An Act to amend and reenact § 13.1-515 of the Code of Virginia, relating to Securities Act; investment advisor advertising.
HB479 amends Virginia’s Securities Act advertising provision for investment advisers. The bill preserves the State Corporation Commission’s authority to require filing of advertisements or sales literature in particular cases, subject to federal law limits, but it adds a new rule expressly allowing Virginia-registered investment advisers to solicit, disseminate, or otherwise use advertisements, including client testimonials and endorsements, so long as those ads comply with the federal advertising rule for investment advisers under § 206(4)-1 of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940.
In practical terms, the bill aligns Virginia law more closely with federal standards governing investment adviser marketing. It removes any state-law barrier that might otherwise restrict the use of testimonials and endorsements by state-registered advisers, while still tying permissible advertising to compliance with federal requirements. The measure affects investment advisers registered under Virginia law, the State Corporation Commission, and the broader securities compliance framework in the Commonwealth.
The bill amends § 13.1-515 of the Code of Virginia, expanding the express advertising authority of investment advisers registered under Virginia’s Securities Act. It does not create a new registration regime, but it changes the substantive advertising rules by allowing testimonials and endorsements in adviser advertising when federal standards are met. The State Corporation Commission retains oversight authority to require filing of advertisements or sales literature in particular cases, but that authority remains limited by federal law.
No committee transcript or recorded vote information was provided, so the available record does not show debate or opposition. Based on the text, the bill appears technical and deregulatory in nature, with a likely policy goal of harmonizing Virginia’s rules with federal investment adviser advertising standards. The enacted chapter status suggests the measure advanced without documented controversy in the materials provided.
The main potential point of contention is the use of client testimonials and endorsements in investment adviser advertising, which some regulators and consumer advocates may view as increasing the risk of misleading marketing. Supporters would likely favor the bill for reducing state-level restrictions and conforming Virginia law to federal rules, while critics may worry about investor protection and the adequacy of federal compliance standards. No specific opposing arguments or named stakeholders are identified in the provided materials.