The SEC should also certify to
courts that it has reviewed every line item, and that each of the fees and
expenses sought by a plan administrator were necessary and appropriate to
fulfill the distribution plan's objectives.
If the SEC is serious about compensating aggrieved investors, noted the
court, it should take a much harder look at the submissions of its fund
administrators. Also, no fund administrator should ever be authorized to speak
on behalf of the SEC or to represent to a court that the SEC has no objection
to the fund administrator's application. As the party before the Court and an
agency of the Government, emphasized the court, the SEC should state its own
position directly and unequivocally.
Commentary and musings on the complex, fascinating and peculiar world that is securities regulation
Friday, August 24, 2012
Federal Court Authorizes Fair Fund Distribution in SEC Enforcement Action
In an order authorizing the distribution
of Fair Funds to aggrieved investors as part of a court-approved consent
judgment in an SEC enforcement action, a federal judge (SDNY) said that, in
order to foster the speedy dissemination of future Fair Funds, the SEC should
create realistic fee and cost reserves and avoid tying distributions to the
payment of fund administrators. In
addition, the SEC should consider requiring fund administrators to certify that
all fees and expenses were reasonable
and that no funds are being distributed to persons or entities who participated
in the underlying wrongdoing or who are otherwise conflicted from receiving any
benefits from the SEC. (SEC v. Zurich Financial Services,
08 Civ. 10760 (WHP), Aug. 21, 2012.)