Investment Advisers

SIFMA Tells Labor Department To Wait For SEC on Fiduciary Rulemaking

Published on: February 3, 2014 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association wants the US Labor Department to hold back on putting out its expected proposed rule modifying its definition of fiduciary standard of care until the Securities and Exchange Commission decides whether it will put out its own standard for financial professionals. SIFMA is worried that new DOL rules might harm brokers that purchase and sell bonds and stocks in addition to offering investment advice.

The SEC and DOL are both working on fiduciary rules. While many agree that brokers such have fiduciary duties to their clients, there are those who worry that this could make commission-based professional relationships in which a financial representative offers products from his/her employer more challenging. SIFMA says it would like a business model that includes a uniform fiduciary standard that doesn’t prevent a client from buying such products if desired.

The Labor Department, which is accountable for enforcing Employee Retirement Income Security Act rules over qualified plans, is expected to propose a stronger standard than the SEC. Already, ERISA places high care standards and loyalty on the fiduciaries of IRAs and pension plan and the DOL makes it a priority to protect customers from the conflicts of interest of advisors.

Advice to Advisors: Financial Advisors Taught Ways to Avoid SEC Scrutiny

Published on: November 11, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

According to the Securities and Exchange Commission Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations Director Andrew J. Bowden, next year the regulator intends to examine about 4,000 registered investment financial advisors who have never been visited by its inspectors before. Bowden said that the agency will target about 50% of firms that have yet to be examined. Some of these investment advisers have been registered for over three years.

Of the close to 11,000 financial advisors that the SEC oversees, nearly 40% have never undergone inspection by the regulator. Still, some are questioning whether Bowden’s office even has the resources to perform all these inspections.

In InvestmentNews, Ascendant Compliance Management partner Keith Marks lists the compliance issues that these yet to be inspected RIAs should deal with now so that they are ready should the agency come knocking:

Two Investment Advisers Sue Twitter for Secondary Market Fraud

Published on: November 5, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Precedo Capital Group and Continental Advisors SA are suing Twitter for secondary market fraud. The securities lawsuit comes right before the social networking company’s IPO, which is slated for this week. The investment advisor plaintiffs claim that Twitter promised them up to $289 million in shares through another financial firm to try and raise its secondary market valuation and test the market. The third firm, GSV Capital, is not a defendant.

Precedo and Continental claim that GSV’s co-founder and CIO Matthew Hanson reached out to them last year about an arrangement involving his firm giving them shares to market to other accredited investors. The plaintiffs say that Twitter and its legal representation, Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, approved the deal. Wanting the healthy commission they expected they’d receive, the investment advisers marketed private Twitter shares to investors abroad and in the US.

Continental and Precedo say they took hundreds of millions of investor orders and collected over $4 million that was placed in an escrow account. The customers wanted exposure to pre-IPO twitter stock.

However, contend the two firms, before payments were accepted Twitter told GSV to cancel the offering, which caused Precedo and Continental to have to pay millions of dollars in lost fees while their reputation suffered. Even though GSV is the one that shut down the offering, the plaintiffs believe that Twitter was the one making the calls and that GSV didn’t have the authority to offer the shares for repurchase. They also claim that Twitter never planned to sell the shares but actually just wanted to get a sense of the demand for the stock so it could set itself up with a high secondary market valuation. Now, Continental and Precedo want $24.2 million in expenses and lost fees.

Twitter says that the lawsuit is without merit and that it never had a relationship with the two investment advisors.

Two Financial Advisers Accuse Twitter of Secondary Market Fraud, NY Times, October 30, 2013

Two Investment Firms Almost Sure They Remember Being Hired to Sell Twitter Stock, Bloomberg, October 30, 2013

More Blog Posts:
Radio Host Dave Ramsey and Financial Advisers Get Into Twitter Fight, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, June 14, 2013

Texas Securities Roundup: $10M Ponzi Scheme, Foreign Note Sale Fraud, Promissory Note Scam, and Money Laundering Lead to Indictments, Criminal Sentences, Stockbroker Fraud Blog, May 21, 2013
Two Oppenheimer Investment Advisers Settle for Over $2.8M SEC Fraud Charges Over Private Equity Fund, Institutional Investor Securities Blog, March 14, 2013 Continue Reading ›

SEC Sanctions Three Investment Advisory Firms for Custody Rule Violations

Published on: October 30, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The SEC has sanctioned registered investment advisory firms Further Lane Asset Management, Knelman Asset Management Group, and GW & Wade with violating the rules that obligate them to fulfill certain standards while keeping custody of the securities or funds of clients. The regulator says that all three firms either did not keep up client assets with the help of a qualified custodian or failed to work with an independent public accountant to perform surprise exams. They also allegedly committed additional federal securities law violations. All three firms have consented to settle the charges against them.

Per the SEC order, although Further Lane Management, which is based in New York, and its CEO Jose Miguel Araiz did keep up custody of hedge fund assets that it managed along with Osprey Group Inc., they did not set up a yearly surprise exam to verify these assets. They also allegedly committed fraud involving fund-of-funds they controlled and other violations.

Araiz, Further Lane Management, and Osprey Group Inc. have consented to pay disgorgement and prejudgment interest of $347,122. Araiz also has to pay a $150,000 penalty and he is suspended from the industry for a year.

Regulatory Reform: Delay or Destruction?

Published on: August 26, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

10 Democrats in the US Senate are calling on the Obama Administration to delay a proposal by the Department of Labor involving retirement plan-related investment advice until after the SEC makes a decision over whether to put out its own proposal about retail investment advice. The Commission is looking at whether it should propose a rule that would up the standard for brokers who give this type of advice. The lawmakers are worried that the two rules might conflict and obligate investment advisers and brokers to satisfy two standards.

Meantime, the Labor Department is getting ready to once more propose a rule that would broaden what “fiduciary” means for anyone that gives investment advice about retirement plans. Its previous proposal in 2010 met with resistance from the industry and some members of Congress. Even now there are also Republican lawmakers that want the DOL to wait until after the SEC makes a decision.

Commission Chairman Mary Jo White says she would like the agency to make this decision as “as quickly as we can.” Also, earlier this month she said it would be “premature” to talk about whether the regulator will change or withdraw a recent proposal to amend Regulation D to improve requirement for companies wanting a more relaxed general solicitation arena.

Radio Host Dave Ramsey and Financial Advisers Get Into Twitter Fight

Published on: June 14, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

Dave Ramsey, a well-known radio host, recently got into a twitter war with fee-only financial advisers. The advisers had criticized the radio personality, who is also an author, for telling his readers to expect a 12% investment return and for promoting brokers who are commission-based. Ramsey hosts the popular “The Dave Ramsey Show,” which is a program about money and life.

One adviser, Carl Richards, Tweeted that Ramsey’s advice was “dangerous.” Ramsey responded to his critics also via Twitter, saying that he provides assistance to more people in minutes than all of these advisers ever will.

Another adviser, David Grant, questioned whether the investment professionals that Ramsey recommends on online pay the host for that endorsement. Ramsey did not respond. However, his website does state that local providers that are endorsed do pay a fee for the “local advertising.” All recommended providers, however, have to be Financial Industry Regulatory Authority Inc. members.

Stock Trader Faces Front Running Charges In Alleged $1.7M Texas Securities Fraud

Published on: June 1, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The SEC has filed Texas securities fraud charges against Daniel Bergin, a Dallas-based Cushing MLP Asset Management LP senior equity trader. Bergin is accused of front running, insider trading, and failing to notify his employer of certain trades.

According to the regulator, Bergin, who was a primary equity trader at the Swank Capital-owned registered investment advisory firm), allegedly made at least $1.7 million in profits in trading securities before making large orders of the same securities for Cushing customers. He purportedly used accounts that were registered in the name of Jacqueline Zaun, his wife, to make the personal trades. The Commission has named her as a relief defendant.

SEC Enforcement Division’s Asset Management Unit Marshall S. Sprung says that Bergin breached clients’ trust by secretly using data about their trades to garner an unfair advantage for himself and make massive profits. (As a Cushing, employee, Bergin had access to information about the trades (and their timing) that the RIA made for clients.

Controversial Democratic Appointee Pushes SEC for Less Talk About Investor and Securities Market Protections and More Action

Published on: April 28, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

According to Securities and Exchange Commissioner Luis Aguilar, the growing number of registered investment advisers, the increasing complexity of the financial instruments they use, and the recent trends in securities examinations show that there is a need for the regulator to up the vigorousness of its investment adviser examinations and enforcement activities. He noted that even as the SEC is working to give the regulated community best practices and guidance to enhance compliance, it also intends to increase its scrutiny of advisers, including more exams (especially for private fund advisers). Alternative investment managers will also get more attention.

Aguilar pointed out that with the number SEC registered investment advisers having gone up about 50% to over 10,000 last year, the value of the assets that they manage also increasing from about $22 trillion in 2002 to approximately $44 trillion in 2011, as well as a rise in the number of complex financial instruments that advisers use, there are more chances for “mischief” to happen. Hence, there is the need for more robust enforcement.

Also, as our securities fraud law firm mentioned in a previous blog post, the SEC commissioner wants there to be an end to mandatory arbitration agreements. Per the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the SEC now can prohibit or limit pre-dispute arbitration agreements, which have become standard fare for brokerage firms. Aguilar is concerned that they are also becoming routine for investment advisory firms. He wants the government to ponder the possibility of adopting rules that would stop or limit broker-dealers and investment advisers from mandating that customers sign clauses in their agreements with one another that prevents them from filing securities fraud lawsuits and instead only resolve their disputes via arbitration.

SEC Submits Request for Data on Whether to Make Brokers & Investment Advisers Abide by Uniform Fiduciary Standard

Published on: April 4, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

The Securities and Exchange Commission has put out its request for information to help it decide whether to impose a uniform standard of care on both investment advisers and broker-dealers that give advice to retail customers. The comment period ends 120 days after the data request, which was issued on March 1, is published in the Federal Register.

Responding to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act’s Section 913, the SEC conducted a study on the effectiveness of the current standards for investment advisers and brokers. Following its examination, Commission staff recommended that the regulator take part in rulemaking to establish a uniform fiduciary standard for those that provide customized retail investments. However, last year, after then-SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro announced that the agency was putting together a request for information so it could decide whether to follow this recommendation, the initiative had to be delayed due to a lack of support from other commissioners.

Now, in this latest request request, the Commission was quick to stress that it has yet to decide whether such a rulemaking needs to happen or what one would entail. It also asked for data regarding others areas impacting both investment advisers and brokers that could benefit from harmonization, including business conduct rules, licensing advertising, registration, and books and records.

SEC OCIE Finds Custody-Related Deficiencies Involving Investment Advisers

Published on: April 3, 2013 | by Shepherd Smith Edwards & Kantas, LLP

According to the Securities and Exchange Commission Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations, it discovered “significant deficiencies” related to custody issues with a third of the investment advisers that it examined, including:

• Failure of an investment adviser to recognize when it has custody • Failure to satisfy the rule’s surprise exam requirements • Failure to fulfill the rule’s qualified custodian requirements

Custody by investment advisers refers either to the holding of securities or client funds or the authority to possess them, including the power of attorney to get securities or funds from client accounts. The 1940 Investment Advisers Act’s Rule 206(4)-2 regarding custody prescribes specific requirements for client asset safety.