Six US Market Regulation Predictions for 2018

 私が働いていた事務所のパートナーによる2018年の米国における市場規制に関する記事です。フィナンシャル・タイムズに掲載された模様。

(4). SEC to seek fiduciary standard for broker-dealers

The conventional wisdom is that Trump appointees will remove, rather than add, new regulatory requirements, but there are a few critical areas that belie this expectation. For example, Jay Clayton, chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, has expressed a strong commitment to tackle the fiduciary standard for brokers in 2018. The Department of Labor recently delayed until mid-2019 the implementation of key provisions of its fiduciary rule that applies to transactions with retirement account clients. The delay provides breathing room for coordination on a consistent approach by the two agencies. Look for possible complications, however, due to the arrival of two new commissioners at the SEC this year, each of whom may have very different views of the necessity and impact of moving from a suitability to a fiduciary standard for brokers.

(5). More enforcement actions related to virtual currencies

We expect the explosion of public interest in the trading of virtual currencies and virtual-currency-related products to continue. US regulators spent much of the second half of 2017 actively focused on these products and the regulatory issues they raised. The SEC, CFTC and state regulators all warned the public of the potential risks of trading in these products. While agencies brought enforcement actions in instances of clear fraud or manipulation, for the most part their efforts have been focused on clarifying the scope of their authority and the application of their regulations to these activities. We believe this approach is likely to shift very quickly and sharply as the regulators pivot to an enforcement mode. Market participants, particularly those involved in offering or selling unregistered securities or who deal in these products without the necessary licences, will be much more likely to face enforcement action than in the past.

Administration Questions Validity of SEC Judges

WSJ writes

The Trump administration on Wednesday abandoned its defense of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s in-house judicial system, siding with opponents who say the hiring process for the SEC’s judges is unconstitutional. In a brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court, lawyers for the Justice Department wrote they now consider the SEC’s administrative law judges to be officers like other presidential appointees, instead of employees who are picked through a human-resources process. That means the way the SEC hires the judges may violate a constitutional clause that safeguards separation-of-powers principles.

The Justice Department’s brief didn’t explicitly describe the judges’ appointments as unconstitutional, but said the selection process for the in-house judge at issue in the case “did not conform” to a constitutional requirement. Mark Perry, a partner at Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP who represented the challengers, said the Supreme Court’s involvement is still needed to resolve a disagreement between lower courts over the judges’ status. The Supreme Court would have to appoint an outside party to argue the case since the Justice Department has turned its back on defending it, the brief says. “We are one step closer to victory,” Mr. Perry said Wednesday.

The SEC didn’t sign the Justice Department’s brief. The regulator likely felt it couldn’t join the position because SEC commissioners have previously issued opinions in contested cases stating that judges are employees, not officers, said Andrew Vollmer, a professor at the University of Virginia School of Law and a former deputy general counsel of the SEC. An SEC spokesman declined to comment.

via TheCorproateCounsel.net