AI Transcripts and Investment Advisers: Embracing Technology While Meeting SEC Requirements

AI Transcripts in Investment Advisory

There has been a boom recently regarding investment advisers’ use of artificial intelligence (“AI”) to transcribe client and internal meetings. Among other applications, AI features such as Zoom AI Companion, Microsoft Copilot, Jump, and Otter.ai (collectively, “AI Meeting Assistants”) can assist with drafting, transcribing, summarizing and prompting action items based on conversation content in the respective application. For instance, Zoom AI Companion and Microsoft Copilot can draft communications, generate transcriptions of conversations, identify points of agreement and disagreement of a discussion and summarize action items.

Overview of SEC Recordkeeping Requirements for AI Transcripts

As of now, there are no specific artificial intelligence regulations pertaining to the use of AI transcripts or the recordkeeping obligations that would follow. However, there are several SEC recordkeeping provisions that may be implicated by use of the AI capabilities offered by the AI Meeting Assistants. Rule 204-2 requires investment advisers to maintain certain records “relating to [their] investment advisory business” including “written communications sent by such investment adviser relating to” such enumerated subjects as: (i) any recommendation made or proposed to be made and any advice given or proposed to be given; (ii) any receipt, disbursement or delivery of funds or securities; (iii) the placing or execution of any order to purchase or sell any security; and (iv) predecessor performance and the performance or rate of return of any or all managed accounts, portfolios, or securities recommendations (subject to certain exceptions).

Every registered investment adviser is required to keep true, accurate and current books and records. The approach at this juncture would be to adopt these AI Meeting Assistant transcripts into the firm’s books and records. Once translated into written form, the SEC could consider the transcripts and summaries to be written communications regarding investment advice. Such transcripts and summaries should be kept in their original form, together with notes (if any) as to any corresponding inaccuracies produced by the AI content. Registered investment advisers are fiduciaries and should not utilize any information in conjunction with providing client services or communications that it does not reasonably believe is accurate. Thus, if the firm was to use the content of AI transcripts and/or summaries in conjunction with client services or communications that was incorrect, the onus would remain on the firm to demonstrate as to how it reasonably relied upon the content. It is inconsequential whether these transcripts and summaries make it into your CRM software or are maintained in the AI Meeting Assistants program. Regardless of whether the content is a meeting summary or list of action items, the transmission would likely constitute a communication for purposes of Rule 204-2 due to implicating an already established recordkeeping requirement.

Implementing Effective AI Strategies in Investment Advisory

  • A firm must eliminate or neutralize the effect of conflicts of interest associated with the firm’s use of artificial intelligence in investor interactions that place the firm’s or its associated person’s interest ahead of investors’ interests.
  • A firm that has any investor interaction using covered technology (AI) to have written policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent violations of the proposed rules.
  • Adopt AI Meeting Assistant transcripts into books and records.

COPYRIGHT © 2024, STARK & STARK by: Securities Practice Group at Stark and Stark, Thomas Kellerman of Stark & Stark For more on AI, visit the NLR Artificial Intelligence section

  • Related Posts

    Federal Appeals Court Reinstates Injunction Against the CTA, Pending Appeal

    At approximately 8:15 p.m. Eastern Time on December 26, 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (Fifth Circuit) reversed course from its prior ruling in Texas Top…

    China’s Supreme People’s Court Issues First Anti-Anti-Suit Injunction in Huawei v. Netgear

    Following Huawei obtaining two anti-anti-suit injunctions (AASI) against Netgear on December 11, 2024 at the Unified Patent Court’s Munich Local Division and the Munich I Regional Court, China’s Supreme People’s…

    Leave a Reply

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

    You Missed

    Dow Jones Today: Stocks Fall Sharply in Early Trading as Big-Tech Tumbles

    • By admin
    • December 30, 2024
    • 0 views

    Jimmy Carter Dies at Age 100, Leaving Long Legacy in Public Health

    • By admin
    • December 30, 2024
    • 1 views
    Jimmy Carter Dies at Age 100, Leaving Long Legacy in Public Health

    Federal Appeals Court Reinstates Injunction Against the CTA, Pending Appeal

    • By admin
    • December 30, 2024
    • 1 views

    China’s Supreme People’s Court Issues First Anti-Anti-Suit Injunction in Huawei v. Netgear

    • By admin
    • December 29, 2024
    • 3 views
    China’s Supreme People’s Court Issues First Anti-Anti-Suit Injunction in Huawei v. Netgear

    Dow Jones Today: Stocks Slide in Early Trading as Nvidia, Tesla Lead Large-Cap Tech Shares Lower

    • By admin
    • December 27, 2024
    • 3 views

    How ‘Weekend Warrior’ Workouts Can Jumpstart Your 2025 Fitness Goals

    • By admin
    • December 27, 2024
    • 8 views
    How ‘Weekend Warrior’ Workouts Can Jumpstart Your 2025 Fitness Goals