Fund Oversight
Government officials wade through the options for hedge-fund regulation.
May 31, 2007 at 08:00 PM
6 minute read
Leasing computers to offshore companies is hardly the kind of transaction for which hedge funds are known. But court documents filed in April in New York State Supreme Court reveal that D.B. Zwirn Special Opportunities Fund did just that in November 2005 by financing part of a $29 million equipment lease for an Indian company purportedly setting up call center operations in Bangalore and New Jersey.
When the company defaulted on its first lease payment, it explained that fire had ravaged its call center in India. The explanation didn't hold water with the fund, which retained Schwartz Cooper, a Chicago firm known for its international asset recovery practice.
“We investigated the New Jersey operation and all we found were computer shells and gray-market goods,” says Roberto Anguizola, a principal with the firm. “Clearly, our clients had been the victims of a massive fraud.”
As their traditional markets get more competitive, hedge funds–which unlike mutual funds are exempt from the registration and disclosure requirement of federal securities laws–are branching out, taking risks that are beyond their historical ambit. Once the exclusive province of wealthy individuals, hedge funds today manage about $1.5 trillion in assets for a range of investors including pension funds, endowments and smaller investors. Hedge funds also are responsible for about 30 percent of trading volume on U.S. exchanges.
“Regulators will have an issue anytime they encounter a group with the power to control substantial amounts of trading activity,” says John Brunjes, partner at McCarter & English. “Anyone who's playing with that kind of money gets people hot.”
Hot enough, it appears, to spur the House Financial Services Committee to hold hearings in March that examined the need for new legislation to keep hedge funds in check. It's all part of a movement by legislators and regulators that are trying hard to draw in the fences around hedge funds–over strenuous industry objections.
SEC's Attack
As hedge funds grew, so did concerns about their potential risk to investors and the economy. The origins of the concerns lay in the $4.4 billion loss that Long-Term Capital Management suffered in 1998 as a result of a devaluation of the Russian ruble. The Federal Reserve Bank bailed out the fund for fear of the impact on the global economy.
Several years later, the SEC came up with a rule requiring certain hedge-fund advisers to register as a means of improving the funds' transparency. But in June 2006, the D.C. Circuit vacated the rule in Goldstein v. SEC. The court reasoned “investment vehicles that remain private and available only to highly sophisticated private investors have historically been understood not to present the same dangers to public markets as more widely available public investment companies.”
Just weeks later, SEC Chairman Christopher Cox told the Senate Banking Committee he might need legislative help with hedge fund regulation. In September 2006, Secretary of the Treasury Robert Rubin announced the President's Working Group on Financial Markets would undertake a study of hedge fund activities.
When new legislation wasn't forthcoming by year's end, the SEC proposed new rules to tighten up the definition of “accredited investors” eligible to invest in hedge funds.
“Under these rules, an 'accredited natural person' would have to own at least $2.5 million in investments, and that figure would be adjusted every five years for inflation,” explains Perrie Weiner, partner at DLA Piper.
The SEC also began investigating whether banks and securities firms set strict enough limits on loans to hedge funds. And it turned out that the legislative initiatives weren't dead.
Congressional Oversight
In February Sens. Carl Levin, Norm Coleman and Barack Obama introduced the Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act.
“The legislation is aimed primarily at tax shelter abuses and not specifically at hedge funds, but it would nonetheless require hedge funds to put in place anti-money-laundering policies that are similar to those applicable to other financial concerns,” explains Margaret Paradis, a partner at Baker & McKenzie.
But the President's Working Group report, released in late February, endorsed a hands-off approach. The group–which includes the chairs of the Treasury Department and the SEC–reasoned that market pressures were the best way to deal with hedge fund risks.
Just a few weeks later, however, Sen. Charles Grassley introduced legislation to revive the repealed rule requiring hedge funds to register with the SEC. On March 13 the House Financial Services Committee held the first of a series of hearings on the subject.
To nobody's surprise, the industry panelists at the hearing were virtually unanimous in opposition to legislation. Perhaps to their own surprise, however, they got some very influential support.
In April, Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, speaking at a conference on global economics in New York, came out in favor of a “light regulatory touch” on hedge funds because they deal with highly sophisticated investors.
About the same time, Simon Johnson, the International Monetary Fund's chief economist, said his organization was not calling for more regulation of hedge funds. And in anticipation of the annual G7 meeting in late April, Canada's finance minister, Jim Flaherty, eschewed the need for global regulations of hedge funds.
Finally, the much-respected former Federal Reserve chief Alan Greenspan is on record as being wary of any direct regulation of hedge funds.
“Most regulators, apart from the enforcement agencies such as the SEC, came out against congressional action largely because of fears that it would drive capital offshore,” says Steve Howard, partner at Thacher Proffitt & Wood.
Before long, the pressure for legislation looked as if it was starting to abate.
Election Jitters
“There's not much appetite on Capitol Hill for increased legislation,” says Houman Shadab, a senior research fellow at George Mason University.
Howard's view is that nothing will happen for at least two years.
“In an election year, hedge fund legislation is not a topic any candidate wants to get near because it won't get him elected,” he says. “It might happen if we get a Democratic president, but that's too far off to predict.”
Which is not to say that hedge funds are free and clear.
“The SEC isn't going to go away, but then you're only dealing with change at the regulatory level,” Brunjes says.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
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.
You Might Like
View AllUS Reviewer of Foreign Transactions Sees More Political, Policy Influence, Say Observers
Pre-Internet High Court Ruling Hobbling Efforts to Keep Tech Giants from Using Below-Cost Pricing to Bury Rivals
6 minute readPreparing for 2025: Anticipated Policy Changes Affecting U.S. Businesses Under the Trump Administration
Senate Panel Postpones Vote on Reconfirmation of Democrat Crenshaw to SEC
Trending Stories
- 1Call for Nominations: Elite Trial Lawyers 2025
- 2Senate Judiciary Dems Release Report on Supreme Court Ethics
- 3Senate Confirms Last 2 of Biden's California Judicial Nominees
- 4Morrison & Foerster Doles Out Year-End and Special Bonuses, Raises Base Compensation for Associates
- 5Tom Girardi to Surrender to Federal Authorities on Jan. 7
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250