June 30, 2009
As a member of the FPA and a registered investment adviser with the SEC, I am opposed to the requirement in the proposed amendments to the custody rule that would subject investment advisers to a surprise audit by an accounting firm. I do not believe the proposed surprise audit would be an effective regulatory response to the recent scandals in this industry. However, I do believe the proposed surprise audit would put undue burden on smaller SEC-registered investment advisers. In my opinion, this is as a result of recent scandals that had nothing to do with an advisors ability to deduct fees from a clients account. In order to enhance consumer protection, I would aggressively support Congress appropriating additional resources to the SEC to hire and train additional examination staff to increase the regular audit cycle of investment advisers.
Thank you!