DOL’s Fiduciary Rule to Become Partially Effective June 9, 2017

May 25, 2017

Reading Time : 3 min

The April 7, 2017 rule also introduced a transition period regarding the exemptions associated with the Fiduciary Rule. Although the exemptions would also become applicable on June 9, 2017 until January 1, 2018, fiduciaries relying upon the exemptions would have to adhere to only the “impartial conduct standard” to qualify for exemptive relief. The “impartial conduct standard” requires that advisers (i) give advice that is in the “best interest” of the retirement investor; (ii) charge no more than reasonable compensation; and (iii) make no misleading statements regarding investment transactions, compensation or conflicts of interest. In this context, “best interest” has two components: (i) prudence (i.e., meeting a professional standard of care); and (ii) loyalty (i.e., the advice must be in the interests of the customer, rather than the adviser).

Although many practitioners expected the Fiduciary Rule to be further delayed or withdrawn, in an Op-Ed published on May 22, 2017 in The Wall Street Journal, United States Secretary of Labor Alexander Acosta wrote that the DOL could find “no principled legal basis” to change the applicability dates of its new Fiduciary Rule. Therefore, certain provisions of the Fiduciary Rule will become applicable on June 9, 2017, with the remainder becoming applicable on January 1, 2018.

Also on May 22, 2017, the DOL issued a Field Assistance Bulletin (FAB) signaling its intention to not vigorously enforce the Fiduciary Rule prior to the January 1, 2018 applicability date. Under this FAB, the DOL states that it will not pursue claims against fiduciaries “who are working diligently and in good faith to comply with the fiduciary duty rule and exemptions.”  The FAB also notes that the Internal Revenue Service moratorium on excise taxes associated with activities subject to the Fiduciary Rule will continue until January 1, 2018.

Finally, also on May 22, 2017, the DOL issued Conflict of Interest FAQs (Transition Period). These FAQs present questions regarding the application of the Fiduciary Rule during the period from June 9, 2017 through January 1, 2018. Of note, one of the FAQs discusses the carveout from the Fiduciary Rule for transactions with plan clients that the adviser reasonably believes are represented by independent fiduciaries having financial expertise (e.g., managing at least $50 million in assets). The FAQ makes clear the DOL view that the “reasonably believes” requirement can be met by the adviser obtaining representations regarding the satisfaction of the requirements from the plan client, including in the form of a negative consent. In this regard, hedge fund advisers should consider obtaining appropriate representations from their plan investors.

The FAQs also note that additional changes may be made to the Fiduciary Rule prior to the January 1, 2018 applicability date in response to comments received by the DOL. In addition, the FAQs provide that the January 1, 2018 applicability date may be further delayed.

While the Fiduciary Rule has been characterized by some as the most important rulemaking under ERISA since the enactment of ERISA, we continue to expect that the Fiduciary Rule will have limited direct impact on typical investment advisers to hedge and private equity funds. For example, almost all dealings with large plans represented by an independent fiduciary having financial expertise are excluded from the Fiduciary Rule. When dealing with small plans and IRAs, however, advisers should take care that no marketing or other communication is individualized to the extent that it would be considered an investment recommendation. This is especially important to hedge and private equity fund advisers because it is unlikely that they qualify for the exemptive relief of the “best interest contract” exemption that accompanies the Fiduciary Rule. Hedge and private equity fund advisers may also be indirectly impacted to the extent that they have relationships with platform providers who may be more directly impacted by the Fiduciary Rule.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Deal Diary

June 27, 2024

On June 24, 2024, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) published five new Form 8-K Compliance and Disclosure Interpretations (C&DIs) expanding the agency’s interpretations of cybersecurity incident disclosures pursuant to Item 1.05 of Form 8-K. In July 2023, the SEC adopted final rules with respect to cybersecurity incidents that generally require public companies to disclose (i) material cybersecurity incidents within four business days after determining the incident was material and (ii) material information regarding their cybersecurity risk management, strategy and governance on an annual basis. We wrote about the final cybersecurity disclosure rules here.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

February 12, 2024

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) recently adopted final rules (available here; also see the fact sheet and press release) representing significant changes to  special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs), shell companies and the disclosure of projections. These rules aim to enhance disclosures, protect investors and align the regulatory framework for SPACs with traditional IPOs. The following summarizes the key aspects of these rules.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

October 4, 2023

On September 20, 2023, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) issued a final rule amending the so-called “Names Rule” (found here) that is “designed to modernize and enhance” protections under Rule 35d-1 of the Investment Company Act of 1940. The final rule is part of the SEC’s holistic efforts to regulate environmental, social and governance (ESG) matters, and is the SEC’s latest attempt to curb greenwashing in U.S. capital markets. The amendments require registered investment funds that include ESG factors in their names to place 80% of their assets in investments corresponding to those factors, thereby extending to ESG funds the SEC’s long-standing approach of regulating the names of registered funds to ensure they are marketed to investors truthfully. Fund complexes with more than $1 billion in assets will have two years from the final rule’s effective date (60 days after publication in the Federal Register) to comply, while fund complexes with less than $1 billion in assets will be given a compliance period of 30 months.

Chair Gary Gensler said “[t]he Names Rule reflects a basic idea: A fund’s investment portfolio should match a fund’s advertised investment focus. In essence, if a fund’s name suggests an investment focus, the fund in turn needs to invest shareholders’ dollars in a manner consistent with that investment focus. Otherwise, a fund’s portfolio might be inconsistent with what fund investors desired when selecting a fund based upon its name.” The sole dissenting vote against the rule modification, Commissioner Mark Uyeda, said “[w]ith these amendments, the Commission overemphasizes the importance of a fund’s name, as if to suggest that investors and their financial professionals need not look at the prospectus disclosures.” Commissioner Uyeda also expressed concern that fund investors will bear the increased compliance costs associated with the rule change.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 31, 2023

As discussed in our prior publication (found here), the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) adopted amendments on December 14, 2022, regarding Rule 10b5-1 insider trading plans and related disclosures. On May 25, 2023, the SEC issued three new compliance and disclosure interpretations (C&DIs) relating to the Rule 10b5-1 amendments.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 24, 2023

On May 15, 2023, the Eastern District of California ruled that California Assembly Bill No. 979 (“AB 979”) violates the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1981. As enacted, California’s Board Diversity Statute, required public companies with headquarters in the state to include a minimum number of directors from “underrepresented communities” or be subject to fines for violating the statute. AB 979 defines a “director from an underrepresented community” as “an individual who self-identifies as Black, African American, Hispanic, Latino, Asian, Pacific Islander, Native American, Native Hawaiian, or Alaska Native, or who self-identifies as gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender.”

...

Read More

Deal Diary

May 9, 2023

Update: On October 31, 2023, the Fifth Circuit granted the US Chamber of Commerce's petition for review of the SEC's share repurchase disclosure rules, holding that the SEC acted arbitrarily and capriciously in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. The court directed the SEC to correct the defects within 30 days of the opinion. On December 1, 2023, the SEC informed the Fifth Circuit that it was unable to correct the rule's defects within 30 days of the opinion. On December 19, 2023, the Fifth Circuit vacated the SEC’s share repurchase disclosure rules.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

April 12, 2023

We have released our 2023 ESG Survey which includes a collection of reports reflecting on significant ESG themes and trends from 2022, as well as what we believe to be key developments for 2023.

...

Read More

Deal Diary

February 6, 2023

As companies begin preparing for the 2023 proxy season, we note that Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. (ISS) and Glass Lewis, the leading providers of corporate governance solutions and proxy advisory services, issued updated benchmark policies (proxy voting guidelines), which can be found here and here, respectively. The updated proxy voting guidelines generally focus on board accountability and oversight considerations and address topics such as climate accountability, board diversity, shareholder rights, corporate governance standards, executive compensation and social issues. What follows is a summary of the proxy voting guidelines published by ISS and Glass Lewis for the 2023 proxy season.

...

Read More

© 2025 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.