State Investment Adviser Advertising and Promotional Standards

To meet the state investment adviser advertising and promotional standards requirement in Washington, you must (1) ensure all advertisements are truthful and not misleading under the SEC Marketing Rule, and (2) implement a documented supervisory process that pre-approves applicable advertising before first use. Your exam defense is the policy, the approvals, and the books-and-records trail. (WAC 460-24A-090) (17 CFR 275.206(4)-1)

Key takeaways:

• Washington expects written supervisory procedures for review and approval of advertising materials before dissemination. (WAC 460-24A-090)
• Your review must test content against the SEC Marketing Rule’s prohibitions on false or misleading statements. (17 CFR 275.206(4)-1)
• Evidence matters: keep versioned materials, approval logs, and reviewer identity/date tied to each advertisement. (WAC 460-24A-090)

State-registered investment advisers often treat advertising review as a “marketing workflow.” Washington treats it as a supervisory control that should be written, assign responsibility, and produce records an examiner can follow. The practical requirement is simple: advertising and sales literature cannot be allowed to “self-publish” from a website CMS, social platform, pitchbook template, or third-party marketer without designated review and documented approval. (WAC 460-24A-090)

This page is written for a CCO or GRC lead who needs to operationalize the state investment adviser advertising and promotional standards requirement fast: who approves, what must be checked, what gets logged, and what evidence to retain. The baseline content standard is also not optional: advertisements must avoid false or misleading statements, and your pre-approval process must catch the common failure modes (performance presentation problems, cherry-picked testimonials, missing limitations, and sloppy substantiation). (17 CFR 275.206(4)-1)

If you already comply with the SEC Marketing Rule, Washington’s added friction is the supervisory pre-approval expectation and the need to show it works in practice. That means real artifacts, not just a policy document. (WAC 460-24A-090)

Regulatory text

Regulatory excerpt (operator-focused paraphrase): Washington-registered investment advisers must establish supervisory procedures for the review and approval of advertising materials. Washington follows NASAA Model Rules, which may require pre-approval of advertisements by a designated supervisory principal before dissemination. (WAC 460-24A-090)

What the operator must do:

1. Create written supervisory procedures that cover advertising and sales literature review and approval. (WAC 460-24A-090)
2. Assign a qualified reviewer (“designated principal”) who has authority to approve or reject materials before first use. (WAC 460-24A-090)
3. Test advertising content for false/misleading risk consistent with the SEC’s advertising rule (Marketing Rule). (17 CFR 275.206(4)-1)
4. Keep records that prove what was reviewed, who approved it, when, and what version went public. (WAC 460-24A-090)

Plain-English interpretation (what “good” looks like)

Washington examiners want to see that marketing cannot publish without compliance sign-off, and that sign-off is not ceremonial. It should confirm:

• Claims are supportable (you can point to backup).
• Material facts and limitations are not omitted.
• Performance discussion (if any) is presented fairly and consistently.
• Disclosures are present, readable, and aligned to the specific claim being made. (17 CFR 275.206(4)-1)
  And separately, the firm can demonstrate it has supervised advertising by requiring pre-approval and keeping the proof. (WAC 460-24A-090)

Who it applies to (entity and operational context)

This requirement applies to:

• Investment advisers registered with the Washington Department of Financial Institutions (DFI), typically state-registered advisers below the federal registration threshold. (WAC 460-24A-090)

Operationally, it touches anyone who creates or distributes communications that could be considered advertising/sales literature, including:

• Marketing staff, investor relations, and business development
• Advisory representatives posting on social media
• Portfolio managers contributing market commentary used in campaigns
• Third parties creating content on your behalf (PR firms, lead-gen shops, website agencies, newsletter platforms)

What you actually need to do (step-by-step)

Use this as an implementation runbook.

Step 1: Define “advertising” and “in-scope channels” for your firm

Create an inventory of where ads can appear. Include:

• Website pages, blogs, landing pages, and downloadable PDFs
• Pitch decks, one-pagers, factsheets, DDQs if used promotionally
• Social posts (firm accounts and supervised persons when used for solicitation)
• Email campaigns and newsletters
• Seminar/webinar invites and scripts
• Third-party listings and profiles (e.g., directories) if you control content

Map each channel to an owner and a publication method (CMS, PDF, email tool). Your goal: identify where pre-approval must be enforced. (WAC 460-24A-090)

Step 2: Write the supervisory pre-approval procedure (tight, testable)

Your procedure should answer five exam questions with no ambiguity:

• Who can approve (name role/title; define backups). (WAC 460-24A-090)
• What requires pre-approval (all ads, plus defined “minor updates” rule). (WAC 460-24A-090)
• When approval is required (before first use; before re-use after material change). (WAC 460-24A-090)
• How approval is documented (ticketing system, PDF sign-off, approval log). (WAC 460-24A-090)
• What checks must be performed for misleading content and required disclosures. (17 CFR 275.206(4)-1)

Practical drafting tip: include a one-page “advertising review checklist” as an appendix to the procedure so reviewers execute consistently.

Step 3: Build a pre-approval workflow that marketing cannot bypass

Pick a mechanism that fits your tooling, but make it auditable:

• Option A (lightweight): approval log + locked folder + final-PDF stamping
• Option B (preferred): ticketing workflow (request, reviewer comments, approve/reject, final attachment)
• Option C (web controls): CMS permissions where only an authorized publisher can push live after approval evidence is attached

Common control point: require marketing to submit (a) the near-final draft, (b) supporting substantiation, and (c) proposed disclosures.

Daydream note (earned mention): if you struggle to keep versions, substantiation, and approvals connected, Daydream-style control libraries and evidence mapping can reduce the “where’s the proof?” scramble during exams by standardizing artifacts and ownership.

Step 4: Standardize content tests against the SEC Marketing Rule

At minimum, train reviewers to flag these high-risk categories:

• Absolute or unqualified claims (“best,” “guaranteed,” “no risk”) without support
• Misleading implications about credentials, scope of services, or investment outcomes
• Performance references that lack context or omit material limitations
• Testimonials/endorsements that create a misleading impression or omit needed context (your reviewer should check how the statement is presented and what disclosures accompany it)
• Hypothetical or model performance claims without clear framing and limitations
  Your documented review should explicitly consider whether any statement is false or misleading. (17 CFR 275.206(4)-1)

Step 5: Train and supervise the humans doing the work

Training should be role-based:

• Marketing: what triggers pre-approval; how to submit substantiation
• Advisors: social posting do’s/don’ts; escalation for edge cases
• Designated reviewer(s): how to apply the checklist; when to escalate to counsel
  Training supports the supervisory expectation embedded in the Washington rule. (WAC 460-24A-090)

Step 6: Retain records in a way an examiner will accept

Recordkeeping is part of passing the exam. Keep:

• Final approved version (PDF/image/video file or URL snapshot)
• Marked-up drafts (or a comment trail)
• Approval record showing reviewer identity and date
• Substantiation for objective claims (AUM statements, performance calculations, awards criteria, survey methodology, etc.)
• Distribution dates and channels (where feasible) Your goal is a single “advertisement package” per item that can be produced quickly. (WAC 460-24A-090)

Required evidence and artifacts to retain (exam-ready list)

Maintain a controlled repository with:

• Advertising policy / supervisory procedure covering pre-approval and standards. (WAC 460-24A-090)
• Designated principal assignment (org chart, role description, written designation). (WAC 460-24A-090)
• Advertising inventory (channels, owners, publication method).
• Pre-approval log (ID, title, channel, reviewer, approval date, version, link to final). (WAC 460-24A-090)
• Completed review checklists tied to each approval.
• Substantiation files for each objective claim.
• Training records for marketing, supervised persons, and reviewers. (WAC 460-24A-090)

Common exam/audit questions and hangups

Expect these, and build your materials so you can answer with artifacts:

• “Show me your advertising review procedure and who is authorized to approve.” (WAC 460-24A-090)
• “Provide all advertisements used in the last period and evidence of pre-approval.” (WAC 460-24A-090)
• “How do you prevent an advisor from publishing on social media without review?”
• “Where is the substantiation for this claim on your website?” (17 CFR 275.206(4)-1)
• “How do you control third-party marketers and listings?”

Hangup pattern: firms can describe the process verbally but cannot produce consistent logs, versions, or reviewer evidence.

Frequent implementation mistakes (and how to avoid them)

1. Approving “concepts” instead of final content.
   Fix: require approval of the exact final file or URL-rendered page to be disseminated; log the version. (WAC 460-24A-090)

2. No substantiation collected during review.
   Fix: make substantiation a required attachment in the request form; no attachment, no approval. (17 CFR 275.206(4)-1)

3. Social media treated as “casual.”
   Fix: define which posts are advertising and route them through pre-approval or a supervised template library. (WAC 460-24A-090)

4. Third parties publish on your behalf without controls.
   Fix: contractually require your pre-approval before dissemination and require copies of what was posted.

5. Disclosures are generic and disconnected from the claim.
   Fix: tie disclosures to specific statements; keep a disclosure library with approved language and required conditions. (17 CFR 275.206(4)-1)

Enforcement context and risk implications (practical view)

No Washington-specific public enforcement cases were provided in the source catalog, so this page does not cite case outcomes. Practically, the risk shows up in examinations as:

• Supervisory deficiency if you cannot show a working pre-approval process. (WAC 460-24A-090)
• Advertising violation exposure if communications are false or misleading or omit material context. (17 CFR 275.206(4)-1)

Operationally, the highest risk is not a single bad PDF. It’s a system where marketing and representatives can publish faster than compliance can supervise.

Practical execution plan (30/60/90)

You asked for speed. Use this plan as a build-and-prove sequence; adjust to your release cycles.

First 30 days (stabilize and stop bypass)

• Appoint the designated advertising reviewer(s) and backups in writing. (WAC 460-24A-090)
• Freeze “self-publish” pathways: restrict CMS/social publishing rights to controlled users.
• Stand up an interim approval log (even a spreadsheet) with required fields: item, channel, reviewer, date, final version link. (WAC 460-24A-090)
• Publish a one-page interim rule to staff: “No external marketing content goes out without recorded approval.”

Days 31–60 (formalize and train)

• Finalize the written supervisory procedure and checklist, aligned to Washington supervision expectations and the SEC Marketing Rule content standard. (WAC 460-24A-090) (17 CFR 275.206(4)-1)
• Create the advertising inventory and classify channels by risk (website/performance materials as highest).
• Roll role-based training and require attestations for marketing and supervised persons. (WAC 460-24A-090)

Days 61–90 (operational maturity and testing)

• Implement a durable workflow tool (ticketing or GRC) that binds drafts, substantiation, approvals, and final versions.
• Conduct a retrospective sample test of recently disseminated ads to confirm evidence completeness; remediate gaps.
• Add third-party content controls: contract clauses, approval gates, and periodic checks of what they posted.

Frequently Asked Questions

Do all marketing materials need pre-approval in Washington?

Washington expects supervisory procedures for review and approval of advertising materials, and the practical expectation is pre-approval before dissemination for in-scope advertisements. Define scope clearly in your procedures and enforce it consistently. (WAC 460-24A-090)

If we already comply with the SEC Marketing Rule, is that enough?

You still need a supervisory process that demonstrates review and approval before use, with records that prove it happened. Content compliance and supervisory pre-approval are related but distinct exam asks. (WAC 460-24A-090) (17 CFR 275.206(4)-1)

How should we handle minor edits, like typos or formatting changes?

Set a written rule for what counts as “non-material,” and require re-approval for any change that affects a claim, performance reference, audience, or disclosure. Keep the rationale and the version history. (WAC 460-24A-090)

Are social media posts considered advertising?

Many posts can function as advertisements if they promote advisory services or induce prospects to engage. Treat them as in-scope unless your policy draws a defensible line and your supervision program can enforce it. (WAC 460-24A-090)

What evidence is most persuasive in an exam?

A complete package per item: the final disseminated version, the approval record with reviewer and date, and the substantiation/disclosure support for objective claims. Examiners can move quickly when your artifacts are connected. (WAC 460-24A-090) (17 CFR 275.206(4)-1)

How do we control third-party marketers or website agencies?

Put pre-approval and record-delivery requirements in the contract, restrict their ability to publish directly where possible, and require them to send the final content and distribution details back to you for retention. Your supervisory duty does not disappear because a third party pushed “publish.” (WAC 460-24A-090)