Editorial

SEC must hedge bets on advertising

Oct 21, 2012 @ 12:01 am

+ Zoom

Now that the comment period has closed on the SEC's proposal to allow hedge funds and private-placement issuers to advertise their offerings, the agency should listen to its critics and go back to the drawing board to come up with a plan that has safeguards in it to minimize the very real dangers facing the investing public.

To be fair, the Securities and Exchange Commission is between a rock and a hard place. Right now, private-placement issuers and hedge funds can raise money from accredited investors but can't advertise their offerings to the general public.

Under the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act, the SEC has been directed to lift its advertising ban, even though the only people who will be allowed to invest in these offerings still will be accredited investors. However, the SEC has the wherewithal — in fact, some say it has the duty — to put guidelines in place that accomplish that goal while at the same time protecting ordinary investors.

Critics of the plan, which include SEC member Luis Aguilar, the Consumer Federation of America and the North American Securities Administrators Association Inc., have taken issue with the commission's proposal for its failure to adopt standards to verify that those who purchase these offerings are accredited investors. Instead, it requires merely that issuers have a “reasonable basis” for thinking that the people buying their investments are accredited.

Financial advisers also are concerned. In a recent InvestmentNews survey (see Page 18), 69% of them said that hedge funds shouldn't be allowed to advertise to the general public.

Their concern is well-founded. No one knows what will happen once the advertising ban has been lifted.

Will ads now appear in personal-finance magazines such as Money and Kiplinger's? How about popular investment websites such as TheStreet.com?

And what about infomercials on late-night TV, where the sales pitches regularly run for a half-hour or more?

Given these wide-ranging advertising vehicles, the potential to create greater demand for private offerings will be evident. That is why critics are insisting that the SEC set effective standards to make sure that only accredited investors are allowed to participate in these markets.

OUTDATED THRESHOLDS

The first thing that the SEC must do is redefine an accredited investor. Right now, it broadly defines such an investor as one with a net worth of at least $1 million or an annual income of $200,000 — $300,000 for a couple — in each of the past two years.

Observers have noted that these thresholds are hopelessly outdated and should be adjusted. Set in 1982, they have never been reset for inflation.

Under the existing guidelines, many wage earners who would never describe themselves as wealthy or even well-off might qualify as accredited investors.

Adjusted for inflation, the net-worth requirement today more likely would be about $2.25 million. The annual-income benchmark would be $450,000 for individuals and $674,000 for couples.

Although wealth is one way to define an accredited investor, it alone doesn't guarantee that an individual is educated or sophisticated enough to evaluate private offerings. Some have suggested that individuals should need to demonstrate actual investment experience to complement the wealth benchmarks.

Apart from redefining what an accredited investor is, the SEC must come up with ways to make sure that issuers have procedures in place to verify the accuracy of the information they are relying on to determine investor accreditation.

Perhaps, the SEC should require a third party, such as a broker or adviser, to sign off on the investor's documentation. At the very least, the issuer should be forced to get the SEC to approve its protocol for accredited-investor verification.

The bottom line is that the SEC shouldn't adopt its proposal as originally issued. Although by law it has to follow the dictates of the JOBS Act, it also has to make sure that it isn't opening the floodgates to future investor fraud.

0
Comments

What do you think?

View comments

Recommended for you

Sponsored financial news

Upcoming Event

May 31

Conference

Spring Excell—Peak Advisor Alliance

Members of the InvestmentNews Research team will be presenting new adviser benchmarking data and providing strategies that can help accelerate the growth of your business. In this exclusive three-hour workshop, InvestmentNews will... Learn more

Featured video

INTV

Voya's Tom Halloran: How to change the lack of diversity in financial services

Voya Financial Inc. has a board of directors that is 40% female, and the emphasis on diversity and inclusion carries through to the firm's advisory business, says Tom Halloran, president of Voya Financial Advisors.

Latest news & opinion

Wells Fargo will ramp up spending to lure brokers

Wirehouse, after losing 400 brokers in first quarter, is bucking trend among rivals who have said they are going to cut back on spending big bucks recruiting veteran advisers

DOL fiduciary rule pushes indexed annuity carriers to develop new products

Insurers are introducing fixed-rate deferred annuities with income guarantees to circumvent BICE.

Trump is gutting rules that Corporate America hates

With executive orders, bureaucratic actions and unprecedented use of an obscure statute, the administration has killed or postponed dozens of regulations.

Wells Fargo Advisors restricting investments for retirement accounts

Mutual fund sales will be limited to T shares, while municipal bonds, preferred stock and international debt will be prohibited.

Investments that advisers should look at in an overheated market

Cash, alternatives, international all beckon, but all have pros and cons.

X

Subscribe and Save 60%

Premium Access
Print + Digital

Learn more
Subscribe to Print