|

The SEC recently settled cherry-picking charges against a Minnesota investment adviser and its sole owner. North East Asset Management Group and its owner, Gregory Zandlo, settled the Commission’s claims without admitting or denying its findings.

The SEC found that, through his firm, Mr. Zandlo shifted profitable trades to certain accounts from December 2020 through May 2022. Specifically, the SEC claimed the defendants were shifting profitable trades to accounts belonging to the firm, Mr. Zandlo, or people related to Mr. Zandlo (collectively, “Favored Accounts”). Continue reading ›

|

On May 1st, the Investment Adviser Association (IAA), sent a letter to the SEC’s new Chairman, Paul Atkins. The IAA is a nonprofit advocacy organization representing the interests of registered investment advisers.

The IAA’s letter essentially acts as a call to action for the Commission’s new regime. In the letter, the IAA’s President and CEO, Karen Barr, applauds then-Acting Chairman Mark Uyeda’s pivot from the “one-size-fits-all” approach of former Chairman Gary Gensler.

Barr continued to outline eight major recommendations: Continue reading ›

|

Regulators continue to emphasize the importance of registered investment advisers’ conflict-of-interest disclosures. The SEC recently settled a case with Transamerica Retirement Advisors, LLC (“Transamerica”) regarding account transfers with insufficient conflict of interest disclosure. 

While Transamerica settled without admitting or denying the allegations, the Commission’s findings are as follows:  Continue reading ›

|

Custody presents a compliance danger for investment advisers, including advisers to private funds. Three recent enforcement cases illustrate the importance of diligent compliance for fund advisers with custody of client assets. 

According to the Advisers Act, an investment adviser has custody of client assets if it holds, directly or indirectly, client funds or securities, or if it has the authority to obtain possession of those assets. See Advisers Act Rule 206(4)-2(d)(2).  Continue reading ›

|

Two recent enforcement cases highlight the pitfalls of conversion from broker-dealer accounts to investment adviser accounts. In both cases, client accounts were converted from broker-dealer to advisory accounts, leading to a change in client fees. In both cases, the adviser was penalized for mismanaging the change in fee arrangements.

The first case relates to One Oak Capital Management, LLC (“One Oak”), a registered investment adviser, and its dually registered investment adviser representative, Michael DeRosa. DeRosa, who was simultaneously employed at a separate broker-dealer, counseled several clients to convert their accounts from broker-dealer accounts and products to advisory accounts with One Oak. Continue reading ›

|

The SEC recently charged New York-based investment advisers Two Sigma Investments LP and Two Sigma Advisers LP (collectively, “Two Sigma”) with breaching their fiduciary duties for failing to reasonably address known vulnerabilities in their investment models. In its Order, the SEC also found compliance and supervisory failures related to those violations, plus violation of the Commission’s whistleblower protections via Two Sigma’s employee separation agreements.

Two Sigma is a large quantitative-analytics-based hedge fund manager using computer-based algorithmic investment models when managing or advising client investments. The SEC claims that, by March 2019, multiple Two Sigma employees had informed senior management that various Two Sigma personnel could freely change variable inputs of their algorithmic models. These unchecked input modifications would alter the algorithm’s predictions and trades without notifying the firm, its representatives, or its clients. This autonomy of various personnel to rewrite the models’ data could materially impact investment decisions for Two Sigma clients. Continue reading ›

|

The SEC recently entered a cease-and-desist order against an SEC-registered investment adviser Federal Prep Advisors, Inc. (“Federal Prep”) and its principal regarding its rollover recommendations from Thrift Savings Plan (“TSP”) accounts to advisory Individual Retirement Accounts (“IRAs”). The SEC determined that Federal Prep did not adequately evaluate and disclose the costs associated with the TSP and its services or the available investment options under the TSP, among other things.[1]

The Thrift Savings Plan is a defined contribution retirement plan for federal employees and members of the uniformed services, and generally has lower fees compared to private employer-sponsored 401(k) plans. From at least June 2020 until around June of 2023, Federal Prep advised approximately 300 clients to rollover assets from a TSP account to an IRA managed by Federal Prep.

Continue reading ›

|

The SEC recently announced its annual Examination Priorities for the 2025 year. This annual release provides insight into the areas that the SEC plans to highlight when inspecting investment advisers, investment companies, broker-dealers, and other entities subject to examination by the SEC’s Division of Examinations. For investment advisers, the 2025 priorities largely are unchanged from the announced 2024 priorities, which we have previously discussed.

For FY25, the SEC again intends to focus on investment advisers who have never been examined, newly registered investment advisers, and investment advisers who have not been examined recently.

Continue reading ›

|

Last month, the SEC announced a series of settled enforcement actions against investment advisers who routinely failed to file 13F and 13H reports with the Commission. The actions are tied to the SEC’s announced examination priority to assess the accuracy and completeness of regulatory filings.

Depending on the frequency, aggregate amount of transacted securities, types of securities, or value of securities an investment adviser advises, advisers registered with the SEC are subject to many filing requirements. Of these, the most common are the 13F and 13H reports required pursuant to Section 13 of the Exchange Act.

Continue reading ›

|

Last week, the SEC announced a series of enforcement actions tied to its ongoing sweep of investment adviser compliance with the new Marketing Rule. In total, nine firms settled claims that they violated Advisers Act Rule 206(4)-1, the “new Marketing Rule,” resulting in $1,240,000 in civil penalties.

We have previously written about the implementation of the new Marketing Rule, the announcement of the corresponding examination sweep program, and the subsequent enforcement actions that have resulted. While the previous enforcement actions have largely centered around investment advisers who have failed to adopt policies and procedures designed to prevent violations of the new Marketing Rule, the recent enforcement actions give greater insight into the real-world application of the new Marketing Rule. Namely, the actions detail marketing violations due to the use of third-party ratings by the investment advisers.

Continue reading ›

Contact Information
2302 Parklake Dr NE
#420
Atlanta, GA 30345
Toll Free: (855) 322-2057Local: (404) 490-4060Fax: (404) 490-4058 jsparker@parkmac.com

Attorney Advertising

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Please do not include any confidential or sensitive information in a contact form, text message, or voicemail. The contact form sends information by non-encrypted email, which is not secure. Submitting a contact form, sending a text message, making a phone call, or leaving a voicemail does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Copyright © 2025, Parker MacIntyre
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design