CFTC ACTING CHAIRMAN WETJEN STATEMENT ON END-USERS AND DODD-FRANK

FROM:  COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION 
Statement of Acting Chairman Mark Wetjen at Roundtable on Dodd-Frank End-User Issues

April 3, 2014

Washington, DC—Commodity Futures Trading Commission Acting Chairman Mark Wetjen made the following statement at the public roundtable on end-users and the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank).

“I am pleased the staff has convened today’s roundtable focusing on end-user issues and the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Congress was crystal clear that commercial end-users, which make up the overwhelming majority of companies in America, did not cause the crisis. Further, Congress was equally clear that in putting in place the significant derivatives reforms contained in Dodd-Frank, the derivative markets needed to remain accessible to end-users who rely on these markets for hedging and price-discovery needs.

“Looking ahead, the Commission must continue to remain open to revisiting certain rules and making adjustments as necessary. For example, the de minimis exception in the swap dealer definition for Special Entities – defined in the Dodd Frank Act to include federal, state, and municipal entities – was making it difficult for government-owned electric utilities to hedge key operational risks. In response, Commission staff recently issued temporary no-action relief that allows counterparties to exclude utility operations-related swaps from the 25 million dollar threshold.”

“Today, I am pleased to announce that I am putting into circulation a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) that would amend the de minimis exception to address this issue. Once the Commission issues the proposal, I look forward to receiving comment from the public and interested parties on this issue. I would like to thank the hardworking staff of the CFTC for convening this roundtable. I am looking forward to hearing the thoughts of everyone participating in the roundtable.”

SEEKING GUIDANCE ON DODD-FRANK STRESS TEST GUIDANCE FOR MEDIUM-SIZED FIRMS

FROM:  FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Agencies Seek Comment on Dodd-Frank Act Stress Test Guidance for Medium-sized Firms

Three federal bank regulatory agencies are seeking comment on proposed guidance describing supervisory expectations for stress tests conducted by financial companies with total consolidated assets between $10 billion and $50 billion.

These medium-sized companies are required to conduct annual company-run stress tests beginning this fall under rules the agencies issued in October 2012 to implement a provision in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act).

To help these companies conduct stress tests appropriately scaled to their size, complexity, risk profile, business mix, and market footprint, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency are proposing guidance to provide additional details tailored to these companies.

The stress test rules allow flexibility to accommodate different approaches by different companies in the $10 billion to $50 billion asset range. Consistent with this flexibility, the proposed guidance describes general supervisory expectations for Dodd-Frank Act stress tests, and, where appropriate, provides examples of practices that would be consistent with those expectations.

The public comment period on the proposed supervisory guidance will be open until September 25, 2013.

CFTC COMMISSIONER CHILTON SETS OUT TEN PRINCIPLES FOR A MORE "TRANSPARENT DODD-FRANK REGULATORY REGIME"

FROM: U.S. COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION
"The End-User Bill of Rights"

Statement of Commissioner Bart Chilton
April 3, 2013

We are one week away from an important date in Dodd-Frank implementation: the April 10 compliance date for Dodd-Frank swap reporting rules for end-users. This date represents the first major compliance date for the end-user community, a class of market participants that includes many who have not been regulated by the CFTC until now.

As we move one step closer to the full implementation of Dodd-Frank, I’m reminded of another important transition, one from over 220 years ago, the transition of this great nation from a colonial monarchy to a national democracy. At the dawn of the United States of America, the founding fathers set out ten principles, the "Bill of Rights" that would bind the new national democratic government. Similarly, today I am setting out ten principles to guide the Commission as we move into a new, more transparent Dodd-Frank regulatory regime. I believe these principles best protect our consumers and end-users who help move our economy forward—and let's keep in mind that these end-users were not the cause of the financial crisis that lead to financial reform. In fact, end-users were among the many victims of the crisis and much of Dodd-Frank was drafted with their interests in mind.

The futures and swaps markets wouldn't exist without end-users. The primary public benefit of derivatives markets is that they provide end-users risk management opportunities that, in turn, allow them to more easily fund operations and investments and thereby generate economic growth. The ability of end-users to fund their operations is directly related to the prices paid by consumers and the overall well-being of our economy; so protecting the end-users is akin to protecting the every-day consumer. The End-User Bill of Rights therefore focuses on what I believe should be the inalienable rights of end-users:

1. Right to reasonable Dodd-Frank implementation. Dodd-Frank needs to be implemented and needs to be implemented quickly, but that does not mean it should be done so harshly. Back in December 2012, I supported the Commission providing good faith forbearance relief for swap dealers (SDs) and major swap participants (MSPs) until July 31, 2013 (under certain circumstances) when trying in earnest to come into compliance with new CFTC Dodd-Frank rules. Consistent with that six month forbearance relief, I will not approve an action against end-users seeking to comply with CFTC Dodd-Frank rules in good faith, provided they act in ways consistent with a good faith intention to comply, until after October 31, 2013.

2. Right to legal certainty. The Commission and the Commission staff need to provide the market as much legal certainty as possible as we move through a challenging implementation period. End-users and other market participants should have little doubt as to the status of their activities and the Commission and staff should respond thoughtfully and diligently to requests for legal certainty. When an answer isn’t easy to provide, then the Commission or staff should be as transparent as possible with the public. The Commission or staff should strive to provide the market relief or clarity well in advance of a compliance date—last minute relief and clarification should be avoided. Finally, during this implementation of Dodd-Frank, I will not support an action against an end-user, exchange, or anyone else on an issue deserving clarity that is the subject of an outstanding request for interpretive guidance.

To provide a specific example of where the Commission could assist the end-user community with additional legal clarity, take the legal status of trade options. The Commission should tighten our guidance on commodity contracts with volumetric optionality, consistent with Commission precedent. At the same time, the Commission should focus on implementing Dodd-Frank for non-trade option swaps and broaden the trade option exemption in order to minimize any market disruptions in the trade options market. We should give end-users the opportunity to meet their statutory obligation to report trade options through an annual Form TO so that the Commission can monitor these markets for problems or evasion.

3. Right to compete in the markets. End-users should be able to hedge without getting mauled by cheetahs or crushed by Massive Passives. To protect end-users' right to compete in the markets, the Commission should start with two common sense rulemakings: First, we need high-frequency trader registration and conduct rules to prevent cheetahs from going feral. We should also provide the public market quality metrics designed to help end-users and other non-cheetahs from distinguishing between false cheetah liquidity and true liquidity. Second, we need caps on speculation so that the commodity markets return to their principal role as risk management markets for end-users. The commodity markets worked best when end-users were the predominant players. The Commission should move quickly on a new proposal on speculation limits by May 1.

4. Right to safe accounts. We need strong rules and rigorous auditing to ensure that futures commission merchants (FCMs) don't abuse their role as intermediaries while not imposing undue burdens on FCMs that provide end-users access to critical risk management markets (including a sensible compromise on residual interest). End-users should also have the right to choose between full segregation or to have their money at an FCM. If we require the availability of this option, the market will provide end-users better and more competitively-priced access to full segregation. Congress should also act to give end-users backstop protection through federally-mandated insurance.

5. Right to have confidence in the commodity markets. End-users should be confident that their intermediaries, FCMs and SDs in particular, are appropriately regulated and supervised. The Commission needs to establish rules that do this and ensure they are being enforced. The Commission needs bigger penalties to deter the abuses that threaten the health and stability of the markets. I have called for raising civil monetary penalty maximums to $10 million for entities and $1 million for individuals. The current $140,000 maximum civil monetary penalty is simply an inadequate deterrence for an agency tasked with, among other things, deterring manipulation and preventing systemic risk. Today’s regulatory infractions can spawn tomorrow’s financial meltdown and the Commission should be able to seek penalties to deter the malfeasance and negligence that can contribute to systemic problems.

6. Right to clear (or not to clear). The right to clear or not to clear should be protected for end-users. Central hedging units for non-financial end-users should be free to clear or not to clear on transactions that mitigate commercial risks for their corporate group. End-users that use inter-affiliate swaps to centralize and manage risk across a corporate group through a central hedging unit should be given the flexibility to clear or not to clear. End-users’ inter-affiliate swaps should also be exempt from transaction-by-transaction reporting. The Commission should move quickly to provide relief from reporting requirements for inter-affiliate transactions for end-users.

7. Right to margin flexibility and reasonable capital rules. Under-collateralization has not been an end-user problem. Accordingly, I support the latest February 2013 IOSCO/Basel consultation that would exempt non-financial entities that are not systemically important from prescriptive margin requirements. The Commission also needs to come up with a sensible compromise on capital requirements for non-financial SDs. The Commission should encourage non-financial SDs to register. Non-financial SDs provide competition to financial SDs and their presence lets end-users hedge their risks on more competitive terms. On the one hand, Commission capital rules should ensure non-financial SDs have adequate capital to fall back on in the event of market or portfolio stresses. On the other hand, these rules should not put non-financial SDs at a competitive disadvantage.

8. Right to hedge. Speculative position limits should encourage and not unduly complicate prudent commercial risk management practices. Public power end-users using swaps to hedge commercial risk should have the same access to risk management markets as privately-owned utilities. This should be done preferably through regulatory relief.

9. Right to smart regulation. As we move through implementation, we are going to find smarter ways to accomplish regulatory policy goals. The Commission owes the end-user community a commitment that it will amend its rules when these smarter ways become apparent. For example, there may be more prudent ways to implement Part 46 historical swaps reporting for end-users that the Commission should consider. In the interim, the Commission should give end-users a six month reprieve, through October 2013, for historical swaps reporting requirements.

10. Right to be heard. SDs and MSPs are, by definition, big boys and girls who’ve seen the writing on the wall for years. As Commission registrants and as large financial conglomerates, they can go to the NFA or industry organizations like ISDA for guidance on how to comply with our rules. NFA and ISDA and similar organizations have experience orchestrating change on an industry-wide basis. Many end-users, on the other hand, are not used to having their swaps activity subject to CFTC regulation. During and after Dodd-Frank implementation we need a venue for end-users to air their concerns. I call for an End-User Advisory Committee (EUAC) with regularized meetings. End-users face an array of unique compliance challenges and legitimate business and regulatory concerns that warrant the Commission’s focused attention.

Just like the Constitution is subject to amendment (some of the best amendments came almost eighty years after the first ratified draft), so is this document. I look forward to working with end-users, consumers, SDs, MSPs, FCMs, and others as we move through an exciting and challenging implementation period and invite their comments on this End-User Bill of Rights. If we do our jobs as regulators and implement Dodd-Frank quickly and reasonably, the markets will improve for the benefit of end-users and the American public. That was the goal of Congress and that continues to be my goal.

SEC ISSUES BULLETIN ON FOREIGN CURRENCY EXCHANGE TRANSACTIONS

The following bulletin is an excerpt from the SEC website: “Washington, D.C., July 20, 2011 — The Securities and Exchange Commission today issued an investor bulletin highlighting some of the most significant risks that foreign currency exchange (forex) transactions may pose for individual investors. The forex market is a large and generally liquid financial market. Banks, insurance companies, and other financial institutions as well as large corporations use the forex markets to manage the risks associated with fluctuations in currency rates. However, the risk of loss for individual investors who trade forex contracts can be substantial. “Forex trading can be very risky and is not appropriate for all investors,” said Lori J. Schock, Director of the SEC’s Office of Investor Education and Advocacy. “Individual investors considering forex trading need to fully understand the unique characteristics of this market and consult their financial adviser before making any investment decisions.” Last week, the Commission issued an interim final temporary rule to permit registered broker-dealers to continue to engage in retail forex transactions for up to one year under the existing regulatory framework that applies to them when effecting such transactions. Under Section 742(c) of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, retail forex transactions would have been prohibited as of July 16, 2011, in the absence of Commission action. The interim rule provides the Commission with time to collect additional information regarding the retail forex activities of broker-dealers and take such regulatory action as may be appropriate to reduce forex risk for investors purchasing or selling foreign securities.”