The Alternative Investment Management Association

Alternative Investment Management Association Representing the global hedge fund industry

The US Securities and Exchange Commission's new rules for investment advisers and investors

Stephane Puel and David Malamed & Joanna Percenik

Gide Loyrette Nouel (Paris) and Gide Loyrette Nouel (NY), respectively

Q4 2007

In December 2006, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC) proposed (i) new anti-fraud rules for investment advisers and (ii) a new standard for the definition of accredited investors. The SEC released these two newly proposed rules to the public for comments. The deadline for the public to submit comments on those two rules ended on 9 March 2007. The 600 comment letters sent to the SEC represent an extraordinarily high number for such technical issues and is a further indication that hedge funds have, in fact, in the public mind become an alternative to traditional investments. On 11 July 2007, the SEC voted to adopt the proposed anti-fraud provisions only.

The New Anti-Fraud Rule

The new rule will make it a fraudulent, deceptive or manipulative act, practice or course of business, for an investment adviser to a pooled investment vehicle to make false or misleading statements to, or otherwise to mislead, investors or prospective investors in that pool. The rule will apply to all investment advisers to pooled investment vehicles, regardless of whether the adviser is registered or not under the Advisers Act. Under the new rule, a pooled investment vehicle will include any investment company and any company that would be an investment company but for the exclusions in Sections 3(c) (1) or 3(c) (7) of the Investment Company Act. No scienter requirement has been provided for in this rule to trigger the adviser’s liability. The new rule does not grant any private right of action.

In other words, the new rule will apply to all pooled investment vehicles, including hedge funds, private equity funds, venture capital, as well as mutual funds and business development companies.

The proposed rule came in the aftermath of the Goldstein decision . In this decision, the US Court of Appeals of D.C. overturned the new rule adopted by the SEC in 2004, requiring most hedge funds managers to register with the SEC. Under the Investment Advisers Act, managers with fifteen or more clients during the preceding twelve months and with more than US $30 million in assets under management are required to register with the SEC unless, among others, the adviser has fewer than fifteen clients. This exemption has been relied on by hedge fund managers to avoid federal registration. However, in 2004, the SEC decided that hedge fund managers were required to “look through” the fund and to count each of their beneficial owners as a client for the purpose of determining whether the manager has fewer than fifteen clients. This new rule was vacated in the Goldstein decision as the court in this case interpreted the term “client” to mean the fund itself and not the investors in the fund.

Most comments have supported these anti-fraud rules. A commonly shared view, however, was that the proposed rule was too broadly drafted and did not circumscribe the definition of fraud. Most commentators have also contested the lack of scienter requirement to establish the liability of the adviser. Some commentators have also suggested that the registered investment companies of Section 3(a) of the Investment Company Act, should be excluded from the scope of the proposed rule 206(4)-8, as the registered investment companies are already covered by a broad range of antifraud rules.

The Accredited Natural Person Rule

Unlike the anti-fraud rules, the accredited natural person standard came under strong criticism, especially among those who qualify under the current rules but would not be eligible to invest in hedge funds under the enhanced standard.

The current definition of an accredited investor under the Securities Act includes a natural person; provided that this person has a net worth of US$1 million or US$ 200,000 in income in the last two years, or US$300,000 in joint income with a spouse in the last two years ((Rule 501(a) and Rule 215 of the Securities Act)).

The new proposed category of accredited natural person, supplements the above test. An accredited natural person would be defined as any natural person who meets the above net worth/income test and who, in addition, owns at least US$2.5 million in qualifying investments. This new standard is intended to apply only to investors investing in private investment vehicles, other than certain venture capital funds, including hedge funds, that rely on the exclusion from the definition of an investment company under Section 3(c)(1) of the Investment Company Act.

The main criticism with respect to this new standard is the lack of correlation between the additional US$2.5 million threshold and a higher sophistication on the part of the investors. Small investors have also complained about the unfair and discriminatory effect of such a new standard. Others have also pointed out that increasing the protection of unsophisticated investors by raising the financial minimum wealth level, does not address the real issue, i.e the growth of hedge funds and it is likely to impair new funds formation and fund raising by smaller investors. Other commentators have criticised the limitation of the proposed new definition to hedge funds only. Some have also questioned the proposed exceptions to this new rule, such as venture capital fund exclusion from the definition of private investment vehicles, based on the assertion that these funds play an important role in the capital formation process for small businesses. Again, those against the exception have argued that investment in venture capital may be as risky as investments in hedge funds and that hedges funds are as valuable a source of capital as venture capital. Many have expressed the view that the SEC should provide exceptions from the accredited natural person status for employees of fund’s managers, who are often sophisticated enough to evaluate the risks of investing in private investment pools. Another concern is the absence of grandfathering rules for current investors. According to the proposed rule, these investors will be prevented from making further investments if they do not meet the US$2.5 million test. The comment letters also call for an alternative to the proposed new standard for accredited investors to avoid the needless complexity of this supplemental test.

The strong reactions to the new standard show that many investors do not wish their access to hedge funds to be limited and that there is no such strong case, on the investors’ side, for increased regulatory protection of their interests. Back to Listing

Main Menu

  1. Home
  2. About
    1. Our Core Objectives
    2. AIMA's Policy Principles
    3. Meet the team
    4. AIMA Council
    5. Global Network
    6. Sponsoring Partners
    7. Opportunities at AIMA
    8. AIMA’s 25th anniversary in 2015
  3. Join AIMA
    1. Benefits of Membership
    2. Membership Fees
    3. Application form
  4. Members
    1. AIMA DDQs
    2. AIMA Annual Reports
    3. AIMA Governance
    4. AIMA Logo
      1. Policy note
    5. AIMA Members' List
    6. AIMA Review of the Year
    7. Committees and Working Groups
    8. Weekly News
    9. Update Profile
  5. Investors
    1. AIMA Investor Services
    2. AIMA Members' List
    3. Investor Steering Committee
  6. Regulation
    1. Asset Management Regulation
      1. EU Asset Management Regulation
        1. AIFMD
        2. European Capital Markets Regulation
        3. MiFID / MiFIR
        4. UCITS
        5. European Venture Capital Directive
        6. Shareholder Rights Directive
        7. European Long Term Investment Fund Regulation
        8. Loan Origination Funds
        9. Capital Raising
        10. AIFMD-Related Events
      2. US Hedge Fund Adviser Regulations
        1. Registration and Reporting
        2. Incentive-Based Compensation
        3. JOBS Act
      3. Asia Pacific Asset Management regulation
      4. Other Jurisdictions’ Asset Management Regulation
      5. Private Placement Regime
        1. Canada
        2. Dubai
        3. Finland
        4. Germany
        5. Hong Kong
        6. Japan
        7. Saudi Arabia
        8. Sweden
        9. United Arab Emirates
      6. Systemically Important Financial Institutions ('SIFIs')
      7. Remuneration
        1. UK
        2. United States
        3. CRD IV and CRR
        4. AIFMD
        5. MiFID
      8. Shadow Banking
      9. Volcker Rule
      10. Other
      11. Systemic Risk Reporting
      12. Dealing Commission
      13. Corporate Governance
      14. Securitisation
    2. Markets Regulation
      1. Bank/Capital Regulation
        1. Capital Requirements Directive
        2. EU Bank Structural Reforms
      2. Capital Markets Union
      3. Derivatives/Clearing
        1. EMIR
        2. MiFID II / MiFIR - Derivatives
        3. MAD / MAR
        4. Dodd-Frank Act Title VII
        5. Hong Kong
        6. IOSCO
        7. Singapore
      4. High Frequency Trading
        1. EU automated trading
          1. ESMA Guidelines
          2. Germany
          3. MiFID II / MiFIR - HFT
        2. US automated trading
          1. SEC Regulation SCI
          2. CFTC Automated Trading
        3. IOSCO
        4. Flash Crash
      5. Insurance Regulation
        1. Solvency II
      6. Market Abuse
        1. MAD / MAR
        2. Indices as Benchmarks
      7. Position Limits
        1. MiFID II - Commodities
        2. CFTC Position Limits
      8. Resolution of Financial Institutions
        1. Europe
          1. EU Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive
          2. EU Non-Bank Recovery and Resolution
        2. CPSS-IOSCO
        3. Financial Stability Board
        4. UK
        5. USA
      9. Shadow Banking
        1. International Shadow Banking
        2. EU Shadow Banking - SFT reporting & transparency
      10. Short Selling
        1. EU Short Selling Regulation
        2. Hong Kong Short Selling Regulation
        3. US Short Selling Regulation
      11. Trading
        1. Dodd-Frank Act
        2. MiFID Portal
        3. REMIT
        4. Securities Settlement
    3. Tax Affairs
      1. Automatic Exchange of Information (AEOI)
        1. FATCA
        2. EU - AEFI
        3. OECD - Global Standard on AEFI
      2. Australia - Investment Manager Regime (IMR)
      3. Base Erosion - Profit Shifting (BEPS)
      4. FIN 48 and IAS 12
      5. Financial Transaction Tax (FTT)
      6. UK Investment Management Exemption (IME)
      7. UK Offshore Funds Regime
      8. Other
    4. AIMA's Policy Principles
    5. Search
    6. Resources
      1. Guidance Notes
      2. Jurisdictional Guides
      3. Noticeboard
        1. AEOI: FATCA and other regimes
        2. AIFMD
        3. Bank/Capital Regulation (including NSFR)
        4. BEPS
        5. CFTC Registration and Exemptions
        6. Corporate Governance
        7. Dealing Commission
        8. Derivatives
        9. FTT
        10. High Frequency Trading
        11. MiFID / MiFIR
        12. Other Hot Asset Management Topics
        13. Other Hot Markets Topics
        14. Other Hot Tax Topics
        15. Position Limits
        16. Trading
        17. UCITS
        18. UK Partnership Tax Review
        19. US State and Local Taxes
        20. Volcker Rule
      4. Hedge Fund Manager Training
      5. Quarterly Regulatory Update
      6. Webinar Programme
      7. Regulatory Compliance Association
        1. About the Regulatory Compliance Association
        2. RCA Curricula and initiatives for alternative investment firms
        3. Meet the regulators and Sr. Fellows
  7. Education
    1. Research
      1. AIMA Research
      2. Industry research
      3. Search research documents
    2. "The Case for Hedge Funds"
      1. Global Hedge Fund Industry Paper: The value of our industry
      2. The Value of the Hedge Fund Industry to Investors, Markets and the Broader Economy: Research commissioned by AIMA and KPMG
      3. The Evolution of an Industry: KPMG/AIMA Global Hedge Fund Survey
      4. Contributing to Communities: A global review of charitable and philanthropic activities by the hedge fund industry
      5. Beyond 60-40: The evolving role of hedge funds in institutional investor portfolios
      6. The Cost of Compliance: Global hedge fund survey by AIMA, MFA and KPMG
      7. Capital Markets and Economic Growth: Long-term trends and policy challenges
      8. Apples and Apples: How to better understand hedge fund performance
      9. The Extra Mile: Partnerships between hedge funds and investors
      10. Key articles by AIMA on the case for hedge funds
    3. AIMA Journal
      1. Recent issues
      2. Search AIMA Journal articles
      3. AIMA Journal Archive
    4. AIMA Guides to Sound Practices
    5. AIMA guides for institutional investors
    6. CAIA Association pages
      1. Fundamentals of Alternative Investments
    7. Regulatory Compliance Association pages
      1. About the Regulatory Compliance Association
      2. RCA Curricula and initiatives for alternative investment firms
      3. Meet the regulators and Sr. Fellows
    8. Certified Investment Fund Director programme
    9. Services to Start-up Managers
    10. Glossary
  8. Events
    1. AIMA Events
      1. AIMA Annual Conference
        1. AIMA 25th Anniversary AGM & Annual Conference
      2. AIMA's Global Policy and Regulatory Forum
        1. 2015 Forum - Review
        2. 2015 Forum - Photos
        3. 2015 Forum - Agenda
        4. 2015 Forum - Sponsors and Supporting Organisations
    2. AIMA webinars
    3. Industry events
  9. Media
    1. Press Releases & Statements
    2. AIMA's blog
    3. Media Coverage
      1. Articles by AIMA
        1. Archive
      2. AIMA in the news
      3. Video interviews
      4. Industry news
    4. Media Contacts
    5. Press Materials

Sub Menu

  1. Education
    1. AIMA Journal
    2. Bibliography
    3. CAIA Designation
    4. Research
    5. Roadmap to Hedge Funds
    6. AIMA's Investor Steering Committee Paper
    7. Glossary
  2. Regulatory, Tax, Policy & Government Affairs
    1. AIMA Position Papers
    2. AIMA Responses
      1. Australian Tax Office
      2. Authority for the Financial Markets
      3. Committee of European Banking Supervisors
      4. Committee of European Securities Regulators
      5. Commodity Futures Trading Commission
      6. Dubai Financial Services Authority
      7. European Commission
      8. European Securities and Markets Authority
      9. Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority
      10. Financial Services Authority (UK)
      11. Financial Services and the Treasury Bureau
      12. Guernsey Financial Services Commission
      13. HM Revenue & Customs
      14. HM Treasury
      15. Independent Commission on Banking
      16. IOSCO
      17. Monetary Authority of Singapore
      18. Securities and Exchange Board of India
      19. Securities and Exchange Commission (USA)
      20. Securities and Futures Commission
      21. Singapore Exchange
      22. The Takeover Panel
      23. US House of Representatives / Senate
      24. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
      25. Financial Stability Oversight Council
      26. Financial Stability Board
      27. US Treasury
      28. Internal Revenue Service
      29. US Federal Reserve
      30. Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA)
      31. Council of European Union
      32. Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing
      33. House of Lords
    3. AIMA Summaries
      1. CESR
      2. European Commission
      3. Financial Services Authority (UK)
      4. HM Revenue & Customs
      5. HM Treasury
      6. IOSCO
      7. Securities and Exchanges Commission
      8. FSOC
      9. CFTC
    4. Guidance Notes
    5. Jurisdictional Resource
    6. AIMA Noticeboard
      1. EU Directive on Alternative Investment Fund Managers
      2. FSA Remuneration Code
      3. Short Selling
      4. US Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
      5. UK Stewardship Code
      6. Securities Law Directive
      7. EU Directive on Alternative Investment Fund Managers - Level II
      8. EU Directive on Markets in Financial Instruments (MiFID)
      9. International Financial Centres
      10. Bribery Act
      11. Market Abuse Directive
      12. MF Global
      13. FATCA
      14. FTT
      15. Other Tax Issues
    7. AIMA Regulatory Update
  3. Sound Practices
    1. Due Diligence Questionnaires
    2. Guides to Sound Practices
  4. Start-Up Service Providers
  5. Useful Websites