Compliance officers love checklists, so we’ve put together some “to dos” to consider completing before the end of the year. Enjoy! Get out Your Checkbook
Things have perked up this month, with EXAMS’ release of its 2025 priorities and publication of a new FAQ on Form PF’s compliance deadlines. The SEC also settled with two advisers on “greenwashing” charges, presumably resulting from EXAMS promise in its 2020 Exam Priorities to review “the accuracy and adequacy of disclosures provided by RIAs offering clients new types or emerging investment strategies, such as strategies focused on sustainable and responsible investing, which incorporate environmental, social, and governance (ESG) criteria.” I also could not resist including two cases from September. The first case includes a textbook example of the issues raised when cross-trading illiquid fixed-income securities. The second case provides a rare example of the SEC pursuing a firm for failing to register because of operational overlap.
In the SEC’s burst of settlements at the end of its fiscal year, one case about the potential misuse of material nonpublic inside information (“MNPI”)
FinCEN added to advisers’ compliance burden this month by imposing new anti-money laundering policies and procedures for January 1, 2026. The SEC also ended its fiscal year with more heart attack-inducing fines against 11 broker-dealers, investment advisers and a dual registrant for “widespread and longstanding failures” for using unapproved electronic communications methods, known as “off-channel communications.” In a surprise move, the Commission announced the first settlement where an adviser received no penalty for its record-keeping failures, presumably because of its self-reporting and selflessness by helping the SEC build a case against another firm. The SEC also continued its “broken windows” regulatory approach by announcing settlements with 11 investment managers for failing to file Form 13F and 13H with civil penalties exceeding $3.4 million. We wrap up with a case showing that the SEC has not given up on its assault on private funds, charging a firm with fraud for singling out some of its investors for preferential treatment.
September 30 is the SEC’s fiscal year-end, so it’s no surprise to see an uptick in enforcement cases this month. The latest slew of settlements
This month’s big news from the SEC was more piggy-bank breaking fines against 26 broker-dealers, investment advisers and dual registrants for “widespread and longstanding failures” for using unapproved electronic communications methods, known as “off-channel communications.” The SEC’s Marketing Rule (Advisers Act 206(4)-1) enforcement continued with a settlement involving an investment adviser for using hypothetical performance on its public website. Next, in a case undoubtedly meant to serve as a warning for advisers after Minnesota Governor Tim Walz was added to the Democratic presidential ticket, the SEC fined an adviser $95,000 for a $7,150 campaign contribution made in violation of the “look back” provision under the Pay-to-Play Rule (Advisers Act Rule 206(4)-5). New rule making activity was less dramatic as the SEC adopted a final rule increasing the dollar threshold for defining a “qualifying venture capital fund” under the Investment Company Act of 1940 from $10 million to $12 million.
Most compliance officers struggle to determine whether they are conducting enough testing to satisfy their obligations under the Advisers Act. In its release adopting Advisers
Welcome to our July Regulatory Roundup, where we provide a quick look at the latest regulatory developments. In this edition, we discuss the implications of the Supreme Court’s decision in SEC v. Jarkesy that limits the Commission’s use of in-house judges, two Texas federal district court judges issued stays blocking the implementation DOL’s Retirement Security Act and PTE 2020-02, and the SEC’s latest schedule for issuing various final Advisers Act rules. Enjoy!
Many private fund managers are breathing a sigh of relief after the Fifth Circuit struck down the Private Fund Rules (check out our blog post
Welcome to our June Regulatory Roundup, where we provide you with a quick look at the latest regulatory developments. In this edition, we discuss the implications of the Fifth Circuit’s striking down the Private Fund Rules, a survey on how much time advisers are spending on compliance with the Marketing Rule, a case study on how not to show fund performance and an SEC settlement where the obligations of Reg BI and fiduciary duty are blurred. Enjoy!
