Tag Archives: broker-dealer

ATS Registration Overview for Digital Asset Platforms

Digital asset platforms located in the U.S. that facilitate trading and exchange of digital assets (which are deemed to be securities) are generally subject to securities laws requiring such platforms to be registered as a national securities exchange (“NSE”) or fall within an exemption from NSE registration. One exemption from registration as an NSE allows firms to conduct a platform business if such firm is registered as an alternative trading system (“ATS”). This requirement was first highlighted by the SEC in the DAO Report released in July 2017. We anticipate that many digital asset platforms currently facilitating trading will continue to face scrutiny as to whether they need to be registered as NSEs or an ATS and many have already begun the process to register as an ATS.

ATS Definition & Requirement to Register

The statutory definition of an ATS is:

any organization, association, person, group of persons, or system:

(1) That constitutes, maintains, or provides a market place or facilities for bringing together purchasers and sellers of securities or for otherwise performing with respect to securities the functions commonly performed by a stock exchange within the meaning of § 240.3b-16 of this chapter; and

(2) That does not:

(i) Set rules governing the conduct of subscribers other than the conduct of such subscribers’ trading on such organization, association, person, group of persons, or system; or

(ii) Discipline subscribers other than by exclusion from trading.

As many digital asset platforms or exchanges technically fall within the ATS definition, these platforms will need to appropriately register with the SEC. To register as an ATS, the platform will need to do the following:

Register as (or buy) a broker-dealer
File Form ATS
Comply with Regulation ATS

1. Register as a Broker-Dealer

Registering as a broker-dealer (“BD”) is a pre-requite to becoming an ATS. A firm may only file Form ATS with the SEC after receiving the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s (“FINRA”) approval of its broker-dealer application (or after purchase of a broker-dealer). For platforms registering as a broker-dealer, at a high level the firm must:

Submit Form BD;
Comply with all applicable state requirements; and
Ensure all of its “associates persons” (BD representatives) have satisfied applicable qualification requirements.

The process to register as a new BD is well worn and relatively straight forward. Firms applying to register as a BD will need to submit online through Form BD online and then submit a New Membership Application (“NMA”) to FINRA. The NMA requires the firm to describe their business and compliance policies and controls in detail. A firm will also be subject to an in-person new membership interview and will have to demonstrate how the ATS technology operates to FINRA staff. As part of the BD process, the firm will need to become a member of at least one self-regulatory organization (“SRO”), which is likely to be FINRA, and become a member of the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (“SIPC”).

If a firm is already a broker-dealer (or has a broker dealer affiliate) but is not an ATS, the firm will need to submit a Continuing Membership Application (“Form CMA”) to FINRA. For groups registering as a de novo BD, the firm should describe those parts of its business that will include the ATS function. As with a de novo BD, an existing BD must demonstrate to FINRA staff how the ATS technology operates.

2. File Form ATS

After a firm has registered as a BD and has discussed the ATS platform with FINRA (to FINRA’s satisfaction), the firm will need to notify the SEC that it is operating as an ATS. Form ATS is the official SEC notification and must be submitted at least 20 days before the firm begins to operate its platform.

Form ATS is general in scope and requires information such as:

Certain identification information (i.e. full name, business name, address, CRD number, etc.)
Firm incorporation documents as attachments
Description of the types of users on the platform (i.e., broker-dealer, institution, or retail) and any differences in access to services between such users
List of the types of securities (digital assets/tokens which are deemed to be securities) that will be traded on the platform
Description of how the ATS will operate
Description of certain ATS operational procedures (i.e., entry of orders, transaction executions, reporting transactions, compliance, etc.)

It is important to note that Form ATS is a notice filing where the SEC provides no confirmation to the ATS regarding the filing status unless the form is deficient. When a Form ATS has been filed with the SEC, it will be listed on the SEC website which will display the platform’s full name, the name(s) under which business is conducted, and the city and state of the ATS. The reports on Form ATS are generally not published and are considered confidential. Such reports will only be available to the SEC staff, state securities authorities, and any SRO for examination.

3. Ongoing Compliance

An ATS will be subject to numerous compliance obligations outside. Some of the specific ATS obligations include:

File Form ATS-R (which summarizes the ATS’s transactions, on a quarterly basis) within 30 calendar days after the end of each quarter.
Amend Form ATS at least 20 calendar days before implementing a material change to the operation of the ATS.
Update Form ATS within 30 calendar days after the end of each quarter to correct any inaccurate or unreported information.
Permit the examination and inspection of its premises, systems, and records and cooperate with the examination, inspection, or investigation of subscribers by the SEC or SRO of which such subscriber is a member.

Additional BD, FINRA, and other guidelines, regulations, and obligations include:

Participating in the lost and stolen securities program.
Complying with the fingerprinting requirement.
Maintaining and reporting information regarding affiliates.
Following certain guidelines when using electronic media to deliver information.
Maintaining an anti-money laundering program.
Complying with the Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) programs.
Filing quarterly and annual financial statements to the SEC.

If an ATS is not in compliance with the above requirements it may be subject to steep penalties. In addition, it is important to note that securities on a registered ATS platform may be subject to a wide range of holding periods which must be enforced for an ATS to remain in compliance.

Registration Timing

It is unclear exactly how long a particular ATS application will take to be approved – it will largely depend on the exact scope of activities the platform will be involved with. In general a platform designed for trading of private placements (in a kind of closed system for accredited investors) would likely take anywhere from 6-12 months to become fully licensed after submitting the Form NMA. Technically, FINRA is required to review and process a substantially complete NMA within 180 calendar days after receiving it.

Issues to Consider

There are a number of issues to consider with respect to an ATS application.

Underlying Instruments – the securities on most current digital asset exchanges are unregistered securities which were originally offered outside of any sort of registration exemption. Essentially these are restricted securities and any person selling or reselling such securities are arguably violating US securities laws (for more background, please see our post on restricted securities and distribution structures). In such a case, we are not sure how FINRA will view a platform which facilitates the trading of restricted instruments. We have seen many token issuers over the last 6-12 months who have decided to offer their tokens/securities according to registration exemptions, including through SAFTs. To the extent a digital asset platform only transacts with such tokens (or tokens which go through the S-1 IPO process, which we think will happen within the next 12 months), we believe it is likely that such a platform would be able to be registered with FINRA.
Discussion with FINRA Regarding Trading System – we have not talked directly with FINRA about their review of ATS platforms. Most ATS platforms were created to allow for “dark pool” trading in the traditional institutional securities space. It is unclear if FINRA has the experience or technical understanding (currently) to deal with digital assets and applicable trading platforms.
IRS Reporting Requirements – the IRS released a notice in 2014 regarding the tax treatment of virtual currency. Since then, the IRS has subjected exchanges to certain user reporting requirements. It is unclear whether the IRS will extend these types of user reporting requirements to ATS platforms as well.
FinCEN’s Money Services Businesses Requirements – the Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) released guidance in March of 2013 regarding individuals who handle virtual currencies. FinCEN determined that a person engaged as a business in the exchange of virtual currency for real currency, funds, or other virtual currency (an “exchanger”) is subject to money services business (“MSB”) registration. Although it is unclear if an ATS qualifies as a MSB, FinCEN has taken action against virtual currency exchanges that did not register with the bureau.
Anti-Money Laundering and Know Your Customer Requirements – MSBs are required by the Bank Secrecy Act to have Anti-Money Laundering (“AML”) and Know Your Customer (“KYC”) procedures. AML procedures are required to detect and report suspicious actives that may indicate money laundering and terrorist financing. KYC procedures are identification verification actions taken to ensure that the user is truly who they claim to be in order to prevent fraud.
State Regulations – many states have imposed their own laws regarding digital assets. In addition, each state has its own rules and regulations regarding ATS platforms that operate within the state. Before beginning to operate an ATS, you will want to research what rules and regulations your state has imposed.

Conclusion

After the DAO report, there have been a number of recent comments from SEC officials regarding digital assets and trading platforms that show the need for the cryptocurrency industry to quickly begin the process of integrating into the traditional securities regulatory landscape. We believe that the ATS structure will become the predominant structure for digital asset exchanges in the future. We also believe that over the next 12-24 months, as regulators flesh out various issues, the process will become more streamlined and well worn. A few cryptocurrency related platforms have already started the process to become an ATS, with more likely to follow.

****

Bart Mallon is a founding partner of Cole-Frieman & Mallon LLP. Cole-Frieman & Mallon LLP has been instrumental in structuring the launches of some of the first digital currency-focused hedge funds and works routinely on matters affecting the digital asset industry. Please contact Mr. Mallon directly at 415-868-5345 if you have any questions on this post.

Section 13(d) Filings and Section 13(g) Filings

1 Reply

Section 13(d) of the Securities Act of 1934 requires any person who beneficially owns 5% or more of a class of equity securities of a publicly traded company to file a report with the SEC within 10 days of reaching the 5% ownership threshold. SEC Rule 13d-1 provides more detailed guidance on the reporting requirements.

Generally those persons who are subject to this rule will need to file a Schedule 13D (discussed in greater detail below) with the SEC. Because Schedule 13D is fairly detailed (the SEC estimates that it will take 14.5 hours to complete the form), the SEC has provided an alternate form and alternate reporting procedures for those persons who acquire 5% but who are generally not purchasing the securities with the purpose nor with the effect of changing or influencing the control of the issuer.

Schedule 13D

The following discussion is from the SEC website and can be found here.

Schedule 13D is commonly referred to as a “beneficial ownership report.” The term “beneficial owner” is defined under SEC rules. It includes any person who directly or indirectly shares voting power or investment power (the power to sell the security).

When a person or group of persons acquires beneficial ownership of more than 5% of a voting class of a company’s equity securities registered under Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, they are required to file a Schedule 13D with the SEC. (Depending upon the facts and circumstances, the person or group of persons may be eligible to file the more abbreviated Schedule 13G in lieu of Schedule 13D.)

Schedule 13D reports the acquisition and other information within ten days after the purchase. The schedule is filed with the SEC and is provided to the company that issued the securities and each exchange where the security is traded. Any material changes in the facts contained in the schedule require a prompt amendment. The schedule is often filed in connection with a tender offer.

You can find the Schedules 13D for most publicly traded companies in the SEC’s EDGAR database. You can learn how to use EDGAR to find information about companies. You can find an HTML version of the Schedule and download a PDF version for easier printing.

Schedule 13G Filing Categories

As discussed above, there is an alternative to the Schedule D filing requirement if the hedge fund manager falls within certain categories desicribed below. If the manager does fall within these categories, the manager can file the less onerous Schedule 13G.

Rule 13d-1(b) – provides that Schedule G can be filed, in lieu of filing Schedule D, within 45 days of the end of the calendar year in which the 5% threshold was exceeded if: (i) generally the person has not acquired the securities with any purpose, or with the effect of, changing or influencing the control of the issuer and (ii) the person is one of a number of enumerated persons (i.e. broker-dealers, registered investment advisors, investment companies, etc).

Rule 13d-1(c) – provides that Schedule G can be filed, in lieu of filing Schedule D, within 10 days of the date which the 5% threshold was exceeded if: (i) generally the person has not acquired the securities with any purpose, or with the effect of, changing or influencing the control of the issuer; (ii) the person is not a certain enumerated person; and (iii) the person does not directly or indirectly own 20% or more of the class of equity securities.

Rule 13d-1(d) – requires Schedule G be filed within 45 days after the end of the calendar year in which the 5% threshold was exceeded if the person meets certain requirements.

****

Please contact us if you have any questions or if you are interested in starting a hedge fund. Other related hedge fund law articles include:

Bart Mallon, Esq. runs hedge fund law blog and has written most all of the articles which appear on this website. Mr. Mallon’s legal practice is devoted to helping emerging and start up hedge fund managers successfully launch a hedge fund. If you are a hedge fund manager who is looking to start a hedge fund, or if you have questions about the Schedule D or Schedule G filing process, please call Mr. Mallon directly at 415-296-8510.

Series 79 Exam

1 Reply

FINRA to Announce New Investment Banking Examination

For many years now all brokers have been treated equally with regard to examination requirements. Whether a broker was working solely with retail clients or solely with institutions on a private placement basis, each such broker would need to take and pass the Series 7 examination in order to become a representative (broker) at the BD (broker firm or broker-dealer). Now, however, there will be a new exam for those brokers whose only acitivites are “investment banking” activities. In the near future these brokers will only need to take and pass a new exam called the Series 79 exam which will presumably be more focused and shorter than the all-day Series 7 exam. I will continue to update this article after the 4th of July weekend, but below I have included the full text of the new FINRA Rule 1032(i) which provides for a new Investment Banking representative registration.

Text of Rule 1032(i)

FINRA Rule 1032. Categories of Representative Registration

(a) through (h) No change.

(i) Limited Representative-Investment Banking

(1) Each person associated with a member who is included within the definition of a representative as defined in NASD Rule 1031 shall be required to register with FINRA as a Limited Representative-Investment Banking and pass a qualification examination as specified by the Board of Governors if such person’s activities involve:

(A) advising on or facilitating debt or equity securities offerings through a private placement or a public offering, including but not limited to origination, underwriting, marketing, structuring, syndication, and pricing of such securities and managing the allocation and stabilization activities of such offerings, or

(B) advising on or facilitating mergers and acquisitions, tender offers, financial restructurings, asset sales, divestitures or other corporate reorganizations or business combination transactions, including but not limited to rendering a fairness, solvency or similar opinion.

(2) Notwithstanding the foregoing, an associated person shall not be required to register as a Limited Representative-Investment Banking if such person’s activities described in paragraph (i)(1) are limited to:

(A) advising on or facilitating the placement of direct participation program securities as defined in NASD Rule 1022(e)(2);

(B) effecting private securities offerings as defined in paragraph (h)(1)(A); or

(3) An associated person who participates in a new employee training program conducted by a member shall not be required to register as a Limited Representative-Investment Banking for a period of up to six months from the time the associated person first engages within the program in activities described in paragraphs (i)(1)(A) or (B), but in no event more than two years after commencing participation in the training program. This exception is conditioned upon the member maintaining records that:

(A) evidence the existence and details of the training program, including but not limited to its scope, length, eligible participants and administrator; and

(B) identify those participants whose activities otherwise would require registration as a Limited Representative-Investment Banking and the date on which each participant commenced such activities.

****

Please contact us if you have any questions or would like to learn how to start a hedge fund. Other related hedge fund law articles include:

Form U4 and Form U5 | Information About the Uniform Registration Forms for Broker-Dealers and Investment Advisors

6 Replies

Purpose of the Forms and Discussion of Recently Approved Changes & Requirements

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), is the largest independent regulator for all securities firms doing business in the United States, and is the entity designated as the filing depository by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for purposes of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. There are currently six different Uniform Registration Forms that are used to file information with FINRA. The Form U4 (Uniform Application for Broker-Dealer Registration) and the Form U5 (Uniform Termination Notice for Security Industry Registration) are used by broker-dealers to register, and terminate the registrations of, associated persons with self-regulatory organizations (SROs), and jurisdictions.

Representatives of broker-dealers and investment advisers use Form U4 to register with the states and with self-regulatory organizations (e.g., FINRA). Forms are filed electronically by their employing firms using the Central Registration Depository (Web CRD or IARD). Broker-dealer agents and investment adviser representatives have an obligation to update previously filed Forms U4 with any new information required to be disclosed. FINRA makes information filed on Form U4 publicly available through its BrokerCheck program.

Broker-dealers and investment advisers use Form U5 to terminate a representative’s registration in a particular jurisdiction or with a particular self-regulatory organization. Firms terminating the registration of an associated person must respond to a series of disclosure questions. Firms also have the obligation to update previously filed Forms U5 if they become aware of new disclosure information.

As discussed above, Form U4 and Form U5 filings (initial applications. termination notices, and amendments) will generally be made electronically through Web CRD or IARD. However, some individuals may need to file the form on paper, including: agents of issuers, certain persons filing with stock exchanges, and certain investment adviser representatives. In addition, NASD Rule 1013 requires the submission of certain paper Forms U4 along with an initial membership application.

The SEC recently approved amendments to Forms U4 and U5 that were proposed by FINRA that call for significant changes to disclosure questions on the Forms, including the addition of questions about certain regulatory actions. The new amendments to the Forms include:

New regulatory action questions that will enable FINRA and other regulators to identify more readily persons subject to a particular category of “statutory disqualification” under the federal securities laws and the FINRA By-Laws. Among the items that would cause a person to become subject to a statutory disqualification are “willful” violations of the federal securities laws, the Commodity Exchange Act, or the rules of the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board. Under the proposed rule changes, both Forms U4 and U5 would be amended to add questions requiring disclosure of findings of “willful” violations.
New questions that require firms to report allegations of sales practice violations made against a registered person in an arbitration or litigation in which the registered person is not a named party. Under the new amendment, reporting would be required if the registered person was either named in or could reasonably be identified from the body of the arbitration claim or civil litigation as a registered person who was involved in one or more of the alleged sales practice violations.
An increase in the monetary threshold for reporting settlements of customer complaints, arbitrations or litigation from $10,000 to $15,000.
The clarification that the date to be provided by a firm in the “date of termination” field is the “date the firm terminated the individual’s association with the firm in a capacity for which registration is required.” Under the new amendment, a firm would be permitted to change the date of and reason for termination, but would be required to state a reason for the change.

The revised Forms were implemented in Web CRD on May 18, 2009. The effective date for most of these changes is May 18, 2009 (the “release date”). The effective date for the new regulatory action disclosure questions will be 180 days from the release date, or November 14, 2009.

Key Items Regarding the Forms Changes:

Invalidation of Pending Form Filings Upon Web CRD System Shutdown:

Implementation of the revised “form versions” will cause all pending (in-process) Form U4 and U5 filings that are not submitted to Web CRD prior to system shutdown on Friday, May 15, 2009, to become invalidated (i.e., converted to a read-only mode). Firm users that still need to submit the information on those invalidated filings will need to recreate the filings using the new forms.

Form U4 Amendments Required:

All registered persons are required to answer new regulatory action disclosure summary questions the next time they file a Form U4 amendment or no later than 180 days following the release date.

Copies of the revised Forms and instructions are available here.

****

Please contact us if you have any questions or would like to start a hedge fund. Other related hedge fund law articles include:

Form U4 and Form U5 Amendments

2 Replies

NASAA Requests Comments on Proposed Changes

Form U4 is the form used by Investment Advisory firms to register investment advisor representatives with their firm. It is also used by broker-dealers to register reps with their firms. Form U5 is used by both IA and BD firms to terminate a representative’s employment with such firm. While I have not reviewed the changes to the forms in depth, the summary discussion (reprinted below) sounds reasonable. We may be submitting comments on these proposals in the future as we discuss with other industry participant – please let us know if you have strong thoughts one way or another on the proposed changes.

The press release and discussion are both reprinted below. For more information, please visit the NASAA site here. Please also review our recommended articles at the very bottom of this page.

****

Notice for Request for Comment on Amendments to Forms U4 and U5 and Proposed Guidance for Filings by Investment Adviser Representatives

The proposed changes have been published by both FINRA and the SEC for public comment. On May 13, 2009, the SEC approved the proposed changes. NASAA is now publishing the amended forms for further review and comment by its members and other interested parties in anticipation of adoption of the revised forms by the NASAA membership.

In addition, this notice includes suggested guidance for states in responding to inquiries regarding the impact of the revisions on filings by investment adviser representatives.

The comment period begins June 9, 2009, and will remain open for 14 days. Accordingly, all comments should be submitted on or before June 23, 2009.

****

NOTICE FOR REQUEST FOR COMMENT ON AMENDMENTS TO THE UNIFORM APPLICATION FOR SECURITIES INDUSTRY REGISTRATION OR TRANSFER (FORM U4), THE UNIFORM TERMINATION NOTICE FOR SECURITIES INDUSTRY REGISTRATION (FORM U5), AND PROPOSED GUIDANCE FOR FILINGS BY INVESTMENT ADVISER REPRESENTATIVES.

The NASAA CRD/IARD Steering Committee and the CRD/IARD Forms and Process Committee have worked with FINRA, regulators, and representatives of the financial services industry in developing amendments to the Form U4 and Form U5. The proposed changes have been published by both FINRA and the SEC for public comment. On May 13, 2009, the SEC approved the proposed changes. NASAA is now publishing the amended forms for further review and comment by its members and other interested parties in anticipation of adoption of the revised forms by the NASAA membership.

In addition, this memo includes suggested guidance for states in responding to inquiries regarding the impact of the revisions on filings by investment adviser representatives.

Questions or comments regarding the revised forms should be directed to the following individuals:
Melanie Lubin
Office of the Attorney General
Division of Securities
200 Saint Paul Place
Baltimore, Maryland 21202-2020
(410) 576-6360
[email protected]

Pam Epting
Office of Financial Regulation
200 East Gaines Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0372
(850) 410-9819
[email protected]

Joseph Brady
NASAA
750 First Street, NE
Suite 1140
Washington, DC 20002
202-737-0900
[email protected]

The comment period begins June 9, 2009, and will remain open for fourteen (14) days. Accordingly, all comments should be submitted to the individuals noted above on or before June 23, 2009.

Summary of Proposed Changes to Registration Forms

The SEC recently approved amendments for Forms U4 and U5 (“the Forms”). These changes fall into the following categories.

Willful Violations. Additional questions have been added to Form U4 in order to enable regulators to identify more readily individuals and firms subject to a particular category of statutory disqualification pursuant to Section 15(b)(4)(D) of the Exchange Act.
Revision to Arbitration and Civil Litigation Question. Changes were made to the text of the question on the Form U4 regarding disclosure of arbitrations or civil litigation to elicit reporting of allegations of sales practice violations made against a registered person in arbitration or litigation in which that person was not named as a party to the arbitration or litigation.
Revision to Monetary Threshold. The monetary threshold for reporting settlements of customer complaints, arbitrations or civil litigation on the Forms has been raised from $10,000 to $15,000.
Date and Reason for Termination. The definition of “Date of Termination” in the Form U5 has been revised in order to enable firms to amend the “Date of Termination” and the “Reason for Termination” subject to certain conditions.
Technical Amendments. Certain technical and clarifying changes were made to the Forms.

The SEC approved these amendments effective May 18, 2009, except the new disclosure questions regarding willful violations, which become effective 180 days later on November 14, 2009. Firms will be required to amend Form U4 to respond to the new disclosure questions the first time they file Form U4 amendments for registered persons after May 18, 2009, at which time they may provide provisional “no” answers. However, firms must provide final answers to the questions no later than November 14, 2009.

Revisions Regarding Willful Violations.

The amendments modify the Forms to enable regulators to query the CRD system to identify persons who are subject to disqualification as a result of a finding of a willful violation. Specifically, the amendments add additional questions to existing Questions 14C and 14E on Form U4. Question 14C, which inquires about SEC and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) regulatory actions, adds three new questions regarding willful violations. Similarly, Question 14E, which concerns findings by a self-regulatory organization, adds three identical questions. The Form U4 Regulatory Action Disclosure Reporting Page (DRP) will continue to elicit specific information regarding the status of the events reported in response to these questions.

Adding new disclosure questions to Form U4 requires firms to amend such forms for all their registered persons. To ensure that firms have appropriate time to populate the forms accurately, the SEC delayed the effective date for the new regulatory action disclosure questions for 180 days until November 14, 2009. This schedule will provide firms with up to 180 days from the release date to answer the regulatory action disclosure questions. Additionally firms, at their discretion, can file provisional “no” answers to the six new regulatory action questions during the 180-day period between the release date and the effective date. During this time, the regulatory action disclosure questions will appear in the CRD system in a manner designed to indicate that such questions are not effective until 180 days from the release date and that any answers provided in response to such questions are provisional until such time as those questions become effective. Any “no” answers filed in response to the new regulatory action disclosure questions during such 180-day period that are not amended before November 14, 2009, will become final, and the firm and subject registered person will be deemed to have represented that the person has not been the subject of any finding addressed by the question(s). If a firm determines that a registered person must answer “yes” to any part of Form U4 Questions 14C or 14E, the amendment filings must include completed DRP(s) covering the proceedings or action reported.

With respect to Form U5, the amendments did not alter Question 7D (Regulatory Action Disclosure), but added new Question 12C to the Form U5 Regulatory Action DRP. As of May 18, 2009, firms that answer “yes” to Question 7D on Form U5 will be required to provide more detailed information about the regulatory action in Question 12C of the DRP. For regulatory actions in which the SEC, CFTC or an SRO is the regulator involved, Question 12C requires firms to answer questions eliciting whether the action involves a willful violation. These questions correspond to the questions added to the Form U4. A firm will not be required to amend Form U5 to answer Question 12C on the DRP and/or add information to a Form U5 Regulatory Action DRP that was filed previously unless it is updating a regulatory action that it reported as pending on the current DRP.

Revisions to the Arbitration and Civil Litigation Disclosure Question.

The Forms have been revised to require the reporting of allegations of sales practices violations made against registered persons in a civil lawsuit or arbitration in which the registered person is not a named party. Specifically, Question 14I on Form U4 and Question 7E on Form U5 were amended to require the reporting of alleged sales practice violations made by a customer against persons identified in the body of a civil litigation complaint or an arbitration claim, even when those persons are not named as parties. The new questions apply only to arbitration claims or civil litigation filed on or after May 18, 2009. A firm is required to report a “yes” answer only after it has made a good-faith determination after a reasonable investigation that the alleged sales practice violation(s) involved the registered person.

Revisions to the Monetary Threshold.

The current monetary threshold for settlements of customer complaints, arbitrations or litigation was set in 1998 and has not been adjusted since that time. The changes to the Forms include raising the existing reporting threshold from $10,000 to $15,000 to reflect more accurately the business criteria (including the cost of litigation) firms consider when deciding to settle claims. This change is reflected in Question 14I on Form U4 and Question 7E on Form U5.

Revisions Regarding “Date of Termination” and “Reason for Termination.”

Revisions to Form U5 provide that the date to be provided by a firm in the “Date of Termination” field is the “date that the firm terminated the individual’s association with the firm in a capacity for which registration is required.” The amendments further clarify that, in the case of full terminations, the “Date of Termination” provided by the firm will continue to be used by regulators to determine whether an individual is required to requalify by examination or obtain an appropriate waiver upon reassociating with a firm. Revisions to Form U5 also clarify that the relevant SRO or jurisdiction determines the effective date of termination of registration. The rule change also permits a firm, as of May 18, 2009, to amend the “Date of Termination” and “Reason for Termination” fields in a Form U5 it previously submitted, but in such cases it requires the firm to provide a reason for each amendment. To monitor such amendments, including those reporting terminations for cause, FINRA will notify other regulators and the broker-dealer with which the registered person is currently associated (if the person is associated with another firm) when a date of termination or reason for termination has been amended. The original date of termination or reason for termination will remain in the CRD system in form filing history.

Technical Revisions.

The Forms were amended to make various clarifying, technical and conforming changes generally intended to clarify the information elicited by regulators and to facilitate reporting by firms and regulators. For example, the amendments eliminated as unnecessary certain cross-references in the Forms. Additionally, certain “free text” fields were converted to discrete fields. The amendments also add to Section 7 of Form U5 (Disclosure Questions) an optional “Disclosure Certification Checkbox” that will enable firms to affirmatively represent that all required disclosure for a terminated person has been reported and the record is current at the time of termination. Checking this box will allow the firm to bypass the process of re-reviewing a person’s entire disclosure history for purposes of filing Form U5 in situations in which disclosure is up to date at the time of the person’s termination. The amendments make additional technical changes to the Forms. For example, they incorporate the definition of “found” from the Form U4 Instructions into the Form U5 instructions; provide more detailed instructions regarding the reporting of an internal review (conducted by the firm); and clarify how an individual may file comments to an Internal Review DRP.

Guidance Regarding U4 Filings for Investment Adviser Representatives.

As explained above, the questions added to items 14C and 14E have been approved by the SEC but the effectiveness of the questions has been delayed until November 14, 2009. The questions currently appear on the form in a manner designed to indicate that they are not currently effective. Further, the answers to the questions currently default to “no” and will continue to do so until they become effective later this year unless a filer manually selects a “yes” answer. The delayed effective date coupled with the default “no” answer is a temporary accommodation in order to give filers an opportunity to determine the appropriate answers to the new questions.

The CRD/IARD Steering Committee has received inquiries regarding how investment adviser representatives should respond to these questions. It is the Steering Committee’s recommendation that state and territorial securities regulators handle the filings for investment adviser representatives in the same manner as broker-dealer agents who file on or after May 18, 2009. That is, investment adviser representatives should be allowed to file provisional responses to the questions contained in 14C and 14E on the Form U4 until such time as the questions become effective on November 14, 2009.

Forms.

Copies of the revisions as approved by the SEC are attached.

****

Please contact us if you have any questions or would like to start a hedge fund. Other related hedge fund law articles include:

Hedge Fund Affiliated Broker Dealer

1 Reply

What does it mean for a hedge fund to have an affiliated broker-dealer?

Definition of Broker-Dealer

We will start off by defining a broker-dealer. Basically a broker-dealer is the term used in the investment management industry for a firm which executes securities trades. The trades may be executed by these firms through an agency relationship (commission) with the client or through dealer (mark up) relationship with a customer. Some firms act in only one capacity and some act in both capacities depending on the securities traded. Continue reading →

Hedge Funds and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) Requirements

4 Replies

Hedge fund managers are often confused about their anti-money laundering (AML) obligations and seem to receive different information from various sources. In general, domestic hedge fund managers do not have any AML obligations. Additionally, it is unlikely that domestic hedge funds will be subject to any AML requirements in the near future.

The rise of the AML regulations came from the PATRIOT ACT, which required financial institutions to adopt AML procedures. These regulations did not apply to domestic hedge funds specifically, but the Treasury promulgated proposed rules which would have applied the AML requirements to domestic hedge funds. The proposed rule would have required hedge funds to (i) have internal AML polices, procedures and controls, (ii) have an AML officer, (iii) have ongoing compliance training for employees and (iv) have an annual audit of the AML program.

An article by the Washington Post recently announced that the Treasury has withdrawn the proposed AML requirements for hedge funds. The article states that the central reason why the AML requirements for hedge funds did not go through is that it is unlikely that terrorist groups would use hedge funds as a way to launder money. The article states that hedge funds may be too risky for terrorists.

This announcement does not affect other financial institutions, such as banks and broker-dealers, which have specific AML and Know Your Customer (KYC) requirements. The fact that the proposal was withdrawn does not mean, however, that hedge funds are free from any sort of AML. As noted above, banks and broker-dealers are subject to their own AML requirements and may require their customers (hedge funds) to also implement AML policies. If a bank or BD does require this, then the hedge fund manager should discuss the situation with the fund’s attorney to determine the appropriate next steps. Offshore hedge funds, too, are subject to the anti-money laundering regulations of the jurisdiction in which they are domiciled. The withdrawal of the proposed AML requirements does not affect these offshore hedge funds.

Please also note that state securities commissions may try to require hedge funds to incorporate AML requirements. Currently we do not know of any state securities commissions with these requirements, but Texas has tried to implement a requirement like this in the past.

Please contact us, or another hedge fund attorney, if you have any questions. Other related HFLB articles include:

Offshore Hedge Funds Structures and Considerations
SEC Cracks Down on Lax AML (regarding a broker-dealer)

Hedge Fund Capital – How to Raise Assets for a Hedge Fund

9 Replies

The biggest issue for start up hedge funds (and also established hedge fund managers) is how to grow assets under management. Growing a hedge fund’s capital base is very important because increased AUM mean both increased management fees and performance fees (assuming the fund has positive performance returns). This article focuses on traditional avenues of raising capital for a hedge fund.

Raising Hedge Fund Capital – Friends and Family

Most hedge funds raise capital to start up through their friends and families. Often this can be a significant sum, other times it can be relatively small. I have seen some hedge funds start with as little as $500,000 and sometimes less. Often, after a hedge fund has a few months of performance (assuming again positive performance) these friends and family members will invest more money. Other friends and family members, who did not originally invest, may also decided to invest. Family members of investors may also be persuaded to invest in the hedge fund.

Generally investments from friends and family are completed fairly quickly and through less formal conversations than from other types of investors. However, the hedge fund manager must always make sure that the friends and family have the fund’s offering documents and have made the appropriate representations in the subscription documents.

After an initial investment from friends and family, it is important for a start up manager to focus on the trading as it is most important to have a good 6-12 month track record that you will be able to market to other potential investors.

Raising Hedge Fund Capital – High Net Worth Individual Investors

High net worth investors (generally qualified purchasers as well as some qualified clients and accredited investors) often invest in hedge funds. High net worth investors will usually have legal and investing teams which will vet the managers and the strategy. Usually there will at least be a minimum amount of due diligence requests on the manager and the fund. Managers can be introduced to high net worth investors through their own networks or through other channels such as hedge fund conferences, hedge fund databases or through other means.

Raising Hedge Fund Capital – Institutional Investors

Institutional investors will occasionally invest in hedge funds with a track record shorter than one year. Generally in these cases the hedge fund sticks out to them for various reasons. Such reasons might be that the hedge fund performance was just spectacular, or the institutional investor likes the way the particular investment strategy fits within the institution’s allocation design, or the hedge fund manager may have a strong pedigree which appeals to the institutional investor.

Whatever the reason, getting an investment from an institutional investors is usually a longer and more in depth process than receiving money from friends and family or from a high net worth investor. The hedge fund manager will need to first establish a meeting with the institutional investor. Generally the meeting will be at the office of the institution and the manager will have a certain amount of time to give his pitch, usually through a pitchbook presentation. Some managers of the institution will look carefully at these presentations; others will not even open the cover. However, the hedge fund manager should be ready to answer any number of different questions from the institution regarding the program. Such questions will likely cover the following topics: risk management procedures, expected performance in down markets, performance analytics, etc. The hedge fund manager should act composed and answer each question directly and completely – this is the time for the manager to show his knowledge of the investment strategy and sell the strategy to others.

Either before or after the meeting with the institution, the hedge fund manager will likely be asked to complete some basic due diligence. I’ve outlined a sample request in this article: Institutional Hedge Fund Due Diligence. After the institution has interviewed and vetted a manager it may take some time before the institution actually invests in the fund. This happens for a variety of reasons and the hedge fund manager is urged to stay patient during the process.

Non-tradtional forms of raising hedge fund capital

I will be discussing other ways to raise capital in subsequent articles. Such non-traditional ways include: utilizing the services of a third party marketer, capital introduction services, hedge fund conferences, and hedge fund databases.

Legal Implications of Raising Capital for a Hedge Fund

As most hedge fund managers know, under the Regulation D offering rules managers cannot raise capital through any type of general advertising or solicitation. This means that they cannot: buy advertising in any financial publications, advertise generally on the internet (but please see article on Hedge Fund Websites), cold call potential investors and or engage in other similar activities. Additionally, hedge fund managers, and others raising money for hedge funds, must be aware of and abide by all broker-dealer regulations. This is a very important issue, so please discuss it with your hedge fund attorney (please see Guide to Broker-Dealer Registration).

Please contact us if you have a story on raising capital for you hedge fund – we would like to hear your story and potentially profile your fund on our blog. Other articles which are related to items in this article include:

Hedge Fund Series 7 question

3 Replies

As I’ve noted in many of my posts, I will try my best to answer your questions or point you to a post within the site which discusses the subject. Below is a common question for licensed brokers who are getting into the hedge fund industry.

Question: I currently hold a series 7 agent license as well as a series 65. I am employed with a broker dealer and soon will make a job change to a hedge fund as a marketer. Can the hedge fund maintain my licenses even though they are not a broker dealer and given the fact that I do not need to have a series 7 license to market the hedge fund? I do not want my license to lapse while in the employ of the hedge fund. I do know that FINRA will hold my license for 24 months before expiring. I would like to maintain my licenses and keep them current by fulfilling my continuing education responsibilities. Please advise.

Answer: No, unfortunately the hedge fund will not be able to “hold” your license if it (or a related entity) is not a broker-dealer. Only a FINRA licensed broker-dealer will be able to “hold” your license – and by “hold” we mean that you would be registered as a representative of the broker-dealer.

This should not be confused with “parking” a license with a broker-dealer which is illegal under FINRA rules. Parking a license basically means that you are registered with a broker-dealer for no business reason other than to keep your licenses current. In the situation above, as you noted, the series 7 designation will expire two years after a U-5 has been submitted by your employing broker-dealer.

One potential way to keep the license is to stay on with your broker dealer and conduct your hedge fund selling activities through the broker-dealer. This may not be possible for a number of business reasons and the broker-dealer may not have the proper compliance procedures in place to market and sell hedge fund interests to its customers. For this reason staying with a broker often is not a viable option and unfortunately I have not come across a good solution to this very common problem.

Hedge Fund Law Blog

Hedge fund laws, starting a hedge fund, news and events…

Tag Archives: broker-dealer

Aspect Advisors & CFM Compliance Update – January 23, 2020

Alternative Trading Systems (ATS)

Section 13(d) Filings and Section 13(g) Filings

Series 79 Exam

Form U4 and Form U5 | Information About the Uniform Registration Forms for Broker-Dealers and Investment Advisors

Form U4 and Form U5 Amendments

Hedge Fund Affiliated Broker Dealer

Hedge Funds and Anti-Money Laundering (AML) Requirements

Hedge Fund Capital – How to Raise Assets for a Hedge Fund

Hedge Fund Series 7 question