Articles Posted in Advisory

Published on:

By

In today’s press release, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced the adoption of rules and amendments to require certain documents, including Form ADV-NR, filed by investment advisers, institutional investment managers, and certain other entities to be filed or submitted electronically.  Form ADV-NR is the appointment of agent for service of process by a non-resident general partner or a non-resident managing agent of any investment adviser (domestic or non-resident), including exempt reporting advisers.  The amendments also make technical amendments to modernize Form 13F and enhance the information provided.  The new rules and form amendments will be effective 60 days after publication in the Federal Register. The amendments to Form 13F will be effective on January 3, 2023.

The press release is available HERE and text of the Final Rules is available HERE.

Published on:

By

Enhanced Focus on Private Funds, ESG, and Operational Resiliency

The Securities and Exchange Commission’s Division of Examinations today announced its 2022 examination priorities.  The Division will focus on private funds, environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing, retail investor protections, information security and operational resiliency, emerging technologies, and crypto-assets.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

The SEC today proposed rule amendments to update beneficial ownership reporting under 1934 Act Sections 13(d) and 13(g).

The proposed amendments to Regulation 13D-G would:

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

The Securities and Exchange Commission today voted to propose amendments to Form PF, the confidential reporting form for certain SEC-registered investment advisers to private funds. The proposed amendments are designed to enhance the Financial Stability Oversight Council’s (FSOC) ability to assess systemic risk as well as to bolster the Commission’s regulatory oversight of private fund advisers and its investor protection efforts in light of the growth of the private fund industry.

Continue reading →

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 →

Published on:

By

Today, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced it had finalized reforms under the Investment Advisers Act to modernize rules that govern investment adviser advertisements and payments to solicitors. The amendments create a single rule that replaces the current advertising and cash solicitation rules. The final rule is designed to comprehensively and efficiently regulate investment advisers’ marketing communications.

Continue reading →

Published on:

By

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission at its open meeting on Tuesday, October 6, unanimously approved a final rule adopting amendments to Form CPO-PQR for commodity pool operators (CPOs).

The amendments to Form CPO-PQR (1) eliminate existing Schedules B and C of the form, except for the Pool Schedule of Investments; (2) amend the information requirements and instructions to request Legal Entity Identifiers (LEIs) for commodity pool operators and their operated pools that have them, and to delete questions regarding pool auditors and marketers; and (3) make certain other changes due to the rescission of Schedules B and C, including the elimination of all existing reporting thresholds. Click here for the full press release.

Published on:

By

An expanded universe of individuals and entities will be able to participate as “accredited investors” in securities offerings as a result of recent SEC rulemaking.

TAKEAWAYS

  • The SEC has expanded its definition of “Accredited Investor” to additional individuals and entities, including individuals with certain professional certifications and knowledgeable employees of private funds.
  • The amendments may provide additional regulatory certainty for issuers, investors and counsel.

On August 26, 2020, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) adopted amendments to the definition of “accredited investor” in Rule 501(a) of Regulation D under the Securities Act of 1933 (the Amendments). The Amendments, which will become effective 60 days after they are published in the Federal Register, expand the pool of individuals and entities that qualify as accredited investors. The definition of accredited investor is relevant, among other things, to the operation of Rule 506 of Regulation D, which is a safe harbor under Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act. Rule 506 is the most commonly-used exemption for private offerings, accounting for the vast majority of the trillions of dollars raised through unregistered offerings every year. Unregistered, private offerings of securities have supplanted public offerings as the dominant form of capital-raising in the United States. Since regulatory requirements are much greater for offerings that include non-accredited investors, an overwhelming majority of Rule 506 offerings are offered only to accredited investors.

READ MORE. . .

Read this article and additional Pillsbury publications at Pillsbury Insights.

More of this will be covered at an ALI CLE webinar, sponsored by Pillsbury, later this month that focuses on Regulation D Offerings and Private Placements.  To find out more about this webinar and to register, please visit https://www.ali-cle.org/course/Regulation-D-Offerings-Private-Placements-2020-VCCP0922

Published on:

By

We urge our clients to consult Pillsbury’s comprehensive COVID-19 Resource Center for information regarding Responding to a Global Crisis, Business Interruption, Cybersecurity, Employer Concerns and other general matters related to the COVID-19 pandemic. We also recommend the following specific measures to mitigate risks of business interruption and regulatory noncompliance resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Continue reading →