SEC independence rule under fire
NEW YORK – The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) rule that requires at least 75% of mutual fund board members, including the chairman, to be independent, is hanging in the balance – a US federal appeals court sent it back to the SEC for further review in early April.
The new rule is being contested by the US Chamber of Commerce. Previously, 40% of mutual fund board members were required to be independent.
The Appeals Court for the district of Columbia Circuit said the SEC violated administrative procedure by not giving an opportunity for the public to comment on the rule, even though the Commission relied, at least in part, on new information to determine the
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
EBA guidance prompts banks to rethink CSRBB perimeters
Banks will likely have to expand their credit spread risk coverage following recommendations
Market players warn against European repo clearing mandate
Regulators urged to await outcome of US mandate and be wary of risks to government bond liquidity
Esma won’t soften regulatory expectations for cloud and AI
CCP supervisory chair signals heightened scrutiny of third-party risk and operational resilience
BPI says SR 11-7 should go; bank model risk chiefs say ‘no’
Lobby group wants US guidance repealed; practitioners want consistent model supervision and audit
Esma supervision proposals ensnare Bloomberg and Tradeweb
Derivatives and bonds venues would become subject to centralised supervision
Industry frowns on FCA’s single-sided trade reporting efforts
Buy side warns UK attempt to ease Mifir burden may miss target; dealers aren’t happy either
One vision, two paths: UK reporting revamp diverges from EU
FCA and Esma could learn from each other on how to cut industry compliance costs
Market doesn’t share FSB concerns over basis trade
Industry warns tougher haircut regulation could restrict market capacity as debt issuance rises
