Assignment Of Investment Advisory Agreement Negative Consent

Prior to the passage of the Dodd-Frank Act, Section 203 (b) (6) of the Advisers Act, which is excluded from the registration requirement of Section 203 (a) of the Advisers Act, any investment advisor is registered with the CFTC as a commodity advisor, whose business is not primarily to act as an investment advisor within the meaning of Section 202 (a) (11) of the Advisers Act. and who was not an investment advisor to an investment company («Registered Fund») or a business development company («BDC») registered under the Investment Companies Act of 1940. We call this provision «the old section 203 (b) (6).» As introduced in December 2009, the law that became the Dodd-Frank Act would have amended the former Section 203 (b) (6) to limit the exemption to investment advisors who were not investment advisors for private funds. As it came into force in July 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act maintained the old Section 203 (b) (6), but renamed It Section 203 (b) (6) (A) and added a new section 203 (b) (6) (B). Section 203 (b) (6) now exempts the registration requirement from the Commission: » (A) any investment advisor registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission as a commodity trade advisor, including the activity is not primarily to act as an investment advisor within the meaning of Section 202 (a) (a) (11) of this security and which is not an investment advisor for (i) an investment firm headquartered I; or (ii) a company that, in accordance with paragraph 54 of Title I of this Act, has been elected as an economic development company and has not withdrawn its election; or (B) any investment advisor registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission as a commodity advisor who advises a private fund if, after the adoption of the Private Funds Registration Act 2010, the consultant`s activity was to be primarily the securities advisory business, that advisor would report to the Commission.» However, it is important for consultants that negative consent in the course of an assignment is generally permitted. The SEC confirmed this view with a series of action letters from the 1980s, which were later confirmed in other letters of action in the 1990s.