Securities and Exchange Commission Reaches Settlement with Investment Adviser Regarding Recapture of Waived Fees and Reimbursed Expenses from Money Market Funds

October 9, 2020

The Securities and Exchange Commission (Commission) reached a settlement with a registered investment adviser (Adviser) for making material misrepresentations regarding the expenses paid by four money market funds (Funds) that the Adviser managed, in connection with fund reimbursement of fees and expenses that the Adviser had waived or reimbursed during the period from January 2016 through February 2019.1

The Adviser had contractual expense limitation agreements with the Funds under which the Adviser agreed to waive fees and/or reimburse fund expenses to ensure each Fund’s total operating expenses did not exceed a certain percentage of the Fund’s average net assets (expense cap). The Adviser also had voluntary expense limitation agreements with the Funds under which the Adviser agreed to waive a portion of its fees and/or reimburse some fund expenses to prevent the Funds from experiencing a negative yield. Under these voluntary expense limitation agreements, the Adviser was entitled to recapture any such waived fees or reimbursed expenses during the following three years, provided the recaptured amounts did not result in negative yields for the Funds.

The Adviser recaptured from the Funds amounts that it had previously waived or reimbursed under the voluntary expense limitation agreements, but the Funds, in some cases, exceeded their contractual expense caps as a result of the recaptured amounts. This caused investors in those Funds to collectively incur over $5.2 million in additional fund expenses.

Furthermore, the Adviser prepared the Funds’ prospectuses but omitted the expenses associated with the amounts that the Adviser recaptured under the voluntary expense limitation agreements from the “Other Expenses” line item in the prospectus fee tables.2 As a result of this omission, the fee tables, in some cases, failed to inform investors that the Funds exceeded their disclosed expense caps for the Funds’ most recent fiscal year.

In addition, the Adviser’s written policies and procedures stated that recaptured expenses were to be included within the “Other Expenses” line item in the prospectus fee tables, but the Adviser failed to implement these policies and procedures with respect to the Adviser’s recapture of amounts previously waived or reimbursed under the voluntary expense limitation agreements.

As a result of the Adviser’s material misstatements and omissions concerning the impact of the recaptured amounts on the Funds’ annual operating expenses, and the Adviser’s failure to implement its policies and procedures relating to the recapture of amounts previously waived or reimbursed, the Commission’s order (Order) found that the Adviser violated Section 206(4) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (IAA) and Rules 206(4)-7 and 206(4)-8 thereunder and Section 34(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (ICA).3

Without admitting or denying the findings in the Order, the Adviser agreed to a cease-and-desist order, a censure, and to pay disgorgement and prejudgment interest of approximately $5.9 million to be disbursed to affected investors in the Funds. The Order noted that the Commission did not impose a civil penalty, based on the Adviser’s voluntary self-reporting of its conduct and subsequent cooperation in the matter. The Adviser, among other actions, took prompt steps to remediate the violations.

S&K Observations

The Order illustrates the potential for compliance errors when funds have multiple expense limitation agreements. Here, the Adviser needed to ensure that the recapture of any waived fees or reimbursed expenses under the voluntary expense limitation agreements would not cause the Funds to exceed the contractual expense limitations for the Funds.

Furthermore, in not imposing a civil penalty on the Adviser, the Order reflects the Commission’s willingness to credit a firm’s cooperation in an investigation or enforcement action under certain circumstances.

 

______________________________________________________

1 In the Matter of Transamerica Asset Management, Inc., Investment Company Act Rel. No. 34035 (Sept. 30, 2020), available at https://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2020/ia-5599.pdf.

2 The Commission staff has observed that some funds reflect recoupments as a positive fee waiver that causes their net expenses to be greater than their gross expenses. This approach is not consistent with the disclosure requirements of Form N-1A because the two additional line items (the amount of the fee waiver and the fund’s net expenses) can only be shown if there is a reduction in gross fees. Instead, because recoupments are expenses to the fund, they should be reflected in the fee table as a separate line-item or included in “Other Expenses” and reflected in the fund’s gross expenses. See SEC Accounting and Disclosure Information Release, ADI 2019-08 – Performance and Fee Issues, available at https://www.sec.gov/investment/accounting-and-disclosure-information/performance/adi-2019-09-performance-and-fee-issues.

3 Section 206(4) of the IAA and Rule 206(4)-7 thereunder require a registered investment adviser to, among other things, adopt and implement written policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent violations of the Advisers Act and its rules. Section 206(4) of the IAA and Rule 206(4)-8 thereunder make it unlawful for any investment adviser to a pooled investment vehicle to make any untrue statement of material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, to any investor or prospective investor in the pooled investment vehicle. Section 34(b) of the ICA makes it unlawful for any person to make any untrue statement of a material fact in any registration statement, or other document filed or transmitted pursuant to the ICA, or for any person so filing or transmitting to omit to state therein any fact necessary in order to prevent the statements made therein, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, from being materially misleading.