CFTC Adopts Internal Business Conduct Rules
|
|
- Erin Byrd
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 CFTC Adopts Internal Business Conduct Rules CFTC Adopts Final Rules on Swap Dealer Major Swap Participant Recordkeeping and Reporting, Duties, and Conflicts of Interest Policies and Procedures; Futures Commission Merchant and Introducing Broker Conflicts of Interest Policies and Procedures; Swap Dealer, Major Swap Participant and Futures Commission Merchant Chief Compliance Officer SUMMARY On February 23, 2012, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission voted to adopt final rules that regulate the internal conduct of futures commission merchants, introducing brokers, swap dealers and major swap participants. These rules impose duties and restrictions on these categories of registered entities concerning internal conflicts of interest and recordkeeping. Swap dealers, major swap participants and futures commission merchants must also designate a chief compliance officer who is charged with establishing and enforcing policies and procedures reasonably designed to ensure compliance with the Commodity Exchange Act and the regulations promulgated thereunder. The four types of registered entities must erect firewalls between clearing personnel and trading business personnel as well as between research personnel and non-research personnel. The final rules relating to recordkeeping require swap dealers and major swap participants to keep sufficient records to show general and trade-specific compliance with the Commodity Exchange Act and its regulations. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission worked closely with commenters and other regulators in drafting these rules. New York Washington, D.C. Los Angeles Palo Alto London Paris Frankfurt Tokyo Hong Kong Beijing Melbourne Sydney
2 OPEN MEETING On February 23, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the Commission or the CFTC ) held an open meeting at which it considered adopting five sets of proposed rules relating to the internal conduct of swap dealers ( SDs ), major swap participants ( MSPs ), futures commission merchants ( FCMs ) and introducing brokers ( IBs ) that it proposed in November and December of 2010 (such proposed rules referred to hereinafter as the Proposed Rules ) 1 as well as promulgating a set of proposed rules on the minimum block sizes for swaps (the Open Meeting ). At the Open Meeting, the Commission voted three to two to adopt a final version of the Proposed Rules (the Final Rules or the Internal Business Conduct Rules ) with Commissioners Sommers and O Malia dissenting. Commissioner Sommers explained in her opening statement that she would not support the Final Rules because, in her opinion, too many of the provisions do not make sense or portend to disturbing trends. 2 Commissioner Sommers specifically cited the Commission s determination in the Final Rules to eschew substituted compliance for entities subject to comparable regulation by a prudential regulator. Commissioner Sommers questioned why the Commission should expend its limited resources on duplicative regulation and whether this approach would fit accordingly with the extraterritoriality issues under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reforms and Consumer Protection Act (the Dodd-Frank Act ). Commissioner O Malia dissented because, among other reasons, he strongly disapproved of the rulemaking process. His chief complaint was that the Commission did not properly conduct its costbenefit analysis. Commissioner O Malia argued that a list of anticipated costs associated with implementing the Final Rules was necessary under the Office of Management and Budget (the OMB ) guidelines. Commissioner O Malia further stated that the entire Dodd-Frank Act rulemaking process suffered from the application of weak standards to analyzing the cost and the benefits of [the Commission s] rulemakings. 3 To that end, Commissioner O Malia issued a letter to Acting Director Zients of the OMB requesting that the OMB review the Commission s cost-benefit analysis conducted in connection with the Internal Business Conduct Rules. 4 In this letter, the Commissioner explained that he believed the Commission has failed to carefully and precisely identify a clear baseline against which the Commission measured costs and benefits and the range of alternatives under consideration in this rule. 5 The letter referred to examples of how commenters suggested alternatives for the rules and the Commission dismissed these suggestions without specific justification or just ignored them. As discussed in detail below, Commissioner O Malia specifically highlighted the Commission s refusal to allow SDs and MSPs to rely on swap data repositories ( SDRs ) to meet their recordkeeping requirements under the Internal Business Conduct Rules. 6 The failure to provide acceptable reasoning for ignoring this suggested alternative showed, in Commissioner O Malia s opinion, that the rulemaking process for the Final Rules did not comply with the guidelines established by the OMB. 7 As of the date of this memorandum, the OMB has made no public response to the Commissioner s request. It is unclear what effect, if any, a review by the OMB would have on the validity of the Internal Business Conduct Rules. -2-
3 FINAL RULES As discussed above, the Proposed Rules consisted of five sets of rules proposed in late The Commission worked with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC ); the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve; the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency; and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to finalize the Proposed Rules. The Commission also received 114 comment letters directly related to the Proposed Rules and responded accordingly to these comments. In response to the comment letters and input from the various federal agencies, the Commission determined to make certain changes between the Proposed Rules and the Final Rules. Some of these differences are highlighted in the discussion below. Many of these changes were made in an attempt to harmonize the Proposed Rules with the rules and regulations promulgated by other domestic and foreign regulators, although the success of this harmonization may be limited. Significantly, the Commission determined to adopt the term swaps activities in its Final Rules and to limit the applicability of the Final Rules to these activities. In particular, the Final Rules state that the term swaps activities shall mean a registrant s activities related to swaps and any product used to hedge such swaps, including, but not limited to, futures, options, other swaps or security-based swaps, debt or equity securities, foreign currency, physical commodities, and other derivatives. 8 This term should limit the scope of the required risk management programs and recordkeeping under the Final Rules, as well as the duties of the chief compliance officer ( CCO ), discussed below. The Commission has determined not to further modify the scope of the Internal Business Conduct Rules to differentiate between SDs and MSPs and these two types of entities will be treated identically under the Final Rules. Finally, the Commission rejected a substituted compliance regime with respect to the [Final Rules] for registrants subject to regulation by a prudential regulator. 9 The Commission explained in the release accompanying the Final Rules (the Adopting Release ) that, because SDs and MSPs are Commission registrants, they should all be subject to consistent regulatory regimes. Further, the Internal Business Conduct Rules are designed to work in tandem with the external business conduct rules, adopted on January 11, 2012, to govern the conduct of SDs and MSPs. 10 These external business conduct rules govern the interactions of SDs and MSPs with their counterparties. DUTIES OF SWAP DEALERS AND MAJOR SWAP PARTICIPANTS The Dodd-Frank Act added Section 4s(j) to the Commodity Exchange Act (the CEA ) which imposes certain duties on all registered SDs and MSPs. These duties includes the following: Monitoring positions to avoid violations of applicable limits; Establishing risk management systems; Disclosing general information concerning swaps to the Commission; Implementing conflicts-of-interest procedures and polices (discussed above); and Avoiding actions that result in an unreasonable restraint on trade. -3-
4 As required under Section 4s(j)(7) of the CEA, the Commission has adopted Subpart J of Part 23 of the regulations in Title 17 of the Code of Federal Regulations (the CFK Regulations ), 11 as part of the Internal Business Conduct Rules, and that subpart prescribes rules and regulations governing compliance with the duties enumerated under Section 4s(j) of the CEA. The Internal Business Conduct Rules require an SD or MSP to establish written procedures and policies with respect to a risk management program. This program, which must be approved by the appropriate governing body, should monitor and manage the risks associated with swaps activities. In connection with these policies and procedures, an SD or MSP must establish a risk management unit separate from its business trading unit with sufficient authority and resources to carry out its requisite duties and functions. The risk management program of an SD or MSP must take into account and set risk tolerance limits (and review them quarterly) based on market risk, credit risk, liquidity risk, foreign currency risk, legal risk, operational risk, settlement risk and any other applicable risks. The Internal Business Conduct Rules contain detailed descriptions of these types of risk and describe how the risk management program should evaluate these risks. The risk management program must also consider risks posed by affiliates. 12 Risk management personnel of an SD or MSP must provide senior management and its governing body with written reports concerning the risk exposures of the SD or MSP and any changes to its risk management program and the SD or MSP must furnish this quarterly report to the Commission. The risk management program of an SD or MSP must include policies and procedures for evaluating the risks associated with, and approving, new products. These policies and procedures should take into account whether the new product would materially alter the overall firm-wide risk profile of an SD or MSP. If the new product would materially alter the risk profile, the governing body must approve the new product. The new product policy can allow for preliminary approval of a new product at risk levels that are not material and solely for determining risk management processes for the new product. Under the Internal Business Conduct Rules, the risk management program of an SD or MSP should also include policies and procedures that relate to its use of central counterparties. The SD or MSP must satisfy all of the capital and margin requirements established by the Commission or other prudential regulators. In connection with the risk management program, the Internal Business Conduct Rules require that an SD or MSP establish policies and procedures for its business trading unit that further the objectives of the risk management program. Moreover, the business trading personnel should be separated from the risk management personnel. Pursuant to the Internal Business Conduct Rules, an SD or MSP must adopt policies and procedures to ensure compliance with the position limits established by the Commission, a DCM or an SEF and prevent improper reliance on exemptions from the position limits. The SD or MSP will be held to a reasonableness standard in establishing and enforcing policies and procedures to this effect. An SD or MSP must provide training on position limit compliance to relevant personnel and establish an early warning system to issue alerts if applicable position limits are in danger of being breached. The Internal -4-
5 Business Conduct Rules require that an SD or MSP test the effectiveness of these policies and procedures quarterly, audit them annually in connection with its audit of its risk management program, and retain all records pertaining to early warnings, violations, tests and audits relating to these policies and procedures. An SD or MSP must also establish supervisory systems to monitor the swaps activities carried out by its officers, employees and agents, as well as a related supervisory structure. The Internal Business Conduct Rules require the SD or MSP to establish a business continuity and disaster recovery program, 13 programs for disclosure and inspection of general information required by the CEA or the CFTC Regulations, and policies to prevent the adoption of practices that result in the unreasonable restraint of trade. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST POLICIES AND PROCEDURES Section 732 of the Dodd-Frank Act amended the CEA to mandate that the Commission adopt rules that require FCMs and IBs to implement conflict of interest systems and procedures. Section 731 of the Dodd-Frank Act amended the CEA to require SDs and MSPs to establish structural and institutional safeguards and appropriate informational partitions to separate trading personnel and clearing personnel. In response to these two amendments to the CEA, the Commission adopted Final Rule 1.71 requiring FCMs and most IBs to adopt conflict-of-interest policies and procedures and Final Rule requiring SDs and MSPs to do the same. 14 The Final Rules require FCMs, MSPs, SDs and most IBs to implement policies and procedures that create informational and supervisory firewalls between research personnel and non-research personnel and between trading business units and clearing units. Under the Internal Business Conduct Rules, trading business personnel at an SD or MSP are prohibited from influencing a customer s decision (or the decision of an affiliated clearing member of a DCO to accept a customer) to use the clearing services of an affiliated clearing member of a DCO. Similarly, an FCM is prohibited from allowing an affiliated SD or MSP to influence the decision of a customer to use the clearing services of an FCM or the decision of an FCM to accept a customer. FCMs must also prohibit trading business personnel from inappropriately influencing research reports or research analysts. Separations Between Affiliated Clearing Units and Business Trading Units The Proposed Rules would have broadly defined business trading unit to include any person that performs or is involved in any pricing, trading, sales, marketing, advertising, solicitation, structuring, or brokerage activities. 15 In the Final Rules, the Commission changed this definition to exclude personnel who are not directly involved in actual trading activities, such as legal, compliance, human resources, risk management, operations and other support functions, but would include personnel who directly perform or exercise supervisory authority over the performance of trading activities. If legal, compliance and risk management personnel were deemed business trading personnel, these departments would not be able to interact adequately with affiliated clearing units or research departments and therefore may not be able to perform their respective functions in an integrated firm. In the Proposed Rules, the term clearing unit -5-
6 similarly would have included personnel involved in clearing activities. The Commission made conforming changes to the definition of this term to exclude personnel who are not directly involved in actual clearing activities. Under the Final Rules, an SD or MSP may not interfere with or influence the decision of an affiliated clearing member, and an FCM may not permit an affiliated SD or MSP to interfere with or influence the decision of its clearing unit personnel, to provide clearing services. The SD or MSP also cannot influence or interfere with the decision to adjust the risk tolerance levels of the clearing unit of an affiliated FCM nor can the SD or MSP influence or interfere with a decision to accept certain forms of collateral from, or charge fees to, a particular customer. The Commission modified the Final Rules to clarify that business trading unit personnel may not condition or tie the provision of trading services to the provision of clearing services or otherwise participate in clearing services by improperly incentivizing or encouraging the use of the affiliated FCM. 16 Improper incentives include discounting clearing services in connection with trading activities. The Commission explained that the separation of the FCM clearing unit from the interference or influence of an affiliated SD or MSP is crucial to promoting open access to clearing. 17 The Final Rules require an FCM to erect an informational partition between its clearing unit personnel and business trading personnel at an affiliated SD or MSP. SDs and MSPs are required to erect similar informational partitions between their business trading units and the clearing personnel at an affiliated clearing member of a DCO. An SD or MSP must prohibit any business trading personnel from supervising, controlling or influencing any clearing personnel of an affiliated clearing member of a DCO. No business trading personnel of an affiliated SD or MSP may influence the compensation of clearing personnel at an affiliated clearing member of a DCO. Further, business trading personnel must not participate in any manner in the provision of clearing services by an affiliated clearing member of a DCO except to assist clearing personnel in an affiliated DCO s default management process. The Internal Business Conduct Rules also require that IBs and FCMs disclose any material incentives and conflicts of interest regarding the customer s decision relating to trade execution and/or clearing of a derivatives transaction prior to execution. SDs and MSPs must disclose any material incentives or conflicts of interest concerning whether a counterparty executes a swap on an SEF or DCM and whether a counterparty clears a derivative through a DCO. Separation of Research Departments; Restrictions on Research Communications FCMs, certain IBs, SDs and MSPs ( Registered Entities ) must now, under the Internal Business Conduct Rules, prohibit non-research personnel, including clearing and business trading personnel, from directing or influencing research analysts and research reports. A research report, under the Final Rules, is any written communication that contains analysis of the price or market and other information reasonably sufficient to allow a person to formulate a decision to enter into a derivatives transaction. Unlike the Proposed Rules, the adopted definition of research report includes neither commentaries on economic, political, or market conditions nor statistical summaries of multiple companies financial data. 18 The -6-
7 Commission excluded these two types of communications in order to harmonize this term with the identical term in NASD Rule 2711, promulgated pursuant to section 15D of the Securities Exchange Act. In general, non-research personnel at a Registered Entity cannot influence the views and opinions expressed in a research report or by research analysts or direct a research analyst to publish a research report. Unlike the Proposed Rules, non-research personnel are not completely prohibited from influencing the content of a research report. Such a broad prohibition, it was feared, would impair ordinary communications between research and non-research personnel. Under the Final Rules, therefore, for example, non-research personnel may still provide factual content for research reports but may not have the authority to review or approve research reports prior to publication. Non-research personnel may review a research report only to verify factual accuracy, and the communications with research personnel concerning such factual verification must be made through, or by, authorized legal or compliance personnel. Clearing or business trading personnel of a Registered Entity must not supervise or control any research analysts, including with respect to the compensation of research analysts. The Commission believed the changes to the definition of the terms clearing unit and business trading unit from the Proposed Rules (discussed above) sufficiently limit the scope of the terms so as to allow more senior officers or supervisors who may indirectly supervise clearing and trading personnel to have a role in setting the compensation of, and evaluating, research analysts. Finally, a Registered Entity must not consider a research analyst s contributions to the Registered Entity s trading or clearing business when setting the compensation for such research analyst. The Internal Business Conduct Rules also regulate the content of research reports and the manner in which they are disseminated. Any communication by research analysts with a prospective or current customer must not be misleading and must contain all material facts and qualifications necessary to ensure that it is not misleading. Unlike the Proposed Rules, the Final Rules do not impose this duty on research analysts at a Registered Entity when communicating with other employees of the Registered Entity or its affiliates. The Final Rules also prohibit Registered Entities from inducing customer business by offering a favorable research report or threatening an adverse research report. Research reports from Registered Entities must disclose the financial interest of the research analyst in any derivative of a type, class, or category the research analyst follows. The Registered Entity also must disclose this information even when distributing independent third-party research. The Commission explained that third-party research distributed by the Registered Entity may be perceived as endorsed by the Registered Entity and the Registered Entity should disclose any conflicts of interest accordingly. The Commission elected not to modify the Proposed Rules to address how the rules would apply to research reports that contain information that is subject to the Internal Business Conduct Rules as well as information that is securities-related. Any discussion of derivatives, even if securities underlie those derivatives, according to the Commission, should be subject to its conflict of interest rules. FIA, ISDA and SIFMA argued in a joint comment letter that applying the Internal Business Conduct Rules to multi- -7-
8 product reports could cause significant problems as securities analysts often assist in preparing these reports and the regulatory scheme for securities research analysts differs from the scheme set forth in the Final Rules. For example, securities analysts are not subject to reporting line rules similar to Final Rule 1.71(c)(1)(ii) and Final Rule (c)(1)(ii). The Commission clarified in the Adopting Release that research analysts subject to both the Internal Business Conduct Rules and securities regulations are required to comply with the Internal Business Conduct Rules only when acting as a research analyst for an SD, MSP, FCM or IB. An IB that has generated less than $5 million in gross revenues from its activities as an IB over the past three years (a Small IB ) will be exempt from the requirements of Final Rule 1.71(c). That is, a Small IB will not have to comply with the requirements under the Internal Business Conduct Rules relating to influencing and controlling research analysts and research reports. A Small IB will still have to establish structural and institutional safeguards reasonably designed to erect informational barriers between research and non-research personnel but this is a different standard than the standard imposed on large IBs, MSPs, SDs and FCMs. These Small IBs would still be required to implement policies and procedures mandating disclosure of material incentives and conflicts of interest in a customer s decision as to the trade execution and/or clearing of a derivatives transaction. THE CHIEF COMPLIANCE OFFICERS OF FUTURES COMMISSION MERCHANTS, SWAP DEALERS AND MAJOR SWAP PARTICIPANTS Section 4d(d) of the CEA requires an FCM to designate an individual as its CCO and Section 4s(k) of the CEA imposes the same requirement on SDs and MSPs. Section 4s(k) provides a list of enumerated duties of a CCO at an SD or MSP whereas Section 4d(d) only requires that the CCO of an FCM perform such duties and responsibilities as set forth in regulations to be adopted by the Commission or rules to be adopted by a futures association. 19 Even though the Commission has the statutory authority to delegate the regulation of CCOs of FCMs, the Commission determined to adopt duties and requirements for CCOs of FCMs that are identical to the duties and requirements of CCOs of SDs or MSPs. As required by the CEA, the Commission adopted Final Rule 3.3, which provides the duties and requirements of FCMs, SDs and MSPs to designate a CCO and provides the duties and qualifications of such a CCO. Under the Final Rules, an FCM, SD or MSP must designate a CCO and provide the CCO with the responsibility and authority to develop appropriate policies and procedures reasonably designed to ensure compliance with the obligations set forth in the CEA and CFTC Regulations that relate to the swaps activities of an SD or MSP or the business of an FCM. The CCO must report directly to the board of directors (not a committee) or, if the entity is not a corporation, the CCO must report directly to the senior officer, and only the board or senior officer (as the case may be) has the authority to remove the CCO. The CCO and the board of directors or senior officer must meet at least annually. The FCM, SD or MSP may only designate a person as CCO who has the appropriate background and skills necessary to -8-
9 carry out the responsibilities of the position. Further, in order to register as an FCM, SD or MSP, the entity must list a CCO as a principal of the applicant in the registration application. The Final Rules provide a non-exclusive list of duties for a CCO to fulfill, including, but not limited to, the following: Administering policies and procedures reasonably designed to ensure compliance with the CEA and the regulations promulgated thereunder (the CFTC Regulations ); Resolving any conflicts of interest (in consultation with the board of directors or senior officer); Taking reasonable steps to ensure compliance with the CEA or CFTC Regulations relating to swaps activities or futures commission merchants (as applicable); Establishing procedures for remediating noncompliance issues; Establishing procedures for handling noncompliance issues; and Preparing and signing the annual report. Unlike the Proposed Rules, the CCO does not have to establish all of the compliance policies under the Final Rules. Instead, the CCO is only charged with administering such policies. The CCO must also resolve conflicts of interest that arise. In the Adopting Release, the Commission clarified that the term resolve encompasses both mitigating and eliminating conflicts of interest but may involve actions other than making the final decision on how to deal with the conflict of interest. Unlike under the Proposed Rules, the Final Rules do not require the CCO to ensure compliance with the CEA and the CFTC Regulations. The Commission agreed with commenters that this term may imply that a CCO guarantees compliance with the relevant CEA and CFTC Regulations. In the Final Rules, the CCO is required only to take reasonable steps to ensure compliance. The Commission explained that the role prescribed for a CCO by the Internal Business Conduct Rules goes beyond the traditional advisory role of a CCO and the CCO must have some supervisory authority. Annual Reports of Futures Commission Merchants, Swap Dealers and Major Swap Participants Final Rule 3.3(d)(6) imposes a duty on CCOs of FCMs, SDs and MSPs to prepare and sign an annual report that must be reviewed by the board of directors or senior officer and furnished to the Commission. Unlike the Proposed Rules that required the CCO to certify the annual report, the Final Rules permit either the CEO or CCO to make the required certification. This certification is made under penalty of law and requires the relevant officer to certify the accuracy and completeness of the annual report. The certifying officer is liable only for compliance matters that are within the certifying officer s knowledge and reasonable belief at the time of certification. The Commission explained in the Adopting Release that good faith compliance by the certifying officer with policies and procedures reasonably designed to ensure the accuracy of the annual report will be a viable defense against allegations that false, incomplete or misleading statements were made in the annual report. The Commission can seek administrative or civil penalties for violations of the relevant part of the CEA and CFTC Regulations and a criminal authority could seek criminal penalties for willful violations of the CEA or CFTC Regulations. It -9-
10 should be noted that there is no materiality qualifier to the certification requirement, and so registrants and the certifying officer could be liable even for minor violations of the CEA or CFTC Regulations. The Internal Business Conduct Rules include a list of the minimum requirements for the content of the annual report. These minimum requirements include: A description of the written policies and procedures, including those relating to conflicts of interest; Identification, assessment and discussion of potential improvements to the policies and procedures reasonably designed to ensure compliance with each applicable requirement under the CEA or CFTC Regulations; A list of material changes to compliance polices and procedures; A description of compliance resources and material deficiencies in such resources; and A description of material non-compliance issues and the respective resolving actions. The Final Rules differ from the Proposed Rules by requiring the annual report to contain a description of policies and procedures rather than requiring a full description of compliance. These policies and procedures that are described are limited to those that are reasonably designed to ensure compliance rather than those that ensure compliance. The Final Rules also require only a description of material non-compliance issues rather than all non-compliance issues as was required by the Proposed Rules. CCOs under the Final Rules do not have to certify compliance with the Volcker Rule and the Derivatives Push-Out Rule 20 as the Commission determined not to finalize these provisions from the Proposed Rules at this time. The Internal Business Conduct Rules provide that the annual report must contain a description of the resources devoted to compliance and any material deficiencies in such resources. Unlike the Proposed Rules, the annual report need only disclose material deficiencies in these resources rather than all deficiencies. The annual report must still provide a full description of compliance resources but in any manner within the reasonable discretion of the registrant. The FCM, SD or MSP must maintain records of its compliance policies and materials provided to the board in connection with the review, and work papers that form the basis, of the annual compliance report. These records should be limited to those that are relevant to the annual report. RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING FOR SWAP DEALERS AND MAJOR SWAP PARTICIPANTS Section 4s(f)(1) of the CEA requires SDs and MSPs to make such reports as are required by the Commission by rule or regulation regarding the transactions and positions and financial condition of the registered swap dealer or major swap participant. Under the CEA, as amended by the Dodd-Frank Act, an SD or MSP must keep all records necessary to create a complete audit trail for trade reconstructions. The CEA also requires that all SDs and MSPs keep daily trading records for each counterparty and each record must be identifiable with a swap transaction. -10-
11 These provisions have been further codified in Sections through of the Final Rules. Under the Internal Business Conduct Rules, the SD or MSP must keep the required records for the entire term of each swap and for a period of five years thereafter. The Commission determined that, although SDRs are required to keep similar records pertaining to swap trades and transactions, SDs and MSPs would not be permitted to rely on SDRs to keep the records required under the Internal Business Conduct Rules at this time. The Commission explained that this reliance would be premature and that the records kept by SDRs may not be sufficient to meet the requirement that the SD or MSP maintain complete records of their swaps for risk management purposes. Commissioner O Malia commented at the Open Meeting that he did not understand how the Commission could adopt the rules creating the SDRs 21 as the gold standard for swap data collection and then deem them unreliable in the Adopting Release. Final Rules (c) and (d) in fact require that an SDR keep records of all data reported to SDRs pursuant to part 43 and part 45 of the CFTC Regulations. The Internal Business Conduct Rules, as adopted, require SDs and MSPs to keep a record of each transaction that is searchable by transaction and counterparty. Unlike the Proposed Rules, the Final Rules do not require an SD or MSP to keep all records pertaining to a single transaction in one electronic file. The records should include records of all orders, correspondence, journals, memoranda, ledgers, confirmations, risk disclosure documents, statements of purchase and sale, contracts, invoices, warehouse receipts and documents of title. An SD or MSP must also keep a record of each position it holds and business records of all swaps it clears with a DCO or executes on an SEF or DCM. In addition, an SD or MSP must keep all other records relating to its swaps activities, including governance documents ranging from board minutes and organizational charts to risk management reports. The records should also include financial records, complaints about employees, and marketing and sales materials. These business records do not have to be kept in a single comprehensive file. SDs and MSPs are required to keep daily trade records for all swaps under the CEA as amended by the Dodd-Frank Act. As required under Section 4s(g)(4) of the CEA, the Internal Business Conduct Rules require an SD and MSP to keep sufficient daily trading records so that a comprehensive and accurate trade reconstruction can be conducted for all swaps and cash and forward transactions related to swaps. These records must be identifiable and searchable by transaction and counterparty. Each record should contain pre-execution trade information that includes all oral and written communications concerning quotes, bids, and prices and these communications should be identified by time. Unlike the Proposed Rules, the Final Rules do not require an SD or MSP to keep records for each swap transaction in a separate electronic file. For swaps, an SD or MSP must maintain records concerning the actual execution including information concerning the terms of the swap, cash flows, the trade ticket, the unique swap identifier, the name of the counterparty, a reference to controlling agreements, price, fees and all other relevant information. These records also must contain the post-execution trade information concerning post-trade processing and events, swap confirmation time and date, swap portfolio -11-
12 reconciliation, swap portfolio compression exercises and central clearing of a swap. Additionally, the Internal Business Conduct Rules require an SD or MSP to keep a ledger reflecting various financial and cash flow information. The records required by the CEA and CFTC Regulations must be kept for five years after they are created and must be readily accessible during the first two years. Records related to any swap or related cash or forward transaction must be kept throughout the life of the transaction and for five years thereafter (they must be readily accessible only during the life of the transaction and for the first two years thereafter). Records of pre-execution oral communications need only be kept for one year. In the Adopting Release, the Commission explained that the readily accessible standard requires that the Commission or Department of Justice be able to inspect the records promptly upon request. During the Open Meeting, Commissioner Chilton proposed an amendment in response to Commissioner O Malia s comments concerning the technological feasibility of some of the recordkeeping rules. This amendment, adopted in Final Rule , gives the Director of the Division of Swap Dealer and Intermediary Oversight the authority to grant SDs and MSPs extensions for complying with the daily trade recordkeeping requirements in Final Rule if compliance would be technologically or economically impracticable. During the extension time, an SD or MSP would not be considered in violation of any registration requirements. COMPLIANCE DATES The Commission determined to require different compliance dates for the various rules included within the Internal Business Conduct Rules. The Commission will require compliance at different dates depending on whether an SD, MSP, FCM or IB is regulated by a U.S. prudential regulator or registered with the SEC (for purposes of the list below, the term Regulated 22 will mean regulated by a U.S. prudential regulator or registered with the SEC). The following summarizes the various compliance dates for each type of entity: Regulated SDs and MSPs must comply with the reporting, recordkeeping and daily trading records rules by the later of 90 days after the Final Rules are published in the Federal Register (the Publication Date ) or the date on which SDs and MSPs are required to apply for registration pursuant to 3.10 (such date referred to hereinafter as the 3.10 Date ) and non-regulated SDs and MSPs must comply by the later of 180 days after the Publication Date or the 3.10 Date; Regulated SDs and MSPs must comply with the risk management program rules by the later of 90 days after the Publication Date or the 3.10 Date and non-regulated SDs or MSPs must comply by the later of 180 days after the Publication Date or the 3.10 Date; Regulated SDs and MSPs must comply with the rules relating to business continuity and disaster recovery plans by the later of 180 days after the Publication Date or the 3.10 Date and non-regulated SDs and MSPs must comply by the later of 270 days after the Publication Date or the 3.10 Date; All SDs or MSPs must comply with the rules relating to monitoring position limits, diligent supervision structures, disclosure of general information and antitrust prevention by the later of 60 days after the Publication Date (the Effective Date ) or the 3.10 Date; -12-
13 FCMs and IBs already registered under with the Commission (as of the Effective Date) must comply with the conflicts of interest rules by the Effective Date and non-registered FCMs and IBs must comply upon registration; Regulated SDs and MSPs must comply with the rules relating to CCOs by the later of 180 days after the Publication Date or the 3.10 Date and non-regulated SDs and MSPs must comply by the later of 180 days after the Publication Date or the 3.10 Date; and Regulated FCMs and non-regulated FCMs registered with the Commission (as of the Effective Date) must comply with the rules relating to CCOs within 180 days or 360 days, respectively, after the Publication Date and unregistered FCMs (as of the Effective Date) must comply upon registration. * * * Copyright Sullivan & Cromwell LLP
14 ENDNOTES The Proposed Rules consist of the following sets of rules: Implementation of Conflicts of Interest Policies and Procedures by Futures Commission Merchants and Introducing Brokers, 75 FR (November 17, 2010); Implementation of Conflicts of Interest Policies and Procedures by Swap Dealers and Major Swap Participants, 75 FR (November 23, 2010); Reporting Recordkeeping, and Daily Trading Records Requirements for Swap Dealers and Major Swap Participants, 75 FR (December 9, 2010); Designation of a Chief Compliance Officer; Required Compliance Policies; and Annual Report of a Futures Commission Merchant, Swap Dealer or Major Swap Participant, 75 FR (November 19, 2010); and Regulations Establishing and Governing the Duties of Swap Dealers and Major Swap Participants, 75 FR (November 23, 2010). Transcript at 11. Transcript at 30. Letter to Director Jeffrey Zients, dated February 23, 2012, available at Id. at 1. Id. at 2-3. OMB. Circular A-4, Regulatory Analysis (September 17, 2003). Final 3.1(g). Adopting Release at 8. Business Conduct Standards for Swap Dealers and Major Swap Participants With Counterparties, 77 FR 9734 (February 17, 2012). For additional information on these rules, see our Memorandum to Clients, dated February 6, 2012, CFTC Imposes External Business Conduct Standards on Swap Dealers and Major Swap Participants. 17 CFR to Final Rule (a) requires that an SD or MSP incorporate its policies and procedures for monitoring position limits into its risk management program. Violating the positions limits by an affiliate established by the Commission, a DCM or an SEF is a risk that an SD or MSP should consider in its risk management program. It is unclear whether the Internal Business Conduct Rules would require an SD or MSP to monitor the position levels of affiliates in connection with its risk management program. If an SD or MSP must do so, such monitoring could potentially preclude such an SD or MSP from relying on exemptions from the position limit rules such as the independent account operator exemption. 17 CFR 151.7(f). Under Final Rule , SDs and MSPs are required to establish business continuity and disaster recovery plans. These plans should include procedures for the maintenance of back-up facilities, systems, infrastructure, personnel, and other resources to achieve the timely recovery of data and documentation and to resume operations generally within the next business day. Adopting Release at 66. The Commission would allow alternative methods for staffing back-up facilities rather than employing a full-time back-up staff so long as prompt recovery is ensured. See id. at Pursuant to Final Rule 1.71(b)(2), if an IB has generated less than $5 million over the past three years from its activities as an IB, then such IB will not have to implement written policies and procedures reasonably designed to ensure compliance but will instead only have to establish structural and institutional safeguards reasonably designed to separate research and nonresearch personnel as well as trading and clearing personnel. Proposed Rule (a)(2). -14-
15 Adopting Release at 113. Adopting Release at 109. ENDNOTES (CONTINUED) Adopting Release at 82, Proposed Rule 1.71(a)(9) and Proposed Rule (a)(9). 7 U.S.C. 6d(d). The Volcker Rule imposes broad restrictions on proprietary trading and investing in and sponsoring private equity and hedge funds by banking organizations. For additional information on the Volcker Rule, see our Memorandum to Clients, dated October 12, 2011, Volcker Rule: Agencies Release Proposed Rule Implementing the Volcker Rule. The Derivatives Push-Out Rule prohibits federal assistance, such as federal deposit insurance and Federal Reserve discount window access, from being provided to SDs and MSPs. Swap Data Repositories: Registration Standards, Duties and Core Principles, 76 FR (September 1, 2011). The term Regulated is used to avoid confusion with the concept of registered. To be a Regulated SD, MSP, FCM or IB, the SD, MSP, FCM or IB does not have to be currently registered with the Commission. The entity need only be subject to regulation by a prudential regulator or registered with the SEC. -15-
16 ABOUT SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP Sullivan & Cromwell LLP is a global law firm that advises on major domestic and cross-border M&A, finance, corporate and real estate transactions, significant litigation and corporate investigations, and complex restructuring, regulatory, tax and estate planning matters. Founded in 1879, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP has more than 800 lawyers on four continents, with four offices in the United States, including its headquarters in New York, three offices in Europe, two in Australia and three in Asia. CONTACTING SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP This publication is provided by Sullivan & Cromwell LLP as a service to clients and colleagues. The information contained in this publication should not be construed as legal advice. Questions regarding the matters discussed in this publication may be directed to any of our lawyers listed below, or to any other Sullivan & Cromwell LLP lawyer with whom you have consulted in the past on similar matters. If you have not received this publication directly from us, you may obtain a copy of any past or future related publications from Jennifer Rish ( ; rishj@sullcrom.com) or Alison Alifano ( ; alifanoa@sullcrom.com) in our New York office. CONTACTS New York David J. Gilberg gilbergd@sullcrom.com Kenneth M. Raisler raislerk@sullcrom.com SC1: C -16-
Swap Execution Facility Requirements
CFTC Proposes Rules for SUMMARY The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the CFTC ) has proposed rules setting forth requirements for Swap Execution Facilities ( SEFs ). 1 SEFs are a new type of regulated
More informationSecurity-Based Swap Execution Facilities
SEC Proposes Rules on Registration of Security-Based Swap Execution Facilities SUMMARY On February 2, 2011, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC ) proposed Regulation SB SEF, 1 which sets forth
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 informationCFTC Proposes to Amend CCO Rules
CFTC Proposes Amendments to Chief Compliance Officer Duties and Annual Reports SUMMARY On May 3, 2017, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the CFTC ) announced proposed amendments to its rules governing
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 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 informationCFTC Exemptive Relief Upon Effective Date of Title VII of Dodd-Frank
CFTC Exemptive Relief Upon Effective Date of Title VII of Dodd-Frank CFTC Issues Proposed Order to Provide Relief from Certain Provisions of Title VII That Would Be Effective on July 16, 2011 SUMMARY On
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 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 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 informationLegislation Affecting Energy Trading: Recent Developments
Legislation Affecting Energy Trading: Recent Developments The House fails to pass Rep. Peterson's Commodity Markets Transparency and Accountability Act of 2008," while the Senate considers Sen. Reid's
More informationRecent CFTC Issuances
CFTC Issues Proposed Rules under the Dodd-Frank Act on the Prohibition of Market Manipulation and an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on the Prohibition of Disruptive Trading Practices SUMMARY On
More informationU.S. House of Representatives Passes Comprehensive OTC Derivatives Legislation
U.S. House of Representatives Passes Comprehensive OTC Derivatives Legislation House of Representatives Passes in H.R. 4173, the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009, Which Includes Compromise
More informationCFTC Proposed Rule on Energy Markets Position Limits and Hedge Exemptions
CFTC Proposed Rule on Energy Markets Position Limits and Hedge Exemptions CFTC Adopts Proposed Rule During Public Meeting to Impose Speculative Position Limits on Energy Commodities and to Limit Hedge
More informationCFTC Proposed Rules on Position Limits on Physical Commodity Derivatives
CFTC Proposed Rules on Position Limits on Physical Commodity Derivatives CFTC Adopts Proposed Rule during Public Meeting to Impose Position Limits on Futures and Swaps on Physical Commodities SUMMARY On
More informationIRS Finalizes Regulations Relating to Allocations of Partnership Items Involving Partners That Are Look-Through Entities
IRS Finalizes Regulations Relating to Allocations of Partnership Items Involving Partners That Are Look-Through Entities SUMMARY On May 19, 2008, the Internal Revenue Service issued final regulations on
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 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 informationABS Shelf Eligibility Criteria
SEC Re-proposes Shelf Eligibility Criteria for Asset-Backed Securities SUMMARY On July 26, 2011, the Securities and Exchange Commission re-proposed eligibility criteria for shelf registration of asset-backed
More informationCourt Dismisses Challenge to CFTC Cross- Border Guidance
Court Dismisses Challenge to CFTC Cross- Border Guidance District Court Dismisses Broad-Based Challenge to CFTC Cross- Border Interpretative Guidance but Remands Several Title VII Dodd- Frank Swaps Rules
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 informationSEC Proposes Rule Regarding Communications Involving Security- Based Swaps Entered Into Solely by Eligible Contract Participants
SEC Proposes Rule Regarding Communications Involving Security- Based Swaps Entered Into Solely by Eligible Contract Participants SUMMARY On September 8, 2014, the Securities and Exchange Commission proposed
More informationSEC and CFTC Adopt Product Definitions Under Title VII of Dodd-Frank
SEC and CFTC Adopt Product Definitions Under Title VII of Dodd-Frank The SEC and CFTC Voted to Further Define Swap, Security-Based Swap, and Security-Based Swap Agreement and Finalize Related Requirements;
More informationDodd-frank implementation update: key differences between the CFTC and SEC final business conduct standards and related cross-border requirements
Dodd-frank implementation update: key differences between the CFTC and SEC final business conduct standards and related cross-border requirements Paul M. Architzel, Dan M. Berkovitz, Gail Bernstein, Seth
More informationCFTC Hearings on Energy Markets
Hearings Focused on Current Application of Position Limits and Hedge Exemptions but CFTC Did Not Take Further Action SUMMARY The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) recently concluded a series
More informationReporting Requirements for Foreign Financial Accounts Including Foreign Hedge Funds and Private Equity Funds
Reporting Requirements for Foreign Financial Accounts Including Foreign Hedge Funds and Private IRS Releases Guidance Allowing Taxpayers Recently Learning of Filing Obligations Until September 23, 2009
More informationCOBRADesk Same Day Clearance
FINRA Announces Optional Procedure for Same Day Clearance of Shelf Filings under Rule 5110 SUMMARY The FINRA Corporate Financing Department has created a Same Day Clearance Option that allows issuers and
More informationCFTC v. Wilson: Court Rules against CFTC in Commodities Manipulation Bench Trial
CFTC v. Wilson: Court Rules against CFTC in Commodities Manipulation Bench Trial Court Holds that Open-Market Bids and Offers Made with an Honest Desire to Trade Cannot Support Liability under the Commodity
More informationProposed Legislation Affecting Energy Trading
Proposed Legislation Affecting Energy Trading Proposed Legislation Responding to the Substantial Increase in the Price of Energy Commodities SUMMARY As a result of recent substantial increases in the price
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 informationProposed Regulations Would Greatly Expand Reach of ERISA Fiduciary Exposure
Proposed Regulations Would Greatly Expand Reach of ERISA Fiduciary Exposure Adoption Would Extend ERISA s Prudence and Conflict of Interest Rules to Those Providing Investment Advice to Employee Benefit
More informationRegulated Investment Companies
IRS Extends Guidance on Stock Distributions to Publicly-Traded SUMMARY On January 7, 2009, the Internal Revenue Service issued Revenue Procedure 2009-15 which extends to publicly-traded regulated investment
More informationJudicial Deference to the IRS
Supreme Court Holds that Chevron Deference Applies to Interpretive Treasury Regulations SUMMARY On January 11, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court held, in Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research v.
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 informationReal Estate Investment Trusts
IRS Issues Temporary Guidance on Stock Distributions by Real Estate Investment Trusts SUMMARY On, the Internal Revenue Service issued Revenue Procedure 2008-68 which provides, on a temporary basis, that
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 informationCFTC Chairman Releases White Paper on Cross-Border Swaps Regulation Version 2.0
CFTC Chairman Releases White Paper on Cross-Border Swaps Regulation Version 2.0 White Paper Proposes New Approach to Providing Exemptions and Other Relief from CFTC s Dodd-Frank Swaps Rules for Certain
More informationNew Disclosure Requirement for Derivatives Over Basket Positions That Are Controlled by the Counterparty
July 9, 2015 New Disclosure Requirement for Derivatives Over Basket Positions That Are Controlled by the Counterparty Financial Institutions and Counterparties Must Retroactively Disclose Participation
More informationOverview of Final Rules on Recordkeeping and Reporting of Swaps
Overview of Final Rules on Recordkeeping and Reporting of Swaps February 21, 2012 This memorandum discusses the final rules adopted by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the CFTC or the Commission
More informationLabCFTC Releases Primer on Virtual Currencies
LabCFTC Releases Primer on Virtual Currencies CFTC FinTech Hub Launches Educational Tool for Innovators and Clarifies Jurisdiction Over Virtual Currencies SUMMARY On October 17, 2017, LabCFTC, the focal
More informationKey Differences Between the CFTC and SEC Final Business Conduct Standards and Related Cross-Border Requirements
SECURITIES May 26, 2016 Dodd-Frank Implementation Update Key Differences Between the CFTC and SEC Final Business Conduct Standards and Related Cross-Border Requirements By Paul M. Architzel, Dan M. Berkovitz,
More informationSEC Reopens Comment Period on Proposed Rules Regarding Security-Based Swaps
SEC Reopens Comment Period on Proposed Rules Regarding Security-Based Swaps SEC Reopens Comment Period and Requests Additional Comment on Previously Proposed Rules Regarding Capital, Margin and Collateral
More informationAmendments to the UK Bank Levy Regime and its Interaction with French and German Bank Levies
Amendments to the Regime and its Interaction with French and German Bank Levies SUMMARY In the UK Budget of June 2010, the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced a tax based on banks balance sheets, known
More informationConflicts of Interest in Securitizations
SEC Proposes Rule under Section 621 of the Dodd-Frank Act to Prohibit Securitization Participants from Engaging in Transactions Involving Material Conflicts of Interest with ABS Investors SUMMARY On September
More informationAgencies Promulgate Final Regulations on Internet Gambling
Agencies Promulgate Final Regulations on SUMMARY On November 12, 2008, the U.S. Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve Board jointly promulgated final regulations implementing certain provisions of
More informationU.S. Response: Jurisdictions Authority and Process for Exercising Deference in Relation to OTC Derivatives Regulation
U.S. Response: Jurisdictions Authority and Process for Exercising Deference in Relation to OTC Derivatives Regulation I. BACKGROUND In July 2010, the United States enacted legislation regarding, among
More informationCorporate Reorganizations
IRS Finalizes Regulations on the Extent To Which Creditors of a Corporation Will Be Treated as Proprietors in Determining Whether Continuity of Interest Is Preserved in a Potential Reorganization SUMMARY
More informationProposed Roadmap For IFRS Adoption
SEC Proposes a Roadmap that Could Lead to Mandatory Use of IFRS by U.S. Issuers Beginning in 2014-2016; Also Proposes Rules Permitting Early Use of IFRS by Certain U.S. Issuers SUMMARY The SEC has published
More informationReporting Requirements for Foreign Financial Accounts
Reporting Requirements for Foreign Financial Accounts Final FinCEN Regulations on Foreign Bank and Financial Account Reporting SUMMARY On February 23, 2011, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of
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 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 informationHouse and Senate Pass NOL Carryback Legislation
House and Senate Pass NOL Carryback Legislation Revenue Provisions of the Worker, Homeownership, and Business Assistance Act of 2009 Include Five-Year Carryback of Net Operating Losses, an Extension and
More informationUK Bank Levy. Rates and Update SUMMARY. December 13, 2010
Rates and Update SUMMARY In his Budget statement delivered on 22 June, 2010, the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced that the UK will introduce a tax based on banks balance sheets from 1 January, 2011,
More informationBrexit: U.S. Agencies Facilitate Legacy Swap Transfers
Brexit: U.S. Agencies Facilitate Legacy Swap Transfers Under Interim Final Rule, Legacy Swaps Currently Exempt from the Swap Margin Rule Would Maintain Legacy Status If Transferred from U.K. Financial
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 informationDirect and Significant Connections: CFTC Provides Guidance on Extraterritoriality
News Bulletin July 2, 2012 Direct and Significant Connections: CFTC Provides Guidance on Extraterritoriality On June 29th, the CFTC published a proposed policy statement and interpretive guidance addressing
More informationDepositary Receipts Program Payments
IRS Releases Chief Counsel Memorandum Applying Withholding Tax to Payments Made to a Non-U.S. Corporate Issuer Participating in a Sponsored American Depositary Receipts Program SUMMARY On December 17,
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 informationRe: RIN 3038 AD51 - Notice of Proposed Rulemaking - Customer Clearing Documentation and Timing of Acceptance for Clearing (76 Fed. Reg.
September 30, 2011 David Stawick Secretary Commodity Futures Trading Commission Three Lafayette Centre 1155 21st Street, NW. Washington, DC 20581 Re: RIN 3038 AD51 - Notice of Proposed Rulemaking - Customer
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 informationDodd-Frank Title VII Update: Where Are We Today and Where Are We Going? Ten Important Issues Facing Derivatives Users
Dodd-Frank Title VII Update: Where Are We Today and Where Are We Going? Ten Important Issues Facing Derivatives Users Nov 07, 2011 Top Ten By James M. Cain This resource is sponsored by: Where Are We Today?
More informationCreditability of Foreign Taxes
Treasury Issues Temporary Regulations on Certain Foreign Tax Credit Transactions SUMMARY On July 15, 2008, the Treasury Department issued temporary regulations (the Temporary Regulations ) intended to
More informationCourt of Appeals Affirms NatWest Decisions
Court of Appeals Affirms NatWest Decisions United States Court of Appeals Affirms Decisions Holding Treas. Regs. 1.882-5 To Be Inconsistent with the 1975 U.S.-U.K. Tax Treaty SUMMARY In National Westminster
More informationEconomic Substance Doctrine: New Directive for IRS Examiners and Managers
Economic Substance Doctrine: New Directive for IRS Examiners and Managers LB&I Directive Sets Out Detailed Substantive and Procedural Standards for IRS Examiners to Follow This Provides Valuable Information
More informationTax Election to Treat Disposition of Stock of a Subsidiary as a Sale of Its Assets
Tax Election to Treat Disposition of Stock of a Subsidiary as a Sale of Its Assets Proposed Regulations Would Allow a Corporation to Treat Certain Dispositions of Stock of a Subsidiary as a Sale of Its
More informationFebruary 22, RIN 3038 AD20 -- Swap Data Repositories. Dear Mr. Stawick:
` February 22, 2011 Mr. David A. Stawick Secretary Commodity Futures Trading Commission Three Lafayette Centre 1155 21 st Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20581 Re: RIN 3038 AD20 -- Swap Data Repositories Dear
More informationADVISORY Dodd-Frank Act
ADVISORY Dodd-Frank Act January 19, 2012 CFTC FINALIZES RULES ON SWAP DATA RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING AND REAL-TIME REPORTING On December 20, 2011, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission ( CFTC or Commission
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 informationSEC Proposes Securities Offering and Disclosure Reforms for Business Development Companies and Registered Closed-End Funds
SEC Proposes Securities Offering and Disclosure Reforms for Business Development Companies and Registered Closed-End SEC Proposes an Overhaul of the Registration, Offering and Communications Processes
More informationDodd-Frank Whistleblower Provision
U.S. Supreme Court Holds That Dodd-Frank Act s Whistleblower Provisions Cover Persons Who Report Concerns to the SEC, Not Those Who Exclusively Report Internally. SUMMARY In Digital Realty Trust, Inc.
More informationRe: CFTC and SEC Staff Public Roundtable on International Issues relating to Dodd-Frank Title VII
Mr. David A. Stawick Secretary Commodity Futures Trading Commission Three Lafayette Centre 1155 21st Street, NW Washington, DC 20581 Ms. Elizabeth Murphy Secretary Securities and Exchange Commission 100
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. Reporting The Future: The CFTC s Final Rule On Real-Time Public Reporting Of Swap Data. January 17, 2012
Reporting The Future: The CFTC s Final Rule On Real-Time Public Reporting Of Swap Data Introduction January 17, 2012 On December 20, 2011, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the Commission) unanimously
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 informationTo Our Clients and Friends Memorandum friedfrank.com
To Our Clients and Friends Memorandum friedfrank.com CFTC Update: CFTC Proposes New Position Limits and Aggregation Rules 1 Introduction On November 5, 2013, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (
More informationRisk-Based Bank Capital Guidelines
Federal Banking Agencies Seek Comment on Alternatives to Credit Ratings in Risk-Based Capital Guidelines SUMMARY On August 10, 2010, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Board of Governors
More informationCFTC to Impose Position Limits on Derivatives on 28 Physical Commodities
CFTC to Impose Position Limits on Derivatives on 28 Physical Commodities CFTC Issues Final Rules to Impose Position Limits on Physical Commodity Futures, Options, Swaps and Swaptions SUMMARY The Commodity
More informationAuction Rate Preferred Stock
IRS Provides Guidance on Effect of Liquidity Facilities on Equity Character of Issued by Closed-End Regulated Investment Companies SUMMARY On June 13, 2008, the IRS issued Notice 2008-55, providing guidance
More informationUK Enacts Finance Act 2010 Effecting 50% Tax on Bankers Bonuses
UK Enacts Finance Act 2010 Effecting 50% Tax on Bankers Bonuses UK Bank Payroll Tax on Certain Bonuses Paid by Financial Institutions: Final Legislation and Additional Developments SUMMARY In the UK Pre-Budget
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 informationTax Reform and State and Local Taxation
Initial New York State Reactions SUMMARY Pursuant to the federal tax reform enacted in December 2017, 1 individuals are significantly limited in their ability to deduct state and local taxes. 2 As a result,
More informationCompensation and Corporate Governance Disclosure and Proxy Solicitation
Compensation and Corporate Governance Disclosure and Proxy Solicitation SEC Publishes Proposed Rules to Expand Disclosure Regarding Compensation and Corporate Governance Matters and to Clarify Proxy Solicitation
More informationMoney Market Fund Regulation
SEC Approves Rule Amendments Affecting Money Market Funds SUMMARY The Securities and Exchange Commission has adopted various amendments to rule 2a-7 and other rules relating to money market funds under
More informationERISA Fiduciary Rule. Fifth Circuit Vacates New ERISA Fiduciary Rule SUMMARY BACKGROUND. March 19, 2018
Fifth Circuit Vacates New SUMMARY On March 15, 2018, the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated, in its entirety, a 2016 Department of Labor (the DOL ) package of regulations providing an expansive
More informationCFTC ISSUES MULTIPLE NO-ACTION LETTERS ON REPORTING AND BUSINESS CONDUCT RULES. Portfolio reconciliation; Swap trading relationship documentation;
CLIENT UPDATE CFTC ISSUES MULTIPLE NO-ACTION LETTERS ON REPORTING AND BUSINESS CONDUCT RULES NEW YORK Byungkwon Lim blim@debevoise.com Emilie T. Hsu ehsu@debevoise.com Aaron J. Levy ajlevy@debevoise.com
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 informationDodd-Frank Title VII Rule Compliance Schedules A Matrix
Legal Update January 19, 2012 Dodd-Frank Title VII Rule Compliance Schedules A Matrix The CFTC s recent release of several final rules, including rules regarding registration of swap dealers and major
More informationMoney Market Mutual Funds
Financial Stability Oversight Council Proposes Recommendations for Money Market Mutual Fund Regulation SUMMARY On November 19, 2012, the Financial Stability Oversight Council (the FSOC ) published for
More informationSEC Work Plan for Consideration of IFRS Adoption
SEC Work Plan for Consideration of IFRS Adoption SEC Publishes a Work Plan to Study Potential Adoption of IFRS for U.S. Issuers; Potential Transition to IFRS Delayed Until 2015-2016 SUMMARY The SEC has
More informationREGULATION OF REMOTE CROSS-BORDER FINANCIAL INTERMEDIARIES
REGULATION OF REMOTE CROSS-BORDER FINANCIAL INTERMEDIARIES TECHNICAL COMMITTEE OF THE INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF SECURITIES COMMISSIONS FEBRUARY 2004 Regulation of Remote Cross-Border Financial Intermediaries
More informationAugust 27, Dear Mr. Stawik:
August 27, 2012 David A. Stawick Secretary of the Commission Commodity Futures Trading Commission Three Lafayette Centre 1155 21 st Street N.W. Washington D.C. 20581 Re: Proposed Interpretive Guidance
More informationIt s Not Just Registration: New Regulation of Swap Transactions by US and non-us Banks under the Dodd-Frank Act
New York Seminar Series It s Not Just Registration: New Regulation of Swap Transactions by US and non-us Banks under the Dodd-Frank Act Tuesday, June 12, 2012 arnoldporter.com New York Seminar Series Financial
More informationFair Pay and Safe Workplaces Executive Order Imposes New Terms for Federal Contractors
Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces Executive Order Imposes New Terms for Federal Contractors Executive Order Requires Federal Contractors to Report Adverse Labor and Employment Law Decisions, Provide Detailed
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 informationAmendments to the New York Non-Profit Revitalization Act
Amendments to the New York Non-Profit Revitalization Act SUMMARY On November 28, 2016, Governor Cuomo signed into law Assembly Bill A10365B (the Amendment ), which amended the New York Not-for-Profit Corporation
More informationDodd-Frank Act OTC Derivatives Reform
Dodd-Frank Act OTC Derivatives Reform Supporting Materials for Panel Discussion OTC Derivatives Reforms at MFA s Regulatory Compliance Conference Compliance 2011, November 30, The Princeton Club, New York
More informationthe Trust Indenture Act of 1939 for those security-based swaps that prior to July 16, 2011 were
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 17 CFR PARTS 230, 240 and 260 [Release Nos. 33-9545; 34-71482; 39-2495; File No. S7-26-11] RIN 3235-AL17 EXTENSION OF EXEMPTIONS FOR SECURITY-BASED SWAPS AGENCY: Securities
More informationFATCA: Updates and Coordinating Regulations
FATCA: Updates and Coordinating Regulations Treasury Releases Last Substantial Regulations Package Necessary to Implement FATCA SUMMARY On February 20, 2014, the IRS and the Treasury Department issued
More informationIRS Acquiesces in Xilinx Decision but only for Pre-2003 Cases
IRS Acquiesces in Xilinx Decision but only for Pre-2003 Cases IRS Acquiesces in the Result (but Not the Reasoning) of Ninth Circuit Holding that Employee Stock Option Expenses Need Not Be Shared Among
More informationPresident Obama s Fiscal Year 2012 Revenue Proposals
President Obama s Fiscal Year 2012 Revenue Proposals Proposals Relating to International Taxation SUMMARY On February 14, 2011, the Obama Administration (the Administration ) released the General Explanations
More information