Federal Register, Volume 78 Issue 140 (Monday, July 22, 2013)[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 140 (Monday, July 22, 2013)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 43785-43796]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17467]
[[Page 43785]]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION
17 CFR Chapter I
RIN 3038-AE05
Exemptive Order Regarding Compliance With Certain Swap
Regulations
AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
ACTION: Exemptive order; request for comments.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: On January 7, 2013, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission
(``Commission'' or ``CFTC'') issued a final order (``January Order'')
that granted market participants temporary conditional relief from
certain provisions of the Commodity Exchange Act (``CEA''), as amended
by Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act (``Dodd-Frank Act'' or ``Dodd-Frank'') (and Commission
regulations thereunder). The January Order expires on July 12, 2013. In
this Exemptive Order (``Exemptive Order''), the Commission provides
temporary conditional relief effective upon the expiration of the
January Order in order to facilitate transition to the Dodd-Frank swaps
regime.
DATES: The Exemptive Order is effective July 13, 2013, and will expire
December 21, 2013, or such earlier date specified in the Exemptive
Order.
ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by RIN number 3038-AE05,
by any of the following methods:
The agency's Web site: at http://comments.cftc.gov. Follow
the instructions for submitting comments through the Web site.
Mail: Melissa D. Jurgens, Secretary of the Commission,
Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st
Street NW., Washington, DC 20581.
Hand Delivery/Courier: Same as mail above.
Federal eRulemaking Portal: http://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
Please submit your comments using only one method.
All comments must be submitted in English, or if not, accompanied
by an English translation. Comments will be posted as received to
www.cftc.gov. You should submit only information that you wish to make
available publicly. If you wish the Commission to consider information
that you believe is exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of
Information Act, a petition for confidential treatment of the exempt
information may be submitted according to the procedures established in
Sec. 145.9 of the Commission's regulations.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See 17 CFR 145.9.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission reserves the right, but shall have no obligation, to
review, pre-screen, filter, redact, refuse or remove any or all of your
submission from www.cftc.gov that it may deem to be inappropriate for
publication, such as obscene language. All submissions that have been
redacted or removed that contain comments on the merits of the proposal
will be retained in the public comment file and will be considered as
required under the Administrative Procedure Act \2\ and other
applicable laws, and may be accessible under the Freedom of Information
Act.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 5 U.S.C. 551, et seq.
\3\ 5 U.S.C. 552.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Gary Barnett, Director, Division of
Swap Dealer and Intermediary Oversight, (202) 418-5977,
[email protected]; Sarah E. Josephson, Director, Office of
International Affairs, (202) 418-5684, [email protected]; Mark
Fajfar, Assistant General Counsel, Office of General Counsel, (202)
418-6636, [email protected]; Laura B. Badian, Counsel, Office of General
Counsel, (202) 418-5969, [email protected]; Evan H. Winerman, Attorney-
Advisor, Office of General Counsel, (202) 418-5674, [email protected];
Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Street NW., Washington, DC 20581.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed the Dodd-Frank Act,\4\
which amended the CEA \5\ to establish a new regulatory framework for
swaps. The legislation was enacted to reduce systemic risk, increase
transparency, and promote market integrity within the financial system
by, among other things: (1) Providing for the registration and
comprehensive regulation of swap dealers (``SDs'') and major swap
participants (``MSPs''); (2) imposing clearing and trade execution
requirements on standardized derivative products; (3) creating rigorous
recordkeeping and data reporting regimes with respect to swaps,
including real-time public reporting; and (4) enhancing the
Commission's rulemaking and enforcement authorities over all registered
entities, intermediaries, and swap counterparties subject to the
Commission's oversight. Section 722(d) of the Dodd-Frank Act also
amended the CEA to add section 2(i), which provides that the swaps
provisions of the CEA apply to cross-border activities when certain
conditions are met, namely, when such activities have a ``direct and
significant connection with activities in, or effect on, commerce of
the United States'' or when they contravene a Commission rulemaking.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection
Act, Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (July 21, 2010).
\5\ 7 U.S.C. 1 et seq. (amended 2010).
\6\ 7 U.S.C. 2(i).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the nearly three years since its enactment, the Commission has
finalized 69 actions to implement Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act. The
finalized actions include rules promulgated under CEA section 4s,\7\
which address registration of SDs and MSPs and other substantive
requirements applicable to SDs and MSPs. Notably, many section 4s
requirements applicable to SDs and MSPs are tied to the date on which a
person is required to register, unless a later compliance date is
specified.\8\ A number of other rules specifically applicable to SDs
and MSPs have been proposed but are not finalized.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ 7 U.S.C. 6s.
\8\ Examples of section 4s implementing rules that become
effective for SDs and MSPs at the time of their registration include
requirements relating to swap data reporting (Commission regulation
23.204) and conflicts of interest (Commission regulation 23.605(c)-
(d)). The chief compliance officer requirement (Commission
regulations 3.1 and 3.3) is an example of those rules that have
specific compliance dates. The compliance dates are summarized on
the Compliance Dates page of the Commission's Web site. (http://www.cftc.gov/LawRegulation/DoddFrankAct/ComplianceDates/index.htm).
The Commission's regulations are codified at 17 CFR Ch. 1.
\9\ These include rules under CEA section 4s(e),7 U.S.C. 6s(e)
(governing capital and margin requirements for SDs and MSPs), and
CEA section 4s(l), 7 U.S.C. 6s(l) (governing segregation
requirements for uncleared swaps).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further, the Commission published for public comment the Proposed
Guidance,\10\ which set forth the manner in which it proposed to
interpret section 2(i) of the CEA as it applies to the requirements
under the Dodd-Frank Act and the Commission's regulations promulgated
thereunder regarding cross-border swaps activities. Specifically, in
the Proposed Guidance, the Commission described the general manner in
which it proposed to consider: (1) Whether a non-U.S. person's swap
dealing activities are sufficient to require registration as a ``swap
dealer,'' \11\ as further defined in a joint release adopted by the
Commission
[[Page 43786]]
and the Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'') (collectively, the
``Commissions''); \12\ (2) whether a non-U.S. person's swap positions
are sufficient to require registration as a ``major swap participant,''
\13\ as further defined in the Final Entities Rules; and (3) the
treatment of foreign branches, agencies, affiliates, and subsidiaries
of U.S. SDs and U.S. branches of non-U.S. SDs. The Proposed Guidance
also generally described the policy basis and procedural framework
underlying the Commission's determination to allow compliance with a
comparable regulatory requirement of a foreign jurisdiction to
substitute for compliance with the requirements of the CEA and
Commission regulations thereunder. Last, the Proposed Guidance set
forth the manner in which the Commission proposed to interpret section
2(i) of the CEA as it applies to the clearing, trading, and certain
reporting requirements under the Dodd-Frank Act with respect to swaps
between counterparties that are not SDs or MSPs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Cross-Border Application of Certain Swaps Provisions of the
Commodity Exchange Act, 77 FR 41214 (Jul. 12, 2012) (``Proposed
Guidance'').
\11\ 7 U.S.C. 1a(49) (defining the term ``swap dealer'').
\12\ See Further Definition of `Swap Dealer,' `Security-Based
Swap Dealer,' `Major Swap Participant,' `Major Security-Based Swap
Participant' and `Eligible Contract Participant,' 77 FR 305969 (May
23, 2012) (``Final Entities Rules'').
\13\ 7 U.S.C. 1a(33) (defining the term ``major swap
participant'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contemporaneously with the Proposed Guidance, the Commission
published the Exemptive Order Regarding Compliance With Certain Swap
Regulations (``Proposed Order'') \14\ pursuant to section 4(c) of the
CEA, in order to foster an orderly transition to the new swaps
regulatory regime and to provide market participants greater certainty
regarding their obligations with respect to cross-border swaps
activities prior to finalization of the Proposed Order. The Proposed
Order would have granted temporary relief from certain swaps provisions
of Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 77 FR 41110 (Jul. 12, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On January 7, 2013, the Commission published the Final Exemptive
Order Regarding Compliance with Certain Swap Regulations (``January
Order''),\15\ which finalized the Proposed Order, with modifications,
and granted temporary relief from certain swaps provisions of Title VII
of the Dodd-Frank Act. In particular, the January Order: (1) Applies,
for purposes of the January Order, a definition of the term ``U.S.
person'' based on the counterparty criteria set forth in CFTC Letter
No. 12-22,\16\ with certain modifications; (2) provides relief
concerning SD de minimis and MSP threshold calculations; (3)
classifies, for purposes of the January Order, requirements of the CEA
and Commission regulations as either ``Entity-Level Requirements'' or
``Transaction-Level Requirements;'' (4) allows non-U.S. persons that
register as SDs or MSPs to delay compliance with certain Entity-Level
Requirements and Transaction-Level Requirements; and (5) allows foreign
branches of U.S. SDs or MSPs to delay compliance with certain
Transaction-Level Requirements. The January Order was effective
December 21, 2012, and expires July 12, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ 78 FR 858 (Jan. 7, 2013).
\16\ CFTC Division of Swap Dealer and Intermediary Oversight,
Re: Time-Limited No-Action Relief: Swaps Only With Certain Persons
to be Included in Calculation of Aggregate Gross Notional Amount for
Purposes of Swap Dealer De Minimis Exception and Calculation of
Whether a Person is a Major Swap Participant, No-Action Letter No.
12-22 (Oct. 12, 2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Need for Further Exemptive Relief With Request for Comments
In issuing the January Order, the Commission attempted to be
responsive to industry's concerns regarding implementation and thereby
ensure that market practices would not be unnecessarily disrupted
during the transition to the new swaps regulatory regime. At the same
time, however, the Commission endeavored to comply with the
Congressional mandate to implement the new SD and MSP regulatory scheme
in a timely manner. Accordingly, the January Order was carefully
tailored both in scope and duration in order to strike the proper
balance between these competing demands.
Following the issuance of the January Order, Commission staff
addressed various implementation issues through no-action letters and
interpretative letters in order to ensure a smooth transition to the
new swaps regulatory regime. Furthermore, the Commission and its staff
have closely consulted with SEC staff and with foreign regulators in an
effort to harmonize cross-border regulatory approaches. As a result,
significant progress has been made towards implementation of the Dodd-
Frank swaps regime. Under these circumstances, the Commission does not
believe that an extension of the January Order is necessary or
appropriate. The Commission believes, however, that further
transitional relief is necessary in order to avoid unnecessary market
disruptions and to facilitate market participants' transition to the
new Dodd-Frank swaps regime. Specifically, with the expiration of the
January Order, the temporary definition of the term ``U.S. person''
will no longer be available. As a result, market participants will need
additional time to adjust their operational and compliance systems in
order to incorporate the revised scope of the term ``U.S. person.''
The Commission also recognizes that implementation of the
Commission's substituted compliance program would benefit from
additional time.\17\ Under this ``substituted compliance program,'' the
Commission may determine that certain laws and regulations of a foreign
jurisdiction are comparable to, and as comprehensive as, a
corresponding category of U.S. laws and regulations.\18\ A finding of
comparability, however, may not be possible at this time for a number
of reasons, including that the foreign jurisdiction has not yet
implemented or finalized particular requirements and that the
Commission does not have sufficient information to make the
comparability determinations (``Substituted Compliance
Determinations''). Moreover, the Commission has only recently received
requests for Substituted Compliance Determinations from parties located
in Australia, Canada, the European Union, Hong Kong, Japan, and
Switzerland.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See Interpretive Guidance and Policy Statement Regarding
Compliance with Certain Swap Regulations, (``Guidance''), adopted
concurrently with the Exemptive Order.
\18\ As stated in the Guidance, any comparability analysis will
be based on a comparison of specific foreign requirements against
specific related CEA provisions and Commission regulations in 13
categories of regulatory obligations, considering certain factors
described in the Guidance.
\19\ The Commission notes that of 78 SDs and two MSPs registered
as of June 14, 2013, 33 SDs are from six non-U.S. jurisdictions:
Twenty from the European Union; five from Australia; five from
Canada; one from Japan; one from Hong Kong; and one from
Switzerland.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission is issuing the Exemptive Order today, with a request
for comments, as it is cognizant that, in the absence of immediate
exemptive relief, market participants will be faced with significant
legal uncertainty and the risk of adverse consequences to their global
business, especially in light of the ongoing discussions with foreign
regulatory entities and their evolving regulatory regimes. For all of
the foregoing reasons, the Commission finds that public notice and
comment on this Exemptive Order would be impracticable, unnecessary,
and contrary to the public interest.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ See 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the Commission understands that the transition to the
Guidance is complex and could apply in varied ways to different
situations, the Commission is seeking public comment on any issues that
are not fully addressed by the Exemptive Order. Thus, the Exemptive
Order is effective as of July 13, 2013, and the Commission is
soliciting comments for 30 days. The
[[Page 43787]]
Commission will take into consideration arguments made in all comments
received and make adjustments to the Exemptive Order, as necessary.
In summary, like the January Order, the Exemptive Order will
provide targeted, time-limited relief from certain Dodd-Frank
requirements to facilitate an orderly transition to the Dodd-Frank
regulatory regime, while, at the same time, ensuring that the Dodd-
Frank swaps market reform is implemented without undue delay.
III. Scope of Exemptive Order
A. Definition of ``U.S. Person'' and Phase-In of Guaranteed Affiliates
and ``Affiliate Conduits''
As discussed above, the Commission recognizes that market
participants may need additional time to facilitate their transition to
the interpretation of the term ``U.S. person.'' Accordingly, under the
Exemptive Order, the definition of the term ``U.S. person'' contained
in the January Order will continue to apply from July 13, 2013 (the
date on which the Exemptive Order is effective) until 75 days after the
Final Guidance is published in the Federal Register. The Commission
expects that this step, and the other relief provided in this Exemptive
Order, will substantially address concerns regarding the complexity of
implementing the swap requirements for the interim period during which
the Exemptive Order is in effect. In addition, guaranteed affiliates
and affiliate conduits do not need to comply with Transaction-Level
Requirements relating to swaps with non-U.S. persons and foreign
branches of U.S. swap dealers and MSPs until 75 days after the Final
Guidance is published in the Federal Register.
B. De Minimis Calculation
The Commission has adopted final rules and interpretive guidance
implementing the statutory definitions of the terms ``swap dealer'' and
``major swap participant'' in CEA sections 1a(49) and 1a(33).\21\ The
Final Entities Rules delineate the activities that cause a person to be
an SD and the level of swap positions that cause a person to be an MSP.
In addition, the Commission has adopted rules concerning the statutory
exceptions from the definition of an SD, including the de minimis
exception.\22\ Commission regulation 1.3(ggg)(4) sets forth a de
minimis threshold of swap dealing, which takes into account the
notional amount of a person's swap dealing activity over the prior 12
months.\23\ When a person engages in swap dealing transactions above
that threshold, the person meets the SD definition in section 1a(49) of
the CEA.\24\ Commission regulations 1.3(jjj)(1) and 1.3(lll)(1) set
forth swap position thresholds for the MSP definition in Commission
regulation 1.3(hhh). When a person holds swap positions above those
thresholds, such person meets the MSP definition in section 1a(39) of
the CEA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ 7 U.S.C. 1a(49) and 1a(33). See Final Entities Rules.
\22\ Section 1a(49)(D) of the CEA, 7 U.S.C. 1a(49)(D), provides
that ``[t]he Commission shall exempt from designation as a swap
dealer an entity that engages in a de minimis quantity of swap
dealing in connection with transactions with or on behalf of its
customers. The Commission shall promulgate regulations to establish
factors with respect to the making of this determination to
exempt.'' This provision is implemented in Commission regulation
1.3(ggg)(4).
\23\ As used in the Exemptive Order, the meaning of the term
``swap dealing'' is consistent with that used in the Final Entities
Rules.
\24\ Under Commission regulations 3.10(a)(1)(v)(C) and 23.21, a
person is required to register as an SD when, on or after October
12, 2012, the person falls within the definition of an SD. However,
the rule defining ``swap dealer'' includes a de minimis threshold so
that an entity is not an SD if it, together with the entities
controlling, controlled by, and under common control with it,
engages in swap dealing activity during the prior 12 months in an
aggregate gross notional amount of less than the specified
thresholds. The rule further specifies that swap dealing activity
engaged in before the effective date of both the ``swap dealer'' and
``swap'' definition rules (i.e., before October 12, 2012) does not
count toward the de minimis threshold. The rule also provides that
an entity that exceeds the de minimis threshold must register as an
SD two months after the end of the month in which it exceeds the
threshold. See Commission regulation 1.3(ggg)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As described in the January Order, the Commission believed it
appropriate to provide, during the pendency of the Commission's cross-
border interpretive guidance, temporary relief for non-U.S. persons
(regardless of whether the non-U.S. persons' swap obligations are
guaranteed by U.S. persons) from the requirement that a person include
all its swaps in its calculation of the aggregate gross notional amount
of swaps connected with its swap dealing activity for SD purposes or in
its calculations for MSP purposes.\25\ In order to facilitate an
orderly transition to the revised scope of the term ``U.S. person,''
the Exemptive Order provides that until 75 days after the Guidance is
published in the Federal Register, a non-U.S. person (regardless of
whether the non-U.S. person's swaps obligations are guaranteed by U.S.
persons) does not need to include in its calculation of the aggregate
gross notional amount of swaps connected with its swap dealing activity
for purposes of Commission regulation 1.3(ggg)(4) or in its calculation
of whether it is an MSP for purposes of Commission regulation 1.3(hhh),
any swaps where the counterparty is a non-U.S. person, or any swap
where the counterparty is a foreign branch of a U.S. person that is
registered as a swap dealer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ On the other hand, the Commission believes that it is not
appropriate to provide a non-U.S. person with relief from the
registration requirement when the aggregate level of its swap
dealing with U.S. persons, as that term is defined in the Guidance,
exceeds the de minimis level of swap dealing, or when the level of
its swap positions with U.S. persons, again as that term is defined
above, exceeds one of the MSP thresholds. In the Commission's view,
such relief from the registration requirement is inappropriate when
a level of swaps activities that is substantial enough to require
registration as an SD or an MSP when conducted by a U.S. person, is
conducted by a non-U.S. person with U.S. persons as counterparties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Aggregation
Commission regulation 1.3(ggg)(4) requires that a person include,
in determining whether its swap dealing activities exceed the de
minimis threshold, the aggregate notional value of swap dealing
transactions entered by its affiliates under common control. Under the
January Order, a non-U.S. person that is engaged in swap dealing
activities with U.S. persons as of the effective date of the January
Order is not required to include, in its calculation of the aggregate
gross notional amount of swaps connected with its swap dealing activity
for purposes of Commission regulation 1.3(ggg)(4), the aggregate gross
notional amount of swaps connected with the swap dealing activity of
its U.S. affiliates under common control.\26\ Further, a non-U.S.
person that is engaged in swap dealing activities with U.S. persons as
of the effective date of the January Order and is an affiliate under
common control with a person that is registered as an SD is also not
required to include, in its calculation of the aggregate gross notional
amount of swaps connected with its swap dealing activity for purposes
of Commission regulation 1.3(ggg)(4), the aggregate gross notional
amount of swaps connected with the swap dealing activity of any non-
U.S. affiliate under common control that is either (i) engaged in swap
dealing activities with U.S. persons as of the effective date of the
January Order or (ii) registered as an SD. Also, under the January
Order, a non-U.S. person is not required to include, in its calculation
of the aggregate gross notional amount of swaps connected with its swap
dealing
[[Page 43788]]
activity for purposes of Commission regulation 1.3(ggg)(4), the
aggregate gross notional amount of swaps connected with the swap
dealing activity of its non-U.S. affiliates under common control with
other non-U.S. persons as counterparties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ For this purpose, the Commission construes ``affiliates''
to include persons under common control as stated in the
Commission's final rule further defining the term ``swap dealer,''
which defines control as ``the possession, direct or indirect, of
the power to direct or cause the direction of the management and
policies of a person, whether through the ownership of voting
securities, by contract or otherwise.'' See Final Entities Rules, 77
FR at 30631 n. 437.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In order to facilitate transition to the expanded scope of the term
``U.S. person,'' the Exemptive Order allows all non-U.S. persons to
apply the aggregation principle applied in the January Order until 75
days after the Guidance is published in the Federal Register.
D. Swap Dealer Registration
A non-U.S. person that was previously exempt from registration as
an SD because of the temporary relief extended to such person under the
Commission's January Order, but that is required to register as an SD
under Commission regulation 1.3(ggg)(4) because of changes to the scope
of the term ``U.S. person'' or changes in the de minimis SD calculation
or aggregation for purposes of the de minimis calculation, is not
required to register as an SD until two months after the end of the
month in which such person exceeds the de minimis threshold for SD
registration.
E. Entity-Level and Transaction-Level Requirements
1. Categorization
For purposes of the Exemptive Order, the Dodd-Frank swaps
provisions applicable to SDs and MSPs are categorized as Entity-Level
or Transaction-Level Requirements in the same way as they are
categorized in the Guidance.\27\ In particular, for purposes of the
Exemptive Order, Entity-Level Requirements consist of: (1) Capital
adequacy; (2) chief compliance officer; \28\ (3) risk management; \29\
(4) swap data recordkeeping; \30\ and (5) swap data repository
(``SDR'') Reporting.\31\ The Transaction-Level Requirements consist of:
(1) Clearing and swap processing; \32\ (2) margin and segregation
requirements for uncleared swaps; (3) trade execution; \33\ (4) swap
trading relationship documentation; \34\ (5) portfolio reconciliation
and compression; \35\ (6) real-time public reporting; \36\ (7) trade
confirmation; \37\ (8) daily trading records; \38\ and (9) external
business conduct standards.\39\ Under the Guidance, Transaction-Level
Requirements (1) to (8) are the ``Category A Transaction-Level
Requirements,'' while external business conduct standards are the
``Category B Transaction-Level Requirements.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ Because, as described in the Guidance, substituted
compliance is not possible with respect to Large Trader Reporting
(``LTR'') requirements (i.e., non-U.S. persons that are subject to
part 20 of the Commission's regulations would comply with it in the
same way that U.S. persons comply), LTR requirements are not
included within the term ``Entity-Level Requirements'' for purposes
of the Exemptive Order.
\28\ 17 CFR 3.3.
\29\ 17 CFR 23.600, 23.601, 23.602, 23.603, 23.605, 23.606,
23.608, and 23.609.
\30\ 17 CFR 1.31, 23.201 and 23.203.
\31\ 17 CFR parts 45 and 46.
\32\ 17 CFR 23.506, 23.610, and part 50.
\33\ The Commission has adopted regulations for determining when
a swap is ``available to trade'' and a compliance schedule for the
trade execution requirement that applies when a swap subject to
mandatory clearing is available to trade. At the present time, no
swap either has been determined to be made available to trade or is
subject to the trade execution requirement. See Process for a
Designated Contract Market or Swap Execution Facility To Make a Swap
Available to Trade, Swap Transaction Compliance and Implementation
Schedule, and Trade Execution Requirement Under the Commodity
Exchange Act, 78 FR 33606 (Jun. 4, 2013). See CEA section 2(h)(8)
and 17 CFR 37.12 or 38.11.
\34\ 17 CFR 23.504 and 23.505.
\35\ 17 CFR 23.502 and 23.503.
\36\ 17 CFR 23.205 and part 43.
\37\ 17 CFR 23.501.
\38\ 17 CFR 23.202.
\39\ 17 CFR 23.400 to 23.451.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission notes that it has not yet finalized regulations
regarding capital adequacy or margin and segregation for uncleared
swaps. In the event that the Commission finalizes regulations regarding
capital adequacy or margin and segregation for uncleared swaps before
December 21, 2013, non-U.S. SDs and non-U.S. MSPs would comply with
such requirements in accordance with any compliance date provided in
the relevant rulemaking.
2. Application of Entity-Level Requirements
i. Application to non-U.S. SDs and non-U.S. MSPs
As described in the Guidance, non-U.S. SDs and non-U.S. MSPs can
generally comply with specified Entity-Level Requirements by complying
with regulations of the jurisdiction in which the non-U.S. SD or non-
U.S. MSP is established, assuming the Commission has made a Substituted
Compliance Determination with respect to the particular regulatory
regime.\40\ In addition to SDs in the United States, there are
provisionally registered SDs that are established in Australia, Canada,
the European Union, Hong Kong, Japan, and Switzerland. Market
participants or regulators in all of these jurisdictions have recently
submitted requests for Substituted Compliance Determinations. Given
that the Guidance is being issued now, and that the Commission did not
receive any submissions in support of Substituted Compliance
Determinations with sufficient time to review them and reach a final
determination, the Commission has determined to temporarily delay
compliance with Entity-Level Requirements in these jurisdictions.
Accordingly, under the Exemptive Order, a non-U.S. SD or non-U.S. MSP
established in Australia, Canada, the European Union, Hong Kong, Japan
or Switzerland may defer compliance with any Entity-Level Requirement
for which substituted compliance would be possible, as described in the
Commission's Guidance, until the earlier of December 21, 2013 or 30
days following the issuance of a Substituted Compliance Determination
for the relevant regulatory requirements of the jurisdiction in which
the non-U.S. SD or non-U.S. MSP is established.\41\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ As detailed in the Guidance, non-U.S. SDs and MSPs may
generally rely on substituted compliance with respect to capital
adequacy, chief compliance officer, risk management, and certain
swap data recordkeeping. Non-U.S persons may also generally rely on
substituted compliance with respect to SDR reporting and certain
aspects of swap data recordkeeping relating to complaints and
marketing and sales materials, but only for transactions with non-
U.S. counterparties.
\41\ The Commission anticipates that non-U.S. SDs/MSPs may
require additional time after a Substituted Compliance Determination
in order to phase in compliance with the relevant requirements of
the jurisdiction in which the non-U.S. SDs or MSP is established.
The Commission and its staff intend to address the need for any
further transitional relief in connection with the subject
Substituted Compliance Determination.
In addition, if an SD or MSP established in another jurisdiction
files a request for registration before December 21, 2013, the
Commission may consider a request for deferring compliance with the
Entity-Level Requirements if a substituted compliance request is
filed concurrently with the application.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the January Order, non-U.S. SDs and non-U.S. MSPs are
required to comply with SDR Reporting for all swaps with U.S.
counterparties. However, non-U.S. SDs and non-U.S. MSPs that are not
part of an affiliated group in which the ultimate parent entity is a
U.S. SD, U.S. MSP, U.S. bank, U.S. financial holding company or U.S.
bank holding company are relieved, during the pendency of the January
Order, from complying with the SDR Reporting requirements for swaps
with non-U.S. counterparties. In order to facilitate the transition to
fully compliant SDR Reporting, the Commission will provide non-U.S. SDs
and non-U.S. MSPs established in Australia, Canada, the European Union,
Hong Kong, Japan or Switzerland that are not part of an affiliated
group in which the ultimate parent entity is a U.S. SD, U.S. MSP, U.S.
bank, U.S. financial holding company, or U.S. bank
[[Page 43789]]
holding company with temporary relief from the SDR reporting
requirements of part 45 and part 46 of the Commission's regulations
with respect to swaps with non-U.S. counterparties on the condition
that, during the relief period: (i) Such non-U.S. SDs and non-U.S. MSPs
are in compliance with the swap data recordkeeping and reporting
requirements of their home jurisdictions; or (ii) where no swap data
reporting requirements have been implemented in their home
jurisdictions, such non-U.S. SDs and non-U.S. MSPs comply with the
recordkeeping requirements of Commission regulations 45.2, 45.6, 46.2
and 46.4. This relief will expire the earlier of December 21, 2013 or,
in the event of a Substituted Compliance Determination for the
regulatory requirements of parts 45 and 46 for the jurisdiction in
which the non-U.S. SD or non-U.S. MSP is established, 30 days following
the issuance of such Substituted Compliance Determination.
3. Application of Transaction-Level Requirements
i. Application to U.S. SDs and MSPs
Generally, U.S. SDs and MSPs must comply with all Transaction-Level
Requirements that are in effect. As described in the Guidance, however,
a foreign branch of a U.S. SD or MSP that enters into a swap with a
non-U.S. counterparty would be able to comply with the requirements of
the local law and regulations in the foreign location of the branch in
lieu of compliance with Category A Transaction-Level Requirements if
the Commission has made a Substituted Compliance Determination with
respect to those regulatory requirements. Additionally, as described in
the Guidance, a foreign branch of a U.S. bank that is an SD or MSP need
not comply with Category B Transaction-Level Requirements unless its
swap counterparty is a U.S. person other than a foreign branch of a
U.S. bank that is an SD or MSP.
Given that the Guidance is being issued now, and that the
Commission did not receive any submissions in support of Substituted
Compliance Determinations with sufficient time to review them and reach
a final determination, the Commission has determined to temporarily
defer compliance with the Category A Transaction-Level Requirements by
foreign branches of U.S. banks if they are located in any of the six
jurisdictions for which the Commission has received, or expects to
receive in the near term, a request for substituted compliance
determinations, for transactions for which substituted compliance is
possible under the Guidance for such entities.\42\ Accordingly, under
the Exemptive Order, a foreign branch \43\ of a U.S. bank that is an SD
or MSP, and which is located in Australia, Canada, the European Union,
Hong Kong, Japan, or Switzerland, may comply with any law and
regulations of the jurisdiction where the foreign branch is located
(and only to the extent required by such jurisdiction) in lieu of
complying with any Category A Transaction-Level Requirement for which
substituted compliance would be possible under the Guidance (other than
a clearing requirement under CEA section 2(h)(1), Commission
regulations under part 50, and Commission regulation 23.506; a trade
execution requirement under CEA section 2(h)(8) and regulation 37.12 or
38.11; \44\ or a real-time reporting requirement under part 43 of the
Commission regulations for swaps with guaranteed affiliates \45\ of a
U.S. person), until the earlier of December 21, 2013 or 30 days
following the issuance of a Substituted Compliance Determination for
the relevant regulatory requirements of the country in which the
foreign branch is located. For swaps transactions with guaranteed
affiliates of a U.S. person, a foreign branch of a U.S. SD or MSP
established in Australia, Canada, the European Union, Hong Kong, Japan
or Switzerland may comply with the law and regulations of the
jurisdiction where the foreign branch is located related to real-time
reporting (and only to the extent required by such jurisdiction) in
lieu of complying with the real-time reporting requirements of part 43
of the Commission regulations until September 30, 2013. In the case of
swaps with guaranteed affiliates of a U.S. person, the Commission
believes that it the real-time reporting requirements of part 43 of the
Commission's regulations should be effective as expeditiously as
possible in order to achieve their underlying statutory objectives.
Therefore, the Commission has determined that it would not be in the
public interest to further delay reporting under part 43 of the
Commission's regulations with respect to such swaps beyond September
30, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\42\ If an SD or MSP established in any other jurisdiction files
an application for registration before December 21, 2013, the
Commission may consider a request for deferring compliance with the
Transaction-Level Requirements if a substituted compliance request
is filed concurrently with the application.
The Commission notes that Transaction-Level Requirements apply
on a transaction-by-transaction basis. As described in the Guidance,
if a Substituted Compliance Determination is applicable to the
jurisdiction in which a foreign branch of a U.S. bank is located for
the relevant regulatory requirements and the branch enters into a
swap (either in the jurisdiction in which it is located or another
jurisdiction), then the branch can elect to comply with either the
regulatory regime of the jurisdiction in which it is located for
which the Substituted Compliance Determination has been made, or the
comparable Category A Transaction-Level Requirements.
\43\ For purposes of this Exemptive Order, market participants
must use the term ``foreign branch'' and the interpretation of when
a swap is with a foreign branch set forth in the Guidance. See
Guidance regarding the types of offices which the Commission would
consider to be a ``foreign branch'' of a U.S. bank, and the
circumstances in which a swap is with such foreign branch.
\44\ The Commission has adopted regulations for determining when
a swap is ``available to trade'' and a compliance schedule for the
trade execution requirement that applies when a swap subject to
mandatory clearing is available to trade. At the present time, no
swap either has been determined to be made available to trade or is
subject to the trade execution requirement. See Process for a
Designated Contract Market or Swap Execution Facility To Make a Swap
Available to Trade, Swap Transaction Compliance and Implementation
Schedule, and Trade Execution Requirement Under the Commodity
Exchange Act, 78 FR 33606 (Jun. 4, 2013). See CEA section 2(h)(8)
and 17 CFR 37.12 or 38.11.
\45\ As used in the Exemptive Order, the term ``guaranteed
affiliate'' refers to a non-U.S. person that is affiliated with a
U.S. person and guaranteed by a U.S. person. In addition, for
purposes of the Exemptive Order, the Commission interprets the term
``guarantee'' generally to include not only traditional guarantees
of payment or performance of the related swaps, but also other
formal arrangements that, in view of all the facts and
circumstances, support the non-U.S. person's ability to pay or
perform its swap obligations with respect to its swaps. See Proposed
Guidance, 77 FR at 41221 n. 47. The term ``guarantee'' encompasses
the different financial arrangements and structures that transfer
risk directly back to the United States. In this regard, it is the
substance, rather than the form, of the arrangement that determines
whether the arrangement should be considered a guarantee for
purposes of the Exemptive Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to a swap that is subject to the clearing requirement
under CEA section 2(h)(1), Commission regulations under part 50, and
Commission regulation 23.506, any foreign branch of a U.S. bank that is
an SD or MSP that was not required to clear under the January Order may
delay complying with such clearing requirement until 75 days after the
publication of the Guidance in the Federal Register. As the Commission
explained in the Clearing Requirement Determination proposal,\46\ the
movement of swaps into central clearing by swap dealers has been taking
place for many years. As part of the OTC Derivatives Supervisors' Group
(``ODSG''), the Federal Reserve Bank of New York led an effort along
with the primary supervisors of certain swap dealers \47\ to enhance
risk
[[Page 43790]]
mitigation practices for OTC derivatives, a key element of which was
introduction of and commitment to central clearing of swaps, including
clearing CDS (credit default swap) indices and interest rate swaps.
Clearing is at the heart of the Dodd-Frank financial reform.\48\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ 77 FR 47170, 47209 (Aug. 7, 2012).
\47\ The ODSG's group of 14 dealers included: Bank of America-
Merrill Lynch; Barclays Capital; BNP Paribas; Citi; Credit Suisse;
Deutsche Bank AG; Goldman Sachs & Co.; HSBC Group, J.P. Morgan;
Morgan Stanley; The Royal Bank of Scotland Group;
Soci[eacute]t[eacute] G[eacute]n[eacute]rale; UBS AG; and Wells
Fargo Bank N.A.
\48\ See Clearing Requirement Determination under Section 2(h)
of the CEA, 77 FR 74284, 74285 (Dec. 13, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With regard to the CDS indices that are subject to the Commission's
clearing determination rules, SDs and other market participants have
been working since 2008 to comply with their commitment to their ODSG
supervisors to clear CDS. Similarly, while clearing of interest rate
swaps began in the late 1990s, SDs and other market participants began
committing in the mid-2000s to clear interest rate swaps in significant
volumes. The SD commitments included both dealer-to-dealer clearing, as
well as clearing by buy-side participants and others. Because SDs and
MSPs have been committed to clearing their CDS and interest rate swaps
for many years, and indeed have been voluntarily clearing for many
years, any further delay of the Commission's clearing requirement is
unwarranted.
In addition, under this Exemptive Order, a foreign branch of a U.S.
SD or MSP located in any jurisdiction other than Australia, Canada,
European Union, Hong Kong, Japan or Switzerland may comply with any law
and regulations of the jurisdiction where the foreign branch is located
(and only to the extent required by such jurisdiction) for the relevant
Transaction-Level Requirement in lieu of complying with any
Transaction-Level Requirement for which substituted compliance would be
possible under the Commission's Guidance until 75 days after the
publication of the Guidance in the Federal Register.
ii. Application to Non-U.S. SDs and Non-U.S. MSPs
As described in the Guidance, a non-U.S. SD or non-U.S. MSP should
generally comply with the Category A Transaction-Level Requirements for
its swaps with U.S. persons and with non-U.S. persons that are
guaranteed by, or are affiliate conduits of,\49\ a U.S. person
(although substituted compliance would generally be available to a non-
U.S. SD or non-U.S. MSP for transactions with (1) foreign branches of a
U.S. bank that is an SD or MSP and (2) guaranteed affiliates or
affiliate conduits of a U.S. person). Additionally, as described in the
Guidance, a non-U.S. SD or non-U.S. MSP would generally need to comply
with Category B Transaction-Level Requirements for all swaps with a
U.S. person (other than a foreign branch of a U.S. bank that is an SD
or an MSP).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ See Guidance regarding when a non-U.S. person generally
would be considered to be an affiliate conduit.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given that the Guidance is being issued now, and that the
Commission did not receive any submissions in support of Substituted
Compliance Determinations with sufficient time to review them and reach
a final determination, the Commission has determined to temporarily
defer compliance with the Category A Transaction-Level Requirements by
non-U.S. SDs and non-U.S. MSPs established in any of the six
jurisdictions for which the Commission has received, or expects to
receive in the near term, a request for substituted compliance
determinations for transactions for which substituted compliance is
possible under the Guidance for such entities.\50\ Accordingly, under
the Exemptive Order, a non-U.S. SD or non-U.S. MSP established in
Australia, Canada, European Union, Hong Kong, Japan or Switzerland \51\
may comply with any law and regulations of the home jurisdiction where
such non-U.S. SD or non-U.S. MSP is established (and only to the extent
required by such jurisdiction) in lieu of complying with any Category A
Transaction-Level Requirement for which substituted compliance would be
possible under the Commission's Guidance (other than a clearing
requirement under CEA section 2(h)(1), Commission regulations under
part 50, and Commission regulation 23.506; a trade execution
requirement under CEA section 2(h)(8) and regulation 37.12 or 38.11;
\52\ or a real-time reporting requirement under part 43 of the
Commission regulations for swaps with guaranteed affiliates of a U.S.
person), until the earlier of December 21, 2013 or 30 days following
the issuance of a Substituted Compliance Determination for the relevant
regulatory requirements of the jurisdiction in which the non-U.S. SD or
non-U.S. MSP is established.\53\ For swap transactions with guaranteed
affiliates of a U.S. person under the Commission's Guidance, a non-U.S.
SD or non-U.S. MSP established in Australia, Canada, the European
Union, Hong Kong, Japan or Switzerland may comply with any law and
regulations of the home jurisdiction where such non-U.S. SD or non-U.S.
MSP is established related to real-time reporting requirements (and
only to the extent required by such home jurisdiction) in lieu of
complying with the real-time reporting requirements of part 43 of the
Commission regulations, until September 30, 2013. In the case of swaps
with guaranteed affiliates of a U.S. person, the Commission believes
that the real-time reporting requirements of part 43 of the
Commission's regulations should be effective as expeditiously as
possible in order to achieve their underlying statutory objectives.
Therefore, the Commission has determined that it would not be in the
public interest to further delay reporting under part 43 of the
Commission's regulations with respect to such swaps beyond September
30, 2013.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ The Commission notes that Transaction-Level Requirements
apply on a transaction-by-transaction basis. As described in the
Guidance, if a Substituted Compliance Determination is applicable to
the jurisdiction in which a non-U.S. SD or non-U.S. MSP is
established and that entity enters into a swap (either in the
jurisdiction in which it is established or another jurisdiction),
then the entity can elect to comply with either the regulatory
regime of the jurisdiction in which it is established for which the
Substituted Compliance Determination has been made, or the
comparable Category A Transaction-Level Requirements.
\51\ If an SD or MSP established in any other jurisdiction files
an application for registration before December 21, 2013, the
Commission may consider a request for deferring compliance with the
Transaction-Level Requirements if a substituted compliance request
is filed concurrently with the application.
\52\ The Commission has adopted regulations for determining when
a swap is ``available to trade'' and a compliance schedule for the
trade execution requirement that applies when a swap subject to
mandatory clearing is available to trade. At the present time, no
swap either has been determined to be made available to trade or is
subject to the trade execution requirement. See Process for a
Designated Contract Market or Swap Execution Facility To Make a Swap
Available to Trade, Swap Transaction Compliance and Implementation
Schedule, and Trade Execution Requirement Under the Commodity
Exchange Act, 78 FR 33606 (Jun. 4, 2013). See CEA section 2(h)(8)
and 17 CFR 37.12 or 38.11.
\53\ The Commission anticipates that non-U.S. SD and MSPs may
require additional time after a Substituted Compliance Determination
in order to phase in compliance with the relevant requirements of
the jurisdiction in which the non-US SD or MSP is established. The
Commission and its staff intend to address the need for any further
transitional relief at the time that the subject Substituted
Compliance Determination is made.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to a swap that is subject to the clearing requirement
under CEA section 2(h)(1), Commission regulations under part 50, and
Commission regulation 23.506, any non-U.S. SD or non-U.S. MSP that was
not required to clear under the January Order may delay complying with
such clearing requirement until 75 days after the
[[Page 43791]]
publication of the Guidance in the Federal Register.\54\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ See discussion, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, under this Exemptive Order, for swaps transactions
with guaranteed affiliates of a U.S. person, a non-U.S. SD or a non-
U.S. MSP established in any jurisdiction other than Australia, Canada,
European Union, Hong Kong, Japan or Switzerland may comply with any law
and regulations of the home jurisdiction where such non-U.S. SD or non-
U.S. MSP is established (and only to the extent required by such
jurisdiction) in lieu of complying with any Transaction-Level
Requirement for which substituted compliance would be possible under
the Commission's Guidance until 75 days after the publication of the
Guidance in the Federal Register.
iii. Application to Non-Registrants
Under this Exemptive Order, for swaps transactions between a
guaranteed affiliate of a U.S. person (established in any jurisdiction
outside the United States) that is not registered as a SD or MSP and
another guaranteed affiliate of a U.S. person(established in any
jurisdiction outside the United States) that is not registered as a SD
or MSP, such non-registrants may comply with any law and regulations of
the jurisdiction where they are established (and only to the extent
required by such jurisdictions) for the relevant Transaction-Level
Requirement in lieu of complying with any Transaction-Level Requirement
for which substituted compliance would be possible under the
Commission's Guidance until 75 days after the publication of the
Guidance in the Federal Register.
IV. Section 4(c) of the CEA
Section 4(c)(1) of the CEA authorizes the Commission to ``promote
responsible economic or financial innovation and fair competition'' by
exempting any transaction or class of transaction from any of the
provisions of the CEA (subject to certain exceptions) where the
Commission determines that the exemption would be consistent with the
public interest and the purposes of the CEA.\55\ Under section 4(c)(2)
of the CEA, the Commission may not grant exemptive relief unless it
determines that: (1) The exemption is appropriate for the transaction
and consistent with the public interest; (2) the exemption is
consistent with the purposes of the CEA; (3) the transaction will be
entered into solely between ``appropriate persons;'' and (4) the
exemption will not have a material adverse effect on the ability of the
Commission or any contract market to discharge its regulatory or self-
regulatory responsibilities under the CEA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\55\ CEA section 4(c)(1), 7 U.S.C. 6(c)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Commission has determined that the Exemptive Order meets the
requirements of CEA section 4(c). First, in enacting section 4(c),
Congress noted that the purpose of the provision ``is to give the
Commission a means of providing certainty and stability to existing and
emerging markets so that financial innovation and market development
can proceed in an effective and competitive manner.'' \56\ Like the
January Order, the Commission is issuing this relief in order to ensure
an orderly transition to the Dodd-Frank regulatory regime.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\56\ H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 102-978, 1992 U.S.C.C.A.N. 3179, 3213
(1992).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This exemptive relief also will advance the congressional mandate
concerning harmonization of international standards with respect to
swaps, consistent with section 752(a) of the Dodd-Frank Act. In that
section, Congress directed that, in order to ``promote effective and
consistent global regulation of swaps and security-based swaps,'' the
Commission, ``as appropriate, shall consult and coordinate with foreign
regulatory authorities on the establishment of consistent international
standards with respect to the regulation'' of swaps and security-based
swaps.\57\ This relief, by providing non-U.S. registrants the latitude
necessary to develop and modify their compliance plans as the
regulatory structure in their respective home jurisdictions evolve,
will promote the adoption and enforcement of robust and consistent
standards across jurisdictions. The Commission emphasizes that the
Exemptive Order is temporary in duration and reserves the Commission's
enforcement authority, including its anti-fraud and anti-manipulation
authority. As such, the Commission has determined that the Exemptive
Order is consistent with the public interest and purposes of the CEA.
For similar reasons, the Commission has determined that the Exemptive
Order will not have a material adverse effect on the ability of the
Commission or any contract market to discharge its regulatory or self-
regulatory duties under the CEA. Finally, the Commission has determined
that the Exemptive Order is limited to appropriate persons within the
meaning of CEA section 4c(3), since the SDs and MSPs eligible for the
relief are likely to be the types of entities enumerated in that
section and active in the swaps market. Therefore, upon due
consideration, pursuant to its authority under section 4(c) of the CEA,
the Commission hereby issues the Exemptive Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\57\ See section 752(a) of the Dodd-Frank Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
V. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act (``PRA'') \58\ imposes certain
requirements on Federal agencies in connection with their conducting or
sponsoring any collection of information as defined by the PRA. An
agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid control number.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Exemptive Order does not require the collection of any
information as defined by the PRA.
VI. Cost-Benefit Considerations
Section 15(a) of the CEA \59\ requires the Commission to consider
the costs and benefits of its actions before promulgating a regulation
under the CEA or issuing certain orders. Section 15(a) further
specifies that the costs and benefits shall be evaluated in light of
five broad areas of market and public concern: (1) Protection of market
participants and the public; (2) efficiency, competitiveness and
financial integrity of futures markets; (3) price discovery; (4) sound
risk management practices; and (5) other public interest
considerations. The Commission considers the costs and benefits
resulting from its discretionary determinations with respect to the
section 15(a) factors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\59\ 7 U.S.C. 19(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Introduction
Throughout the Dodd-Frank rulemaking process, the Commission has
strived to ensure that new regulations designed to achieve Dodd-Frank's
protections are implemented in a manner that is both timely and also
minimizes unnecessary market disruption. In its effort to implement the
Dodd-Frank regulations on a cross-border basis, the Commission's
approach has not been different. In this respect, the Commission has
attempted to be responsive to industry's concerns regarding
implementation and the timing of new compliance obligations, and
thereby to ensure that market practices would not be unnecessarily
disrupted during the transition to the new swaps regulatory regime. At
the same time, however, the Commission has endeavored to comply with
the
[[Page 43792]]
Congressional mandate to implement the new SD and MSP regulatory scheme
in a timely manner. The Commission, therefore, also seeks to ensure
that the implementation of these requirements is not subject to undue
delay. The Commission believes that the Exemptive Order strikes the
proper balance between promoting an orderly transition to the new
regulatory regime under the Dodd-Frank Act, while appropriately
tailoring relief to ensure that market practices are not unnecessarily
disrupted during such transition.
The Exemptive Order also reflects the Commission's recognition that
international coordination is essential in this highly interconnected
global market, where risks are transmitted across national borders and
market participants operate in multiple jurisdictions.\60\ The
Exemptive Order would allow market participants to implement the
calculations related to SD and MSP registration on a uniform basis and
to delay compliance with certain Dodd-Frank requirements while the
Commission continues to work closely with other domestic financial
regulatory agencies and its foreign counterparts in an effort to
further harmonize the cross-border regulatory framework.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ See generally CFTC-SEC Joint Report on International Swap
Regulation Required by Section 719(c) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street
Reform and Consumer Protection Act at 105-09 (Jan. 31, 2012),
available at http://www.cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@swaps/documents/file/dfstudy_isr_013112.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Consideration of Costs and Benefits of the Exemptive Order
The Exemptive Order permits, subject to the conditions specified
therein, market participants outside the United States to: (i) Apply
the January Order's limited, interim definition of the term ``U.S.
person'' for a period of 75 days; (ii) make the SD and MSP registration
calculations in accordance with the January Order's guidance for a
period of 75 days; and (iii) delay compliance with certain Dodd-Frank
requirements specified in the Exemptive Order. The Exemptive Order
reflects the Commission's determination to protect U.S. persons and
markets through the cross-border application of the provisions of the
Dodd-Frank Act and the Commission's regulations in a manner consistent
with section 2(i) of the CEA and longstanding principles of
international comity. By carefully tailoring the scope and extent of
the phasing-in provided by the Exemptive Order, the Commission believes
that it achieves an appropriately balanced approach to implementation
that mitigates the costs of compliance while avoiding open-ended delay
in protecting the American public from swaps activities overseas. To be
sure, the conditions attached to the Exemptive Order are not without
cost, but the Commission believes that the phasing-in of certain Dodd-
Frank requirements as permitted by the Exemptive Order will reduce
overall costs to market participants.
In the absence of the Exemptive Order, non-U.S. SDs or MSPs would
be required to be fully compliant with the Dodd-Frank regulatory regime
without further delay. The Exemptive Order allows non-U.S. SDs and MSPs
(and foreign branches of U.S. SDs and MSPs) to delay compliance with a
number of these requirements until (at latest) December 21, 2013. With
respect to these entities, therefore, the benefits include not only the
avoided costs of compliance with certain requirements during the time
that the Exemptive Order is in effect, but also increased efficiency,
because the additional time allowed to phase in compliance will allow
market participants more flexibility to implement compliance in a way
that is compatible with their systems and practices. The additional
time provided by the Exemptive Order will also give foreign regulators
more time to adopt regulations covering similar topics, which could
increase the likelihood that substituted compliance will be an option
for market participants. Thus, the Exemptive Order is expected to help
reduce the costs to market participants of implementing compliance with
certain Dodd-Frank requirements. These and other costs and benefits are
considered below.
1. Costs
The costs of the Exemptive Order are similar to those of the
January Order. One potential cost, which is difficult to quantify, is
the potential that the relief provided herein--which will delay the
application of certain Dodd-Frank requirements to non-US SDs and MSPs
and to foreign branches of U.S. SDs and MSPs--will leave market
participants without certain protections and will leave U.S. taxpayers
exposed to systemic risks. As with the January Order, however, the
Commission believes that these risks are mitigated by the relatively
short time period of the Exemptive Order's application.
When the Commission issued the January Order, it also considered
the possibility that the order could result in competitive disparities
from the delay in compliance permitted to non-U.S. market participants,
discouraging potential non-U.S. counterparties from engaging in swaps
with U.S. persons. As the Commission noted in the January Order, it was
difficult to estimate quantitatively the potential negative effects
that the January Order would have on U.S. SDs and MSPs. Similarly,
while the Commission cannot exclude the possibility that the Exemptive
Order could result in negative competitive effects on U.S. SDs and
MSPs, it would be difficult to estimate those potential negative
effects quantitatively. Nevertheless, the Commission notes that, in the
six months since it issued the January Order, it has not observed
significant competitive disparities that discouraged potential non-U.S.
counterparties from engaging in swaps with U.S. SDs and MSPs. Given the
short time period of the Exemptive Order's application, the Commission
believes it is unlikely that the Exemptive Order (which is more limited
in scope than the January Order) will cause significant competitive
disparities that will harm U.S. SDs and MSPs.
2. Benefits
As with the January Order, the primary benefit of the Exemptive
Order is that it affords entities additional time to come into
compliance with certain of the Commission's regulations. By phasing in
(1) the term ``U.S. person,'' (2) SD and MSP calculations, and (3) the
application of various Entity- and Transaction-Level requirements to
persons in six jurisdictions outside the U.S., the Exemptive Order will
reduce compliance costs for such persons. This relief will provide
market participants with the additional time that they need for an
orderly transition and will allow market participants to apply the
Dodd-Frank requirements flexibly to their particular circumstances.
Importantly, the Exemptive Order allows non-U.S. SDs and non-U.S.
MSPs and foreign branches of U.S. SDs and MSPs from six jurisdictions
to delay compliance with Entity-Level Requirements (as defined in the
Exemptive Order) and Transaction-Level Requirements (other than
clearing and trade execution) for which substituted compliance is
possible, as described in the Guidance. This delay will permit the
Commission to properly develop the scope and standards of its
``substituted compliance'' regime by allowing foreign regulators
additional time to implement regulatory changes necessary to facilitate
the Commission's determination of comparability.
[[Page 43793]]
C. Section 15(a) Factors
1. Protection of Market Participants and the Public
The exemptive relief provided in the Exemptive Order will protect
market participants and the public by facilitating a more orderly
transition to the new regulatory regime than might otherwise occur in
the absence of the order. In particular, non-U.S. persons are afforded
additional time to come into compliance than would otherwise be the
case, which contributes to greater stability and reliability of the
swaps markets during the transition process.
2. Efficiency, Competitiveness, and Financial Integrity of the Markets
The Commission believes that the efficiency and integrity of the
markets will be furthered by the additional compliance time provided in
the Exemptive Order. As discussed above, the Commission is mindful of
the possibility that the Exemptive Order could potentially cause
competitive disparities, but believes it is unlikely that the Exemptive
Order will cause significant competitive disparities that will harm
U.S. SDs and MSPs.
3. Price Discovery
The Commission has not identified any costs or benefits of the
Exemptive Order with respect to price discovery.
4. Risk Management
As with the January Order, application of Entity-Level risk
management and capital requirements to non-U.S. SDs and MSPs could be
delayed by operation of the Exemptive Order, which could weaken risk
management. However, such potential risk is limited by the fact that
the Exemptive Order is applicable for a finite time.
5. Other Public Interest Considerations
The Commission has not identified any other public interest
considerations relating to costs or benefits of the Exemptive Order.
VII. Exemptive Order
The Commission, in order to provide for an orderly implementation
of Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act (``Dodd-Frank Act''), and consistent with the
determinations set forth above, which are incorporated in the Exemptive
Order by reference, hereby grants, pursuant to section 4(c) of the
Commodity Exchange Act (``CEA''), time-limited relief to non-U.S. swap
dealers (``SDs'') and major swap participants (``MSPs'') and to foreign
branches of U.S. SDs and MSPs, from certain swap provisions of the CEA,
subject to the terms and conditions below.
(1) Phase-in of ``U.S. Person'' Definition: For purposes of the
Exemptive Order, from July 13, 2013 until 75 days after the
Interpretive Guidance and Policy Statement Regarding Compliance with
Certain Swap Regulations (``Guidance'') is published in the Federal
Register, all market participants, including a prospective or
registered SD or MSP, must apply a ``U.S. person'' definition which
would define the term as:
(i) A natural person who is a resident of the United States;
(ii) A corporation, partnership, limited liability company,
business or other trust, association, joint-stock company, fund or any
form of enterprise similar to any of the foregoing, in each case that
is (A) organized or incorporated under the laws of a state or other
jurisdiction in the United States or (B) for all such entities other
than funds or collective investment vehicles, having its principal
place of business in the United States;
(iii) A pension plan for the employees, officers or principals of a
legal entity described in (ii) above, unless the pension plan is
primarily for foreign employees of such entity;
(iv) An estate of a decedent who was a resident of the United
States at the time of death, or a trust governed by the laws of a state
or other jurisdiction in the United States if a court within the United
States is able to exercise primary supervision over the administration
of the trust; or
(v) An individual account or joint account (discretionary or not)
where the beneficial owner (or one of the beneficial owners in the case
of a joint account) is a person described in (i) through (iv) above.
Until 75 days after the Guidance is published in the Federal
Register, any person not listed in (i) to (v) above is a ``non-U.S.
person'' for purposes of the Exemptive Order.
(2) Phase-In of Guaranteed Affiliates and ``Affiliate Conduits'':
Guaranteed affiliates and affiliate conduits do not need to comply with
Transaction-Level Requirements relating to swaps with non-U.S. persons
and foreign branches of U.S. swap dealers and MSPs until 75 days after
the Final Guidance is published in the Federal Register.
(3) De Minimis SD and MSP Threshold Calculations: From July 13,
2013 until 75 days after the Guidance is published in the Federal
Register, a non-U.S. person is not required to include, in its
calculation of the aggregate gross notional amount of swaps connected
with its swap dealing activity for purposes of Commission regulation
1.3(ggg)(4), or in its calculation of whether it is an MSP for purposes
of Commission regulation 1.3(hhh):
(i) Any swap where the counterparty is not a U.S. person, or
(ii) Any swap where the counterparty is a foreign branch of a U.S.
person that is registered as an SD.
(4) Aggregation for Purposes of the De Minimis Calculation: From
July 13, 2013 until 75 days after the Guidance is published in the
Federal Register, a non-U.S. person that was engaged in swap dealing
activities with U.S. persons as of December 21, 2012 is not required to
include, in its calculation of the aggregate gross notional amount of
swaps connected with its swap dealing activity for purposes of
Commission regulation 1.3(ggg)(4), the aggregate gross notional amount
of swaps connected with the swap dealing activity of its U.S.
affiliates under common control.\61\ Further, from July 13, 2013 until
75 days after the Guidance is published in the Federal Register, a non-
U.S. person that was engaged in swap dealing activities with U.S.
persons as of December 21, 2012 and is an affiliate under common
control with a person that is registered as an SD is also not required
to include, in its calculation of the aggregate gross notional amount
of swaps connected with its swap dealing activity for purposes of
Commission regulation 1.3(ggg)(4), the aggregate gross notional amount
of swaps connected with the swap dealing activity of any non-U.S.
affiliate under common control that is either (i) engaged in swap
dealing activities with U.S. persons as of December 21, 2012 or (ii)
registered as an SD. Also, from July 13, 2013 until 75 days after the
Guidance is published in the Federal Register, a non-U.S. person is not
required to include, in its calculation of the aggregate gross notional
amount of swaps connected with its swap dealing activity for purposes
of Commission regulation 1.3(ggg)(4), the aggregate gross notional
amount of swaps connected with the swap dealing activity of its non-
U.S. affiliates under common control with
[[Page 43794]]
other non-U.S. persons as counterparties.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\61\ For this purpose, the Commission construes ``affiliates''
to include persons under common control as stated in the
Commission's final rule further defining the term ``swap dealer,''
which defines control as ``the possession, direct or indirect, of
the power to direct or cause the direction of the management and
policies of a person, whether through the ownership of voting
securities, by contract or otherwise.'' See Final Entities Rules, 77
FR at 30631, n. 437.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5) SD Registration: A non-U.S. person that was previously exempt
from registration as an SD because of the temporary relief extended to
such person under the Commission's exemptive order issued on January 7,
2013,\62\ but that is required to register as an SD under Commission
regulation Sec. 1.3(ggg)(4) because of changes to the scope of the
term ``U.S. person'' or changes in the de minimis SD calculation or
aggregation for purposes of the de minimis calculation, is not required
to register as an SD until two months after the end of the month in
which such person exceeds the de minimis threshold for SD registration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\62\ Final Exemptive Order Regarding Compliance with Certain
Swap Regulations, 78 FR 858 (Jan. 7, 2013) (``January Order'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(6) Entity-Level Requirements:
(i) Non-U.S. SDs and non-U.S. MSPs. Except as provided in (ii) of
this paragraph 6, a non-U.S. SD or non-U.S. MSP established in
Australia, Canada, the European Union, Hong Kong, Japan or Switzerland
need not comply with any Entity-Level Requirement \63\ for which
substituted compliance is possible under the Commission's Guidance
until the earlier of December 21, 2013 or 30 days following the
issuance of an applicable substituted compliance determination under
the Guidance (``Substituted Compliance Determination'') for the
relevant Entity-Level Requirement of the jurisdiction in which the non-
U.S. SD or non-U.S. MSP is established.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\63\ For purposes of the Exemptive Order, the term ``Entity-
Level Requirements'' refers to the requirements set forth in
Commission regulations 3.3, 23.201, 23.203, 23.600, 23.601, 23.602,
23.603, 23.605, 23.606, 23.608, 23.609, and parts 45 and 46. The
Commission notes that it has not yet finalized regulations regarding
capital adequacy or margin and segregation for uncleared swaps. In
the event that the Commission finalizes regulations regarding
capital adequacy or margin and segregation for uncleared swaps
before December 21, 2013, non-U.S. SDs and non-U.S. MSPs would
comply with such requirements in accordance with any compliance date
provided in the relevant rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(ii) Notwithstanding paragraph (6)(i), non-U.S. SDs and non-U.S.
MSPs established in Australia, Canada, the European Union, Hong Kong,
Japan or Switzerland that are not part of an affiliated group in which
the ultimate parent entity is a U.S. SD, U.S. MSP, U.S. bank, U.S.
financial holding company, or U.S. bank holding company may delay
compliance with the swap data repository (``SDR'') reporting
requirements of part 45 and part 46 of the Commission's regulations
with respect to swaps with non-U.S. counterparties on the condition
that, during the relief period: (1) Such non-U.S. SDs and non-U.S. MSPs
are in compliance with the swap data recordkeeping and reporting
requirements of their home jurisdictions; or (2) where no swap data
reporting requirements have been implemented in their home
jurisdictions, such non-U.S. SDs and non-U.S. MSPs comply with the
recordkeeping requirements of Regulations 45.2, 45.6, 46.2 and 46.4.
This relief will expire the earlier of December 21, 2013 or, in the
event of a Substituted Compliance Determination for the regulatory
requirements of parts 45 and 46 of the jurisdiction in which the non-
U.S. SD or non-U.S. MSP is established, 30 days following the issuance
of such Substituted Compliance Determination.\64\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\64\ Commission staff also extended no-action relief regarding
reporting in the cross-border context to address privacy law
conflicts. See CFTC Division of Market Oversight, Time-Limited No-
Action Relief Permitting Part 45 and Part 46 Reporting
Counterparties to Mask Legal Entity Identifiers, Other Enumerated
Identifiers and Other Identifying Terms and Permitting Part 20
Reporting Entities to Mask Identifying Information, with respect to
certain Enumerated Jurisdictions, No-Action Letter No. 13-41 (Jun.
28, 2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(7) Transaction-Level Requirements Applicable to Non-U.S. SDs and
MSPs.\65\ A non-U.S. SD or non-U.S. MSP established in Australia,
Canada, the European Union, Hong Kong, Japan or Switzerland may comply
with any law and regulations of the home jurisdiction where such non-
U.S. SD or non-U.S. MSP is established (and only to the extent required
by such jurisdiction) in lieu of complying with any Transaction-Level
Requirement for which substituted compliance would be possible under
the Commission's Guidance (other than a clearing requirement under CEA
section 2(h)(1), Commission regulations under part 50, and Commission
regulation 23.506; a trade execution requirement under CEA section
2(h)(8) and regulation 37.12 or 38.11; \66\ or a real-time reporting
requirement under part 43 of the Commission regulations for swaps with
guaranteed affiliates of a U.S. person),\67\ until the earlier of
December 21, 2013 or 30 days following the issuance of a Substituted
Compliance Determination for the relevant regulatory requirement of the
jurisdiction in which the non-U.S. SD or non-U.S. MSP is established.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\65\ For purposes of the Exemptive Order, the term
``Transaction-Level Requirements'' refers to the requirements set
forth in Commission regulations 23.202, 23.205, 23.400 to 23.451,
23.501, 23.502, 23.503, 23.504, 23.505, 23.506, 23.610 and parts 43
and 50. The Commission notes that (1) it has not yet finalized
regulations regarding margin and segregation for uncleared swaps and
(2) it has not yet determined that any swap is ``available to
trade'' such that a trade execution requirement applies to the swap.
In addition, to the extent that a guaranteed affiliate is given
exemptive relief from any particular Transaction-Level Requirement
under this Exemptive Order, the same exemptive relief would apply to
affiliate conduits.
\66\ The Commission has adopted regulations for determining when
a swap is ``available to trade'' and a compliance schedule for the
trade execution requirement that applies when a swap subject to
mandatory clearing is available to trade. At the present time, no
swaps no swap either has been determined to be made available to
trade or is subject to a trade execution requirement. See Process
for a Designated Contract Market or Swap Execution Facility To Make
a Swap Available to Trade, Swap Transaction Compliance and
Implementation Schedule, and Trade Execution Requirement Under the
Commodity Exchange Act, 78 FR 33606 (Jun. 4, 2013). See CEA section
2(h)(8) and 17 CFR 37.12 or 38.11.
\67\ As used in the Exemptive Order, the term ``guaranteed
affiliate'' refers to a non-U.S. person that is affiliated with a
U.S. person and guaranteed by a U.S. person. In addition, for
purposes of the Exemptive Order, the Commission interprets the term
``guarantee'' generally to include not only traditional guarantees
of payment or performance of the related swaps, but also other
formal arrangements that, in view of all the facts and
circumstances, support the non-U.S. person's ability to pay or
perform its swap obligations with respect to its swaps. See Cross-
Border Application of Certain Swaps Provisions of the Commodity
Exchange Act, 77 FR 41214, 41221 n. 47 (Jul. 12, 2012). The term
``guarantee'' encompasses the different financial arrangements and
structures that transfer risk directly back to the United States. In
this regard, it is the substance, rather than the form, of the
arrangement that determines whether the arrangement should be
considered a guarantee for purposes of the Exemptive Order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(8) With respect to a swap that is subject to a clearing
requirement under CEA section 2(h)(1), Commission regulations under
part 50, and Commission regulation 23.506, any non-U.S. SD or non-U.S.
MSP that was not required to clear under the January Order may delay
complying with such clearing requirement until 75 days after the
publication of the Guidance in the Federal Register.
(9) For swaps transactions with guaranteed affiliates of a U.S.
person, a non-U.S. SD or non-U.S. MSP established in Australia, Canada,
the European Union, Hong Kong, Japan or Switzerland may comply with any
law and regulations of the home jurisdiction where such non-U.S. SD or
non-U.S. MSP is established related to real-time reporting requirements
(and only to the extent required by such home jurisdiction) in lieu of
complying with the real-time reporting requirements of part 43 of the
Commission regulations, until September 30, 2013.
(10) For swaps transactions with guaranteed affiliates of a U.S.
person, a non-U.S. SD or a non-U.S. MSP established in jurisdiction
other than Australia, Canada, European Union, Hong Kong, Japan or
Switzerland may comply with any law and regulations of
[[Page 43795]]
the home jurisdiction where such non-U.S. SD or non-U.S. MSP is
established (and only to the extent required by such jurisdiction) in
lieu of complying with any Transaction-Level Requirement for which
substituted compliance would be possible under the Commission's
Guidance until 75 days after the publication of the Guidance in the
Federal Register.
(11) U.S. Registrants: The Exemptive Order does not apply to a U.S.
person that is required to register as an SD or MSP. Notwithstanding
the previous sentence, a foreign branch of a U.S. SD or MSP located in
Australia, Canada, the European Union, Hong Kong, Japan or Switzerland
may comply with any law and regulations of the jurisdiction where the
foreign branch is located (and only to the extent required by such
jurisdiction) for the relevant Transaction-Level Requirement in lieu of
complying with any Transaction-Level Requirement for which substituted
compliance would be possible under the Commission's Guidance (other
than a clearing requirement under CEA section 2(h)(1), Commission
regulations under part 50, and Commission regulation 23.506; a trade
execution requirement under CEA section 2(h)(8) and regulation 37.12 or
38.11; \68\ or a real-time reporting requirement under part 43 of the
Commission regulations for swaps with guaranteed affiliates of a U.S.
person), until the earlier of December 21, 2013 or 30 days following
the issuance of a Substituted Compliance Determination for the relevant
Transaction-Level Requirement in the applicable jurisdiction in which
the foreign branch is located.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\68\ The Commission has adopted regulations for determining when
a swap is ``available to trade'' and a compliance schedule for the
trade execution requirement that applies when a swap subject to
mandatory clearing is available to trade. At the present time, no
swap either has been determined to be made available to trade or is
subject to a trade execution requirement. See Process for a
Designated Contract Market or Swap Execution Facility To Make a Swap
Available to Trade, Swap Transaction Compliance and Implementation
Schedule, and Trade Execution Requirement Under the Commodity
Exchange Act, 78 FR 33606 (Jun. 4, 2013). See CEA section 2(h)(8)
and 17 CFR 37.12 or 38.11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(12) With respect to a swap that is subject to the clearing
requirement under CEA section 2(h)(1), Commission regulations under
part 50, and Commission regulation 23.506, any foreign branch of a U.S.
SD or MSP that was not required to clear under the January Order may
delay complying with such clearing requirement until 75 days after the
publication of the Guidance in the Federal Register.
(13) For swaps transactions with guaranteed affiliates of a U.S.
person, a foreign branch of a U.S. SD or MSP located in Australia,
Canada, the European Union, Hong Kong, Japan or Switzerland may comply
with the law and regulations of the jurisdiction where the foreign
branch is located related to real-time reporting (and only to the
extent required by such jurisdiction) in lieu of complying with the
real-time reporting requirements of part 43 of the Commission
regulations until September 30, 2013.
(14) A foreign branch of a U.S. SD or MSP located in any
jurisdiction other than Australia, Canada, European Union, Hong Kong,
Japan or Switzerland may comply with any law and regulations of the
jurisdiction where the foreign branch is located (and only to the
extent required by such jurisdiction) for the relevant Transaction-
Level Requirement in lieu of complying with any Transaction-Level
Requirement for which substituted compliance would be possible under
the Commission's Guidance until 75 days after the publication of the
Guidance in the Federal Register.
(15) For swaps transactions between a guaranteed affiliate of a
U.S. person (established in any jurisdiction outside the United States)
that is not registered as a SD or MSP and another guaranteed affiliate
of a U.S. person (established in any jurisdiction outside the United
States) that is not registered as a SD or MSP, such non-registrants may
comply with any law and regulations of the jurisdiction where they are
established (and only to the extent required by such jurisdiction) for
the relevant Transaction-Level Requirement in lieu of complying with
any Transaction-Level Requirement for which substituted compliance
would be possible under the Commission's Guidance until 75 days after
the publication of the Guidance in the Federal Register.
(16) Inter-Affiliate Exemption. Where one of the counterparties is
electing the Inter-Affiliate Exemption, nothing in this Exemptive Order
affects or eliminates the obligation of any party to comply with the
conditions of the Inter-Affiliate Exemption, including the treatment of
outward-facing swaps condition in Commission regulation 50.52(b)(4)(i).
(17) Expiration of Relief: The relief provided to non-U.S. SDs,
non-U.S. MSPs and foreign branches of a U.S. SD or U.S. MSP in this
order shall be effective on July 13, 2013 and expire on December 21,
2013 or such earlier date specified in the Order.
(18) Scope of Relief: The time-limited relief provided in this
order: (i) Shall not affect, with respect to any swap within the scope
of this order, the applicability of any other CEA provision or
Commission regulation (i.e., those outside the Entity-Level and
Transaction-Level Requirements); (ii) shall not limit the applicability
of any CEA provision or Commission regulation to any person, entity or
transaction except as provided in this order; (iii) shall not affect
the applicability of any provision of the CEA or Commission regulation
to futures contracts, or options on futures contracts; and (iv) shall
not affect any effective or compliance date set forth in any Dodd-Frank
Act rulemaking by the Commission. Nothing in this order affects the
Commission's enforcement authority, including its anti-fraud and anti-
manipulation authority.
Issued in Washington, DC, on July 16, 2013, by the Commission.
Melissa D. Jurgens,
Secretary of the Commission.
Appendices to Exemptive Order Regarding Compliance With Certain Swap
Regulations--Commission Voting Summary and Chairman's Statement
Appendix 1--Commission Voting Summary
On this matter, Chairman Gensler and Commissioners Chilton and
Wetjen voted in the affirmative. Commissioner O'Malia voted in the
negative.
Appendix 2--Statement of Chairman Gary Gensler
I support the Exemptive Order Regarding Compliance with Certain
Swap Regulations (Order). With this Commission action another
important step has been taken to make swaps market reform a reality.
Since the enactment of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act (Dodd Frank Act), the Commission has worked
steadfastly toward a transition from an opaque unregulated
marketplace to a transparent, regulated swaps marketplace and has
phased in the timing for compliance to give market participants time
to adjust to the new regulatory regime and smooth the transition.
The Order provides a phased-in compliance period for foreign swap
dealers (including overseas affiliates of U.S. persons) and overseas
branches of U.S. swap dealers with respect to certain requirements
of the Dodd-Frank Act.
Today's Order is a continuation of the Commission's commitment
to this phasing of compliance--in this case for foreign market
participants--and follows upon the Commission's January 2013 phase-
in exemptive order, which expired on July 12, 2013. The Order will
remain in effect until December 21, 2013, and is intended to
complement other Commission and staff actions that facilitate an
orderly transition.
As of July 12th, 80 swap dealers have registered with the
Commission. Of these, 35
[[Page 43796]]
are established in jurisdictions other than United States, including
Australia, Canada, the European Union, Hong Kong, Japan, and
Switzerland.
The Order provides for a phase-in of the cross-border
application of Dodd-Frank requirements. Such phase-in period
provides for 75 days following the publication of the Order in the
Federal Register for market participants to adapt to the cross-
border application of the Dodd-Frank requirements. This relates to,
for example, who is a U.S. person, swap activity conducted by or
with affiliates that are guaranteed by a U.S. person, swap activity
conducted by or with overseas branches of U.S. based swap dealers,
the aggregation guidelines applicable to a group of affiliates for
the purpose of determining whether a specific affiliate is required
to register as a swap dealer, and identifying relevant transactions
for the purpose of the swap dealer registration de minimis
calculation.
Thus, within several months, the public will gain greater
protections as hedge funds, organized in the Cayman Islands, but
with their principal place of business here in the U.S., will be
subject to reforms applicable to all other U.S. persons, including
the clearing requirement.
Secondly, during the transitional period through December 21st,
a foreign swap dealer may phase in compliance with certain entity-
level requirements. In addition, those entities (as well as foreign
branches of U.S. swap dealers) are provided time-limited relief from
specified transaction-level requirements when transacting with
overseas affiliates guaranteed by U.S. entities (as well as with
foreign branches of U.S. swap dealers).
The phase-in period provides time for the Commission to work
with foreign regulators to consider their jurisdictions' submissions
related to substituted compliance. Substituted compliance, where
appropriate, would allow for foreign swap dealers to meet the reform
requirements of the Dodd-Frank Act by complying with comparable and
comprehensive foreign regulatory requirements. With respect to any
transaction with a U.S. person, though, compliance will be required
in accordance with previously issued rules and staff guidance.
To this end, the Commission has received substituted compliance
submissions from market participants or regulators located in
Australia, Canada, the European Union, Hong Kong, Japan and
Switzerland. Commission staff has actively engaged in substantive
discussions and active coordination with the appropriate regulators
in these jurisdictions as an integral part of the submission review
process.
Now, 3-years after the passage of financial reform, and a full
year after the Commission proposed guidance with regard to the cross
border application of reform, it is time for reforms to properly
apply to and cover those activities that, as identified by Congress
in section 722(d) of the Dodd-Frank Act, have ``a direct and
significant connection with activities in, or effect on, commerce of
the United States.'' With the additional transitional phase in
period provided by this Order, it is now time for the public to get
the full benefit of the transparency and the measures to reduce risk
included in Dodd Frank reforms.
[FR Doc. 2013-17467 Filed 7-19-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
Last Updated: July 22, 2013