Catagory:Investment Manager Regulation

1
Australia: New Greenwashing Guidance
2
Australia: Cybersecurity now a legal obligation for AFS Licensees
3
Australia: Eagerly Awaits Foreign Financial Service Providers’ Legislation
4
United States: All Square: Amended CFTC “Block Trade” Definition Officially Effective
5
United States: MNPI (aka, “My Next Possible Investigation”): The SEC’s Scrutiny of MNPI Compliance Programs
6
Europe: FCA Challenge to UK Fund Service Providers    
7
Australia: Finally, a new fund vehicle
8
United States: Private Funds and SEC Crypto Regulation
9
Australia: What do changes to Unfair Contract Terms (UCT) laws in Australia mean for financial services?
10
United States: Reporting of U.S. Ownership on TIC form SHC Due by March

Australia: New Greenwashing Guidance

By Jim Bulling and Alex Morrison

ASIC has released Information Sheet 271 (INFO 271) to assist responsible entities of managed funds, corporate directors of CCIVs and trustees of registerable superannuation funds (Product Issuers) in avoiding ‘greenwashing’ when offering sustainability-related products (Products). INFO 271 describes greenwashing and provides a comprehensive overview of the current regulatory setting for communications about sustainability–related products.

Read More

Australia: Cybersecurity now a legal obligation for AFS Licensees

By Kane Barnett and Bernard Sia

As technology continues to drive change within the financial services industry, Australian courts and regulators have confirmed the need for Australian financial services (AFS) licensees to address the cybersecurity risks. On 5 May 2022, the Australian Federal Court ruled in favour of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), holding that AFS licensee RI Advice Group Pty Ltd (RI Advice) had breached its statutory obligations by failing to have adequate cybersecurity measures in place.

Read More

Australia: Eagerly Awaits Foreign Financial Service Providers’ Legislation

By Jim Bulling

In February this year we provided an update on the introduction of the draft legislation providing relief to Foreign Financial Services Providers (FFSPs) in Australia.

As we discussed back in February the draft legislative pack provided three significant potential exemptions for FFSPs namely:

  • Professional Investor Exemption
  • Comparable Regulator Exemption
  • Fit and Proper Person Test Exemption
Read More

United States: All Square: Amended CFTC “Block Trade” Definition Officially Effective

By: Cheryl L. Isaac and Michael G. Lee

On 25 May 2022, the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s (CFTC) block trade no-action relief, provided in CFTC No-Action Letter (NAL) 20-35, expired. As of that day, all swap execution facilities (SEFs) are required to comply with the amended definition of “block trade” provided under CFTC Regulation 43.2.

“Block trades” are large, privately negotiated (either directly or through a broker) swap transactions that meet certain quantity thresholds. Block trades must qualify for execution apart from the SEF’s order book or trading platform in accordance with the relevant SEF’s rules, pursuant to CFTC Regulations.

Read More

United States: MNPI (aka, “My Next Possible Investigation”): The SEC’s Scrutiny of MNPI Compliance Programs

By: Keri E. Riemer

The SEC’s Division of Examinations recently released a risk alert describing a pattern of deficiencies relating to investment advisers’ use of material non-public information (MNPI). The Staff highlighted the following as areas of concern:

  • Alternative Data. Advisers that used data from non-traditional sources beyond company financial statements, filings, and press releases appeared to not have adopted or implemented written policies and procedures reasonably designed to address the potential risk of receiving and using MNPI through such sources.
  • “Value-Add Investors”. Advisers did not have—or did not appear to implement—adequate policies and procedures related to investors who are more likely to possess MNPI (e.g., officers or directors of a public company, asset management firm principals or portfolio managers, and investment bankers).
  • Expert Networks. Advisers did not appear to adequately track calls with expert network consultants, retain detailed notes from the calls, and monitor trading activity related to companies in industries similar to those discussed during the calls.
  • Deficiencies related to Access Persons. The Staff identified advisers who failed to correctly identify “access persons” (as defined in Rule 204A-1(c) under the Investment Advisers Act), ensure that those access persons obtain pre-approval for investments in IPOs and other similar offerings, and maintain adequate records of the holding and transactions of access persons.

The Staff also encouraged industry participants to review their practices, policies, and procedures regarding the topics addressed above. We recently issued a client alert which describes the risk alert in greater detail and provides takeaways for industry participants.

Europe: FCA Challenge to UK Fund Service Providers    

By: Andrew Massey and Melissa Vance

Fund managers can expect changes to custodian and other fund service provider practices in response to regulator challenge, and should review their due diligence of service providers.

In a letter on 23 March 2022, the FCA instructed the Chief Executive and Boards of third-party custodians, depositories for authorised and non-authorised funds, and third-party administrators to review key risks identified by the FCA, including the following:

Read More

Australia: Finally, a new fund vehicle

By Kane Barnett

On 1 July 2022 Australia will finally get a new fund vehicle, the corporate collective investment vehicle (CCIV).

Historically, Australian funds have been established as unit trusts or, in the case of certain venture capital funds, limited partnerships. The CCIV is a corporate structure that is intended to be more internationally recognisable than the trust-based fund structure as it is similar to the equivalent structure in other key fund jurisdictions such as the United Kingdom, Cayman Islands, Singapore and Hong Kong.

Read More

United States: Private Funds and SEC Crypto Regulation

By: Rob Weiss

Fund sponsors continue to search for ways to get their investors exposure to cryptocurrencies.

For sponsors able to offer registered fund products, exchange-traded products (ETPs) are attractive: available to retail investors, highly liquid, and without a fixed term, ETPs check several boxes for sponsors and investors alike. However, while the SEC has authorized listing of ETPs that trade in bitcoin futures regulated by the CFTC, the SEC has not authorized listing of ETPs that trade directly in spot cryptocurrency. We recently wrote an article on this point, which can be accessed here.

Read More

Australia: What do changes to Unfair Contract Terms (UCT) laws in Australia mean for financial services?

By: Jim Bulling

Expanding both the scope of the UCT regime and regulator enforcement powers

On Wednesday 9 February 2022 a bill was introduced to Parliament which seeks to amend the Australian Consumer Law and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission Act (ASIC Act) to extend the Unfair Contract Terms Regime (UCT Regime).

Section 12BF of the ASIC Act currently prohibits unfair terms in standard form consumer and small business contracts as they relate to financial products and financial services.

Under the proposed changes, the UCT regime for small businesses under the ASIC Act will apply where the upfront price of the standard form contract (price threshold) does not exceed AU$5 million and one party to the contract is a business that either employs fewer than 100 people (employee threshold) or has an annual turnover of less than AU$10 million. These changes substantially expand the current law where the price threshold is AU$300,000 (or AU$1 million in a multiyear contract) and the employee threshold is 20 people. As such, the changes are likely to cause the UCT regime to apply to many more financial services business to business contracts.

Read More

United States: Reporting of U.S. Ownership on TIC form SHC Due by March

By: Todd Gibson

It’s time again for the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s mandatory five-year benchmark survey of the ownership of foreign securities by U.S. residents. All U.S. custodians and end-investors that exceed the applicable reporting threshold of reportable foreign must complete Form SHC and file it electronically or by email with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York no later than 4 March 2022.

Interested in learning more? Our recent alert provides details about who is required to report, the structure and purpose of the form, which securities are reportable, the penalties for noncompliance, and the confidentiality of data. The alert also provides a links to the Federal Register notice announcing the survey and instructions for Form SHC on the Department of Treasury website.

Copyright © 2023, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.