ◽  
Investment Advisers

Purpose To explain the guidance published on January 6, 2016 by the SEC’s Division of Investment Management containing its views and recommendations relating to mutual fund distribution and sub-accounting fees. Design/methodology/approach Explains the SEC’s Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations focus on “distribution in guise” payments, its 2013 “sweep exam,” an enforcement action against a fund’s adviser and affiliated distributor related to payments for distribution-related activities outside of a 12b-1 plan, lists SEC staff recommendations with respect to mutual fund distribution and sub-accounting fees, summarizes the SEC’s guidance on board oversight of sub-accounting fees, provides indicia that a payment may be for distribution-related activities, and points to the need for mutual funds to have policies and procedures designed to prevent violations of Section 12(b) and Rule 12b-1. Findings The guidance is an outgrowth of the staff’s observations from a three-year “distribution in guise” sweep exam of mutual fund complexes, investment advisers, broker-dealers and transfer agents conducted by the SEC’s Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations and other offices and divisions of the SEC to identify whether firms were using fund assets to directly or indirectly finance any activities primarily intended to result in the sale of fund shares outside of an approved Rule 12b-1 distribution plan. Originality/value Practical guidance from experienced financial services lawyers.

OCIE issues risk alert on the most frequently identified advisory fee and expense compliance issues

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-3
Author(s):  
Robert Van Grover
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Investment Management ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Informed Decisions ◽  
Policies And Procedures ◽  
The Us ◽  
Investment Advisers ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose To summarize and interpret a Risk Alert issued on April 12, 2018 by the US SEC’s Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations (OCIE) on the most frequent advisory fee and expense compliance issues identified in recent examinations of investment advisers. Design/methodology/approach Summarizes deficiencies identified by the OCIE staff pertaining to advisory fees and expenses in the following categories: fee billing based on incorrect account valuations, billing fees in advance or with improper frequency, applying incorrect fee rates, omitting rebates and applying discounts incorrectly, disclosure issues involving advisory fees, and adviser expense misallocations. Findings In the Risk Alert, OCIE staff emphasized the importance of disclosures regarding advisory fees and expenses to the ability of clients to make informed decisions, including whether or not to engage or retain an adviser. Practical implications In light of the issues identified in the Risk Alert, advisers should assess the accuracy of disclosures and adequacy of policies and procedures regarding advisory fee billing and expenses. As a matter of best practice, advisers should implement periodic forensic reviews of billing practices to identify and correct issues relating to fee billing and expenses. Originality/value Expert guidance from experienced investment management lawyer.

CFTC overhauls customer protection requirements

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert M. Brown
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Commodity Futures ◽  
Regulatory Regime ◽  
Futures Trading ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Regulatory Response ◽  
Market Participants ◽  
Policies And Procedures ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose – The purpose of the paper is to summarize the Commodity Futures Trading Commission's (CFTC) recent overhaul of its customer protection rules, which regulate how futures commission merchants (FCMs) and derivatives clearing organizations (DCOs) handle customer funds. Design/methodology/approach – The paper summarizes the most significant aspects of the CFTC's October 30, 2013 customer protection rulemaking, explains FCM and DCO obligations under the new regulatory regime, and sets forth a compliance timeline. Findings – The CFTC's recent overhaul of its customer protection rules impose significant new requirements on FCMs and DCOs in their handling of customer funds. Practical implications – All FCMs and DCOs that handle customer funds should review these new rules and begin putting into place policies and procedures to ensure their compliance as each new requirement comes into effect. Originality/value – The CFTC's overhaul of its customer protection regime is new and significant. FCMs and DCOs need to understand their new obligations under the rules. As these new rules are the CFTC's regulatory response to the events that led to the insolvencies of MF Global and Peregrine Financial Group, these developments also should be of interest to futures and swaps market participants generally.

SEC targets investment adviser community

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-47
Author(s):  
Robert P. Bramnik ◽  
Mauro M. Wolfe
Keyword(s):  
Financial Services ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Practical Advice ◽  
Compliance Programs ◽  
The Us ◽  
Investment Advisers

Purpose – To draw attention to the US Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) disciplinary focus on the investment adviser community Design/methodology/approach – Describes six recent enforcement cases for disclosure, custody, supervisory, procedural, and other rule violations and compliance failures; explains changes in registered investment adviser (RIA) exemptions following enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act; discusses recent SEC announcements concerning inspections and examinations of RIAs. Findings – The SEC's recent announcements and enforcement actions signal that all advisers (both registered investment advisers and exempt reporting advisers) may want to pay particular attention to their compliance programs and supervisory procedures. Originality/value – Practical advice from experienced financial services lawyers.

ESMA issues Brexit opinions to EU regulators: a warning shot not only to the UK but also to the EU27

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 50-52
Author(s):  
William Yonge ◽  
Simon Currie
Keyword(s):  
Financial Services ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Regulatory Response ◽  
Market Participants ◽  
Financial Firms ◽  
Practical Guidance ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Practical Implications ◽  
The Eu

Purpose To summarize and analyse four opinions issued in May and July 2017 by the European Securities and Markets Authority (“ESMA”) concerning regulatory and supervisory arbitrage risks that arise as a result of increased requests from financial market participants to relocate activities and functions in the EU27 following the UK’s decision to withdraw from the EU, and the expected regulatory response to those risks. Design/methodology/approach Discusses the possible relocation of financial firms, activities and functions following the UK’s decision to withdraw from EU; the resulting cross-sectoral regulatory and supervisory arbitrage risks that ESMA foresees; nine principles that ESMA enumerates to guide its regulatory response to those risks; some common themes that emerge from ESMA’s July Opinions; and the implications for UK firms and trading venues seeking to establish a presence in the EU 27. Findings ESMA foresees regulatory and arbitrage risks in Brexit and a potential “race to the bottom” as certain national regulators jostle for and grab UK market share. Practical implications UK firms and trading venues seeking to establish a presence in the EU27 from which to operate will need to give detailed consideration and focus to the resources and operational substance which will need to be located in the jurisdiction in which that presence is established. Originality/value Practical guidance from experienced financial services, securities and fund management lawyers.

A review of the SEC Participating Affiliate No-Action Letters’ relief from Investment Advisers Act of 1940 registration for foreign investment advisers

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 22-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wendy E. Cohen ◽  
David Y. Dickstein ◽  
Christian B. Hennion ◽  
Richard D. Marshall ◽  
Allison C. Yacker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Foreign Investment ◽  
Financial Services ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Content Type ◽  
The Us ◽  
Information Update ◽  
Practical Guidance ◽  
Investment Advisers

Purpose To explain the US Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) staff’s (the “Staff”) participating affiliate exemption from investment adviser registration for foreign advisers set forth in a line of Staff no-action letters issued between 1992 and 2005 (the “Participating Affiliate Letters”) and to discuss recent guidance issued by the Staff in an information update published in March 2017 (the “Information Update”) with respect to complying with requirements of the Participating Affiliate Letters. Design/methodology/approach Reviews the development of the Staff’s approach regarding the non-registration of foreign advisers that rely on the Participating Affiliate Letters from prior to the issuance of those letters through the Information Update and sets forth recommendations for registered investment advisers and their participating affiliates. Findings While there are arguments that the Information Update goes beyond restating established standards and does not clearly explain whether submission of all listed documentation is required, the Information Update will likely standardize the information submitted to the SEC. Originality/value Practical guidance for advisers relying on the Participating Affiliate Letters from experienced securities and financial services lawyers.

MSRB publishes its first compliance advisory for broker-dealers

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 49-51
Author(s):  
Scott R. Anderson ◽  
Kate S. Poorbaugh
Keyword(s):  
Financial Services ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Compliance Programs ◽  
Policies And Procedures ◽  
Practical Guidance ◽  
Effective Compliance ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose To summarize the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board’s 2016 Compliance Advisory for brokers, dealers and municipal securities dealers. Design/methodology/approach Summarizes several Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB) rules that the Compliance Advisory highlights as presenting key compliance risks for brokers, dealers and municipal securities dealers. Discusses the factors included in the Compliance Advisory that dealers should consider when evaluating compliance procedures and controls. Findings By highlighting some key compliance risks and providing considerations tailored to those risks, the Compliance Advisory can be used as a tool to aid dealers in developing and assessing effective compliance programs. Practical implications Dealers should consider reviewing their firms’ existing compliance policies and procedures in light of the considerations discussed in the Compliance Advisory. Originality/value Practical guidance from experienced securities and financial services regulatory lawyers.

SEC issues proposed investment adviser reporting and disclosure rules

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 23-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathan J. Greene
Keyword(s):  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Performance Information ◽  
Investment Funds ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Investment Companies ◽  
Reporting Requirements ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Investment Advisers ◽  
Internal Procedures ◽  
Separate Account

Purpose – To explain proposed rules and amendments recently issued by the USA Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that would impose more detailed reporting requirements for investment advisers that file Form ADV. A companion article describes the SEC’s proposed registered investment company reporting rules which were issued simultaneously. Design/methodology/approach – Describes the SEC’s reasoning for collecting more detailed data, introduces the proposed separate account reporting requirements for SEC-registered investment advisers, explains proposed amendments to Part 1A of Form ADV, describes a proposed codification of SEC staff positions that provide for so-called “umbrella registrations” by closely related advisory firms, and details two proposed amendments to Advisers Act Rule 204-2, the books and records rule, which would require investment advisers to maintain additional materials related to the calculation and distribution of performance information. Findings – Many questions still remain as to how the final rules will eventually take shape; however, it is evident that investment advisers will be subject to a wider array of reporting requirements. Investment advisors are likely to incur increased costs as a result of the proposed rules and amendments, and production of the reports could necessitate a revamp of their various internal procedures. Also, access to additional and enhanced information will have consequences for investment companies with respect to SEC examinations and enforcement activity. Practical implications – Investment advisers should understand that detailed new regulatory reporting is coming and, more specifically, separately managed account clients of investment advisers should be made aware of the proposed reporting requirements. Originality/value – Practical guidance from experienced investment funds lawyer.

OCIE to investment advisers: focus on these five problem areas

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 16-18
Author(s):  
Brynn D. Peltz ◽  
Ilan S. Nissan ◽  
Evyn W. Rabinowitz
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Code Of Ethics ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Policies And Procedures ◽  
Funds Management ◽  
Practical Guidance ◽  
Investment Advisers ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose To explain a Risk Alert published on February 7, 2017 published by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations (OCIE) describing the five compliance topics most frequently identified in deficiency letters sent to investment advisers after the completion of an OCIE examination. Design/methodology/approach Discusses deficiencies noted by the OCIE relating to the Compliance Rule, required regulatory filings, the Custody Rule, the Code of Ethics Rule, and the Books and Records Rule. Findings The OCIE published the Risk Alert with its noted deficiencies only one month after releasing its exam priorities for the year. Practical implications All investment advisers should consider reviewing their compliance practices, policies and procedures in light of the deficiencies and weaknesses identified in the SEC Risk Alert. Originality/value Practical guidance from experienced lawyers specializing in asset and funds management.

The SEC provides new custody rule guidance to investment advisers

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 9-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew T. Wirig ◽  
Kate S. Poorbaugh
Keyword(s):  
Financial Services ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Investment Management ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Investment Advisers

Purpose To summarize guidance from the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (“SEC”) Division of Investment Management regarding Rule 206(4)-2 (the “Custody Rule”) under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. Design/methodology/approach This article summarizes the SEC’s guidance on “inadvertent custody” created by broad authority in custodial agreements, custody created by standing letters of instruction, and adviser authority to transfer funds or securities between two or more of a client's accounts. Findings This article concludes that firms should review their existing client custodial agreements, standing letters of instruction and other arrangements carefully to determine whether they have custody and whether additional action is necessary. Originality/value This article contains information on the Custody Rule and related SEC guidance from experienced securities and financial services regulatory lawyers.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document