Articles Posted in Investment Adviser

|

We previously posted about the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) enforcement action against Parker Terrill Austin (“Austin”) and Embarcadero Capital Advisors, Inc. (“Embarcadero”) for alleged misuse of client’s nonpublic personal information. In that case,  each party consented to the entry of a separate judgment [against Austin and Embarcadero] last month. Those judgments also resolved allegations regarding misrepresentations by the same defendants.  

In the complaint, in addition to the privacy claims, the SEC also alleged that Austin and Embarcadero made fraudulent misrepresentations in relation to the disclosure documents filed with the commission and given to clients.  These allegations resulted in findings of violations of the antifraud provisions of Sections 206(1), 206(2), and 207 of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. 

Continue reading ›

|

Highlighting the importance of properly handling clients’ personal information and complying with applicable fiduciary obligations, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) reached a settlement last month that resulted in a final judgment brought against Parker Terrill Austin (“Austin”), an investment adviser based in California and founder of his advisory firm, Embarcadero Capital Advisors, Inc. (“Embarcadero”). The SEC filed its complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on September 10, 2025.   

Continue reading ›

|

The Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) settled an administrative proceeding against Simplify Asset Management, Inc. (“Simplify”), a Delaware corporation and registered investment adviser that engages in transactions related to exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”), for multiple violations of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “Investment Company Act”). From July 2021 through November 2024, Simplify caused its ETF clients to violate multiple provisions of the Investment Company Act by failing to maintain and implement adequate compliance policies and procedures and by failing to adequately oversee certain regulatory requirements. The SEC has imposed a cease-and-desist order and a $400,000 civil money penalty, which Simplify must pay within 21 days of entry of the order. 

Continue reading ›

|

Highlighting the importance of timely filing of Suspicious Activity Reports (“SARs”), the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) entered a settled order against UBS Financial Services Inc. (“UBSFS”), a registered broker-dealer and investment adviser incorporated in Delaware and with its principal place of business in Weehawken, New Jersey. The SEC found that UBSFS failed to timely file certain SARs, in violation of Section 17(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Rule 17a-8 thereunder. As part of the settlement, UBSFS agreed to cease and desist from committing or causing further violations of the relevant provisions, was censured, and agreed to pay a $20 million civil monetary penalty to the SEC within 30 days of entry of the order.

Continue reading ›

|

The Securities and Exchange Commission recently proposed a new rule, Regulation E-Delivery, that looks to broaden the ability of financial industry professionals to deliver required compliance and regulatory information and documents to clients and proposed clients. If adopted, the proposed rule would modernize the regulatory framework by superseding the SEC’s current guidance for e-delivery while providing new requirements and conditions for electronic delivery. Continue reading ›

|

The SEC recently announced its intent to issue an order that will adjust the dollar amount necessary to be considered a “qualified client” under Section 205(a)(1) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”). This increase, adjusted to reflect inflation, raises the minimum net worth or dollar amount of assets under management necessary for an investment adviser to charge a performance fee to the client.

Continue reading ›

|

On December 16th, the SEC released a Risk Alert containing observations of investment advisers’ compliance with Rule 206(4)-1 (the “Marketing Rule”). The Commission provides risk alerts such as this to inform and remind investment advisers and stakeholders of advisers’ compliance requirements. Regarding testimonials and endorsements, the Commission observed common deficiencies in the following requirements: (1) clear and prominent disclosures, (2) disclosure of material terms of compensation arrangements, (3) disclosure of material conflicts, (4) oversight and compliance, (5) ineligible persons, and (6) promoter affiliated with the adviser. Continue reading ›

|

Highlighting the importance of investment advisers’ proper calculation of assets under management (“AUM”), the SEC recently charged six investment advisers with misrepresenting their AUM.

The six connected firms, Bluesky Eagle Capital Management Ltd., Supreme Power Capital Management Ltd., AI Financial Education Foundation Ltd., AI Investment Education Foundation Ltd., Invesco Alpha Inc., and Adamant Stone Limited, were allegedly deficient in several areas, including claiming incorrect business addresses and falsely claiming to be public companies. AUM reporting, however, was the primary offense, as the cause of action was “making material misrepresentations in their SEC-filed Forms ADV that could not be substantiated.” While the advisers were allegedly engaged in several blatant forms of violative conduct, the SEC’s focus on their AUM misrepresentations underscores the importance of advisers’ proper calculation of AUM. Continue reading ›

|

On November 18, 2025, the SEC Division of Examinations announced its 2026 examination priorities. Each year, the Division releases its annual examination priorities to (1) inform investment advisers, broker-dealers, and investors of the Division’s upcoming points of emphasis and (2) provide a roadmap for firms to effectively direct their compliance attention.

Regarding investment advisers, the Division’s examination priorities are:

Continue reading ›

|

The compliance deadlines for the SEC’s amendments to Regulation S-P, adopted on May 15, 2024, are approaching. For investment advisers with $1.5 billion or more in assets under management, the compliance deadline is December 3, 2025. Advisers with fewer than $1.5 billion in AUM have six more months, with a compliance deadline of June 3, 2026.

Critically, Reg S-P now requires RIAs to notify clients in the event of certain data breaches. Under the amended rule, RIAs must notify clients of any event that could endanger their personal data, unless the RIA has determined, after reasonable investigation, that sensitive client information has not been, and is not reasonably likely to be, used for substantial harm or inconvenience. Such notice must be sent as soon as practicable, and no later than 30 days after learning of the breach, to any affected or potentially affected clients. If the RIA cannot identify which clients may be affected, the RIA must notify all of its clients. Substantively, any such notification must: 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

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 © 2026, Parker MacIntyre
JUSTIA Law Firm Blog Design