ARTICLE
28 November 2024

Federal Court Vacates SEC's Expanded Dealer Definition

KG
K&L Gates LLP

Contributor

At K&L Gates, we foster an inclusive and collaborative environment across our fully integrated global platform that enables us to diligently combine the knowledge and expertise of our lawyers and policy professionals to create teams that provide exceptional client solutions. With offices spanning across five continents, we represent leading global corporations in every major industry, capital markets participants, and ambitious middle-market and emerging growth companies. Our lawyers also serve public sector entities, educational institutions, philanthropic organizations, and individuals. We are leaders in legal issues related to industries critical to the economies of both the developed and developing worlds—including technology, manufacturing, financial services, health care, energy, and more.
On 21 November 2024, the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Court) ruled against the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in two separate cases, vacating its rule which expanded...
United States Texas Litigation, Mediation & Arbitration

On 21 November 2024, the US District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Court) ruled against the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in two separate cases, vacating its rule which expanded the definition of securities dealers.

In February 2024, the SEC adopted a rule expanding the definitions of "dealer" and "government securities dealer" to extend to market participants who provide significant liquidity to the markets (the Dealer Rule). See our client alert dated 29 February 2024 here. The Dealer Rule would have included many market participants who trade for their own accounts, such as private funds.

Several trade associations filed lawsuits challenging the Dealer Rule on the grounds that the SEC exceeded its statutory authority and that the Dealer Rule was arbitrary and capricious and therefore should be vacated in its entirety. The first case was filed by the National Association of Private Fund Managers, Alternative Investment Management Association Limited, and Managed Funds Association representing the interests of their private fund members (the Private Funds Association Case), while the second was filed by the Crypto Freedom Alliance of Texas and the Blockchain Association.

In both decisions, the Court granted the trade associations' motions for summary judgment, finding that the SEC had exceeded its statutory authority. The Court reasoned that the new definition is inconsistent with the history of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act) which indicates that "dealers" act on behalf of customers. The Court stated in the Private Funds Association Case that the structure of the Exchange Act "only makes sense if dealers are in the business of customer-order facilitation."

The Court also rejected the SEC's requests to vacate the Dealer Rule only as it applies to private funds or to remand to the SEC for further rulemaking, handing the SEC two significant defeats.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More