Disclaimer

The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.

 Skip to Content

SEC Casts Wider Investment Adviser Net: May Ensnare Index and Other Providers
September 08, 2022
A June 15 release published by the SEC has requested public comment relevant to, primarily, the circumstances under which any of the following types of “information providers” should be deemed “investment advisers” for purposes of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 or the Investment Company Act of 1940:

Index providers, who “compile, create the methodology for, sponsor, administer, and/or license market indexes.”

Model portfolio providers, including broker-dealers, asset managers, third-party strategists, asset allocators, and advisers. A model portfolio consists of “a diversified group of assets (often mutual funds or exchange-traded funds (‘ETFs’)) designed to achieve a particular expected return with exposure to corresponding risks.”

Pricing services, who “provide prices, valuations, and additional data about a particular investment (e.g., a security, a derivative, or another investment), to assist users with determining an appropriate value of the investment.”

The large number of specific questions on which the SEC’s release requested comments reflects the large number of factors that bear on this subject and the complex analysis that could be applied. The complexity is compounded by the wide variety in (a) the types of information and related services provided by each type of information provider; (b) the users of such information or services; (c) and the uses to which they put such information or services. Moreover, depending on the circumstances, the appropriate result under the Investment Advisers Act may differ from that under the Investment Company Act.

The release does not specifically mention insurance companies or the various types of investment products they issue, including those that have an index-based component or that entail model portfolio use. Nevertheless, in a number of contexts, insurance companies without a doubt use or provide types of information with which the SEC’s release is concerned. This SEC initiative, therefore, could potentially be very significant for many insurance companies.

The SEC set August 16, 2022, as the deadline for receiving comments in response to its release. As with many other recent short SEC comment periods, it is questionable whether the SEC could have expected to receive very detailed or definitive comments on this subject. Nevertheless, many very substantive comments have been submitted. It is to be hoped, moreover, that there will be further opportunity for comment if and when the SEC develops a more concrete proposal on this subject, or that the SEC will at least be willing to consider comments received after the above deadline.
Authored By
Image: Thomas C. Lauerman
Thomas C. Lauerman
Related Practices
Life, Annuity, and Retirement Solutions Financial Services Regulatory
Related Industries
Life, Annuity, and Retirement Solutions Life, Annuity, and Retirement Solutions Securities & Investment Companies
©2024 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.