DOCSLIB.ORG

SEC Re-Adopts Controversial Fund Governance Rule After Court Questions Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
SEC Re-Adopts Controversial Fund Governance Rule After Court Questions Analysis July 2005 StayCA Clientu Alertr fromr Paule Hastingsnt SEC Re-Adopts Controversial Fund Governance Rule After Court Questions Analysis From the Investment Management Practice Group On June 21, 2005, the United States Court of Appeals, determine whether an action is consistent with the public District of Columbia Circuit (the “Court”) in a lawsuit interest” and to “ … consider … whether the action will brought by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (the promote efficiency, competition, and capital formation.”6 “Chamber”)1 challenging the SEC’s adoption of what The Court then concluded that the SEC violated the are known as “the mutual fund governance rules” (the 1940 Act and thus, the Administrative Procedure Act “Rule”)2, ordered the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “APA”), by “failing adequately to consider the costs (the “SEC”) to reconsider certain provisions of the Rule. imposed upon funds” by the implementation of the new In its opinion, the Court ruled that although the SEC had fund governance requirements.7 Additionally, the Court the authority to adopt the Rule, it had failed to adequately ruled that because the SEC failed to consider alternatives consider (i) the costs associated with compliance with two to the requirements, such as the “disclosure alternative” provisions of the Rule and (ii) any alternatives thereto. proposed by two SEC commissioners, it again violated In response to the Court’s ruling, Chairman William H. the APA.8 As a result of its ruling, the Court remanded Donaldson quickly scheduled a meeting of the SEC to the Rule to the SEC “to address the deficiencies with the consider the matters remanded to it by the Court. On June 75% independent director condition and the independent 29, 2005, the SEC, over the strenuous dissents of two of chairman condition.”9 its commissioners, once again voted to adopt the rule in its current form, leaving the two provisions challenged by the On the last day of Chairman Donaldson’s tenure at the Chamber in tact and unchanged. The compliance date for SEC, the SEC re-adopted the controversial Rule without the fund governance Rule remains January 16, 2006. making any significant modifications or new findings. Most industry observers, however, agree that the battle is Since its adoption on July 24, 2004, the SEC’s new far from over. Already, the Chamber has vowed publicly fund governance Rule has stirred great debate within to continue its fight against this second rule making that the industry and has faced formidable challenges. In still imposes the 75% independent director requirement particular, there has been much controversy surrounding and the independent chairman requirement on mutual two provisions of the Rule that will require nearly all funds. The arrival of Chairman Donaldson’s successor, registered investment companies3 to (i) increase board Rep. Christopher Cox (R-California), may also affect the independence requirements to 75% and (ii) appoint implementation of these hotly contested provisions. an independent board chairman.4 The most significant challenge so far came on September 2, 2004, when the Chamber filed suit against the SEC, claiming that the Paul Hastings’ Investment Management SEC overstepped its authority by imposing the 75% Group ranked 5th in 2004 by net assets of independent director requirement and the independent chairman requirement on mutual funds. The Court in all fund clients in The American Lawyer’s the Chamber case ruled that the SEC had authority Corporate Scorecard. We have appeared under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “1940 Act”) to adopt the new fund governance Rule and that in the top five for the past two years and the adoption of such Rule was not “arbitrary, capricious, our representation by assets has jumped an abuse of discretion or otherwise not in accordance with law.”5 The Court, however, noted that Section 2(c) 35% from 2003 to 2004. of the 1940 Act does require the SEC “to consider or StayCurrent Notes: If you have any questions concerning the matters discussed in this Alert or any other matter, please do not hesitate to contact any of 1. This Court ruling was in connection with a lawsuit brought the following attorneys in our Investment Management Group: by the Chamber against the SEC (Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America v. Securities and Exchange Commission, 2005 WL 1430551 (D.C. Cir.)). In Los Angeles In New York (cont.) 2. Investment Company Governance, SEC Release No. IC- 26520 (July 27, 2004) 69 FR 46378 (August 2, 2004) (“Adopting Robert E. Carlson 213-683-6299 Christopher Tafone 212-318-6713 Release”). [email protected] [email protected] 3. These new fund governance requirements would apply to most, if not all, funds since almost all funds rely on at least Laurie Dee 213-683-6163 Brian Hurley 212-318-6531 one or more of the SEC exemptive rules. The exemptive rules [email protected] [email protected] are: Rule 10f-3 (permitting funds to purchase securities in a primary offering when an affiliated broker-dealer is a Michael Glazer 213-683-6207 Matthew van Wormer 212-318-6962 member of the underwriting syndicate); Rule 12b-1 (permitting use of fund assets to pay distribution expenses); Rule 15a- [email protected] [email protected] 4(b)(2) (permitting fund boards to approve interim advisory contracts without shareholder approval where the adviser George P. Hawley 213-683-6142 Michael Giordano 212-318-6735 or a controlling person receives a benefit in connection with [email protected] [email protected] the assignment of the prior contract); Rule 17a-7 (permitting securities transactions between a fund and another client of Ethan Lipsig 213-683-6304 In Palo Alto the fund investment adviser); Rule 17a-8 (permitting mergers [email protected] between certain affiliated funds); Rule 17d-1(d)(7) (permitting Thomas S. Wisialowski 650-320-1820 funds and their affiliates to purchase joint liability insurance Arthur L. Zwickel 213-683-6161 [email protected] policies); Rule 17e-1 (specifying conditions under which funds may pay commissions to affiliated brokers in connection with [email protected] the sale of securities on an exchange); Rule 17g-1(j) (permitting In San Francisco funds to maintain joint insured bonds); Rule 18f-3 (permitting In New York funds to issue multiple classes of voting stock); and Rule Julie Allecta 415-856-7006 23c-3 (permitting the operation of interval funds by enabling Anthony Dreyspool 212-318-6601 [email protected] closed-end funds to repurchase their shares from investors). [email protected] In addition, proposed rule 15a-5 would also be included in this Nicole Gerrard 415-856-7086 list if it is adopted in its current form. Kathleen D. Fuentes 212-318-6569 [email protected] 4. The Adopting Release sets forth five new fund governance [email protected] requirements (listed below) although it was only the first two that were the subject of the lawsuit brought by the Chamber: David A. Hearth 415-856-7007 Lawrence J. Hass 212-318-6401 [email protected] • At least 75% of the directors/trustees on a mutual fund’s [email protected] board must be independent from fund management. Alex Y. Kymn 415-856-7046 • The chairman of the board of directors/trustees must be Michael R. Rosella 212-318-6800 [email protected] an independent director/trustee. [email protected] • The board of directors/trustees must assess its Mitchell E. Nichter 415-856-7009 effectiveness at least once a year. Domenick Pugliese 212-318-6295 [email protected] • Independent directors/trustees must meet in a separate [email protected] session, without fund management and the interested directors/trustees, at lease once a quarter. Adam Mizock 415-856-7094 • Independent directors/trustees must be permitted to Jacqueline A. May 212-318-6282 [email protected] employ staff and hire experts. [email protected] 5. Chamber of Commerce, 2005 WL 14300551 at page 5. Gregory T. Pusch 415-856-7067 6. Id. at page 6 (internal citations omitted). Thomas Rao 212-318-6838 [email protected] 7. Id. at page 9. [email protected] 8. The “disclosure alternative” referred to by the Court in In Washington, D.C. its opinion was presented by dissenting SEC Commissioners Gary D. Rawitz 212-318-6877 Cynthia Glassman and Paul Atkins. As an alternative to the [email protected] Wendell M. Faria 202-508-9574 requirement that every fund have an independent chairman, these commissioners proposed that a fund be “required [email protected] prominently to disclose whether it has an inside or an Joshua H. Sternoff 212-318-6011 independent chairman and thereby allow investors to make an [email protected] informed choice.” Id. 9. Id. at page 10. StayCurrent is published solely for the interests of friends and clients of Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP and should in no way be relied upon or construed as legal advice. For specific information on recent developments or particular factual situations, the opinion of legal counsel should be sought. Paul Hastings is a limited liability partnership. Copyright © 2005 Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP. 17 Offices Worldwide | Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP | www.paulhastings.com .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SBAI Annual Report (2017)
    Annual Report 2017 Table of Contents Contents 1. Foreword ............................................................................................................................................. 4 2. SBAI Mission ........................................................................................................................................ 7 3. The Alternative Investment Standards ............................................................................................... 8 Why are the Standards important? .................................................................................................... 8 4. The SBAI Toolbox .............................................................................................................................. 10 5. Overview of SBAI’s Activities in 2017/2018 ...................................................................................... 11 Key Highlights .................................................................................................................................... 11 Rebranding .................................................................................................................................... 11 North American Committee .......................................................................................................... 11 SBAI Toolbox ................................................................................................................................. 12 New SBAI Initiatives .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Form ADV Part 2A – Disclosure Brochure
    Prosperity Advisory Group LLC Form ADV Part 2A – Disclosure Brochure Effective: October 12, 2020 This Form ADV Part 2A (“Disclosure Brochure”) provides information about the qualifications and business practices of Prosperity Advisory Group LLC (“PAG” or the “Advisor”). If you have any questions about the content of this Disclosure Brochure, please contact the Advisor at (585) 381-5900. PAG is a Registered Investment Advisor with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). The information in this Disclosure Brochure has not been approved or verified by the SEC or by any state securities authority. Registration of an investment advisor does not imply any specific level of skill or training. This Disclosure Brochure provides information about PAG to assist you in determining whether to retain the Advisor. Additional information about PAG and its Advisory Persons is available on the SEC’s website at www.adviserinfo.sec.gov by searching with the Advisor’s firm name or CRD# 310720. Prosperity Advisory Group LLC 50 Square Drive, Suite 220, Victor, NY 14564 Phone: (585) 381-5900 * Fax: (585) 381-0478 https://prosperityadv.com Item 2 – Material Changes Form ADV 2 is divided into two parts: Part 2A (the "Disclosure Brochure") and Part 2B (the "Brochure Supplement"). The Disclosure Brochure provides information about a variety of topics relating to an Advisor’s business practices and conflicts of interest. The Brochure Supplement provides information about the Advisory Persons of PAG. PAG believes that communication and transparency are the foundation of its relationship with Clients and will continually strive to provide you with complete and accurate information at all times.
    [Show full text]
  • Manulife Asset Allocation Client Brochure
    Manulife Asset Allocation Portfolios Sophisticated Investment Solutions Made Simple 1 Getting The Big Decisions Right You want a simple yet Deciding how to invest is one of life’s big decisions – effective way to invest in fact it’s a series of decisions that can have a big and Manulife Asset impact on your financial future. Allocation Portfolios It can be complicated and overwhelming, leaving you feeling uncertain offer a solution that can and anxious. The result? Many investors end up chasing fads, trends and help you get it right. short-term thinking, which can interfere with your ability to achieve long-term financial goals. As an investor, you want to make the most of your investments. You want to feel confident you’re receiving value for your money and reputable, professional advice. Big life decisions “Am I making the right investment choices?” Disappointing returns “Should I change my investing strategy?” Confusion and guesswork “How can I choose the best investment for me?” Manulife Asset Allocation Portfolios are managed by Manulife Investment Management Limited (formerly named Manulife Asset Management Limited). Manulife Asset Allocation Portfolios are available in the InvestmentPlus Series of the Manulife GIF Select, MPIP Segregated Pools and Manulife Segregated Fund Education Saving Plan insurance contracts offered by The Manufacturers Life Insurance Company. 2 Why Invest? The goal is to offset inflation and grow your wealth, while planning for important financial goals. Retirement: Canadian Education Raising a Child Pension Plan (CPP) $66,000 $253,947 $735.21 Current cost of a four-year The average cost of raising a Current average monthly payout for post-secondary education1 child from birth to age 183 new beneficiaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Division of Investment Management No-Action Letter: Lazard Freres
    FEB 2 1996 Our Ref. No. 95-399 RESPONSE OF THE OFFICE OF CHIEF Lazard Freres Asset COUNSEL DIVISION OF INVESTMENT Management MAAGEMENT File No.80l-6568 Your letter dated July 20, 1995 requests our assurance that we would not recommend enforcement action to the Commission under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 ("Advisers Act ") if Lazard Freres Asset Management ("LFAM"), a registered investment adviser, charges a performance fee to BPI Capital Management Corporation (BPI Capital) with respect to the performance of the BPI Global Opportunities Fund (the "Fund"). BPI Capital is an investment counsel and portfolio manager registered under the laws of the Province of Ontario and manages 16 publicly offered mutual funds. The Fund is an open- end fund organized under the laws of the Province of Ontario. The Fund has entered into a management agreement with BPI Capital under which BPI Capital is responsible for management of the Fund's ::civestment portfolio and day- to- day management of the Fund. unics of the Fund are offered to investors in the Provinces of Ontario, Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta and British Columbia pursuant to prospectus exemptions under the laws and regulations of each of these Provinces. Under such prospectus exemptions, miLimum investment amounts are CAD $150,000 for investors in Oncario and Saskatchewan and CAD $97,000 for investors in Mani toba, Alberta and British Columbia. A lower minimum amount of CAD $25,000 is available to investors in British Columbia designated as "sophisticated purchasers." No units of the Fund have been offered to any investors residing in the United States and there is no intention to offer any units of the Fund to U.
    [Show full text]
  • Arbitrage Pricing Theory∗
    ARBITRAGE PRICING THEORY∗ Gur Huberman Zhenyu Wang† August 15, 2005 Abstract Focusing on asset returns governed by a factor structure, the APT is a one-period model, in which preclusion of arbitrage over static portfolios of these assets leads to a linear relation between the expected return and its covariance with the factors. The APT, however, does not preclude arbitrage over dynamic portfolios. Consequently, applying the model to evaluate managed portfolios contradicts the no-arbitrage spirit of the model. An empirical test of the APT entails a procedure to identify features of the underlying factor structure rather than merely a collection of mean-variance efficient factor portfolios that satisfies the linear relation. Keywords: arbitrage; asset pricing model; factor model. ∗S. N. Durlauf and L. E. Blume, The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, forthcoming, Palgrave Macmillan, reproduced with permission of Palgrave Macmillan. This article is taken from the authors’ original manuscript and has not been reviewed or edited. The definitive published version of this extract may be found in the complete The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics in print and online, forthcoming. †Huberman is at Columbia University. Wang is at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and the McCombs School of Business in the University of Texas at Austin. The views stated here are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York or the Federal Reserve System. Introduction The Arbitrage Pricing Theory (APT) was developed primarily by Ross (1976a, 1976b). It is a one-period model in which every investor believes that the stochastic properties of returns of capital assets are consistent with a factor structure.
    [Show full text]
  • Investment Management Update
    Investment Management Update March 2012 CFTC Adopts Rule Amendments Affecting CPOs and CTAs Introduction • Eliminate an exemption available in Rule 4.7 under the CEA to commodity pools whose participants The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) are “qualified eligible participants” from the recently adopted amendments to Part 4 of the regulations requirement to provide audited financial 1 statements in annual reports. implementing the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA). In • Incorporate by reference, rather than by full relevant part, Part 4 of the regulations sets forth the inclusion of its specific text, the accredited registration and compliance obligations for commodity pool investor standard set forth in Rule 502 of operators (CPOs) and commodity trading advisors (CTAs). Regulation D under the Securities Act of 1933, as First proposed in February 2011, the amendments implicate amended, into the definition of “qualified eligible several sections of Part 4, including Rule 4.5, upon which person” in Rule 4.7. many mutual funds and other registered investment • Adopt new Rule 4.27, which requires registered 2 CPOs and CTAs to annually file, respectively, Forms companies rely to avoid registering as a CPO. As adopted, CPO-PQR and CTA-PR with the National Futures revised Rule 4.5 will significantly narrow the relief from CPO Association (NFA). registration currently available for advisers to, and sponsors • Adopt a mandatory Risk Disclosure Statement for of, registered investment companies. Furthermore, since CPOs and CTAs addressing certain risks specific to many advisers to investment companies rely on a CTA swap transactions. registration exemption that is dependent upon the investment company’s ability to rely on Rule 4.5, the Amendments to Rule 4.5 amendments to Rule 4.5 will result in more advisers to Background registered investment companies having to register as CTAs.
    [Show full text]
  • PWC and Elwood
    2020 Crypto Hedge Fund Report Contents Introduction to Crypto Hedge Fund Report 3 Key Takeaways 4 Survey Data 5 Investment Data 6 Strategy Insights 6 Market Analysis 7 Assets Under Management (AuM) 8 Fund performance 9 Fees 10 Cryptocurrencies 11 Derivatives and Leverage 12 Non-Investment Data 13 Team Expertise 13 Custody and Counterparty Risk 15 Governance 16 Valuation and Fund Administration 16 Liquidity and Lock-ups 17 Legal and Regulatory 18 Tax 19 Survey Respondents 20 About PwC & Elwood 21 Introduction to Crypto Hedge Fund report In this report we provide an overview of the global crypto hedge fund landscape and offer insights into both quantitative elements (such as liquidity terms, trading of cryptocurrencies and performance) and qualitative aspects, such as best practice with respect to custody and governance. By sharing these insights with the broader crypto industry, our goal is to encourage the adoption of sound practices by market participants as the ecosystem matures. The data contained in this report comes from research that was conducted in Q1 2020 across the largest global crypto hedge funds by assets under management (AuM). This report specifically focuses on crypto hedge funds and excludes data from crypto index/tracking/passive funds and crypto venture capital funds. 3 | 2020 Crypto Hedge Fund Report Key Takeaways: Size of the Market and AuM: Performance and Fees: • We estimate that the total AuM of crypto hedge funds • The median crypto hedge fund returned +30% in 2019 (vs - globally increased to over US$2 billion in 2019 from US$1 46% in 2018). billion the previous year.
    [Show full text]
  • Hedge Fund Standards Board
    Annual Report 2018 Established in 2008, the Standards Board for Alternative Investments (Standards Board or SBAI), (previously known as the Hedge Fund Standards Board (HFSB)) is a standard-setting body for the alternative investment industry and custodian of the Alternative Investment Standards (the Standards). It provides a powerful mechanism for creating a framework of transparency, integrity and good governance to simplify the investment process for managers and investors. The SBAI’s Standards and Guidance facilitate investor due diligence, provide a benchmark for manager practice and complement public policy. The Standards Board is a platform that brings together managers, investors and their peers to share areas of common concern, develop practical, industry-wide solutions and help to improve continuously how the industry operates. 2 Table of Contents Contents 1. Message from the Chairman ............................................................................................................... 5 2. Trustees and Regional Committees .................................................................................................... 8 Board of Trustees ................................................................................................................................ 8 Committees ......................................................................................................................................... 8 3. Key Highlights ...................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Manulife Diversified Investment Fund1 BALANCED Series F · Performance As at August 31, 2021 · Holdings As at July 31, 2021
    Manulife Diversified Investment Fund1 BALANCED Series F · Performance as at August 31, 2021 · Holdings as at July 31, 2021 Portfolio advisor: Manulife Investment Why Invest Management Limited This global balanced fund provides diversification across all major asset classes and employs a tax-effective overlay strategy to help minimize potential capital gains distributions at year-end. The equity selection process is based on Mawer's disciplined, fundamentally based bottom-up research process, which includes a strong focus on downside protection. Sub-Advisor: Mawer Investment Within fixed income, the fund will take a core position in Canadian government debt. Management Ltd. Growth of $10,000 over 10 years5 Management 32,000 $27,462 Steven Visscher 28,000 24,000 ($) 20,000 Fund Codes (MMF) 16,000 12,000 Series FE LL2 LL3 DSC Other 8,000 Advisor 4502 — 4702 4402 — 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 Advisor - DCA 24502 — 24702 24402 — F — — — — 4602 FT6 — — — — 1901 Calendar Returns (%) T6 9502 — 9702 9402 — 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 1.99 11.10 20.29 12.56 10.85 3.57 10.33 -0.75 15.62 10.44 Key Facts Inception date: June 27, 2008 Compound Returns (%) AUM2: $914.91 million 1 month 3 months 6 months YTD 1 year 3 years 5 years 10 years Inception CIFSC category: Global Equity Balanced 2.25 7.00 10.16 8.62 14.06 9.65 8.60 10.36 8.80 Investment style: GARP (%) (%) 3 Geographic Allocation Fixed Income Allocation Distribution frequency : Annual Colour Weight % Name Colour Weight % Name 51.31 Canada 46.96 Canadian provincial bonds 4 Distribution yield : 1.59% 21.91 United States 29.22 Canadian investment grade Management fee: 0.73% 5.17 United Kingdom bonds 2.49 Japan 10.84 Canadian government bonds Positions: 386 1.98 Sweden 6.72 Floating rate bank loans Risk: Low to Medium 1.96 Netherlands 2.50 Canadian corporate bonds 1.95 Switzerland 2.31 Canadian Mortgage-backed Low High 1.85 France securities MER: 1.03% (as at 2020/12/31, includes HST) 1.46 Ireland 1.10 U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • U B S , Federated Investors, Incorporation and Hermes
    Press Release UBS, Federated Investors, Inc. and Hermes Investment Management Launch Innovative Fixed Income Impact Funds1 Zurich, 26 September 2019 — Federated Investors Inc., Hermes Investment Management and UBS today announced the launch of new SDG Engagement High Yield Credit funds. These pioneering funds1 will seek to achieve a meaningful social and/or environmental impact as well as a compelling return by investing in high yield bonds and engaging with their issuers. The funds will have a Lead Engager dedicated to driving positive change in line with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals framework. A UCITS fund, managed by Hermes Investment Management, will be offered to investors across the globe. Additionally, a mutual fund will be available in the U.S. that will be advised by Federated Investment Management Company, sub-advised by Hermes Investment Management, and distributed by Federated Securities Corp. In 2018, Federated Investors, Inc., the parent company of the advisor and distributor, acquired a majority interest in London-based Hermes Fund Managers Limited, which operates Hermes Investment Management. The funds are the first that UBS has launched with the companies simultaneously to a global investor base. UBS, the world’s leading global wealth manager2, will make the funds available through the UBS platform to U.S. and non-U.S. clients (the latter initially on an exclusive basis for a 6-month period). The funds will form part of UBS’s USD 5 billion commitment to SDG-related impact investing. Separately, they will also represent the first new strategy addedto UBS’s award-winning3 100% sustainable multi-asset portfolio since its launch last year.
    [Show full text]
  • Corporate Sustainability Report 2020 CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY REPORT 2
    CREATING VALUE RESPONSIBLY 2020 Corporate Sustainability Report 2020 CORPORATE SUSTAINABILITY REPORT 2 LAZARD 2020 PHOTOGRAPHY CHALLENGE There were nearly 500 submissions from our colleagues across the firm, representing our offices around the world. Please enjoy a selection of the photos submitted in this report. Photo credits are provided in an index beginning on page 51. Safe Harbor This report may contain forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can identify these statements by forward-looking words such as “may”, “might”, “will”, “should”, “could”, “would”, “expect”, “plan”, “anticipate”, “believe”, “estimate”, “predict”, “potential”, “target,” “goal”, or “continue”, and the negative of these terms and other comparable terminology. These forward-looking statements, which are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and assumptions about us, may include projections of our future financial performance based on our growth strategies, business plans and initiatives and anticipated trends in our business. These forward-looking statements, including with respect to the current COVID-19 pandemic, are only predictions based on our current expectations and projections about future events. There are important factors that could cause our actual results, level of activity, performance or achievements to differ materially from the results, level of activity, performance or achievements expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. These factors include, but are not limited to, those discussed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K under Item 1A “Risk Factors,” and also discussed from time to time in our reports on Forms 10-Q and 8-K. Although we believe the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee future results, level of activity, performance or achievements.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction and Overview of 40 Act Liquid Alternative Funds
    Introduction and Overview of 40 Act Liquid Alternative Funds July 2013 Citi Prime Finance Introduction and Overview of 40 Act Liquid Alternative Funds I. Introduction 5 II. Overview of Alternative Open-End Mutual Funds 6 Single-Manager Mutual Funds 6 Multi-Alternative Mutual Funds 8 Managed Futures Mutual Funds 9 III. Overview of Alternative Closed-End Funds 11 Alternative Exchange-Traded Funds 11 Continuously Offered Interval or Tender Offer Funds 12 Business Development Companies 13 Unit Investment Trusts 14 IV. Requirements for 40 Act Liquid Alternative Funds 15 Registration and Regulatory Filings 15 Key Service Providers 16 V. Marketing and Distributing 40 Act Liquid Alternative Funds 17 Mutual Fund Share Classes 17 Distribution Channels 19 Marketing Strategy 20 Conclusion 22 Introduction and Overview of 40 Act Liquid Alternative Funds | 3 Section I: Introduction and Overview of 40 Act Liquid Alternative Funds This document is an introduction to ’40 Act funds for hedge fund managers exploring the possibilities available within the publically offered funds market in the United States. The document is not a comprehensive manual for the public funds market; instead, it is a primer for the purpose of introducing the different fund products and some of their high-level requirements. This document does not seek to provide any legal advice. We do not intend to provide any opinion in this document that could be considered legal advice by our team. We would advise all firms looking at these products to engage with a qualified law firm or outside general counsel to review the detailed implications of moving into the public markets and engaging with United States regulators of those markets.
    [Show full text]