DCIO received a request for guidance from the Joint Audit Committee concerning FCM regulatory reporting requirements for investments in a money market mutual fund. The fund had announced that its net asset value per share had fallen from $1.00 and that, as permitted by order of the SEC dated September 22, 2008, the fund had suspended redemptions and postponed payments.
The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight granted exemptive relief from certain of the Part 4 regulations to the registered CPO of a commodity pool, whose shares the CPO intended to publicly offer and to list for trading on a national securities exchange. As is discussed in the letter, this relief was in the nature of substituted compliance with those regulations.
The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight granted exemptive relief from certain of the Part 4 regulations to the registered CPO of a commodity pool, whose shares the CPO intended to publicly offer and to list for trading on a national securities exchange. As is discussed in the letter, this relief was in the nature of substituted compliance with those regulations.
The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight provided an Interpretation that a software vendor would not be an introducing broker (“IB”) as defined in Commodity Exchange Act Section 1a(23) and Commission Regulation 1.3(mm) as a result of providing its customers a software application with the ability to route orders for the purchase or sale of commodity futures and options contracts to a futures commission merchant (“FCM”) or IB of their choice.
The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight issued an interpretation that when an IB does no more than introduce a non-clearing FCM to a clearing FCM, and the non-clearing FCM then establishes an omnibus account with the clearing FCM, the requirement of Regulation 1.57(a)(1) that an IB open and carry each customer’s account with a carrying FCM on a fully-disclosed basis is not triggered, where: (1) the IB does not transmit trading orders fore the omnibus account to the clearing FCM; and (2) the IB does not accept funds from the customers whose accounts are maintained in the omnibus
The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight issued an interpretation that a technology service provider is not an introducing broker (IB) and, therefore, is not required to register as such, as a result of providing its customers with an internet-based software application with the ability to route orders for the purchase or sale of commodity futures and options to an IB or futures commission merchant (FCM) of their choice in connection with related cash market transactions.
The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight granted exemptive relief from the books and records location requirement of Regulations 4.7 and 4.23.
The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight granted exemptive relief from certain of the Part 4 regulations to the registered CPO of three commodity pools, whose shares had been publicly offered and listed for trading on a national securities exchange. Prior to issuance of the Division’s letter, the pools had been operated in compliance with Part 4. As is discussed in the letter, relief granted by the Division was in the nature of substituted compliance with the regulations from which relief was sought.
The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight granted exemptive relief from certain of the Part 4 regulations to the registered CPO of a commodity pool, whose shares the CPO intended to publicly offer and to list for trading on a national securities exchange. As is discussed in the letter, this relief was in the nature of substituted compliance with those regulations.
