Search results
1 – 4 of 4Michael S. Caccese, Clair Pagnano, Eden Rohrer and Xiomara Corral
To analyze the June 9, 2017 Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”) interpretive letter permitting the use of Related Performance Information in continuously…
Abstract
Purpose
To analyze the June 9, 2017 Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. (“FINRA”) interpretive letter permitting the use of Related Performance Information in continuously offered closed-end registered investment company sales materials distributed solely to institutional investors.
Design/methodology/approach
Provides background, including the application of FINRA Rule 2210, and explains the conditions under which fund marketing materials may contain Related Performance Information.
Findings
While the interpretive letter will not result in a fundamental shift in the Industry’s approach to providing Related Performance Information of open- and closed-end funds to institutional investors, it also represents FINRA’s ongoing recognition that communications provided solely to institutional investors do not raise the same investor protection concerns as communications provided to retail investors.
Originality/value
Expert guidance from experienced investment management and investment fund lawyers.
Details
Keywords
Michael S. Caccese, Douglas Y. Charton and Pamela A. Grossetti
To explain an administrative law judge (ALJ) decision, along with a censure, fine, and industry disbarment, against an investment adviser for misleading advertising and false…
Abstract
Purpose
To explain an administrative law judge (ALJ) decision, along with a censure, fine, and industry disbarment, against an investment adviser for misleading advertising and false claims of compliance with Global Investment Performance Standards (GIPS).
Design/methodology/approach
Explains the background to GIPS, the investment adviser’s GIPS violations, the significance of the case, and lessons to be learned by investment advisors on compliance with GIPS standards.
Findings
The decision is particularly significant because the ALJ issued such severe sanctions based solely on false claims of GIPS compliance notwithstanding the fact that all reported performance returns were accurate and no investors relied on or were harmed by the false claims of compliance.
Practical implications
The Zavanelli case should serve to put firms on notice that persistent noncompliance with the GIPS standards can have serious consequences and that all marketing materials should be subject to effective review and approval policies and procedures prior to distribution or publication to ensure compliance with the GIPS standards.
Originality/value
Practical guidance from experienced financial services lawyers.
Details