Robin Powers Summarizes the Three Regulatory Changes Addressed by Dodd-Frank Protocol 2.0
By Robin Powers | May 22, 2013
ISDA DODD-FRANK PROTOCOL 2.0
DF Protocol 2.0 (or the March DF Protocol) is intended to address the requirements of three rules finalized in the latter half of 2012, too late to be covered by the August DF Protocol. More specifically, DF Protocol 2.0 addresses (a) the end-user exceptionto the clearing requirement for swaps; (b) the clearing requirement determinationthat mandates clearing for certain classes of interest rate swaps and credit default swaps; and (c) the rule entitled “Confirmation, Portfolio Reconciliation, Portfolio Compression, and Swap Trading Relationship Documentation Requirements for Swap Dealers and Major Swap Participants.”
The structure of, and adherence process for, DF Protocol 2.0 is similar to that of the August DF Protocol. Adhering parties must complete and deliver to each of their counterparties a Protocol Questionnaire, which, among other things, provides certain identifying and contact information, identifies whether the adhering party falls into certain regulatory categories established in the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) and in Commodity and Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) regulations, and specifies whether the adhering party wishes to avail itself of certain exceptions or exemptions from the applicable CFTC rules. DF Protocol 2.0 is independent of the August DF Protocol. Adherence to the August DF Protocol does not imply or require adherence to DF Protocol 2.0 (and vice versa).
CFTC Issues a ‘No Action’ Letter that Exempts FX Prime Brokers from Certain Aspects of Dodd-Frank
By Robin Powers | May 01, 2013
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has issued a time limited ‘No Action’ letter that exempts Prime Brokers from certain aspects of Dodd-Frank rules.
There had been widespread concern that Prime Brokers would be required to comply with the obligation to disclosure of the mid-market mark.
The CFTC No Action letter recognized that the prime broker would merely be reporting “mirror” trades that were not initiated by a market participant, but rather part of the process of the “give up” between executing dealer and prime brokerage customer.
Current List of Provisionally Registered Swap Dealers as of April 1, 2013
By Robin Powers | Apr 24, 2013
A list of provisionally registered swap dealers is listed below. This list is current as of April 1, 2013.
Is Your Swap Counterparty on This List to Register as Swap-dealers Under Dodd-Frank?
By Robin Powers | Mar 01, 2013
The following banks/dealers are the first to register as swap-dealers under the Dodd-Frank Act, which requires higher capital, collateral and trading standards. The list, which is expected to grow, reflects companies that had at least $8 billion in swap-dealing business in October and had to register by the end of last year.
2013 Annual Requirements for Investment Advisers Registered with the SEC
By Mark Diamond | Feb 22, 2013
Investment advisers registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) have certain annual requirements under the U.S. Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Advisers Act”). Some of these requirements may also apply to “exempt reporting advisers” or warrant consideration as best practices. This memo summarizes certain annual regulatory and compliance obligations, including a number of significant 2013 reporting or filing deadlines. In particular, in 2013 many advisers face the challenge of reporting for the first time on Form PF, a new informational form required in connection with certain private investment funds (discussed in greater detail below).
Mandatory Clearing of OTC Derivatives
By Robin Powers | Jan 31, 2013
Mandatory clearing will be phased in over the first three quarters of 2013.
Market participants trading certain interest rate and credit default swaps will be required to comply by March 11, 2013. Regulated entities such as swap dealers and major swap participants must comply in this first phase; buy side firms that meet the definition of “active fund” could also be impacted in this phase. “Active funds,” are defined by the CFTC as private funds executing on average 200 or more swaps per month over the preceding 12 months.
Commodity Futures Trading Commission Extends Compliance Date for Dodd-Frank Protocol
By Robin Powers | Dec 19, 2012
Commodity Futures Trading Commission Extends Compliance Date for Dodd-Frank Protocol to May 1, 2013 in Order to Give Market Participants Additional Time to Adhere. Buy side market participants received a holiday gift from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) - compliance deadlines for the business conduct and documentation rules (the “Business Conduct Rules“) related to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank”), have now been delayed until May 1, 2013. These Business Conduct Rules have been obliging end users to enter into the ISDA August 2012 DF Protocol or otherwise amend their swap documents by the end of the year.
Accountable Care Organizations and the Fraud and Abuse Laws: Five Ways to Avoid the Pitfalls
By Carson Porter | Dec 18, 2012
Accountable Care Organizations by their very nature are structured in a way that implicates the so-called “Fraud and Abuse Laws.” ACO provider participants have a financial stake in the organization, refer patients to other providers within the ACO, and share information about patients and practices – all warning flags for running afoul of the fraud and abuse laws. However, ACOs were created with the explicit purpose of coordinating care for a population of patients to improve outcomes and reduce costs. To avoid unduly constraining ACO participants’ efforts to provide coordinated care, five waivers to the fraud and abuse laws have been created. This article provides a brief overview of the federal fraud and abuse laws, including the anti-kickback statute, the Stark laws, and the Civil Monetary Penalty laws, along with the corresponding self-implementing waivers to these laws available to ACOs.
Strengthening Commercial Identity: Trademarks and Small Businesses
By Paul Beattie | Oct 05, 2012
Somewhere in the suburbs of Seattle, never mind where exactly, there is a little apocryphal, bakery called FRIAR ANGELINO’S. It makes the best bread imaginable – a circle of sourdough, with a flaky outer crust and a warm, spongy interior. Above the entrance is an old weather-beaten sign depicting a rotund, smiling monk, with a bottle of wine in one hand and a loaf of bread in the other. Not long ago, an investor approached the owner. A deal was struck, and now FRIAR ANGELINO’S bakery franchises are springing up throughout the region. The loaves of bread have also begun appearing in supermarkets, wrapped in simple brown paper bearing the bakery’s trademark: the name FRIAR ANGELINO’S and a picture of a fat, smiling monk.
Tax Consequences of Selling a Concentrated Stock Position in 2012 vs 2013
By Rimon Admin | Aug 21, 2012
Rimon, P.C. and Bernstein commissioned a study on tax consequences of diversifying and divesting concentrated stock holdings in 2012 versus 2013 to get a sense for the impact of changing tax rates, including new healthcare taxes, on selling and diversifying private stock. The study explores the upfront tax difference in executing trades this year versus next year, and the impact that difference can have over the longer-term. This raises important questions we should all be asking regarding planning for an efficient transaction, deployment into new investments – private or public – and multi-generational or charitable planning. Read the case study here.