![if gte IE 9]><![endif]><![if gte IE 9]><![endif]><![if gte IE 9]><![endif]><![if gte IE 9]><![endif]><![if gte IE 9]><![endif]>
Not a Lexis+ subscriber? Try it out for free.
LexisNexis® CLE On-Demand features premium content from partners like American Law Institute Continuing Legal Education and Pozner & Dodd. Choose from a broad listing of topics suited for law firms, corporate legal departments, and government entities. Individual courses and subscriptions available.
The SEC now recognizes "spousal equivalents" defined as
"cohabitants occupying a relationship generally equivalent to that of a
spouse." Before wondering if the federal government is making big strides, keep
in mind that this recognition is limited to the new Family Office Rule
Dodd-Frank created a new exemption for Family Offices.
Previously they typically operated under the 15 clients rule that was repealed
by Dodd-Frank or a private ruling from the SEC. Dodd-Frank left it up to the
SEC to define a "family office."
Rule 202(a)(11)(G)-1 contains three general conditions to
fitting into the Family Office Exemption. First, the family offices may only
provide advice about securities to certain "family clients." Second, family
clients must wholly own the family office and family members and/or family
entities must control the family office. Third, a family office cannot hold
itself out to the public as an investment adviser.
Th rule inevitably leads to a definition of "family." Too
narrow and many family offices would be excluded. Too broad and every investor
will find an ancestor from the Mayflower. The SEC decided on a 10 generation
The rule treats lineal descendants and their spouses, spousal
equivalents, stepchildren, adopted children, foster children and persons
who were minors when another family member became their legal guardian as
I think it was bold move of the SEC to include spousal
equivalents. They brush aside the Defense of Marriage Act argument: Because the
term "spouse" is not defined in the rule and a "spousal equivalent" is
identified as a category of person, separate and distinct from a "spouse," that
meets the definition of a "family member".... DOMA provides that in
"determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation,
or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the
United States...the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who
is a husband or wife." 1 U.S.C. 7.
The failure of a family office to be able to meet the
conditions of the new rule will not preclude the office from providing services
to family members. But, the family office will need to find another exemption,
register under the Advisers Act or seek an exemptive order from the SEC.
additional commentary on developments in compliance and ethics, visit Compliance Building,
a blog hosted by Doug Cornelius.
For more information about LexisNexis
products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site.