Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explain the results of a June 18, 2009 Joint US Department of Labor‐Securities and Exchange Commission hearing regarding Target Funds as investment options for individual and company‐sponsored retirement plans.

The paper explains the background of Target Funds, the meaning of “target” dates and “glide paths,” the popularity of Target Funds with investors, recent losses suffered by Target Funds, areas of confusion among investors and plan sponsors such as fund naming conventions and differing target date strategies, asset allocation strategies, and glide paths; improvements in disclosure that are needed; possible problems with proprietary funds; and the prospects for new SEC and DOL regulations.

Given the extensive use of Target Funds as an investment option in retirement plans, particularly as a safe harbor “default” option, the SEC and DOL are expected to promulgate regulations governing some aspects of Target Funds, in order to protect investors by providing greater disclosure, especially regarding the glide path.

The paper provides practical guidance by experienced employee benefits, executive compensation, financial services and private funds lawyers.

The purpose of this paper is to examine SEC rule amendments that permit a mutual fund to use a three‐ or four‐page “summary prospectus” to satisfy statutory prospectus delivery obligations and amendments to a fund's statutory prospectus requirements that require key information in a standardized order at the front of the document.

The approach is to explain the SEC's regulatory changes to the basic mutual fund disclosure documents designed to help investors choose among the more than 8,000 mutual funds.

The investing public's use of the internet for fund research and fund transactions has made it possible for the SEC to take a “layered” approach to disclosure documents, providing an investor with a short‐form document and making available more detailed information on fund web sites. The SEC will likely follow suit with other documents and updated compliance requirements.

The paper will assist fund legal counsel and compliance professionals: to comply with the new statutory prospectus requirements; and to determine whether the summary prospectus is an appropriate disclosure document for a particular fund.

The USA Patriot Act and its implementing regulations required mutual funds to implement anti‐money laundering (AML) programs by July 24, 2002. This legislation, which substantially amended the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), no doubt will have the most far‐reaching affect on the fund industry since the Investment Company Act was adopted in 1940. It also will present new challenges to fund legal counsel and compliance personnel. Until the Patriot Act was signed into law, the regulatory framework for funds generally focused on protecting investors through mandatory disclosure obligations and self‐dealing prohibitions. AML programs add a new focus. An AML program must be designed to, among other things, prevent a fund from being used for money laundering or the financing of terrorist activities. While banks have had AML programs for several decades, these requirements are uncharted waters for mutual funds, as well as for most other securities firms.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an introduction to benefits of using over‐the‐counter (OTC) derivatives when implementing an investment strategy. The paper aims to examine the basic legal structure of OTC derivative transactions and the International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA) agreements used to document such transactions. The paper also aims to offer advice to institutional investors on steps they can take during the negotiation of ISDA agreements to reduce associated counterparty, termination and liquidity risk.

The paper outlines the typical structure of OTC derivative trades; summarizes the documents used to establish a trading relationship, and outlines key considerations for institutional investors during the negotiation of ISDA agreements.

An institutional investor should carefully review and negotiate ISDA documents to properly implement OTC derivative trades that conform to the investor's overall business operations and investment strategy.

While achieving the benefits of OTC derivative trades, an institutional investor also can negotiate agreements to reduce risks associated with these transactions.

The paper provides practical guidance from experienced securities and derivatives lawyers.

This paper aims to re-evaluate social enterprise (SE) history to pinpoint a pluralist turn in communitarian philosophy during the 1970s, which has the potential to transform labour and consumer rights in enterprise development.

Through a close examination of model rules created by founders of the FairShares Association (FSA), the authors find that the communitarian origins of SE are disturbingly obscured and hidden.

In studying FSA documents and building a timeline of the development of the FairShares Model (FSM), the authors found links between SE developments in the UK, continental Europe, Asia, North/South America and the development of solidarity cooperatives.

The authors argue that the discovery of a communitarian pluralist turn advances “new cooperativism” by enfranchising both labour and users in industrial relations (IR). Using this insight, they challenge accounts of SE history and argue for more research on SE’s potential contribution to radical IR.

The paper highlights the potential of the FSM as a vehicle for catalysing new SE and IR practices that share wealth and power more equitably between social entrepreneurs, workforce members, service/product users and community/social investors.

This chapter investigates the nature of the transformation of macroeconomics by focusing on the impact of the Great Depression on economic doctrines. There is no doubt that the Great Depression exerted an enormous influence on economic thought, but the exact nature of its impact should be examined more carefully. In this chapter, I examine the transformation from a perspective which emphasizes the interaction between economic ideas and economic events, and the interaction between theory and policy rather than the development of economic theory. More specifically, I examine the evolution of what became known as macroeconomics after the Depression in terms of an ongoing debate among the “stabilizers” and their critics. I further suggest using four perspectives, or schools of thought, as measures to locate the evolution and transformation; the gold standard mentality, liquidationism, the Treasury view, and the real-bills doctrine. By highlighting these four economic ideas, I argue that what happened during the Great Depression was the retreat of the gold standard mentality, the complete demise of liquidationism and the Treasury view, and the strange survival of the real-bills doctrine. Each of those transformations happened not in response to internal debates in the discipline, but in response to government policies and real-world events.