It's December 31, 1999. Do you know where your investments are?

A subcommittee of the Senate Banking committee wants to make sure that question is answered before it's too late. Public companies and mutual fund and investment advisors are required by the Securities and Exchange Commission to make a full disclosure of the anticipated costs, problems and uncertainties associated with the Y2K issue. The question is, are they taking the requirement seriously?

By now, everyone has heard about the havoc affected computers will wreak on the financial world on January 1, 2000. But some say investors have been late to understand how the glitch could affect their personal portfolios.

In April, the U.S. Senate created a special committee to address the Y2K technology problem and Sen. Bob Bennett (R-Utah) chairs the group. He likes to compare the computer bug to the biblical story of the Tower of Babel: "People got together and decided they were going to build a tower to heaven and God didn't like it so he fixed it so they couldn't talk to each other," Bennett said to Congress last month. However, Bennett is also concerned for investors, many of whom he says are unaware of the scope of the problem.

SEC Commissioner Laura Simone Unger is scheduled to testify Wednesday before Bennett and the Senate Banking subcommittee regarding the level of disclosure the commission will seek from public companies, and whether it is sufficient under SEC guidelines. The SEC issued a staff legal bulletin on the topic last October and updated it at the beginning of this year. The document includes an outline on the reasons and requirements for disclosure for both public and investment companies. "The disclosure must be reasonably specific and meaningful," notes the bulletin, "rather than standard boilerplate."

Public companies are currently in the midst of filing their annual 10-K's with the SEC, giving investors an opportunity to take a look at what companies have to say about their Y2K preparedness. John Gannon, branch chief for SEC's Office of Investor Education and Assistance, says his office has received a few inquiries from investors wondering what exactly they should be looking for. He ticks off a number of questions they should ask: "Is the company aware of the problem? Do they have a plan in place?" he says. "If they're a broker-dealer are they going to participate in the Street-wide testing with the SIA [Securities Industry Association]?" The New York-based association plans to begin testing the computer systems of all securities firms in February, 1999.

SIA president Marc Lackritz doesn't believe investors have much to worry about. For one thing, he's confident the tests will be successful. And Lackritz also has faith in the intellect of savvy investors. "It will actually be a good test for industries," he says. "If investors sense that a particular industry is going to fall behind, it will be reflected in the market price."

Larry Alleva, Southeast regional managing partner with Price Waterhouse's technology industry group, says his clients are all very aware of the Y2K issue. According to Alleva, companies need to keep in mind that the cost of glitch repairs may impact future financial results. "The prudent company is making sure investors are informed," Alleva says.

Alleva also points out an issue that many might overlook: Even if a company has its internal systems in order, that's still no guarantee of smooth sailing in today's networked world. For example, a given company may be Y2K-compliant, but the other firms it's partnered or allied with may be behind on their fixes. And the consequences of such negligence can be far-reaching.

Rich Leggett, technology analyst with Arlington-based Friedman, Billings, Ramsey, says many companies aren't disclosing much about their Y2K preparedness because they still don't really know the scope of the problem. While this will probably resolve itself before the final hour, advisory groups, consultants, programmers and lawyers are cashing in on the problem, generating an entire Y2K economy. According to Leggett, "This is probably the biggest thing since the O.J. Simpson trial."