Ever since the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act required many investment advisers to private equity funds to register with the SEC for the first time, fund managers knew that additional scrutiny might eventually follow. The SEC then launched the Presence Exams Initiative in October 2012, specifically to examine the operations of private equity investment advisers. Now, the Commission seeks to greatly increase the size of the task force examining the private equity industry. As a result of these developments, much of the private equity industry is now subject to registration, a new compliance infrastructure, and soon, perhaps, the next round of SEC enforcement actions.

Currently, the SEC is most focused on fund manager practices related to disclosure of management fees, valuation of assets, and conflicts of interest. From the Commission’s perspective, the discretionary nature of certain undisclosed fund expenses and the potentially inflated valuation of illiquid assets held by private equity funds are of special concern.

Given the SEC’s mobilization and commitment of resources to the examination of private equity, the scrutiny of investment advisers of privately managed funds will inevitably increase. Recent comments by Andrew Bowden, Director of the Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations for the SEC, indicated that more than half of the 150 investment fund manager examinations completed so far reveal what the SEC believes to be violations of law or material weaknesses in compliance controls regarding the collection of fees and allocation of expenses imposed by investment advisers against managed funds. Examples included shifting of staff costs onto portfolio companies or to third-party contractors, undisclosed fee arrangements with operating partners, fee-shifting, and the use of accelerated monitoring fees charged to portfolio companies. Enforcement actions have already begun. SEC claims against Clean Energy Capital, LLC and Camelot Acquisitions Secondary Opportunities Management, LLC, alleging misuse of managed investor funds, are likely early examples of the potentially many cases that will define the boundaries of acceptable investment adviser conduct.

Regardless of the extent and scope of the SEC’s own enforcement actions, the Dodd-Frank disclosure requirements and the SEC’s ongoing investigations may also invite private claims. Actions against the industry are still in their infancy, but now that private equity is less private, some managers may find themselves in the crosshairs of the next wave of regulatory enforcement and claims.


Written by:

Published In:


DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Carlton Fields Jorden Burt | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›

* With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name.