Investment Company Act

Subscribe to Investment Company Act via RSS

The wave of litigation involving private credit continues to expand. FS KKR Capital Corp. (“FSK”), one of the largest publicly traded business development companies (“BDCs”), is already defending a securities class action lawsuit (KKR SCA) alleging that it overstated asset valuations and misrepresented the effectiveness of its efforts to address troubled portfolio companies. On July 15, 2026, a shareholder of FSK filed a separate derivative lawsuit against the company’s external investment adviser, FS/KKR Advisor, LLC (FS/KKR), alleging that the adviser extracted grossly excessive advisory fees in violation of its fiduciary duties under Section 36(b) of the Investment Company Act of 1940.

Continue Reading Another Private Credit Excessive Fee Lawsuit

When it became public a few weeks ago that the SEC had disbanded its Climate and ESG Task Force, the SEC emphasized that it was not taking its eye off of ESG-related issues. In the latest example of the SEC’s continuing ESG-related monitoring, late last week the ESG announced that it had settled charges against investment adviser Invesco Advisers. The agency alleged that the company had made misleading statements about the percentage of company-wide assets under management that integrated ESG factors in investment decisions. In settling the charges, the company agreed to pay a $17.5 million civil penalty. The SEC’s November 8, 2024, press release about the charges and the settlement can be found here. The SEC’s November 8, 2024, cease-and-desist order in the matter can be found here.

Continue Reading SEC Charges Investment Adviser With ESG-Related Misleading Statements

Last week, when a group of plaintiffs’ attorneys filed a shareholder’s derivative suit against Bill Ackman’s SPAC seeking damages and alleging the company was really an Investment Company that should be registered under the Investment Company Act, I assumed the attorneys filed the suit because it was Ackman’s firm; because of the size and prominence of the SPAC; and because of Ackman’s unusual plan to invest the SPAC’s IPO proceeds in a minority interest. Well, it turns out, the plaintiffs’ lawyers involved were just getting started. They have now filed two more shareholders derivative suits against two other SPACs’ boards and sponsors, based on the same theory as in the Ackman SPAC suit that the SPACs involved are really Investment Companies that should be registered under the Investment Company Act. Looks like these SPACs-are-Investment-Companies suits are a thing now, and this could all get very interesting.
Continue Reading More SPACs-Are-Really-Investment-Companies Derivative Suits Filed

Regular readers know that I have been tracking SPAC-related securities class action lawsuits and other SPAC-related litigation. As I discuss in the second item below, the SPAC-related class actions have continued to be filed as the year has progressed. There have also been SPAC-related shareholder derivative lawsuits filed as well, but none quite like the derivative lawsuit filed this week on behalf of Wall Street investor William Ackerman’s SPAC vehicle, Pershing Square Tontine Holdings Ltd. against the SPAC’s directors and other defendants. The suit claims that the defendants structured massive compensation arrangements for the SPAC sponsor and the SPAC directors in violation of the Investment Company Act of 1940 and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. A copy of the complaint can be found here.
Continue Reading Bill Ackman’s SPAC’s Directors Hit With Derivative Suit Over “Staggering” Compensation