Schedule 13D/13F Clarity on ETF Issues

Do I need to file a 13D or 13G if my client accounts hold in excess of 5% of an ETF?

Generally, no. The SEC has granted no-action relief to ETFs with respect to compliance with Section 13(d) of the Securities Exchange Act. Section 13(d) was designed to require disclosure when holders begin to accumulate large blocks of equity securities of publicly held companies. Generally, under Section 13(d), any person who indirectly or directly becomes the beneficial owner of more than 5% of an issuer’s equity securities registered under Section 12 of the Exchange Act must file with the SEC a Schedule 13D within 10 days after the acquisition. A person may generally file a short‐form statement on Schedule 13G in lieu of a Schedule 13D if the filer meets certain qualifications including being a “passive investor.”

Since ETFs are structured as open-ended funds, with market makers able to create and redeem shares to satisfy market demand, the value of the shares does not materially differ from the value of the per share NAV of the Fund. The SEC’s view is that so long as there is not a material difference between the actual market price of ETFs and the NAV of the shares, there is no ability to exploit inside information. However, the SEC did state that IF ETFs begin to trade at prices that material deviate from NAV, then the relief available in the No-Action letters would no longer be available.

As stated in the SEC’s Select Sector SPDR Trust No-Action Letter dated May 6, 1999, “An Insider of an open-end fund generally would not be able to exploit inside information by buying or selling shares of the fund on the basis of an anticipated change in the shares’ value because an open-end fund is required to price its shares, and effect redemptions and sales of its shares, at NAV.”

As stated in the SEC’s PDR Services Corporation No-Action Letter publicly available December 14, 1998 and referenced within the previous no-action letter: “In reaching this position, we note particularly your representation that each Fund’s Shares have traded and will continue to trade at prices that do not material deviate from NAV. If any funds’ Shares begin to trade at prices that material deviate from ANV, the relief granted in this letter would no longer be available.”

Related Content

Latest Content

How Do You Supervise for SEC Pay-to-Play Violations?

If you wanted more information about the contours of the SEC’s Pay-to-Play Rule, or how the SEC may enforce it, three recent Settlement Orders against large investment advisers for “over de minimis” political contributions provide some insight regarding one of the prohibitions: Contributions by Covered Associates to certain Government Officials over the specified Exception amount (capitalized words are terms in the … Continued

Do your Fund Documents Clearly Disclose Receipt of Accelerated Monitoring Fees?

Somewhat more reminiscent of the broken-windows enforcement era, two affiliated private equity advisers managing billions settled with the SEC on charges that they failed to make pre-commitment disclosures in fund governing documents related to accelerated fees received from portfolio companies. Interestingly, according to the Settlement Order, the advisers had made some disclosures in fund documents … Continued

With New Risk Alert, SEC Doubles Down on Best Execution

On July 11, 2018, the SEC issued a Risk Alert outlining commonly found compliance issues related to best execution by investment advisers. Advisers have an obligation to seek best execution of client transactions, taking into consideration quantitative factors such as execution quality and commission rate, as well as more qualitative factors such as the value … Continued

The Cost of Compliance: Understanding and Leveraging Resources

For compliance officers, obtaining the necessary tools and resources to build an effective compliance program can be costly and difficult to implement. How do you distinguish the best in class, the most cost-efficient and effective for use in your program? In this ComplianceCast, speakers David Porteous of Faegre Baker Daniels and Korrine Kohm of Ascendant … Continued

California Privacy Law Brings GDPR-Lite to the U.S.

New Act Will Give Consumers Rights to Access and Delete Their Data In what has become an ongoing race among states to have the toughest privacy regulation in the U.S., California has jumped to the front. On June 28, 2018, California’s legislature unanimously passed a privacy bill that was later signed by Governor Jerry Brown, … Continued

Mailing List

Subscribe to the Ascendant Compliance email list for the latest compliance resources, conferences, ComplianceCasts™, and more.

Loading form...

Contact Us

Ascendant works together with clients to identify and assess critical needs through customized plans. If you need assistance with compliance functions, regulatory services, cybersecurity or technology tools, we’d love to speak with you.