Articles Posted in

Published on:

By

Recent enforcement action could signal expanding the boundaries of misappropriation theory, with significant implications for SEC-regulated entities and other market participants.

TAKEAWAYS

  • With Chair Gensler at the helm, an emboldened SEC Enforcement Division will continue to take aggressive positions in insider trading enforcement actions and is willing to test the contours of insider trading law in litigation.
  • The Panuwat enforcement action advances the novel theory that possessing confidential information about one issuer may preclude trading in the securities of competitors and other companies in a business sector.
  • In light of the increased risk posed by the Panuwat matter, regulated entities and other market participants should review their policies and procedures to ensure that they are reasonably designed and tailored to
    prevent the misuse of material nonpublic information.

On August 17, 2021, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) charged a former pharmaceutical company executive with insider trading for purchasing the securities of a rival company based on confidential information he learned about his own employer’s contemplated merger with another pharmaceutical company. The SEC’s enforcement action, which is being litigated in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, appears to confirm early predictions that the SEC, with Chair Gary Gensler at the helm, would aggressively police the securities markets for insider trading.

READ MORE . . .

Read this article and additional Pillsbury publications at Pillsbury Insights.

Published on:

By

Most 3(c)(1) private equity and hedge funds are impacted; exempt venture capital funds are not impacted.

Effective August 16, 2021, the dollar thresholds specified in the definition of “qualified client” under Rule 205-3 of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended (“Advisers Act”) will increase (i) from $2.1 million to $2.2 million (net worth test) and (ii) from $1 million to $1.1 million (assets under management (AUM) test).  Clients that enter into investment advisory agreements (and existing fund investors that make additional fund investments) in reliance on the net worth test prior to the effective date will be “grandfathered” in under the prior net worth threshold.  The increases are made pursuant to a five-year inflation adjustment required by section 205(e) of the Advisers Act (section 419 of the Dodd-Frank Act).  (The most recent prior change was effective August 15, 2016.)

Continue reading →