Close Close
Popular Financial Topics Discover relevant content from across the suite of ALM legal publications From the Industry More content from ThinkAdvisor and select sponsors Investment Advisor Issue Gallery Read digital editions of Investment Advisor Magazine Tax Facts Get clear, current, and reliable answers to pressing tax questions
Luminaries Awards
ThinkAdvisor
Sara Crovitz

Regulation and Compliance > Federal Regulation

Advisor Texting, DOL Fiduciary Rule Are Hot-Button Issues This Year

X
Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

The Securities and Exchange Commission’s regulatory agenda “shows no signs of letting up,” with several rules that “advisors should pay particular attention to,” according to Sara Crovitz, partner at Stradley Ronon in Washington.

The Labor Department is also likely to deliver on a new fiduciary rule this year, Crovitz said.

Industry trade groups are raising concerns about an ongoing sweep by the SEC of advisors’ off-channel communications, including text messaging and other electronic communications.

The groups told SEC Chairman Gary Gensler in a recent letter that the sweep exceeds the agency’s authority because, according to news reports, the SEC has asked each of the investment advisors “involved in the sweep to have the personal phones of several employees imaged and reviewed, and that the SEC seeks evidence of any off-channel business communication, regardless of its nature.”

The SEC exam priorities list “that came out earlier this week said off-channel communications were priority for 2023,” Crovitz said.

We caught up with Crovitz — a former deputy chief counsel at the SEC who now specializes in  all aspects of investment company and investment advisor regulation — to get her thoughts on what’s looking to be a very active regulatory year.

THINKADVISOR: Any thoughts on the SEC’s off-channel communications sweep, in what’s being called the “WhatsApp sweep”?

SARA CROVITZ: In September 2022, the SEC settled with 16 financial firms, mostly broker-dealers, with fines over $1 billion with regard to allegations that firm employees were routinely communicating about business matters using personal email or text messaging applications on personal devices, where the communications were not captured by the firms’ record-keeping systems.

I understand that both broker-dealers and investment advisors have received the sweep.

And [SEC] Exams has added as a priority for its program for 2023 reviewing both investment advisor compliance and recordkeeping around electronic communications, so there’s no sign this issue is going away soon.

What other regulatory hot topics should be on advisors’ radar this year?

The first is the outsourcing proposal, which came out in October. The rule would prohibit as fraudulent registered investment advisors’ outsourcing certain services or functions, which could include commonly used ones such as recordkeeping, investment risk software or trading services, unless the advisors conduct a prescriptive, one-size-fits-all due diligence and monitoring process.

The proposal seems like a solution in search of a problem — advisors have been using third-party service providers for years and already are fiduciaries to their clients and responsible for the services within scope of their advisory agreement whether outsourced or not.

Despite the now-common short comment period, the SEC received almost 100 comment letters, many of them quite critical of the proposal — in particular, it’s not at all clear how any incremental benefits could possibly outweigh the costs of the proposal given the lack of evidence of any real problem.

Another is a proposed amendment to the investment advisor custody rule, which the SEC will consider on Feb. 15.

The advisor custody rule was amended after the [Bernie] Madoff scandal, and defines custody extremely broadly, which has led to some perhaps unintended consequences.

For instance, the staff in investment management has been grappling for several years with the fact that the authority to withdraw client funds or securities gives rise to custody, and advisors can be deemed to have custody even when the advisor may not be aware it has custody.

For example, where an agreement between a client and its custodian gives the advisor broader access to client assets than the advisor’s own agreement.

Similar issues arise with regard to assets that can’t be settled on a delivery versus payment basis. This proposed rulemaking also likely would address digital asset [crypto] custody.

Also worth keeping an eye on are proposed rules for both advisors and broker-dealers relating to digital engagement practices coming out of [the 2021] GameStop episode, finalization of rules requiring detailed policies and procedures relating to best execution by broker-dealers and finalization of cybersecurity rules for advisors.

Are you anticipating the release of a new fiduciary rule by the Labor Department this year? 

Yes.

I’ll get out my crystal ball and predict that the DOL will get its proposal out before summer ends.

For one, the DOL indicated publicly last year that the rule was imminent, and the Senate finally confirmed Lisa Gomez as [Employee Benefits Security Administration] assistant secretary last September.

But more importantly, there will be added pressure this year because of the potential for a rule adopted too late in 2024 being subject to repeal under the Congressional Review Act.

In other words, the DOL will want to get a proposal out with enough time to finalize the rule before we get too close (60 legislative days) to the end of the congressional session in 2024.

Are you watching any legislation?

One to watch — and hope we don’t see — is anti-money laundering legislation for investment advisors.

Advisor AML provisions had shown up in the National Defense Authorization Act last year but were dropped.

The provisions would have expanded the Bank Secrecy Act’s know-your-customer and due diligence rules to cover investment advisors. In many cases, AML requirements for advisors would be duplicative because advisors are one of several financial service providers interacting with a client, and many of these financial service providers already are covered by AML rules.

(Pictured: Sara Crovitz)


NOT FOR REPRINT

© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.