According to the Daily Montanan, a class-action lawsuit has been filed against the State of Montana. This lawsuit challenges the constitutionality of a licensing fee structure imposed on non-resident investment adviser representatives and securities salespersons, alleging it violates the privileges and immunities clause of the United States Constitution.
The Office of the Investor Advocate of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) recently released a report about the SEC staff’s study of mandatory arbitration clauses in investment advisory client agreements used by investment adviser firms registered with the SEC.
For investment adviser firms which are state registered with Nebraska, it’s crucial to be aware that there are certain additional documents which must be submitted directly (via a ShareFile link) to the Nebraska Securities Bureau in addition to and separate from the paying the regulatory fees associated with annual renewals and filing the Form ADV Annual Amendment via the IARD (“Investment Adviser Registration Depository”) system.
As we approach the end of the year, it is crucial for investment adviser firms to review their 2024 Preliminary Renewal Statements, which are now accessible through their IARD accounts. This statement is an overview of the firm’s current registration status and the associated renewal fees. Let us delve into the specifics of this renewal statement and its implications for your investment adviser firm.
Investment adviser firms can now access to their Preliminary Renewal Statement for 2024 through their IARD (Investment Adviser Registration Depository) accounts.
Just as a skilled surfer anticipates the perfect wave, an investment adviser firm’s seasoned executives and compliance professionals must prepare for the impending regulatory swell.
The Division of Examinations of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) recently issued the Fiscal Year 2024 Examination Priorities signaling areas of particular interest for the upcoming audits of investment advisers. Notably, this year’s exam priorities introduces what appears to be a new focus on whether investment adviser firms are obtaining “informed consent” from clients when making material changes to advisory agreements:
The U.S. Attorney’s Office (District of Connecticut) announced that it entered into a plea agreement with an owner/investment adviser representative of an investment adviser firm based in Connecticut. This CT investment adviser representative waived his right to be indicted and pled guilty to defrauding clients of $2.7 million through a cherry-picking scheme. Last month, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) also issued a cease-and-desist order against this investment adviser representative and firm. This blog post will review the cherry-picking allegations and offer several best practices for a chief compliance officer (“CCO”) to detect such activity within his or her own investment adviser firm.
During the last several years, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) has intensified its scrutiny of liability hedge clauses within investment advisory client agreements used by investment adviser firms.
In the ever-evolving landscape of artificial intelligence and intellectual property, Google has recently introduced a new tool called Google Extended which may be helpful to investment advisers desiring to protect their proprietary content on their website. This new tool allows web publishers such as investment adviser firms to have their websites indexed for search engine purposes while opting out of having their data used for training Google’s artificial intelligence (“AI”) models, including Bard. This development has far-reaching implications for various industries, including investment advisers who are increasingly reliant on digital platforms for client acquisition and engagement.
