The Network:


Currently browsing the Investment Advisers Act category.



Financial Services Providers Race (Cautiously) to Conquer Social Media

By Juan O. Perla, J.D. Candidate ’12, UC Berkeley School of Law

The first of this month Goldman Sachs announced that it would be hiring a new “social media community manager.” This report comes on the heels of Morgan Stanley’s announcement in March that it was launching a new social media program designed to enable its nearly 17,800 financial advisers to use Twitter and LinkedIn to disseminate investment information and insights. The moves by these two giants are sure to trigger a race in Wall Street to conquer the social media landscape for financial and investment services.

But why has the financial services industry been so slow to join the social media frenzy? For one, it worries about the legal pitfalls of letting their legions of advisers loose into unchartered territory. And their unease is not totally unfounded. As posted previously on The Network, the Financial Regulatory Authority (FINRA) brought an action last year to suspend and fine a California-based broker $10,000 for promoting certain investments in “a series of ‘misrepresentative and unbalanced’ messages” to her 1,400 Twitter followers. And as recently as a few months ago, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) charged an Illinois-based investment adviser with securities fraud for offering to sell “more than $500 billion in fictitious securities through various social media websites.” These regulatory actions precede a set of notable guidance letters from both the SEC and FINRA, briefly discussed in the prior post, but reviewed in more depth below.

Read the rest of this entry »

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

California’s Response to Dodd Frank and the Repeal of the “Private Advisers” Exemption

By Charles Rogerson

The Commissioner of the California Department of Corporations is considering amending Rule 260.204.9 of Title 10 of the California Code of Regulations in response to the repeal of the “private advisers” exemption mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act. The former exemption, found in the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”), had allowed specified investment advisers with fewer than fifteen clients in any twelve-month period to forgo SEC registration. Notably, the exemption counted each fund as a single client, not each individual investor. This exemption had a corollary in the California Code under 260.204.9. As amended by Dodd-Frank, the Advisers Act requires investment advisers with assets in excess of a specified statutory amount ($25 to $100 million) to register with the SEC.

Read the rest of this entry »

AddThis Social Bookmark Button