We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.


Refine your search



25 results found


Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP | USA | 28 Jun 2013

DOL proposes to substitute creditworthiness determinations for credit ratings in ERISA prohibited transaction class exemptions

On June 21, 2013, the Department of Labor (DOL) published proposed amendments to certain class exemptions required by Section 939A of the Dodd-Frank


Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP | USA | 7 Jul 2011

DOL opines on scope of PTE 86-128

In Advisory Opinion 2011-08A (June 21, 2011), the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) concluded that ERISA “investment advice” fiduciaries are within the scope of Prohibited Transaction Exemption (PTE) 86-128, thus confirming the availability of conditional relief for such a fiduciary (or an affiliate) to effect securities transactions or cross trades for a fee as an agent for an ERISA plan.


Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP | USA | 9 Jun 2011

DOL opines on QPAM issue in stable value context

For the second time in 2011, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has issued an ERISA advisory opinion that considers the PTE 84-14 qualified professional asset manager (QPAM) exemption, this time in the stable value context.


Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP | USA | 25 Oct 2010

DOL proposes to expand “fiduciary” status under ERISA

On October 22, 2010, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) proposed to replace its long-standing regulation defining the circumstances in which investment advice confers “fiduciary” status under ERISA, with a new, more expansive definition.


Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP | USA | 9 Feb 2010

Georgia Supreme Court recognizes a cause of action for “holders” of securities and limited duties in favor of non-discretionary account customers

In response to three questions certified to it by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, on February 8, 2010, the Georgia Supreme Court held that, under Georgia common law, “holder” claims are actionable, plaintiffs in misrepresentation or omission claims involving publicly traded securities must prove loss causation, and a limited fiduciary relationship exists between registered representatives and clients, even in non-discretionary accounts.


Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP | USA | 7 Dec 2009

Investor Protection Act passes the Financial Services Committee

With a vote of 41 to 28, the Investor Protection Act of 2009 (H.R. 3817) cleared the House Financial Services Committee and was ordered reported to the House, as amended.


Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP | USA | 30 Nov 2009

DOL opines that security interest in non-IRA brokerage assets to cover IRA indebtedness is a prohibited transaction

In Advisory Opinion 2009-03A (October 27, 2009), the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) opined that the pledge of an IRA owner’s personal accounts at a brokerage firm to secure the payment of any debt or liability in his self-directed IRA maintained with that firm would violate the prohibited transaction rules of Internal Revenue Code 4975.


Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP | USA | 6 Nov 2009

SEC Chairman speaks at SIFMA annual conference

SEC Chairman Mary A. Schapiro spoke at the SIFMA (Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association) annual conference on the following.


Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP | USA | 6 Nov 2009

FINRA Chairman and CEO testifies before the House Financial Services Committee

Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) Chairman and CEO Richard Ketchum testified before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Financial Services to discuss, in part, proposals to harmonize the regulation of broker-dealers and investment advisers and address the role of arbitration in the securities industry.


Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP | USA | 2 Oct 2009

SIFMA files amicus brief in favor of mutual fund adviser and duties owed

The Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA) filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in Jones v. Harris Associates.

Previous page 1 2 3