Search results

1 – 5 of 5
Article
Publication date: 2 May 2017

Rachael Leah Schwartz, Domenick Pugliese, Marguerite Bateman and Kimberly Vargo

To provide an overview of the US Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) recently adopted rule 22e-4 (Rule 22e-4) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (1940…

385

Abstract

Purpose

To provide an overview of the US Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) recently adopted rule 22e-4 (Rule 22e-4) under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (1940 Act) regarding investment company liquidity risk management programs.

Design/methodology/approach

Reviews and summarizes the specific requirements of Rule 22e-4 to better enable investment companies and their boards to comply by the general compliance date of December 1, 2018 (smaller complexes have until June 1, 2019).

Findings

The SEC clarifies that each fund should tailor its particular Program to ensure that it is adequately assessing and managing its specific liquidity risk based on its investment strategies and risks; however, it is not expected that a fund would eliminate all adverse impacts of liquidity risk. In addition, under the final rule, while the board does have certain duties and responsibilities with respect to certain aspects of a fund’s Program, the SEC pared back much of what had been in the Proposing Release to ensure that the board’s role remains one of oversight and not management.

Practical implications

Although the compliance date does not occur for almost two years, funds and their boards should begin reviewing the Rule 22e-4 requirements now and developing their Program.

Originality/value

Practical guidance from experienced investment management attorneys that provides insight into expectations for compliance with Rule 22e-4.

Details

Journal of Investment Compliance, vol. 18 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1528-5812

Keywords

Article
Publication date: 3 May 2016

Michael Rosella, Bill Belitsky and Alexandra Marghella

To discuss a September 22, 2015 Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) proposal for a set of broad and sweeping rules mandating that open-end mutual funds and exchange-traded…

329

Abstract

Purpose

To discuss a September 22, 2015 Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) proposal for a set of broad and sweeping rules mandating that open-end mutual funds and exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”) develop and implement formalized and written liquidity risk management programs (“LRMPs”).

Design/methodology/approach

Describes the purpose of an LRMP, the six “liquidity buckets,” the nine factors that must be considered in determining an instrument’s liquidity, the need to continuously monitor the liquidity of each position, the set of eight mandated factors used to assess a fund’s liquidity risk, the requirement for a fund to define a three-day liquid asset minimum, the role of the fund’s board of directors, a separate rule permitting “swing pricing” to adjust net asset value to take into account the costs of unexpected redemptions or cash infusions, disclosure requirements, and proposed compliance dates.

Findings

In proposing this new program, the SEC stated that its goal was to enhance effective liquidity risk management practices by funds and thereby reduce the risk that funds will be unable to meet redemptions under reasonably foreseeable stressed market conditions.

Originality/value

Expert guidance by experienced financial services lawyers.

Article
Publication date: 2 July 2018

Vadim Avdeychik and Justin Capozzi

This paper aims to provide an overview of recent US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Division of Investment Management staff (“Staff”) guidance related to investment funds…

679

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to provide an overview of recent US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Division of Investment Management staff (“Staff”) guidance related to investment funds registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 that seeks to provide exposure to cryptocurrencies or cryptocurrency-related products.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper provides analysis regarding the Staff’s view on registered investment companies that intend to invest in cryptocurrencies or cryptocurrency-related products, including an overview of the questions posed by the Staff with respect to registered investment companies that seek to hold cryptocurrencies or cryptocurrency-related products, which are divided into five categories: valuation, liquidity, custody, arbitrage (for exchange-traded funds) and potential manipulation and other risks.

Findings

The Staff is asking for additional information from industry participants to fully analyze and evaluate registered investment companies that seek to invest in cryptocurrencies.

Practical implications

The industry should continue to provide information to the Staff with the short-term goal of fostering an open dialogue and with the long-term goal of launching a registered investment company that invests in cryptocurrencies or cryptocurrency-related products.

Originality/value

This paper provides practical guidance from experienced lawyers of the Investment Company Act and Securities Act.

Article
Publication date: 18 October 2019

James Audette, Walter Draney, Jonathan Koff and Morrison Warren

To introduce the concepts of interval funds and tender offer funds and compare them to other pooled investment vehicles.

Abstract

Purpose

To introduce the concepts of interval funds and tender offer funds and compare them to other pooled investment vehicles.

Design/methodology/approach

This article provides an overview of the interval fund and tender offer fund structures, including the law, regulations and market practices regarding redemptions, liquidity, fees and expenses and other key terms.

Findings

Interval funds and tender offer funds should be considered by alternative investment managers seeking to expand into public markets or traditional fund managers that seek additional portfolio flexibility.

Originality/value

In addition to a plain English analysis of the rules and regulations applicable to interval funds and tender offer funds, the article analyzes market practices regarding redemption frequency and amount.

Article
Publication date: 1 December 2020

Robert L. Sichel, William P. Wade, Ruth E. Delaney, Kristina M. Zanotti and Michael McGrath

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

Abstract

Purpose

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

Design/methodology/approach

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

Findings

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.

Originality/value

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

Details

Journal of Investment Compliance, vol. 21 no. 2/3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1528-5812

Keywords

1 – 5 of 5