Q&A Addressing SEC Proposed New Rule Regulating Funds Use of Derivatives
|
|
- Gabriel Rich
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 FEBRUARY 1, 2016 SIDLEY UPDATE Q&A Addressing SEC Proposed New Rule Regulating Funds Use of Derivatives On December 11, 2015, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) voted to propose Rule 18f-4 (Proposed Rule), a new rule under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the Act), intended to redress the ad hoc approach by which mutual funds, closed-end funds, exchange-traded funds and companies that elect to be treated as business development companies under the Act (collectively, Funds) and address issues raised by investments in derivatives transactions. The proposing release was published on December 28, 2015; the 90-day comment period expires on March 28, A copy of the proposing release is available at: The Proposed Rule is intended to limit Funds use of leverage and ensure that any Fund engaging in derivatives transactions has adequate assets available to meet its obligations under those transactions. The Proposed Rule also addresses requirements for financial commitment transactions (which include reverse repurchase agreements, short sale borrowings and any firm or standby commitment agreement) and imposes supplemental reporting and disclosure requirements to proposed Form N-PORT and proposed Form N-CEN. The Proposed Rule would supersede the confusing and sometimes inconsistent SEC guidance under Release 10666, multiple no-action letters and other SEC guidance issued over more than three decades. Below is a brief summary of key aspects of the proposal followed by Q&A section intended to address specific components of the Proposed Rule relevant to Funds and industry professionals. Limitations on Derivatives Transactions The Proposed Rule defines derivatives transactions broadly to include any swap, security-based swap, futures contract, forward contract, option, any combination of the foregoing, or any similar instrument under which a Fund is or may be required to make a payment or delivery of cash or other assets during the life of the instrument or at maturity or early termination. Under the Proposed Rule, a Fund may invest in a derivatives transaction only if it: complies with one of two alternative portfolio limitations; maintains certain qualifying assets and segregates such assets on its books and records; and depending upon the extent of a Fund s derivatives usage, adopts a formal derivatives risk management program. Sidley Austin provides this information as a service to clients and other friends for educational purposes only. It should not be construed or relied on as legal advice or to create a lawyer-client relationship. Attorney Advertising - For purposes of compliance with New York State Bar rules, our headquarters are Sidley Austin LLP, 787 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10019, ; One South Dearborn, Chicago, IL 60603, ; and 1501 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C ,
2 Page 2 Portfolio Limitations. A Fund engaging in derivatives transactions would be required to comply with one of two alternative portfolio limitations that are intended to limit a Fund s overall exposure and limit speculation by constraining its use of leverage. Each portfolio limitation would be measured at the time the Fund enters into a derivatives transaction. Exposure-Based Portfolio Limitation. The exposure-based portfolio limitation would impose a ceiling on a Fund s exposure at 150 percent of its net assets. Exposure would be determined by aggregating the total notional amounts of the Fund s derivatives transactions, its total obligations under financial commitment transactions and its total amount of indebtedness and liquidation preference with respect to senior securities. Additionally, the notional amount for any derivatives transaction would be adjusted if: o o o enhanced leverage is embedded into such derivatives transaction; the underlying reference asset is a managed account or entity formed primarily for the purpose of investing or trading derivatives transactions; or it is a complex derivatives transaction in which the amount payable at maturity is variable. Risk-Based Portfolio Limitation. The risk-based portfolio limitation would impose a ceiling on a Fund s exposure at 300 percent of its net assets. A Fund would be permitted to utilize this portfolio limitation only if the derivatives transactions reduce the Fund s market risk. In making this determination, the Proposed Rule would require the Fund to analyze market risk using a value-at-risk (VaR) test designed to estimate its potential losses on an instrument or portfolio over a 10-to-20-day time horizon at a confidence level of 99 percent. Asset Coverage and Segregation Requirement. A Fund engaging in derivatives transactions would be required to maintain qualifying coverage assets and to identify and segregate such assets on its books and records on a daily basis. The amount of qualifying coverage assets is calculated based on the sum of two components: a mark-to-market coverage amount; and a risk-based coverage amount. The mark-to-market coverage amount is the amount payable by the Fund if it were to exit the transaction. This coverage amount would be reduced by an amount equal to any variation margin that the Fund has posted as collateral under the relevant derivatives transaction. Additionally, if the Fund were to have a netting agreement in place, the mark-to-market coverage amount for each derivatives transaction could also be netted. The risk-based asset coverage amount is a cushion above the mark-to-market coverage amount reflecting the amount payable by the Fund if it were to exit the transaction under stressed conditions. The risk-based coverage amount would be calculated in accordance with internal policies and procedures approved by the Fund s board of directors. Qualifying coverage assets would include cash and cash equivalents or, if the Fund may satisfy its obligations under a derivatives transaction by delivery of a particular asset, such asset.
3 Page 3 Risk Management Program. A Fund would be required to have a formal derivatives risk management program if: its derivatives exposure exceeds 50 percent of the Fund s net assets; or it engages in any complex derivatives transactions (regardless of its exposure). The SEC notes in the release for the Proposed Rule that, at a minimum, the written derivatives risk management program would be required to address leverage risk, market risk, counterparty risk, liquidity risk and operational risk. A derivatives risk manager an employee appointed by the Fund s board of directors that is not a portfolio manager of the Fund would be required to administer the policies and procedures of the formal derivatives risk management program. The derivatives risk manager also would be required to provide a quarterly report for review and approval by the Fund s board of directors. Limitations on Financial Commitment Transactions Under the Proposed Rule, a Fund would be required to maintain qualifying coverage assets in an amount equal to its full obligations under a financial commitment transaction (i.e., both conditional and unconditional obligations). For purposes of financial commitment transactions, qualifying coverage assets include cash and cash equivalents, as well as assets that can be converted to cash on the date the obligation would become due, and securities or other assets pledged in connection with the transaction (e.g., securities held in connection with a short sale borrowing). Reporting Requirements The Proposed Rule imposes additional requirements to proposed Form N-PORT and proposed Form N-CEN. A Fund would be required to disclose its schedule of investments and specific information about the transactions on proposed Form N-PORT and it would be required to identify which of the two portfolio limitations the Fund is relying upon during the reporting period on proposed Form N-CEN. Questions and Answers Terms and Scope of the Proposed Rule Q 1: What types of transactions are covered by the Proposed Rule? The Proposed Rule covers three categories of transactions, collectively senior security transactions : 1) Derivatives transactions, which include any swap, security-based swap, futures contract, forward contract, option, any combination of the foregoing, or any similar instrument that may require payment or delivery of cash or other assets during the life of the instrument or at maturity or early termination. 1 A subcategory of derivatives transactions, so-called complex derivatives transactions, are described in Question 2 below. 1 Proposed Rule 18f-4(c)(2).
4 Page 4 2) Financial commitment transactions, which include any short sale borrowing, reverse repurchase agreement, firm or standby commitment agreement, or similar agreement 2 ; and 3) Any other senior security entered into by a fund pursuant to Sections 18 or 61 of the Act, including borrowings from banks under the 300 percent asset coverage test and the issuance of debt or preferred stock by closed-end funds and business development companies. The Commission is requesting comment on whether purchased options and other derivatives that provide economic leverage should be added to the definition of derivatives. Q 2: What is a complex derivatives transaction for purposes of the Proposed Rule? A complex derivatives transaction is any derivatives transaction for which the amount payable by either party upon the settlement date, maturity or exercise is (i) dependent on the value of the underlying reference asset at multiple points in time during the term of the transaction or (ii) a non-linear function for the value of the underlying reference asset. 3 Examples of complex derivatives transactions include knock-out or barrier trades (i.e., trades for the which the payout at maturity is dependent upon whether the price of the underlying asset reaches a specified level prior to maturity) and variance swaps (i.e., a swap for which the payout at maturity is determined by reference to a volatility measure of the underlying asset). Complex derivatives transactions do not include standard put or call options where optionality is dependent only upon a single strike price. Q 3: Are all transactions in listed or OTC securities options subject to the proposed limitations on derivatives transactions under the Proposed Rule? No. Under the Proposed Rule, only written options, which involve a potential for future payment obligations by a Fund, would be treated as derivatives transactions. Purchased options would not be treated as derivatives transactions for purposes of the Proposed Rule. Further, the Proposed Rule does not apply to any instrument for which the entire cost is paid up-front, even if the instrument derives its value from other assets, such as CDOs, CLOs and other asset-backed securities, and even if there is substantial leverage embedded in the instrument. Q 4: Are securities lending transactions entered into by Funds considered financial commitment transactions? No. However, the proposing release requests comments as to whether or not securities lending transactions should be covered by the Proposed Rule. 2 Proposed Rule 18f-4(c)(4). 3 Proposed Rule 18f-4(c)(1).
5 Page 5 The Proposed Rule s Impact on Prior Guidance Q 5: If the Proposed Rule is adopted, may Funds continue to rely on Release and its line of no-action letters? No. If the Proposed Rule is adopted, the SEC will rescind Release and the line of letters discussing derivatives and financial commitment transactions 4. If the Proposed Rule is adopted, a Fund may only enter into derivatives transactions or financial commitment transactions if it complies with the Proposed Rule or with Sections 18 or 61 under the Act. The proposing release notes that a transition period is expected that would allow Funds to continue to rely on Release for a limited time. No guidance has been provided as to the duration of this transition period. Q 6: What are the Proposed Rule s implications for managed futures mutual funds, alternative mutual funds, leveraged ETFs and similar funds that significantly use derivatives? The Proposed Rule may significantly impact the operations and policies of some of these Funds. These Funds would be more limited in their use of derivatives transactions under the Proposed Rule than is currently the case. To the extent these Funds use derivatives for market exposure, exposure related to derivatives transactions (including complex derivatives transactions) would be limited to 150 percent of the Fund s net assets, unless the derivatives transactions reduce the Fund s market risk (as discussed below under Portfolio Limitations), in which case such exposure would be limited to 300 percent of the Fund s net assets. Q 7: How will the Proposed Rule affect a Fund s investment in financial commitment transactions? The Proposed Rule generally takes the same approach to financial commitment transactions as is currently followed in connection with Release However, under the Proposed Rule, since a Fund s qualifying coverage assets cannot exceed its net assets (i.e., the proceeds from a borrowing cannot be included among the qualifying coverage assets), financial commitment transactions cannot exceed a Fund s net assets. Q 8: What are the Proposed Rule s implications for tender option bond (TOB) trusts? If the TOB trust is non-recourse to the Fund, no asset segregation is required. If the TOB trust permits recourse to the Fund, then such recourse should be treated as a financial commitment transaction requiring the segregation of qualifying coverage assets to the extent of the Fund s obligation. This would limit the ability of the Fund to obtain leverage, since such a financial commitment transaction would be included in the Fund s calculation of exposure for purposes of determining if the Fund was in compliance with its portfolio limitations. 4 Proposing release p. 260.
6 Page 6 Portfolio Limitations Q 9: What are the alternative portfolio limitations that a Fund must comply with? If a Fund engages in any senior securities transactions in reliance upon the Proposed Rule, then the Fund s board of directors must elect to adhere to either an exposure-based portfolio limitation or a riskbased portfolio limitation. The exposure-based portfolio limitation would impose a ceiling on the Fund s exposure at 150 percent of its net assets. 5 The risk-based portfolio limitation would impose a higher ceiling on the Fund s exposure at 300 percent of its net assets, but a Fund would be permitted to utilize this portfolio limitation only if its derivatives transactions reduce the Fund s market risk. 6 In making this determination, the Proposed Rule would require the Fund to analyze market risk using a VaR model to estimate its potential losses on an instrument or portfolio. A Fund must determine its exposure based on a VaR model if electing the riskbased portfolio limitation, regardless of whether the Fund uses an alternative risk-based metric to analyze its portfolio for purposes of determining its risk-based coverage amount (described in Question 17 below), and regardless of the instruments invested in or the diversification of the portfolio. Q 10: How is exposure calculated? Under the Proposed Rule, exposure is calculated by aggregating the following: the notional amounts of a Fund s derivatives transactions; the Fund s obligations under financial commitment transactions; and the Fund s amount of indebtedness (and, with respect to closed-end Funds and business development companies, the involuntary liquidation preference of outstanding preferred stock) with respect to senior securities. 7 Consequently, if a Fund has bank loans outstanding, such loans will reduce, dollar-for-dollar, the availability of derivatives leverage (and likewise, if a Fund has outstanding derivatives leverage, it will reduce, dollar-for-dollar, the availability of bank loans). The notional amount for derivatives transactions is generally defined as the market value of an equivalent position in the underlying reference asset for the derivatives transaction 8, or the principal amount on which payment obligations under the derivatives transactions are calculated. 9 However, since the notional amount is intended to reflect the Fund s economic exposure to the underlying reference asset or metric, the Proposed Rule provides that exposure for certain types of 5 Proposing release p Proposing release p Proposed Rule 18f-4(c)(3). 8 Proposed Rule 18f-4(c)(7)(i). 9 Proposed Rule 18f-4(c)(7)(ii).
7 Page 7 derivatives transactions should be calculated using an adjusted notional amount as described in Question 11 below. Q 11: What types of trades require exposure to be calculated using an adjusted notional amount? The Proposed Rule identifies three categories of derivatives transactions for which exposure is to be determined by reference to an adjusted notional amount: 1) Enhanced leverage transactions: If a derivatives transaction provides a return based on the leveraged performance of an underlying asset, then the notional amount would be multiplied by the applicable leverage factor. 10 2) Managed account look-through : If the underlying reference asset is a managed account or entity formed primarily for the purpose of investing or trading derivatives transactions, or an index that reflects the performance of such managed account or entity, then the notional amount would be calculated by reference to the Fund s pro rata portion of the notional amounts of the derivatives transactions of the underlying reference vehicle. 11 3) Complex derivatives transactions: If a derivatives transaction is a complex derivatives transaction, then the notional amount of such transaction would be calculated by determining the aggregate notional amount(s) of non-complex derivatives transactions that replicate the market risk associated with the complex derivatives transaction at the time the Fund entered into such transaction. 12 Thus, to the extent possible, the complex derivatives transaction should be broken down into its constituent plain vanilla derivatives transactions, and the aggregate of the notional amounts for all such plain vanilla transactions would constitute the notional amount for the related complex derivatives transaction. It is understood that such constituent non-complex derivatives transactions would vary depending on the type of complex derivatives transaction for which a notional amount is being determined. Q 12: What methods may be used to calculate Value-at-Risk (VaR)? With respect to the risk-based portfolio limitation, the VaR measure is intended to determine if a Fund s derivatives investments, on the whole, will directionally increase or mitigate risk; it is not required, nor intended, to be the measure by which a Fund assesses its potential losses. 13 Under the Proposed Rule, the VaR method used in determining if a Fund is eligible to use the risk-based portfolio limitation examines the market risk of a Fund s portfolio by comparing the market risk of such Fund s portfolio exclusive of derivatives investments (the securities VaR) to the market risk of such Fund s portfolio inclusive of derivatives instruments (the full portfolio VaR). If the Fund s full portfolio VaR is less than its securities VaR, then such Fund may elect to use the risk-based portfolio limitation. 10 Proposed Rule 18f-4(c)(iii)(A). 11 Proposed Rule 18f-4(c)(iii)(B). 12 Proposed Rule 18f-4(c)(iii)(C). 13 Proposing release p. 127.
8 Page 8 The Proposed Rule defines VaR as an estimate of potential losses on an instrument or portfolio, expressed as a positive amount in U.S. dollars, over a specified time horizon and at a given confidence level. 14 The Fund must apply the same VaR model to its full portfolio VaR and its securities VaR. 15 While VaR may be calculated using a wide range of models and parameters, the Proposed Rule would require a Fund to use a VaR model with a minimum 99 percent confidence interval and a time horizon of not less than 10 days and not more than 20 days. Additionally, the Proposed Rule would require that the VaR model selected by a Fund take into account all significant and identifiable market-risk factors associated with its investments. If a Fund elects to use a historical VaR model, it must have a minimum of three years historical market data. 16 Q 13: If a Fund s exposure exceeds the applicable exposure limit after entering into a derivatives transaction, would the Fund be required to terminate or unwind its derivatives transaction(s)? No. A Fund relying on the Proposed Rule would be required to comply with the applicable portfolio limitation immediately after entering into the transaction, but would not be required to terminate or unwind a transaction solely because the Fund s exposure subsequently increased. However, the Fund would not be permitted to enter into additional senior securities transactions in reliance upon the Proposed Rule unless the Fund would be in compliance with the applicable portfolio limitation immediately after entering into the transaction. 17 Thus, a Fund would not be allowed to enter into a riskreducing derivatives transaction subsequent to market movements that caused the Fund to exceed its relevant portfolio limitation unless such derivatives transaction brings the Fund below the applicable 150 percent or 300 percent threshold. The SEC has requested comment as to whether risk-reducing transactions should be permitted regardless of whether a Fund would be in compliance with the relevant portfolio limitation following such transaction. Asset Coverage and Segregation Requirement Q 14: What are the asset segregation requirements with respect to a Fund s derivatives transactions? The Proposed Rule would require a Fund to determine on a daily basis whether its segregated amounts are adequate. A Fund would be required to segregate on its books an amount of qualifying coverage assets equal to the aggregate coverage amounts with respect to its derivatives transactions and financial commitment transactions. A Fund s qualifying coverage assets may not exceed the Fund s net assets, and the same asset may not be used to cover a derivatives transaction and a financial commitment transaction at the same time. A Fund s board of directors, including a majority of its independent directors, would be required to approve policies and procedures reasonably designed to provide for the maintenance of the Fund s segregated qualifying coverage assets. 14 Proposed Rule 18f-4(c)(11). 15 Proposed Rule 18f-4(c)(11)(i). 16 Proposed Rule 18f-4(c)(11)(ii). 17 Proposing release p. 150.
9 Page 9 Q 15: Are the requirements for asset segregation different for physically settled derivatives and cash settled derivatives? No. The requirements of the Proposed Rule are the same whether the derivatives transaction is physically settled or cash settled. Q 16: What are the asset segregation requirements with respect to a Fund s financial commitment transactions? Under the Proposed Rule, a Fund would be required to maintain qualifying coverage assets in an amount equal to its full obligations under a financial commitment transaction (i.e., both conditional and unconditional obligations). Q 17: How are qualifying coverage assets for derivatives transactions and financial commitment transactions calculated? For derivatives transactions, the required amount of qualifying coverage assets would be the sum of (i) a mark-to-market coverage amount, plus (ii) a risk-based coverage amount. The mark-to-market coverage amount is the amount currently payable by the Fund if the Fund were to exit the derivatives transaction at that time. 18 The mark-to-market coverage amount would be reduced by the value of any assets that represent variation margin or posted collateral (other than initial margin) under a derivatives transaction. Variation margin or collateral in excess of a Fund s current liability under the derivatives transaction would not reduce the Fund s mark-to-market coverage amount for other derivatives transactions except as otherwise permitted under a netting agreement. 19 The Proposed Rule permits a Fund to calculate mark-to-market coverage on a net basis for derivatives transactions for which it has entered into a netting agreement allowing payment netting with respect to multiple derivatives transactions with the same counterparty (e.g., derivatives transactions governed by an ISDA Master Agreement), but would not permit netting across different counterparties. The risk-based asset coverage amount reflects the amount payable by a Fund if it were to exit the derivatives transaction under stressed conditions, providing a cushion in excess of the mark-to-market coverage amount. 20 The risk-based coverage amount for a derivatives transaction would be reduced by the value of any assets that represent initial margin or posted collateral (but not variation margin) for the purpose of covering the Fund s potential payment amounts with respect to such transaction. The Fund can apply the same netting concept noted above with respect to the mark-to-market coverage amount. A Fund could use one or more financial models that take these factors into account to determine the riskbased coverage amount and, unlike for purposes of determining if a Fund is eligible to use the risk-based portfolio limitation, a Fund is not required to use a VaR model for determining its risk-based coverage amount. 18 Proposed Rule 18f-4(c)(6). 19 Proposing release pp Proposed Rule 18f-4(c)(9).
10 Page 10 For financial commitment transactions, a Fund would be required to maintain qualifying coverage assets with a value at least equal to the value of the Fund s obligations under its financial commitment transactions. 21 A Fund can count as qualifying coverage assets those assets that have been pledged as collateral with respect to its financial commitment transactions that can be expected to satisfy such obligations. Q 18: Are qualifying coverage assets the same for derivatives transactions and financial commitment transactions? No. Qualifying coverage assets for derivatives transactions include cash and cash equivalents or, if the Fund may satisfy its obligations under a derivatives transaction by delivery of a particular asset, such asset. Examples of items the SEC considers to be cash equivalents include certain Treasury bills, agency securities, bank deposits, commercial paper and shares of money market funds. 22 For purposes of financial commitment transactions, qualifying coverage assets also include cash and cash equivalents, and additionally include assets that can be converted to cash on the date the obligation would become due, securities, the particular asset that the Fund may deliver to satisfy its obligations under the transaction, or other assets pledged in connection with the transaction (e.g., securities held in connection with a short sale borrowing). 23 If a payment obligation under a financial commitment transaction is expected on a short-term basis, the qualifying coverage assets would also need to be convertible to cash or be able to generate cash on a short-term basis. Q 19: Can a Fund use an offsetting cover transaction in determining if it has qualifying coverage assets for a derivatives transaction? No. Under the Proposed Rule, the particular asset that the Fund may deliver to satisfy its obligation under the derivatives transaction would be a qualifying asset. However, in a departure from Release and related prior SEC guidance, a derivative providing offsetting exposure would not be a qualifying coverage asset for a derivatives transaction. 24 Thus, if a Fund has written a call option on a security that the Fund owns, such security would be considered a qualifying coverage asset. However, if a Fund has written a CDS on a bond, a purchased CDS on the same bond would not be considered a qualifying coverage asset. 25 Q 20: Can a Fund use equity securities or non-government debt securities to cover its derivatives mark-to-market coverage and risk-based coverage amounts? Generally not. Non-government debt securities and equity securities (other than shares of money market funds) would not qualify as cash or a cash equivalent. The one exception would be in the case of a derivatives transaction under which the fund may satisfy its obligation by delivering a particular equity 21 Proposing release p Proposing release p Proposing release p Proposing release p Proposed Rule 18f-4(c)(8)(ii).
11 Page 11 security or non-government debt security. In that case, that particular security would qualify as a coverage asset. Q 21: Can a Fund use equity securities or non-government debt securities to cover its financial commitment transaction obligations? Yes, subject to liquidity. In addition to cash, cash equivalents and deliverable assets, Funds may cover financial commitment transaction obligations using any assets that are convertible to cash or that will generate cash prior to the date on which the Fund can be expected to be required to pay such obligation. 26 An equity or non-government debt security position that is convertible to cash or matures in time for the Fund to use the cash proceeds to complete the financial commitment transaction may be used as qualifying coverage. Any portion of such position that could not be converted to cash by such time could not be used as qualifying coverage. In addition, the Fund may use as qualifying coverage any assets pledged by the Fund with respect to the financial commitment obligation that can be expected to satisfy such obligation, as determined in accordance with policies and procedures approved by the Fund s board of directors. 27 Risk Management Program Q 22: What are the implications of the Proposed Rule for independent directors of Funds? A Fund s board of directors, including a majority of the non-interested directors, must determine which of the two portfolio limitations will apply to the Fund. Funds engaging in more than a limited amount of derivatives transactions (i.e., the aggregate exposure of a Fund s derivatives transactions exceeds 50 percent of its net assets) or Funds that use complex derivatives transactions, must adopt and implement a formalized derivatives risk management program (periodically updated at least annually) administered by a designated derivatives risk manager. 28 The Fund s board of directors, including a majority of independent directors, must approve any material changes to the derivatives risk management program. The board of directors must, on at least a quarterly basis, review a written report of the derivatives risk manager assessing the adequacy of the derivatives risk management program. 29 Under the Proposed Rule, the Fund s board of directors, including a majority of the independent directors, would be required to approve policies and procedures reasonably designed to provide for the maintenance of qualifying coverage assets. Q 23: Must a Fund have a formal derivatives risk management program? No. A Fund is only required to have a formal derivatives risk management program if the Fund s aggregate exposure exceeds 50 percent of its net assets or if it engages in any complex derivatives transactions (regardless of exposure). 26 Proposed Rule 18f-4(c)(8)(iii). 27 Proposed Rule 18f-4(c)(8)(iii). 28 Proposing release p Proposed Rule 18f-4(a)(3)(iii).
12 Page 12 Q 24: Can an Employee of the Fund s Investment Adviser act as the derivatives risk manager? Yes. The derivatives risk manager must be an individual designated by the Fund, which can be an employee or officer of the Fund or the Fund s investment adviser, but cannot be a portfolio manager of the Fund. The derivatives risk manager would be required to administer the policies and procedures of the formal derivatives risk management program. The derivatives risk manager would also be required to provide a quarterly report evaluating the derivatives risk management program for review and approval by the Fund s board of directors. 30 Recordkeeping and Disclosure Requirements Q 25: Are there new recordkeeping requirements? Yes. The Proposed Rule requires that the Fund maintain, for a period of at least five years, (i) written records of each determination made by the board of directors with respect to the portfolio limitation applicable to the Fund; (ii) a written copy of all policies and procedures approved by the board of directors for the Fund s ongoing compliance with the Proposed Rule, including but not limited to the Fund s maintenance of qualifying coverage assets and, immediately after entering into any senior securities transaction, compliance with the Fund s portfolio limitation; (iii) copies of all policies and procedures relating to the Fund s adopting and implementing any required derivatives risk management program and the materials provided to the board in connection with its approval of the derivatives risk management program, including any material changes to the derivatives risk management program and any written reports relating to the derivatives risk management program; (iv) records documenting the periodic reviews and updates to the derivatives risk management program, including any VaR calculation models, measurement tools, and policies and procedures used to evaluate the derivatives risk management program s effectiveness and to reflect changes in risks over time; and (v) records demonstrating that immediately after the Fund entered into a senior securities transaction it complied with the applicable portfolio limitation and asset coverage requirements with respect to each senior securities transaction, showing the Fund s aggregate exposure, the value of the Fund s net assets and, if applicable, the Fund s full portfolio VaR and securities VaR. 31 The Proposed Rule requires that the Fund maintain, for a period of at least five years, (i) a written copy of the policies and procedures approved by the board that are reasonably designed to provide for the Fund s maintenance of qualifying coverage assets and (ii) a written record reflecting the amount of each financial transaction commitment obligation entered into by the Fund and identifying the qualifying coverage assets maintained by the Fund with respect to each financial commitment obligation, as determined by the Fund at least once each business day Proposing Rule 18f-4(a)(3)(ii). 31 Proposed Rule 18f-4(a)(6). 32 Proposed Rule 18f-4(b)(3).
13 Page 13 Q 26: Are there new disclosure requirements? Yes. The Proposed Rule imposes additional disclosure requirements under proposed Form N-PORT and proposed Form N-CEN. A Fund would be required to disclose its schedule of investments and specific information about the transactions on proposed Form N-PORT. Additionally the Fund would be required to disclose risk metrics, including the delta for derivatives instruments with optionality, interest rate risk and credit risk spread. Further, if the Fund were required to implement a derivatives risk management program under the Proposed Rule, then it would also be required to report the vega and gamma for its investments. 33 The Fund would be required to identify which of the two portfolio limitations the Fund is relying upon during the reporting period on proposed Form N-CEN. 33 Proposing release p. 254.
14 Page 14 If you have any questions regarding this Sidley Update, please contact the Sidley lawyer with whom you usually work, or John A. MacKinnon Partner Frank P. Bruno Partner James C. Munsell Partner Laurin Blumenthal Kleiman Partner Michael S. Sackheim Partner Sara N. Shouse Associate Investment Funds, Advisers and Derivatives Practice Sidley has a premier, global practice in structuring and advising investment funds and advisers. We advise clients in the formation and operation of all types of alternative investment vehicles, including hedge funds, fund-of-funds, commodity pools, venture capital and private equity funds, private real estate funds and other public and private pooled investment vehicles. We also represent clients with respect to more traditional investment funds, such as closed-end and open-end registered investment companies (i.e., mutual funds) and exchange-traded funds (ETFs). Our advice covers the broad scope of legal and compliance issues that are faced by funds and their boards, as well as investment advisers to funds and other investment products and accounts, under the laws and regulations of the various jurisdictions in which they may operate. In particular, we advise our clients regarding complex federal and state laws and regulations governing securities, commodities, funds and advisers, including the Dodd-Frank Act, the Investment Company Act of 1940, the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Commodity Exchange Act, the USA PATRIOT Act and comparable laws in non-u.s. jurisdictions. Our practice group consists of approximately 120 lawyers in New York, Chicago, London, Hong Kong, Singapore, Shanghai, Tokyo, Los Angeles and San Francisco. Derivatives Practice Sidley s derivatives lawyers in numerous worldwide offices advise clients on a broad range of domestic and international derivatives transactions involving swaps, commodity futures contracts and options. Our clients, located in the U.S. and outside the U.S., include commercial banks, investment banks, insurance companies, hedge funds and mutual funds and their advisers, commodity and options exchanges, clearing organizations and other participants in the OTC and exchange-traded derivatives markets. In serving our derivatives clients, our internationally-based group utilizes the extensive experience of lawyers in Sidley s other practice areas, including tax, banking, insurance, investment funds, litigation, bankruptcy, employee benefits, securitization and financial regulatory practices. We act for our clients in a wide variety of settings, including initial transaction and product structuring, negotiation and execution; post-trade operation, modification, work-out, dispute resolution, remedies and recovery; practice before regulatory authorities; and general consultation. To receive Sidley Updates, please subscribe at BEIJING BOSTON BRUSSELS CENTURY CITY CHICAGO DALLAS GENEVA HONG KONG HOUSTON LONDON LOS ANGELES NEW YORK PALO ALTO SAN FRANCISCO SHANGHAI SINGAPORE SYDNEY TOKYO WASHINGTON, D.C. Sidley and Sidley Austin refer to Sidley Austin LLP and affiliated partnerships as explained at
CFTC Proposes First Clearing Mandate and Finalizes Phased Compliance Rules
AUGUST 10, 2012 DERIVATIVES UPDATE CFTC Proposes First Clearing Mandate and Finalizes Phased Compliance Rules On July 24, 2012, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission ( CFTC ) proposed its first clearing
More informationSEC Proposes New Limits on Funds Use of Derivatives
December 2015 Practice Groups: Investment Management, Hedge Funds and Alternative Investments Derivatives & Structured Products Global Government Solutions SEC Proposes New Limits on Funds Use of Derivatives
More informationRevised EU Capital and Remuneration Framework for Investment Firms Proposal
JANUARY 30, 2018 SIDLEY UPDATE Revised EU Capital and Remuneration Framework for Investment Firms Proposal Introduction On December 20, 2017, the European Commission (EC) published draft legislative proposals
More informationNew York Insurance Holding Company Bill Becomes Law
AUGUST 13, 2013 INSURANCE UPDATE Insurance Holding Company Bill Becomes Law On July 31, 2013, Governor Cuomo signed a bill (Assembly 7807A) that amends the Insurance Law and implements key provisions of
More informationSEC Proposes Sweeping Changes to the Use of Derivatives and Financial Commitment Transactions by Registered Funds and BDCs
CLIENT MEMORANDUM SEC Proposes Sweeping Changes to the Use of Derivatives and Financial Commitment Transactions January 5, 2016 AUTHORS P. Georgia Bullitt Rose F. DiMartino Margery K. Neale Jay Spinola
More informationSEC and FDIC Proposed Rules on the Orderly Liquidation of Certain Large Broker-Dealers
MAY 16, 2016 SIDLEY UPDATE SEC and FDIC Proposed Rules on the Orderly Liquidation of Certain Large Broker-Dealers Overview On February 18, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Federal
More informationNew York Banking Regulator Issues Anti-Money Laundering Rules for Transaction Monitoring and Filtering Programs
JULY 7, 2016 SIDLEY UPDATE New York Banking Regulator Issues Anti-Money Laundering Rules for Transaction Monitoring and Filtering Programs On June 30, 2016, the New York State Department of Financial Services
More informationISS Releases QualityScore Updates and Opens Data Verification Period
November 2, 2016 SIDLEY UPDATE ISS Releases QualityScore Updates and Opens Data Verification Period ISS Publishes New Questions and Other Methodology Updates to Its QualityScore (Formerly QuickScore) Governance
More informationSummary SIDLEY UPDATE
DECEMBER 18, 2015 SIDLEY UPDATE Congress Passes REIT and FIRPTA Reforms: REIT Spinoffs Restricted, But Generally Beneficial for Existing REITs and Foreign Investors in U.S. Real Estate Markets On December
More informationINVESTMENT FUNDS UPDATE. SEC Proposes Amendments to Address Runs on Money Market Funds and Increase Transparency of Money Market Fund Risks
JUNE 19, 2013 INVESTMENT FUNDS UPDATE SEC Proposes Amendments to Address Runs on Money Market Funds and Increase Transparency of Money Market Fund Risks On June 5, 2013, the Securities and Exchange Commission
More informationAIFMD 2014 Update private placements: where did we end up, and where are we going?
SEPTEMBER 8, 2014 INVESTMENT FUNDS UPDATE AIFMD 2014 Update private placements: where did we end up, and where are we going? Introduction The European Union Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive
More informationINVESTMENT FUNDS, ADVISORS AND DERIVATIVES UPDATE AIFM Directive 2013 Update: Marketing by US and Other Non-EU Managers
FEBRUARY 6, 2013 INVESTMENT FUNDS, ADVISORS AND DERIVATIVES UPDATE AIFM Directive 2013 Update: Marketing by US and Other Non-EU Managers Introduction This Update considers what US and other non-eu alternative
More informationSEC Proposes Derivatives and Leverage Rule for 1940 Act Funds
Westlaw Journal DERIVATIVES Litigation News and Analysis Legislation Regulation Expert Commentary VOLUME 22, ISSUE 9 /MARCH 24, 2016 EXPERT ANALYSIS SEC Proposes Derivatives and Leverage Rule for 1940
More informationNEW DIRECTED TRUST STATUTE
ank AUGUST 10, 2012 Illinois Directed Trust Statute NEW DIRECTED TRUST STATUTE Governor Quinn signed this statute into law on August 10, 2012. It will become effective on January 1, 2013. New Section 16.3
More informationInvestment Company Use of Derivatives and Leverage: What It Could Mean for You
mofo.com Investment Company Use of Derivatives and Leverage: What It Could Mean for You Mutual Fund Directors Forum Annual Policy Conference Washington, D.C. March 29, 2016 Presented by Jay G. Baris Karrie
More informationEnglish High Court Limits Scope of Privilege for Documents Generated During the Course of Internal Investigations
JUNE 1, 2017 SIDLEY UPDATE English High Court Limits Scope of Privilege for Documents Generated During the Course of Internal Investigations On May 8, the English High Court 1 struck down the majority
More informationThe ICC Launches New Guide for In-House Counsel on Effective Management of International Arbitration
June 12, 2014 INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION UPDATE The ICC Launches New Guide for In-House Counsel on Effective Management of International Arbitration On June 6, 2014, the International Chamber of Commerce
More informationClient Alert. CFTC Publishes Guidance on Expansive New CPO and CTA Regulations
Number 1385 August 20, 2012 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department The CPO-CTA Q&A attempts to clarify many of the issues that have been raised [in relation to several new expansive regulations],
More informationU.S. and EU OTC derivatives rules overview and extraterritorial reach
APRIL 23, 2012 DERIVATIVES UPDATE U.S. and EU OTC Derivatives Regulation a Comparison of the Regimes Introduction At the G-20 meeting in Pittsburgh in September 2009, the G-20 leaders made the following
More informationLatham & Watkins Corporate Department
Number 1300 March 2, 2012 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department Final CFTC Rules Maintain Limited Trading Exemptions But May Require Many More Investment Advisers to Investment Funds to Register
More informationThe Investment Lawyer
The Investment Lawyer Covering Legal and Regulatory Issues of Asset Management VOL. 23, NO. 3 MARCH 2016 REGULATORY MONITOR SEC Update By Philip Hinkle and Matthew Kerfoot An Overview of the SEC s Derivatives
More informationDerivatives Regulation Update: Latest Developments and What to Expect in 2016
Derivatives Regulation Update: Latest Developments and What to Expect in 2016 Thursday, January 14, 2016, 12:00PM 1:30PM EST Presenters: Julian Hammar, Of Counsel, Morrison & Foerster LLP James Schwartz,
More informationIntroduction to the U.S. Regulation of Cross-Border Transactions Involving Swaps and Security-Based Swaps
March 2016 Practice Group: Investment Management, Hedge Funds and Alternative Investments Introduction to the U.S. Regulation of Cross-Border Transactions Involving Swaps and Security-Based Swaps By Anthony
More informationIntroduction to the Commercial End-User Exception to Mandatory Clearing of Swaps and Security-Based Swaps Under Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act
March 2016 Practice Group: Investment Management, Hedge Funds and Alternative Investments Introduction to the Commercial End-User Exception to Mandatory Clearing of Swaps and Security-Based Swaps By Anthony
More informationNew ISDA Resolution Stay Protocols
February 4, 2016 New ISDA Resolution Stay Protocols Presented by Miki Navazio, Partner, Sidley Austin LLP Overview Three ISDA Resolution Stay Protocols ISDA 2014 Resolution Stay Protocol (Original Protocol)
More informationIFLR Indonesia Forum: Debt Capital Markets
BEIJING BRUSSELS CHICAGO DALLAS FRANKFURT GENEVA HONG KONG HOUSTON LONDON LOS ANGELES NEW YORK PALO ALTO SAN FRANCISCO SHANGHAI SINGAPORE SYDNEY TOKYO WASHINGTON, D.C. IFLR Indonesia Forum: Debt Capital
More informationThis memorandum provides a general overview of the new rules, rule amendments
Implementing Amendments to the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 November 4, 2011 If you have any questions regarding the matters discussed in this memorandum, please contact the following attorneys or call
More informationClient Alert. SEC Staff Provides New Guidance Regarding the Rule 15a-6 Registration Exemption for Foreign Broker-Dealers.
Number 1495 April 8, 2013 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department SEC Staff Provides New Guidance Regarding the Rule 15a-6 Registration Exemption for Foreign Broker-Dealers The FAQs provide
More informationUpdated SEC Guidance Will Require Many Public Companies to Revise their Presentation of Non-GAAP Information
May 20, 2016 SIDLEY UPDATE Updated SEC Guidance Will Require Many Public Companies to Revise their Presentation of Non-GAAP Information New and Revised C&DIs Criticize Several Common Practices Relating
More informationClient Alert. IRS Releases Final FATCA Regulations. Summary. Background
Number 1460 January 29, 2013 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Tax Department IRS Releases Final FATCA Regulations Summary The Regulations represent a significant step towards FATCA implementation, yet considerable
More informationConsolidated Statement of Financial Condition May 30, 2003
Consolidated Statement of Financial Condition May 30, 2003 Goldman, Sachs & Co. Established 1869 New York Hong Kong London Tokyo Atlanta Baltimore Bangkok Beijing Bermuda Boston Buenos Aires Calgary Chicago
More informationSEC PROPOSES LIQUIDITY RISK- MANAGEMENT RULES. Christopher D. Menconi, Sean Graber, Beau Yanoshik, David W. Freese January 20, 2016
SEC PROPOSES LIQUIDITY RISK- MANAGEMENT RULES Christopher D. Menconi, Sean Graber, Beau Yanoshik, David W. Freese January 20, 2016 2015 Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP Overview Introduction Liquidity Risk
More informationBona Fide Hedge Exemptions for Commodity Swap Dealers
Bona Fide Hedge Exemptions for Commodity Swap Dealers CFTC Issues Concept Release Seeking Comment on Whether to Eliminate the Bona Fide Hedge Exemption for Certain Swap Dealers and Create a New Exemption
More informationSEC ISSUES DERIVATIVES CONCEPT RELEASE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES MAY BE IN STORE FOR REGISTERED FUNDS
CLIENT MEMORANDUM SEC ISSUES DERIVATIVES CONCEPT RELEASE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES MAY BE IN STORE FOR REGISTERED FUNDS The Securities and Exchange Commission issued a concept release on August 31 with respect
More informationISDA 2013 EMIR NFC Representation Protocol: Factors to consider in deciding whether to adhere
2nd April 2013 Practice Group(s): Finance Investment Management ISDA 2013 EMIR NFC Representation Protocol: Factors to consider in deciding whether to adhere By Stephen Moller On 8 March 2013, The International
More informationCFTC and Derivative Developments
2016 INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE CFTC and Derivative Developments Michael W. McGrath, Partner, Boston Kenneth Holston, Of Counsel, Boston Copyright 2016 by K&L Gates LLP. All rights reserved. AGENDA
More informationClearing Exemption for Inter-Affiliate Swaps
CFTC Proposes Rule to Exempt Swaps between Certain Affiliated Entities from the Clearing Requirement under Dodd-Frank SUMMARY On August 16, 2012, the CFTC issued a proposed rule to exempt swaps between
More informationInvestment Advisers and Funds New Treasury Report Form for Foreign Claims and Liabilities
February 2014 Practice Groups: Investment Management Hedge Funds and Venture Funds Investment Advisers and Funds New Treasury Report Form for Foreign Claims and Liabilities By Clifford J. Alexander and
More informationCFTC and SEC Adopt New Rules Further Defining Major Swap Participant and Major Security-Based Swap Participant
CFTC and SEC Adopt New Rules Further Defining Major Swap Participant and Major Security-Based Swap Participant May 3, 2012 Pursuant to Section 712 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection
More informationClient Alert. CFTC Issues a Flurry of No-Action Letters and Guidance as New Swap Regulations Become Effective. Swap Entity Definition Guidance
Number 1425 November 6, 2012 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department CFTC Issues a Flurry of No-Action Letters and Guidance as New Swap Regulations Become Effective Between October 10 and October
More informationThe Extra-territorial Impact of EMIR on Non-EU Swap Counterparties
10 December 2013 Practice Group(s): Derivatives, Securitization and Structured Products Investment Management, Hedge Funds and Alternative Investments The Extra-territorial Impact of EMIR on Swap By Sean
More informationUNDERSTANDING CLOSED- END INTERVAL FUNDS Sean Graber, Partner Thomas S. Harman, Partner David W. Freese, Associate. June 7, 2017
UNDERSTANDING CLOSED- END INTERVAL FUNDS Sean Graber, Partner Thomas S. Harman, Partner David W. Freese, Associate June 7, 2017 2017 Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP Overview What are Interval Funds? How are
More informationKey issues. Client memorandum. February CFTC Exemptions 1
CFTC Exemptions 1 Client memorandum February 2012 CFTC Significantly Limits the Exemption from Commodity Pool Operator Registration for Registered Investment Advisers and Rescinds the Registration Exemptions
More informationADVISORY Dodd-Frank Act
ADVISORY Dodd-Frank Act August 5, 2013 CFTC ISSUES FINAL INTERPRETIVE GUIDANCE AND POLICY STATEMENT AND EXEMPTIVE ORDER REGARDING CROSS-BORDER APPLICATION OF DODD-FRANK ACT SWAP PROVISIONS On July 12,
More informationFund Managers Alert: CFTC Rescinds Exemptions and Expands its Regulations
Fund Managers Alert: CFTC Rescinds Exemptions and Expands its Regulations April 16, 2012 The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission ( CFTC ) recently announced the adoption of significant amendments
More informationClient Alert. CFTC Issues Proposals on the Extraterritorial Application of US Swaps Regulations. Overview
Number 1359 July 6, 2012 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department CFTC Issues Proposals on the Extraterritorial Application of US Swaps Regulations The Releases set forth a complex and intertwined
More informationFinancial Services Advisory
Financial Services Advisory January 28, 2016 SEC Proposed Rule 18f-4 Would Severely Restrict Use of Derivatives by Investment Companies On December 11, 2015, the Securities and Exchange Commission proposed
More informationA Series of Fortunate Events
Number 973 18 January 2010 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department Changes in Regulation of Derivatives and Repo Transactions in Russia The Amendments almost by accident spawned a more general
More informationSecurity-Based Swaps: Capital, Margin and Segregation Requirements
Security-Based Swaps: Capital, Margin and Segregation Requirements SEC Proposes Rules Regarding Capital, Margin and Collateral Segregation Requirements for Security-Based Swap Dealers and Major Security-Based
More informationPayment Services Directive II: Unravelling the Mystery 7 March 2017
Payment Services Directive II: Unravelling the Mystery 7 March 2017 John Casanova, Partner Sidley Austin LLP PSD II What is it? New directive which will repeal and replace current EU payment services legislation.
More informationProposed Rules Under the Investment Advisers Act
Proposed Rules Under the Investment Advisers Act SEC Proposes Rules to Implement Dodd-Frank Act Registration Requirements for Advisers to Private Funds; Registration Exemptions for Venture Capital Funds,
More informationUnderstanding the Requirements and Impact of the Volcker Rule and the Final Regulations. February 11, 2014
Understanding the Requirements and Impact of the Volcker Rule and the Final Regulations Please note that any advice contained in this communication is not intended or written to be used, and should not
More informationBasel III Pillar 3 Disclosures Report. For the Quarterly Period Ended June 30, 2016
BASEL III PILLAR 3 DISCLOSURES REPORT For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2016 Table of Contents Page 1 Morgan Stanley... 1 2 Capital Framework... 1 3 Capital Structure... 2 4 Capital Adequacy... 2
More informationSpecial Resolution Regimes and the ISDA Resolution Stay Jurisdictional Modular Protocol
July 2016 Practice Groups: Investment Management, Hedge Funds and Alternative Investments Finance Global Government Solutions Special Resolution Regimes and the ISDA Resolution Stay By Robert A. Wittie
More informationSEC Proposes Rules to Modernize and Enhance Information Reported by Investment Companies and Investment Advisers
CLIENT MEMORANDUM SEC Proposes Rules to Modernize and Enhance Information Reported by Investment Companies and Investment Advisers June 18, 2015 Contents Proposals and Amendments Relating to the Investment
More informationBetter Late Than Never? The CFTC and the NFA Publish FAQs on CPO and CTA Reporting Forms
November 2015 Practice Groups: Investment Management, Hedge Funds and Alternative Investments Derivatives & Structured Products Private Equity Global Government Solutions Better Late Than Never? The CFTC
More informationSECURITIES AND FUTURES REGULATORY UPDATE FINRA Publishes Debt Research Rule Proposal
FEBRUARY 27, 2012 SECURITIES AND FUTURES REGULATORY UPDATE FINRA Publishes Debt Research Rule Proposal On February 17, 2012, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, Inc. ( FINRA ) published its debt
More informationCFTC and SEC Issue Final Swap-Related Rules Under Title VII of Dodd-Frank
CFTC and SEC Issue Final Swap-Related Rules Under Title VII of Dodd-Frank CFTC and SEC Issue Final Rules and Guidance to Further Define the Terms Swap Dealer, Security-Based Swap Dealer, Major Swap Participant,
More informationCFTC Proposes Rules for Cross-Border Application of Margin Requirements for Uncleared Swaps
AUGUST 4, 2015 DERIVATIVES UPDATE CFTC Proposes Rules f Cross-Bder Application of Margin Requirements f Uncleared Swaps On June 29, 2015, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) proposed rules
More informationDerivatives Under the New Italian Takeover Bids Regulation
Number 1231 6 September 2011 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department Derivatives Under the New Italian Takeover Bids Regulation Under the new CONSOB regulation on takeover bids, derivatives
More informationProposed Dodd-Frank Section 943 Rules
SEC Proposes Disclosure Requirements Regarding Representations and Warranties in Asset-Backed Securities Offerings SUMMARY On October 4, 2010, the Securities and Exchange Commission proposed rules pursuant
More informationSenior Credit Agreement With Commentary (Leveraged Transactions) SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP
Senior Credit Agreement With Commentary (Leveraged Transactions) SIMPSON THACHER & BARTLETT LLP Commentary focusing on a form of credit agreement used in senior secured credit financings in the syndicated
More informationBasel III Pillar 3 Disclosures Report. For the Quarterly Period Ended December 31, 2015
BASEL III PILLAR 3 DISCLOSURES REPORT For the quarterly period ended December 31, 2015 Table of Contents Page 1 Morgan Stanley... 1 2 Capital Framework... 1 3 Capital Structure... 2 4 Capital Adequacy...
More informationOn June 22, 2011, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC ) adopted
November 4, 2011 Venture Capital Fund Adviser Exemption If you have any questions regarding the matters discussed in this memorandum, please contact the following attorneys or call your regular Skadden
More informationBasel III Pillar 3 Disclosures Report. For the Quarterly Period Ended June 30, 2017
Basel III Pillar 3 Disclosures Report For the Quarterly Period Ended June 30, 2017 BASEL III PILLAR 3 DISCLOSURES REPORT For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2017 Table of Contents Page 1 Morgan Stanley
More informationSEC Delays Municipal Advisor Registration and Record-Keeping Obligations
Updated January 16, 2014 Practice Group(s): Public Finance SEC Delays Municipal Advisor Registration and Record-Keeping Obligations By Scott A. McJannet, Erica R. Franklin, Laura D. McAloon and Cynthia
More informationThe CFTC Adopts Final Rules on the Recordkeeping and Reporting of Historical Swaps
The CFTC Adopts Final Rules on the Recordkeeping and Reporting of Historical Swaps June 20, 2012 The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the CFTC ) has adopted final rules governing the recordkeeping
More informationSEC Approves Final NYSE and NASDAQ Compensation Committee Rules
February 5, 2013 SEC Approves Final NYSE and NASDAQ Compensation Committee Rules Companies are required to comply with certain of the new listing standards relating to compensation adviser independence
More informationJoining the Crowd: SEC Adopts Final Crowdfunding Regulations - Part I
November 2015 Practice Groups: Investment Management, Hedge Funds and Alternative Investments Broker-Dealer Capital Markets Corporate/M&A Emergining Growth and Venture Capital FinTech Global Government
More informationMarch An Act to provide for the reconciliation pursuant to titles II and V of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2018
March 2018 An Act to provide for the reconciliation pursuant to titles II and V of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2018 Overview Key provisions in (the legislation formerly known
More informationMoney Market Fund Regulation
SEC Proposes Rule Amendments That Bring Money Market Funds Under Increased Regulation SUMMARY Money market funds depend on rule 2a-7 to value their assets in order to maintain a stable net asset value,
More informationProposed Margin Requirements for Uncleared Swaps Under Dodd-Frank
Proposed Margin Requirements for Uncleared Swaps Under Dodd-Frank Federal Reserve Board, OCC, FDIC, Farm Credit Administration and Federal Housing Finance Agency Repropose Rules for Minimum Margin and
More informationGLOBAL TOTAL RETURN BOND FUND. (the "Fund")
The Directors, whose names appear under the section of the Prospectus headed "Management of the ICAV", accept responsibility for the information contained in this Supplement and the Prospectus. To the
More informationOTC Derivatives Markets Act of 2009
OTC Derivatives Markets Act of 2009 November 10, 2009 Glenn Sarno, Joyce Xu and Daniel Bae OTC DMA Overview Over-the-Counter Derivatives Markets Act of 2009 Highlights Establishes framework for comprehensive
More informationBasel III Pillar 3 Disclosures Report. For the Quarterly Period Ended September 30, 2016
Basel III Pillar 3 Disclosures Report For the Quarterly Period Ended September 30, 2016 BASEL III PILLAR 3 DISCLOSURES REPORT For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2016 Table of Contents Page 1
More informationImplementation of Title VII of Dodd-Frank
SEC Issues Proposed Rules to Mitigate Potential Conflicts of Interest in the Operation of Security-Based Swap Clearing Agencies, Security- Based Swap Execution Facilities and Security-Based Swap Exchanges
More informationLatham & Watkins Corporate Department
Number 1260 November 22, 2011 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department The Limits of Control: Private Funds and the Large Trader Rule... investment advisers to private funds should consider updating
More informationIRS Moves Forward with Plan to Change the Determination Letter Process
July 14, 2016 Practice Group(s): Employee Benefits IRS Moves Forward with Plan to Change the Determination Letter Process By Karrie Johnson Diaz, Jennifer S. Addis, Alyssa M. Fritz In 2015, the Internal
More informationADVISORY Dodd-Frank Act
ADVISORY Dodd-Frank Act May 7, 2012 CFTC AND SEC JOINTLY ADOPT FINAL SWAP ENTITY DEFINITION RULES On April 18, 2012, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission ( CFTC ) and the Securities and Exchange Commission
More informationSEC Exemptive Relief in Connection with Effective Date of Title VII of Dodd-Frank
SEC Exemptive Relief in Connection with Effective Date of Title VII of Dodd-Frank SEC Issues Interim Final Rules and Order to Provide Relief from Certain Provisions That Would Be Effective on July 16,
More informationSEC Provides Relief to Security-Based Swap Dealers From Business Conduct Rules
SEC Provides Relief to Security-Based Swap Dealers From Business Conduct Rules Relief From Certain Documentation Requirements Under the SEC s Business Conduct Rules Would Apply for Five Years After the
More informationInternal Revenue Service Directive to Examiners on Equity Swaps
Internal Revenue Service Directive to Examiners on Equity Swaps The Internal Revenue Service Outlines its Approach for Examining Equity Swaps That May Have Been Executed to Avoid U.S. Withholding Tax SUMMARY
More informationSwap Clearing and the Commercial End- User Exception: Corporate Governance and Risk Management Issues for Commercial Companies
January 17, 2013 Practice Group: Derivatives, Securitization, and Structured Products Swap Clearing and the Commercial End- User Exception: Corporate Governance and Risk Management Issues for Commercial
More informationLatham & Watkins Corporate Department
Number 242 December 13, 2002 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department The proposed rule is designed to force textual MD&A disclosures about off-balance sheet arrangements that have not been prominently
More informationDe r i vat i v e s a n d
De r i vat i v e s a n d Trading Update July 2010 Analysis of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act OTC Derivatives Reform: Wall Street Transparency and Accountability Act of 2010 I. Introduction Title
More informationGLOBAL HIGH INCOME BOND FUND
The Directors, whose names appear under the section of the Prospectus headed "Management of the ICAV", accept responsibility for the information contained in this Supplement and the Prospectus. To the
More informationRegulation of Private Funds and Their Advisers Under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act
Regulation of Private Funds and Their Advisers Under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act August 3, 2010 I. INTRODUCTION On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed into law the Dodd-Frank
More informationSEC Approves Amendments to Rule 15c2-12
Number 1039 June 8, 2010 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Tax Department SEC Approves Amendments to Rule 15c2-12 For issuers or obligated parties with any currently outstanding municipal securities, including
More informationCFTC Federal Register Notice
Request for Public Comment on Areas of Rulemaking Under Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act SUMMARY On August 26, 2010, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) issued the attached Federal Register
More informationFinal Regulations Adopt Most Proposed Regulations
Number 591 April 16, 2007 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Tax Department Final Regulations under Section 409A Important Issues for Stock Options and Other Stock Rights In general, the final regulations under
More informationSEC Issues Risk Alert on Custody Rule, Reinforcing Its Message to Registered Investment Advisers in Its Examination Priorities for 2013
March 15, 2013 Practice Group: Private Equity Investment Management, Hedge Funds and Alternative Investments SEC Issues Risk Alert on Custody Rule, Reinforcing Its Message to Registered Investment Advisers
More informationProposed Treasury Exemption for Foreign Exchange Swaps and Forwards
Proposed Treasury Exemption for Foreign Exchange Swaps and Forwards Treasury proposes to exempt foreign exchange swaps and foreign exchange forwards from the definition of swap under the Commodity Exchange
More informationREQUIREMENTS AND HIGHLIGHTS OF THE VOLCKER RULE AND ITS REGULATIONS
REQUIREMENTS AND HIGHLIGHTS OF THE VOLCKER RULE AND ITS REGULATIONS July 1, 2015 Charles Horn, Partner Steve Stone, Partner Melissa Hall, Of Counsel Monique Botkin, Investment Adviser Association (Moderator)
More informationPENNSYLVANIA TURNPIKE COMMISSION POLICY AND PROCEDURE
PTC 502005539 (12/05) Policy Subject: 7.7 - Interest Rate Swap Management Policy PENNSYLVANIA TURNPIKE COMMISSION POLICY AND PROCEDURE This is a statement of official Pennsylvania Turnpike Commission Policy
More informationBoard Oversight of Closed-End Funds
Board Oversight of Closed-End Funds Mutual Fund Directors Forum December 5, 2013 Presented By: Michael K. Hoffman Beijing Houston Palo Alto Tokyo Thomas A. DeCapo Boston Brussels London Los Angeles Paris
More informationProposed Assessment Rate Adjustment Guidelines for Large and Highly Complex Institutions
Proposed Assessment Rate Adjustment Guidelines for Large and Highly Complex Institutions FDIC Proposes New Assessment Rate Adjustment Guidelines for Large and Highly Complex Institutions in connection
More informationLatham & Watkins Corporate & Finance Departments
Number 1204 June 20, 2011 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate & Finance Departments After the Credit Crunch: Venture Credit Facilities at the Term Sheet Stage This Alert highlights some of the key
More informationClient Alert. CFTC Proposes to Exempt Certain Energy-Related Transactions from Derivatives Regulations. Overview
Number 1402 September 20, 2012 Client Alert Latham & Watkins Corporate Department CFTC Proposes to Exempt Certain Energy-Related Transactions from Derivatives Regulations Overview Once these orders become
More informationProposed Dodd-Frank Section 945 Rules
SEC Proposes Requirements Regarding Review of Assets Underlying Asset-Backed Securities Offerings and Disclosure of Findings and Conclusions SUMMARY On October 13, 2010, the Securities and Exchange Commission
More informationMMI Legal & Compliance Webinar: The Volcker Rule and the Final Regulations. January 15, Charles M. Horn Julie A. Marcacci
MMI Legal & Compliance Webinar: The Volcker Rule and the Final Regulations January 15, 2014 Please note that any advice contained in this communication is not intended or written to be used, and should
More information