PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. (text of measure as introduced: CR S10856-10857)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 28, 2009
Mutual Fund Transparency Act of 2009 - Amends the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Investment Company Act of 1940 to require brokers and dealers of mutual funds to disclose in writing the related commissions they receive to purchasers of shares of any registered open-end or closed-end company or any interest in a registered unit investment trust or municipal securities used for education savings plans.
Amends the Investment Company Act of 1940 to: (1) reduce from 60% to 25% the membership of the board of directors of a mutual fund that may be composed of "interested persons"; (2) prohibit such board from having an interested person as chairman; (3) prohibit requiring the vote of a director who is an "interested person" of the mutual company; and (4) require a mutual fund company to have a committee composed solely of "non-interested persons" responsible for selecting nominees for election to the board and for adopting qualification standards for such nominations.
Requires the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to issue final rules: (1) redefining the term "significant service provider" to include the investment adviser and principal underwriter of a mutual fund; and (2) declaring that brokers and dealers have a certain fiduciary duty in providing investment advice to retail clients, including the duty to act solely in the best interest of the client without regard to the financial or other interest of the broker or dealer.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the SEC to study and report to certain congressional committees on designated topics, including: (1) the level of financial literacy among purchasers of open-end companies; (2) information that investors need to make sound financial decisions prior to share purchases; and (3) methods to increase transparency of expenses and potential conflicts of interest in transactions involving shares of open-end companies.
Directs the Comptroller General to study and report to certain congressional committees on mutual fund advertising, including: (1) current marketing sales practices, especially the use of unsustainable past performance data; and (2) recommendations to improve investor protections in mutual fund advertising.
People & committees
Sen. Akaka, Daniel K. [D-HI] · D–HI
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. (text of measure as introduced: CR S10856-10857)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S10855-10856, S10857-10858)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.1964 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.1964 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.1964 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.1964 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.