Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Accredited Investor topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senators debate accredited investor test as witnesses propose aptitude and professional-credential alternatives
Summary
Senators and witnesses debated whether the traditional wealth/income test for accredited investors remains appropriate, with suggestions for qualitative accreditation (tests, professional credentials, plan-administered safeguards) to broaden access without surrendering protections.
Sen. Rounds and others asked whether the traditional accredited investor test — largely based on income or net worth thresholds — still serves the public interest. Ken Benson and other industry witnesses acknowledged that Congress periodically should revisit the thresholds and that qualitative measures of sophistication (for example, securities licensing or CFA credentials) may be appropriate complements.
Mike Flood described three paths to broaden access responsibly: pass an aptitude test, enable 403(b) parity so plan administrators curate choices, or rely on registered advisers. Benson said regulators and Congress can consider alternative demonstrations of sophistication beyond raw wealth tests.
