Category Archives: Investment Advisor

California Investment Advisor Exemption for Certain Hedge Fund Managers

In the article Connecticut Hedge Fund Registration Exemption, we discussed that certain states like Connecticut provide administrative orders allowing hedge fund managers an exemption from the registration provisions under certain circumstances.

Similarly certain states have provided a similar exemption to hedge fund managers through the securities commission rule making process.  For example, California Rule 260.204.9 provides that hedge fund managers are exempt from registration with the California Securities Commission if (i) the manager has $25 million or more in assets under management and (ii) has less than 15 clients (a hedge fund counts as a single client).  As with all exemptions from investment advisor registration, the hedge fund manager must make sure that it does not hold itself out as an investment advisor.  The California Rule also provides an exemption for managers of venture capital funds. Continue reading

SEC Chairman Cox Notes Importance of Investment Advisor CCOs

At a recent speech at the 2008 CCOutreach National Seminar, a seminar for the Chief Compliance Officers of registered investment advisors, SEC Chairman Christopher Cox noted the importance of compliance offices during these volatile times.  Cox noted that CCOs are partners with the SEC to ensure that investment advisory firms remain compliant and follow all investment advisory rules and regulations.  The speech is reprinted below.  Continue reading

Comments on the Series 65 and Series 66 Exam

I received a couple of comments regarding my posts on the Series 65 exam and the Series 66 exam which I would like to share with the community.  Both comments were made by Chuck Lowenstein, a Senior Editor – Securities at Kaplan Financial Education.

Regarding the post Differences between the Series 65 and Series 66 Exam, I received the following comment:

I must take issue with the statement that the Series 66 exam is easier to pass than the Series 65 for those with a Series 7 registration. Our experience with many thousands of students who have taken these tests indicates differently. An applicant with a Series 7 license will almost always have an easier time passing the Series 65 than the 66 and there are several obvious reasons for this.

1) Passing score on the 65 is only 68.5% while it is an industrywide high requirement of 71% on the Series 66.

2) The “extra” material added to the Series 65 is on subjects very familiar to most Series 7’s. For example, there are questions on common and preferred stock, mutual funds, options and limited partnership programs; all topics thoroughly covered on an Series 7 training program. There is extensive coverage of economics and analysis, but very little that is not part of the Series 7 exam.

3) 80 of the 100 questions (80%) of the Series 66 are based upon state and federal laws, while only 45 questions (35%) of the Series 65 cover this topic. Because these questions deal with the intracies of the law, these are typically the most difficult questions for students to handle.

The real advantage in taking the Series 66 is that, for those who will be selling securities as well as giving advice, is that it “kills two birds with one stone”. That is, instead of being required to sit for both the Series 65 and the Series 63 (Uniform Securities Agent State Law Examination), taking the Series 66 covers one for both.

Regarding the post The Series 65 Exam, I received the following comment:

Hi:

Thanks for the kind words about the Kaplan course. I have recently taken the responsibility for editing the Series 63, 65 and 66 exams and was amazed at the number of errors. Although most were typographical in nature, there were far too many where one would mark the correct answer to a question only to be told that it was wrong.

Our 4th Editions of the Series 65 and Series 66 are just released and I believe I have caught virtually all of these mistakes. In addition, our new platform allows us to post errata on our website on a daily basis so, just in case there is something that I overlooked, it will be posted for all to see.

SEC and Registered Hedge Fund Investment Advisors: Report by the GAO

This article is part of a series examining the statements in a report issued by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) in February 2008.  The items in this report are important because they provide insight into how the government views the hedge fund industry and how that might influence the future regulatory environment for hedge funds.  The excerpt below is part of a larger report issued by the GAO; a PDF of the entire report can be found here.

There are many important items in the except below.  While many hedge fund investment advisors are no longer registered with the SEC because the hedge fund registration rule was vacated by a circuit court judge, many hedge fund managers are registered.  As I have done with certain previous articles (see SEC Emphasizes IA Compliance for Hedge Funds), I believe that the following excerpt should be required reading for all investment advisor chief compliance officers (CCOs). The article discusses, the areas which the SEC examiners are likely to emphasize during an examination.  Such areas include: soft dollars, prime brokerage, calculation of the performance fee, valuation of hedge fund assets, and custody of hedge fund assets.

Continue reading

Hedge Fund Performance Fee Issues for State Registered Investment Advisors

One of the problems with the securities laws in the United States is that there are two levels of rules to be cognizant of at any single time – the federal rules and the state level rules.

For hedge fund managers that are registered as investment advisors with the SEC, there is a simple rule regarding performance fees – performance based fees can only be charged to those investors in the hedge fund who are “qualified clients” (the $1.5 million net worth requirement).  For hedge fund managers that are registered as investment advisors with the state, however, the manager may need to be aware of the performance fee rules of states other than their own state because each state has different securities laws.  (HFLB note: we will be discussing the issue of different state securities laws in an upcoming article on the Uniform Securities Act.)

Issues

There are three issues for a state-registered investment advisor to be aware of with regard to a hedge fund:

1.  Are performance fees allowed at the state level?  If so, what are the state’s investor qualification requirements?

2.  Does an investment advisor need to “look through” the hedge fund to the individual investors to determine if a performance fee can be charged?

3.  In the situation where a hedge fund investor resides in a state other than the state where the manager is registered, and with regard to the performance fee and “look through” rules, does the manager need to adopt the laws of the investor’s state or the laws of the state in which it is registered?

Discussion

First, generally all states will allow performance fees, but each state has different investor qualification requirements.  Some states track the federal rules and require that performance fees be charged only to qualified clients, some states require that the performance fees be charged only to accredited investors, and some states do not allow state-registered investment advisors to charge performance fees (whether a state can legally have such a requirement is another issue).

With regard to the second issue, most all of the states which allow performance fees will “look through” the hedge fund to the individual investor for the purpose of determining who can take the performance fees; this means that each investor in the hedge fund will need to meet the qualification requirements.  However, some states interpret their securities laws to mean that the performance fee can be taken at the fund level and that there is no “look through.”  In these cases, if the hedge fund itself meets the qualification standards (say $1.5 million dollar net worth), then presumably the performance fee can be taken on all of the hedge funds assets, even if no single investor in the hedge fund is a qualified client.  The central reason that anomalies like this exist is poor drafting on the part of the state legislatures.

Finally, we come to the third issue which is essentially a conflict of laws question.  There are a couple of situations where this would apply.

Situation 1: Manager is registered as an investment advisor in State X which allows performance fees to be charged only to “accredited investors” ($1 million net worth) and “look through” rules apply.  Investor from State Y wishes to invest in the hedge fund, but State Y has laws which prohibit performance fees except to those people who are qualified clients.

Situation 2: Same facts as above, but State X provides that there is no “look through” at the fund level and only the fund needs to be an “accredited investor” in order to charge a performance fee at the fund level (which would ultimately be paid by the investor through a diminished capital account).

While we believe that in both situations above the manager should be able to charge performance fees based on its own state laws and without regard to the laws of other states, there have been some state securities commissions that have stated informally to me over the phone that they believe the manager should charge performance fees to investors from their state pursuant to their state rules.  We have never heard of a state instituting a proceeding against a hedge fund manager in this situation, but it is one potential issue and it has not been clearly resolved.

To try to bring a little bit of resolution to this issue, we did a conflicts of law analysis and found that it would probably be ok for a hedge fund manager to charge performance fees to its investors pursuant to the manager’s state law and without regard to the state law of the investors.  However, I do not think a law firm would provide any sort of legal opinion on this issue because it is definitely still within the grey area of the law (HFLB note: this discussion should not be taken as any sort of legal advice, pursuant to our standard website disclaimer).

Generally I would recommend that state registered hedge fund managers only charge performance fees to qualified clients even if the manager’s state had lower requirements.  If the manager wanted to charge performance fees to non-qualified clients, then the manager should consider charging performance fees pursuant to the state laws of each investor in the fund.  The issue with this of course is that it would present additional work for the administrator and create additional costs for the fund.  Additionally, the subscription documents would need to be redrafted to address the state law issues.

In any event, if this situation applies to a state-registered investment advisor who manages a hedge fund, the hedge fund manager should discuss this issue with their legal counsel.

Other HFLB articles include:

Investment Advisor and Investment Advisor Representative IARD System Fee Waiver

The SEC and NASAA have waived two separate charges for Investment Advisors for the 2009 calendar year.  The first charge being waived is a systems charge for the Investment Advisor to access the IARD system.  This fee used to be $30.  The second charge is the fee to access the IARD system for each investment advisor representative.  This fee used to be $30 as well, which went to the NASAA.  For small investment advisors this amounts to a small savings, however, larger firms with many investment advisor representatives will be pleased they will not have to pay this system fee.

However, fees which go to the individual states are not being waived and these fees are often in the range of $100-$500 for each investment advisory firm, and $30-$125 for each investment advisor representative depending on the state of registration.  For more information please see the press release below or contact your hedge fund attorney or compliance professional.  The full press release can be found here.

SEC, NASAA Announce IARD System Fee Waiver

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
2008-259

Washington, D.C., Oct. 30, 2008 — The Securities and Exchange Commission and the North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA) today announced they will waive the initial set-up and annual system fees paid by investment adviser firms to maintain the Investment Adviser Registration Depository (IARD) system. Separately, NASAA announced that for next year it will also waive those system fees paid by investment adviser representatives (IARs).

Andrew J. Donohue, Director of the SEC’s Division of Investment Management, said, “We are pleased to be able to continue the fee waiver of initial and annual fees paid by investment advisers through July 31, 2009. We are also pleased that enhancements will continue to be made to this important and useful online adviser registration and public disclosure system, which enables the investing public easily to access information about investment advisers.”

Fred J. Joseph, NASAA President and Colorado Securities Commissioner, said, “The IARD system promotes effective and efficient investor protection through readily accessible disclosure while offering a consistent and streamlined registration process for investment advisers and their representatives. Given the current economic climate, we are pleased that the IARD system’s ongoing success has allowed us to maintain the system fee waivers put in place in 2005 for investment adviser firms and also to fully waive for the first time the system fees paid by investment adviser representatives.”

For next year, NASAA will waive payment of initial and renewal IARD system fees by state-regulated investment adviser firms and investment adviser representatives’ initial and renewal fees. NASAA’s Board of Directors approved the system fee waiver and will continue to monitor the system’s revenues to determine whether future fee adjustments are warranted.

The IARD system is an Internet-based national database sponsored by NASAA and the SEC and operated by FINRA in its role as a vendor. IARD provides a single nationwide database for the collection and dissemination of information about individuals and firms in the investment advisory field and offers investment advisers and representatives a single source for filing state and federal registration and notice filings. The system contains the employment and disciplinary histories of more than 25,000 investment adviser firms and nearly 250,000 individual investment adviser representatives. IARD system fees are used for user and system support and for enhancements to the system.

****

Related HFLB articles include:

SEC Emphasizes Importance of Hedge Fund Investment Advisor Compliance

The SEC’s Lori Richards, Director, Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations, spoke last week at an event and emphasized the importance of compliance during these volatile markets.  For chief compliance officers (CCOs) at registered investment advisory firms, the following speech transcript should be required reading.  Hedge fund managers registered as investment advisors must be especially aware of the fiduciary obligation they have to their client.  Specifically Richards noted that examiners will be focusing investment programs to make sure there is no style drift in their portfolios and that valuation is done pursuant to the manager’s stated valuation procedures.

Richards also discussed a number of areas which compliance officers should be focusing on during this time.  Specifically she advocated that a firm’s CCO: make sure following all securities laws and regulations, including the Form SH filings; make sure there is no market manipulation or insider trading; review and update if necessary the following Form ADV, Form ADV Part II, performance advertising, marketing, fund prospectuses and any other information provided to clients; review best execution and any soft dollar programs.  Richards noted that in keeping with the “culture of compliance,” the CCO “should insist on absolute compliance with policies and procedures, there should be no possibility of ‘suspending’ compliance. And it would be timely for you to remind firm employees of your presence and make clear to every employee in the firm that no shortcuts will be allowed.”

Richards also noted that the examiners will be looking for undisclosed payments by and to hedge fund investment advisors.  This is especially interesting in light of the recent case brought by the DOL against a registered investment adviser for failing to disclose payments from a hedge fund manager.  Please see DOL Sues Investment Advisor for ERISA violation.

If a registered hedge fund manager’s CCO has not considered any of the above issues the manager should immediately contact a hedge fund attorney or compliance professional.  It is likely that a hedge fund manager will be audited given the SEC’s “risk-based” model of audits.  I have posted some regular articles below.  The full text of the speach is reprinted below and can also be found here.

****

Speech by SEC Staff:
Compliance Through Crisis: Focus Areas for SEC Examiners and Compliance Professionals

by Lori A. Richards
Director, Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
National Society of Compliance Professionals
National Meeting
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania

October 21, 2008

Good Morning. I’m very pleased to be with you here today at the National Meeting of the National Society of Compliance Professionals. I believe that this is the largest professional organization of compliance professionals in the securities industry, so you carry a lot of clout!

Before I begin, I am required to state that the views I express today are my own, and do not necessarily represent the views of the Commission or any other member of the staff.

This event and others like it are so important — they provide an opportunity to share information about cutting edge compliance practices, about emerging compliance risks, and about strategies to help establish strong compliance programs and instill a healthy culture of compliance. Your role as compliance professionals is critical in any market environment, but in today’s turbulent times, it is essential. Your job each day is to educate, to guide, to investigate, to test and sometimes to insist on adherence to the law and to the firm’s policies, and sometimes, to just say no! Your job is important in any environment, and it is just as or more important now.

The compliance function within firms is critical in helping to assure operations in compliance with the law, and it must continue to be fully and adequately resourced. While not profit centers, firms must remember that their compliance programs (and related legal functions, as well as the information technology programs that support a well-run compliance program) are essential to their operations — reductions in resources to these programs would be ill-advised. Securities firms cannot now afford to reduce vigilance in compliance.

In today’s environment, perhaps the most important thing you can do as a compliance professional is to remind firm employees of their obligations to investors — for an adviser, the fiduciary obligation to clients, and for a broker, the obligation to follow just and equitable principles of trade. These obligations must continue to motivate and inform the way that the firm interacts with clients, customers, and investors. In addition to this reminder, however, there are areas where you will want to pay particular attention to compliance obligations. I will describe some of those this morning. Finally, you cannot let slip the other ongoing compliance responsibilities that the firm has, I will describe some of these priority areas as well.

As I speak to you today, our markets are undergoing unprecedented change. Once large firms no longer exist, and others have been acquired or merged. Securities firms that once stood alone are now parts of large banks. A money market fund has broken a dollar, and the Treasury has implemented a new program to guarantee certain money market funds from loss and the government has taken unprecedented steps to buy troubled assets and shore up credit markets. These are sudden and significant changes, and while we won’t see their full impact for some time, today, in the securities compliance world, our work could not be more important.

It’s worth remembering, for all of us who work administering compliance programs under the securities laws, that the underlying tenets of the securities laws are quite simple and provide meaningful protections to every investor every day:

  • Companies publicly offering securities to investors must tell the public the truth about their businesses, the securities they are selling, and the risks involved in investing — enabling investors to make informed investment decisions.
  • People who sell and trade securities and provide investment advice — brokers, dealers, advisers and exchanges — must treat investors fairly and honestly, putting investors’ interests first.

In the current credit crisis, the SEC has been aggressively working to police the markets, and to ensure that the “rules of the road” for public companies and market participants include full disclosure to investors and promote healthy capital markets. While a small agency (only 3,800 staff), the SEC packs clout through its experienced and dedicated staff. Addressing the extraordinary challenges facing our markets, the SEC has issued new regulations to strengthen capital markets and protections for investors, taken enforcement measures against market manipulation (including a landmark enforcement action against a trader who spread false rumors designed to drive down the price of stock), initiated examination sweeps, communicated with investors, and collaborated with domestic and foreign regulators around the world.

The SEC is an aggressive police force too — we bring hundreds of enforcement actions each year to protect public investors from fraud.  Indeed in just this last year, we brought more than 650 enforcement actions, more than the year before, involving all types of fraud that harm investors — corporate non-disclosure, ponzi schemes, insider trading, failures to value assets correctly, and other types of frauds. The protections of the securities laws are meaningful and have real consequences for investors. In just the last year alone, we returned over one billion dollars to harmed investors — making the protections of the federal securities laws mean something to those investors who have been defrauded.

And, in the Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations, we are keenly focused on issues that present risk to investors. I wanted to highlight some of the areas that SEC examiners will be focusing on in the months ahead in our examinations of registered investment advisers, investment companies, and broker-dealers — and suggest that these are areas that you might focus attention on as well.

Let me start with the “landscape” because the sheer number of registered firms subject to our examinations impacts our actions quite directly. At the start of FY 2009:

  • There are approximately 11,300 registered investment advisers and 950 fund complexes with over 8,000 mutual fund portfolios (this is a highly transient population: approximately 1,200 advisers became registered and 750 de-registered in FY 2008).
  • There are approximately 5,600 broker-dealers, 174,000 branch offices, and 676,000 registered representatives (as more firms have consolidated, the broker-dealer registrant pool has declined slightly in recent years, while the number of branch offices has increased dramatically). And, there are approximately 410 SEC-registered transfer agents.

Our program is risk-based, which means that we seek to accord resources to those firms and issues that present the greatest risk to investors. Our overall examination plan consists of numerous complementary components: routine and periodic examinations of those advisers (about 1,000) that are considered “higher risk;” routine examinations of large broker-dealer firms to evaluate their internal controls; “oversight” examinations of broker-dealers to evaluate the SROs’ regulatory programs; cause exams based on indications of violations; “sweep” exams focused on particular risk areas; random examinations of lower risk advisers; and visits to newly-registered advisers. In addition to these types of examinations, we will also closely monitor the compliance activities and controls of certain large advisers and broker-dealers.

We’ve also sought to leverage compliance results from firms’ own compliance programs by encouraging firms’ own compliance professionals to be aggressive in assuring compliance with the securities laws. In the coming year, we will continue this work as well — we will continue our CCOutreach programs for chief compliance officers. Our National Seminar for adviser and fund CCOs is November 13, and we just announced that our National Seminar for broker-dealer CCOs, in coordination with FINRA, will be held on March 10, 2009. We will also continue to issue ComplianceAlerts that summarize results of recent examinations so that all firms can benefit from our insights into both what can go wrong, and also, what particular practices seem to help make things go right.

Our examination program includes focus areas and exam initiatives that are particularly critical in today’s market environment. While these are not new areas, they are timely now and examiners will be paying special attention to compliance in these areas. These areas include:

  • Portfolio management: recent losses may provide an impetus for portfolio managers to trade more aggressively than they should or to deviate from investment objectives in order to make up losses, and perhaps also to catch-up on performance-based fees. This is an area where compliance personnel should be active.
  • Financial controls, including compliance with net capital and customer control requirements by broker-dealers, as well as these firms’ risk management and internal control procedures. While the Division of Trading and Markets will no longer be supervising the holding companies of large broker-dealer firms — OCIE examiners will continue to focus attention on controls within the registered broker-dealer, which are intended to protect investors’ accounts with a broker-dealer. And, if you’re an adviser in precarious financial condition — you must disclose this fact to clients. This is an area where your focus is warranted.
  • Valuation, at all types of registrants, including controls and procedures for valuation of illiquid and difficult-to-price securities at all registrants. Reluctance to fair value or mark down prices cannot take precedence over the firm’s pricing procedures — investors and fund shareholders have a right to know the current value of their holdings. If you work for a broker-dealer that provides quotes or for an investment adviser or other user of broker quotes — be particularly alert to and look for the possibility of “accommodation quotes” — which don’t reflect prices at which the security could actually be sold. At its worst, this could be fraudulent conduct. A reminder too — under accounting rules (FAS 157), issuers must classify their assets within a hierarchy. For those assets valued by using a broker’s quote or a price from a pricing service — you should be sure that you understand whether the quote or price is based on actual transactions, reflects the willingness of the broker to trade at that price, or is based on a model or another methodology.  Among strong practices in this area are to require multiple sources of pricing information, and also to regularly go back and compare the actual prices realized on any sale to the fair values used: then, determine the reasons for any wide gaps and implement improvements in pricing processes. This is an area where your focus is needed now — be sure that your firm is implementing its controls and its oversight over pricing.
  • Sales of structured products by broker-dealers and advisers. Of special note — given that investors may be particularly looking for lower-risk investment products, examiners will focus on products marketed as being relatively “safe,” such as principal protected notes and other products, and will review the adequacy of disclosures concerning credit risk, liquidity, and investment risk. Conversely, investors may be looking to recoup losses, and may be more vulnerable to sales of high-risk, high-return products. You will want to focus on both types of products and make sure that representations are accurate and that your firm is treating investors fairly.
  • Controls and processes at recently merged or acquired firms, both advisers and broker-dealers. This is an area where compliance staff must be active — to help make sure that controls and processes do not fall through the cracks in a merged organization.
  • Money market funds, including, at a minimum, compliance with Rule 2a-7 regarding the creditworthiness of portfolio securities, shadow pricing, and compliance oversight — and more broadly, whether funds’ are stretching for yield and subjecting the fund to excessive undisclosed risk. We have examinations underway. The problems experienced by money market funds should be seen as cautionary for all managers and CCOs of money market funds.
  • Short selling and compliance with Regulation SHO and filings of Form SH. Examiners are also focusing on firms’ policies and procedures to prevent employees from knowingly creating, spreading, or using of false or misleading information with the intent to manipulate securities prices, and will be concluding a sweep of broker-dealers and hedge fund advisers in this area.

Beyond these specific compliance risk issues, in times of financial strain, people may act in uncharacteristic ways — in order to conceal losses, inflate revenues or profits, to stay in business or just to avoid delivering bad news. Examiners will be alert for indications of fraud and “acts of desperation” by individuals and firms that are under financial duress. As compliance personnel, however, you are much closer to the scene than we are — and you should be aware of and alert to the increased possibility that individuals under stress may take fraudulent or deceptive actions. Checks and balances are critical in this environment. You should insist on absolute compliance with policies and procedures, there should be no possibility of “suspending” compliance. And it would be timely for you to remind firm employees of your presence and make clear to every employee in the firm that no shortcuts will be allowed.

In addition to these focus areas, OCIE examiners will also be focusing on other compliance risks, and so too must you. We cannot afford to pay less attention to any of these issues. Let me describe several of these areas:

  • Suitability and appropriateness of investments for clients: Examiners will focus on whether securities recommended and investments made for clients and funds are consistent with disclosures, the client’s investment objectives and any investment restrictions, and with the broker or adviser’s obligations to clients to only recommend securities that are suitable or appropriate. We’ll focus in particular, on how firms are interacting with their senior customers and clients. We’ll also focus on structured products and other complex derivative instruments, variable annuities, niche ETFs, managed pay-out funds, and 130/30 funds.
  • Disclosure: Examiners will focus on ADVs, performance advertising, marketing, fund prospectuses and any other information provided to clients. This is a good time for you to review your firm’s disclosures to investors and shareholders. Make sure that any steps the firm has taken in recent days or weeks to deal with the credit crisis are consistent with the firm’s disclosures. Examiners will be specifically looking at how the firm represents its participation in Treasury’s money market guarantee program, the existence of SIPC coverage, and at advertised performance figures. Consider your disclosures as your “Constitution” — even in a crisis, it’s your governing document, and it must match your practices.
  • Controls to prevent insider trading: We’re focusing on the adequacy of policies and procedures, information barriers, and controls to prevent insider trading and leakage of information including the identification of sources of material non-public information, surveillance, physical separation, and written procedures. Controls to prevent insider trading should be strong in any environment.
  • Trading, brokerage arrangements and best execution: We’ll be looking at whether brokerage arrangements are consistent with disclosures, whether the firm seeks best execution, and whether soft dollars are used appropriately (consistent with disclosures), Reg NMS and direct market access arrangements. We will particularly scrutinize the use of an affiliated broker-dealer or any undisclosed relationships with a broker-dealer for excessive commissions, kick-backs and other conflicted relationships. Your best execution committees will want to particularly review execution quality in current markets.
  • Proprietary and employees’ personal trading: This is a basic part of any compliance program — when we find weaknesses in this area, it makes us wonder about the firm’s commitment to addressing other conflicts of interest. This is not an area to be overlooked.
  • Undisclosed payments: Examiners are looking for compensation or payment arrangements that may be part of revenue-sharing, or other undisclosed arrangements with third parties. These payments may be made to increase fund sales or assets under management (such as fund networking fees and payments by advisers to broker-dealers for obtaining space on the firms’ recommended adviser list). Undisclosed payments may also involve misappropriation of adviser/fund/broker-dealer assets by, for example, creating fictitious bills and expense items, or receiving kick-backs from a service provider.
  • Safety of customer assets: Examiners will look at whether brokers, funds and advisers have effective policies and procedures for safeguarding their clients’ assets from theft, loss, and misuse. This is a good time for you too to assess controls in this area. Make sure that advisory clients’ money is with a qualified custodian and review prime brokerage relationships. You may want to ensure that the process for sending account statements to clients has controls to ensure that the account statements cannot be intercepted or falsified. Examiners will also continue to focus on controls for compliance with Regulation S-P with respect to customer information.
  • Anti-money laundering: Examiners will look at whether funds and broker-dealers are complying with obligations under the securities laws, the Patriot Act and Bank Secrecy Act to have effective policies and procedures to detect and deter money-laundering activities, whether these policies and procedures are regularly tested for continued effectiveness, and whether actual practices are consistent with the policies and procedures.
  • Compliance, supervision, and corporate governance: While this is the last item I’ll list, it’s the most important — because it underpins all the other compliance responsibilities that firms have. In the coming year, examiners will focus in particular on supervisory procedures and practices at large branch offices of broker-dealers and at advisory branch offices, on supervision and controls over traders, whether funds have appropriately-constituted boards and have considered required matters (e.g., fair value procedures), and whether firms have implemented effective internal disciplinary processes. Also, we’ll examine: firms that advertise themselves as allowing maximum independence to registered representatives; for abuses in transferring customer accounts as registered representatives move to new firms; supervision of producing branch managers; bank broker-dealer branches; and the adequacy of firms’ testing to detect unsuitable or aberrant trades.

For advisers and mutual funds, in that this is the fifth year of both the Compliance Rule and our CCOutreach efforts for adviser and fund CCOs, we hope to see improvements in firms’ compliance programs, and in particular, that significant deficiencies were identified promptly and corrected appropriately by firms.

* * *

These are challenging times, no doubt. The SEC has been and will continue to guard the interests of investors. Industry compliance professionals too play an indispensable role in fostering and assuring investor protection and the integrity of our markets. As I said at the outset, I think that the first thing that you might do in the current environment is to is to remind firm employees of their obligations to investors — for an adviser, the fiduciary obligation to clients, and for a broker, the obligation to follow just and equitable principles of trade. These obligations must continue to motivate and inform the way that the firm interacts with investors.

I have shared with you today some of the issues that SEC examiners will be focusing on in the coming months — and these are areas where I hope you too will focus your attention. Finally, you cannot let slip the other ongoing compliance responsibilities that the firm has, and I have described some of these priority areas as well.

I hope this information will be helpful to you in your work, and I look forward to continuing to work with you to help improve and assure strong compliance practices in the securities industry.

Thank you.

Differences between the Series 65 and the Series 66

Hedge fund managers who must register as investment advisor representatives with the SEC (through notice filings) or the state securities commission will need to have the proper FINRA exam licenses. Generally this means that the hedge fund manager will need to have passed the Series 65 exam within two years of registration (or the license must not have been inactive for two years prior to the registration).

However, if a manager has a Series 7 exam license, he will only need to take the Series 66 exam instead of the Series 65. This would generally be a good idea because the Series 66 exam is easier than the Series 65 exam and managers should be able to pass the Series 66 with less effort than the Series 65. I have detailed below the different requirements for the Series 65 versus the Series 66

Series 65 Exam

  • 140 multiple choice questions
  • 10 pre-test; 130 count towards score
  • 180 minutes to take the exam
  • Must achieve a 72% to pass
  • Test covers: economics and analysis; investment vehicles; investment recommendations and strategies; and legal and regulatory guidelines, including prohibition on unethical business practices.
  • NASAA test outline link.

Series 66 Exam

  • 110 multiple choice questions
  • 10 pre-test; 100 count towards score
  • 150 minutes to pass the exam
  • Must achieve 72% to pass
  • Test covers: much of the material included on the Series 65, but it does not include the product, analysis and strategy questions that are a large part of the Series 65.
  • NASAA test outline link.

Other related articles include:

If you have any questions, please contact us.

How to Register as an Investment Advisor

Many hedge fund managers come from brokerage firms or other investment advisory firms and may, accordingly, have some of the FINRA licenses like a Series 7 or a Series 65.  However, most managers have not registered an as investment advisor and do not understand the process.  This guide is designed to familiarize managers with the  investment advisor registration process.

Investment Advisor Compliance Firm

First, you will want to find a firm that will help you through the process of registering as an investment advisor.  A hedge fund lawyer or a hedge fund compliance firm (usually consisting of former SEC or state securities commission examiners) will be able to help you with this process. Potential investment advisors should not try to go through the registration process by themselves – it will take too much time and subject the advisor to potential liability.

Jurisdiction

The manager can register as an investment advisor with the SEC or the state securities commission of the state in which the manager resides.  The manager should have a conversation with the lawyer or complaice firm regarding the pros and cons of the registration with the SEC or state.  Generally, however, a manager will only be able to register with the SEC if the manager has at least $25 million under management.

Cost

The costs should be the same for the advisor whether they go with a hedge fund lawyer or with a compliance firm.  Generally, for state-registered investment advisers, the professional fees run anywhere from $2,500-$3,500 for the registration.  For SEC-registered investment advisors, the professional fees will run anywhere from $4,000 to $8,000 depending on the complexity of the investment advisory firm.
The above costs are service provider fees and do not include the fees an investment advisor firm will pay to the state of residence of the investment advisor.  Such fees will generally include the following:

  • IA firm registration fee (State registered IAs only)
  • IA representative fee
  • Form U-4 fee
  • Notice filing fee (SEC registered IAs only)
  • Other miscellaneous fees

Tests

The manager who is registering to be an investment advisor will typically need to have taken and passed the Series 65 exam within the two years prior to registration.  Most all states will also allow managers to register if they have the Series 7 exam and the Series 66 exam.  Since most managers who have the Series 7 will not have the Series 66, the managers will need to take this exam.

Additionally, most states will not require a manager to have any of the above exams if they have one of the following designations

  • Chartered Financial Planner (CFP);
  • Chartered Financial Consultant (ChFC);
  • Personal Financial Specialist (PFS);
  • Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA); or
  • Chartered Investment Counselor (CIC).

Forms

The investment advisor will need to complete a wide variety of forms during the registration process.  These forms include:

IARD entitlement Forms – “IARD” stands for the Investment Adviser Registration Depository which is sponsored by the SEC and the NASAA (the association of state securities regulations, www.nasaa.org) but which is operated by FINRA.  As the IARD system is an online system, these forms need to be manually completed and processed by FINRA before you can begin the registration process.  The forms can be found here: IARD Entitlement Forms

Form ADV – this is the form which all investment advisors complete.  When a firm is registered with the SEC or the state, then the filings can be seen here by typing in the advisor’s name.  Please see Form ADV.  (HFLB note: we will have a detailed guide on Form ADV coming out soon.)

Form ADV Part II – this is the part of Form ADV which provides more information on the advisor’s activities.  It is sometimes refered to as the investment advisory “brochure.”  Please see Form ADV Part II.  (HFLB note: we will have a detailed guide on Form ADV Part II coming out soon.)

Form U4 – this form will need to be completed for all members of the firm which will be investment advisor representatives.  If such members have been in the securities industry for a while, they will likely already have a U4 on file with FINRA.  (HFLB note: we will have a detailed guide on Form ADV Part II coming out soon.)

Registration Timeline

Your compliance provider will be able to help you determine how long it will take to become registered as an investment advisor.  Generally SEC registration will be quicker than state registration and many times registration can be completed within 2 to 4 weeks.

State registration is more difficult to determine and will depend on the state of registration.  A state like California may take 6 to 8 weeks.  A state like South Carolina will take about 2 weeks, it just depends and you should discuss this issue with your compliance provider if the registration is time sensitive.

Other helpful articles include:

Please contact us if you would like to register your firm as an investment advisor or if you have any questions on the above.

Overview of Hedge Fund Investment Advisors

It is often said that hedge funds are unregistered or lightly regulated investment pools.  While this is correct, there are certain regulations which an investment manager must follow, including certain regulations under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (and the securities laws of the hedge fund manager’s state of residence).  These regulations may require a hedge fund manager to be registered as an investment advisor.

Definition

In general terms, an investment advisor is any person (or company) which receives remuneration for providing investment advice to a client.  This will include all hedge fund managers.

Registration or Exemption

While all hedge fund managers will fall within the definition of investment advisor, not all hedge fund managers will need to be registered. An investment advisor will need to be registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission or with the state securities division if the advisor does not fall within an exemption from the registration provisions.  The exemption may be at the federal level, the state level, or both.  (Please see this article on the Section 203(b)(3) exemption.)

Other Requirements

All investment advisors are fiduciaries and must act in the best interest of their clients.  Investment advisors (whether or not such advisor is registered) will need to adhere to the anti-fraud provision of the Investment Adviser’s Act of 1940.

Other helpful articles on investment advisors include:

Please contact us if you have any questions.