Search results

To explain recent regulatory guidance for different types of stakeholders, including asset managers, fund complexes, and institutional investors.

Summary of recent regulatory guidance and explanation for different types of stakeholders, including asset managers, fund complexes, and institutional investors.

While the U.S. Department of Labor’s (DOL’s) letter does not open the door to direct access to Private Market Investments by 401(k) plan participants, it does provide a framework for the expanded use of private equity and, we believe, other types of Private Market Investments in managed asset allocation funds such as target date funds.

Practical guidance from experienced asset management and investment funds and ERISA lawyers.

The purpose of this paper is to to summarize Advisers Act registration implications for non‐US advisers that now rely on the “private adviser” exemption from Advisers Act registration and to summarize the principal changes affecting investors in funds managed by non‐US advisers contained in the Dodd‐Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010.

The paper explains the elimination of the “private adviser” exemption and the creation of the narrower “foreign private adviser” and other exemptions from Adviser Act registration, reporting and recordkeeping requirements relating to private funds; the Dodd‐Frank Act's provisions for information sharing by the SEC and the confidentiality of private fund information; the “Volcker Rule's” limitation of investment by banking entities and non‐bank financial companies in hedge funds and private equity funds; changes in the definition of “accredited investor”; and the future adjustment of the “qualified client” test for inflation.

The Dodd‐Frank Act will require many investment advisers and fund managers with their principal offices and places of business outside the USA to register with the SEC and to observe, with respect to US clients, the full spectrum of SEC regulations that apply to registered investment advisers. The Act will also impose new disclosure and recordkeeping requirements on many non‐US advisers.

The paper provides expert guidance from experienced financial services lawyers.

This article examines the recent phenomenon of investment advisors' and mutual fund complexes' creation of alternative investment products such as private investment funds. It explores the reasons behind the popularity of these investment vehicles.

The purpose of this paper is to explain certain SEC and state registration, disclosure, and recordkeeping requirements for US and non‐US investment advisers and fund managers as defined in the Dodd‐Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010.

The paper explains SEC and US state registration requirements; the elimination of the “private adviser” exemption; the creation of new, narrower adviser registration exemptions; reporting and recordkeeping requirements relating to private funds; information and confidentiality provisions for private funds; the SEC's authority to make rules and regulations defining technical, trade, and other terms used in the amendments set forth in the Act; provisions of the “Volcker Rule” concerning banking entities' ownership interests in hedge funds and private equity funds; the adjustment of the “qualified client” test for inflation; the definition of an “accredited investor”; and disqualifications from using Regulation D.

The Act will require many US and non‐US investment advisers and fund managers to register with the SEC under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, particularly those advisers that have previously relied on the “private adviser” exemption from SEC registration, which has been eliminated by the Act. The Act will also impose new disclosure and recordkeeping requirements on many investment advisers, including some who are not required to register with the SEC.

The paper provides expert guidance from experienced financial services lawyers.

This paper aims to explain the rules recently adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission under the provisions of the Dodd‐Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act relating to the increased asset threshold for federal registration as an investment adviser, the new exemptions from investment adviser registration (including the exclusion of “family offices” from the definition of an investment adviser), the enhanced reporting obligations imposed on registered and certain exempt advisers, and the definition of a “qualified client” for purposes of applying the performance fee rule under the Investment Advisers Act.

This paper summarizes the principal content of the Rules and explains their application to investment advisers, focusing in particular on analyzing the impact of the Rules on US and non‐US advisers to private funds.

The Rules clarify important aspects of the Dodd‐Frank amendments to the Investment Advisers Act and expand the scope of certain registration exemptions as they relate to foreign advisers. The Rules also expand significantly the family office exclusion from investment adviser status.

The paper provides expert guidance from experienced financial services lawyers.

To introduce, compare and contrast the new regulatory regimes for closed-ended funds recently enacted in the Cayman Islands and the British Virgin Islands (BVI).

Explores similarities and differences between the two regimes, as well as practical implications for fund managers, with respect to (1) the regulatory frameworks governing the funds; (2) the definitions of the types of funds covered by the regulations; (3) registration requirements and associated timing; (4) operating requirements, including responsibilities for portfolio management, valuation and safekeeping of fund property; the number of directors; audits; valuation procedures; safekeeping of fund assets; cash monitoring; identification of securities; offering documents, term sheets and marketing materials; and representation in the respective jurisdictions; and (5) additional requirements, including numbers and qualifications of investors.

The new legislation has been enacted in order to respond to certain European Union and other international recommendations and has the effect of aligning the regulatory regimes applicable to such funds structured in Cayman and BVI to the regulatory regimes applicable to such funds in other jurisdictions.

Expert guidance from lawyers with extensive experience in fund management, fund structuring and Cayman Islands and British Virgin Islands laws and regulations.

The purpose of this paper is to describe an investment program that offers students with the opportunity to simultaneously manage a private asset fund and a public asset fund. The program has been in operation since 2013 and has made significant progress in student placement and connectivity with local, regional and national financial firms.

The authors describe the structure, methods used and challenges encountered in this dual portfolio environment and add relevant thoughts for discussion. The authors discuss potential conflicts of interests that may arise in managing a private equity portfolio, the concern of proper deal flow, the issue of the investment timeline when investing in private equity and the problems encountered when measuring private equity performance.

While public asset funds have been around for decades and are relatively well accepted throughout all levels and types of higher education institutions. The uses of private equity funds, though not unheard of, are much less prevalent. Allowing the same group of students to manage both type of portfolios is relatively unique and provides with a more comprehensive learning experience.

A primary distinguishing attribute of this program is that accepted students are given the opportunity to simultaneously manage both public and private equity assets throughout an academic year. The goal is to create a comprehensive portfolio management program that replicates a changing investment management environment where private equity is an increasingly significant asset class.

To discuss general legal considerations for non-US private equity sponsors who seek to market their funds to US institutional investors.

Explains relevant aspects of US securities laws, commodity exchange laws, pension and employee benefit plan laws, federal income tax laws, and the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA).

The evolving US regulatory regime necessitates careful planning and thorough knowledge of relevant laws and regulations to effect a successful US marketing effort.

Practical guidance from experienced investment funds and tax lawyers.

Alice Handy, an investment professional with 30 years' experience as head of the University of Virginia Investment Management Company, has opened a new asset management firm targeted at midsize endowments and nonprofit institutions in January 2004. Her business, Investure, LLC, offered outsourced investment services to institutions with $150 million to $1 billion in assets and access to top-performing managers at lower cost than a fund of funds (FoF). Smith College, a prestigious liberal arts college with a nearly $1 billion endowment, is interested in increasing its current allocation to private equity. Handy and her partner are preparing to meet with Smith's trustees in an attempt to win Smith College as Investure's first client. The case presents three different approaches to private equity investing: direct investment through a traditional limited partnership, investment through a FoF, or investment through Investure's outsourced model. The class discussion presents an opportunity to evaluate advantages and shortcomings of each approach, introduce key terminology, and discuss the current trends in the private equity market. Students are given the cash inflows and outflows for a representative investment in a venture capital fund of the type Handy hopes to invest in on behalf of Smith College. The main analytical task requires students to evaluate the expected gross and net returns generated by the representative investment under each of the different approaches and fee structures.

This case was written for an early class in courses on entrepreneurial finance, venture capital, or private equity. It can also be used in specialized courses for fund trustees interested in alternative assets.

To introduce the various private fund structuring options available in Singapore, an important fund management hub that has increasingly also come to be recognized as a popular fund domicile with its pro-business environment, transparent and robust regulatory regime and government support through tailored investment structures, tax incentives and extensive double taxation treaties.

This article provides an overview of the available private fund structures as well as the key legal issues and considerations that fund managers and investors should take into account when structuring a private fund. It also provides a brief summary of the available tax incentive schemes for funds in Singapore.

With growth in private market assets under management fueled by private equity funds over the last decade, the use of private investment funds established in Singapore has become a popular means to tap the large capital inflows into Asia. Singapore offers a wide range of fund structures to suit different fund strategies and considerations, including the variable capital company (“VCC”) structure, a legal structure tailored for use as investment funds that was introduced in January 2020.

There are a range of Singapore private fund structures available with different features, including the VCC, which is a corporate structure that allows for umbrella-sub-fund structures with segregated assets and liabilities, and the limited partnership, which is familiar to international investors and permits a large degree of contractual flexibility. Other structures such as unit trusts and private companies may also be suitable depending on the particular circumstances and objectives of the fund. Fund managers who are exploring setting up fund vehicles to tap Asian capital or to invest in Asia should be aware of the possible options, and their pros and cons.

Practical analysis and guidance and market commentary from experienced investment funds lawyers.