The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight issued an interpretation that a limited liability company and a trust operated by the limited liability company are not commodity pools where all participants are close family members.
The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight provided no-action relief to the general partner of a commodity pool from registering as a CPO under Section 4m(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act, and allowed an affiliated, registered CPO (“designee”) to serve as the CPO of the pool instead, where, among other things: (1) the general partner and the designee are under common ownership and control; (2) the general partner has delegated all of its management authority to the designee; (3) the general partner does not engage in the solicitation of investors for the pool and does not manage pr
The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight took a CPO registration no-action position with respect to the independent trustees of a commodity pool where the independent trustees had no authority to perform CPO functions, the independent trustees were appointed solely to comply with audit committee requirements under the Sarbanes Oxley Act and exchange listing requirements, and a separate registered CPO was authorized to perform all commodity pool operator functions.
The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight provided no-action relief to the general partner of a commodity pool operator (CPO) from registering as such pursuant to Section 4m(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act (Act), and allowing a registered CPO (designee) to serve as the CPO instead.
The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight issued an interpretation that a family partnership is not a commodity pool where all participants are close family members. This interpretation would not be affected by family members forming a CTA which will manage both the family partnership’s commodity interest trading and the trading of non-related persons.
The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight provided no-action relief to the general partner of a commodity pool from registering as a CPO under Section 4m(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act, and allowed an affiliated, registered CPO (“designee”) to serve as the CPO of the pool instead, where, among other things: (1) the general partner and the designee are under common ownership and control; (2) the general partner has delegated all of its management authority to the designee; (3) the general partner does not engage in the solicitation of investors for the pool and does not manage pr
The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight provided no-action relief to the general partner of a commodity pool from registering as a CPO under Section 4m(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act, and allowed an affiliated, registered CPO (“designee”) to serve as the CPO of the pool instead, where, among other things: (1) the general partner and the designee are under common ownership and control; (2) the general partner has delegated all of its management authority to the designee; (3) the general partner does not engage in the solicitation of investors for the pool and does not manage pr
The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight took a CPO registration no-action position with respect to the trustee of a commodity pool where the trustee had no authority to perform CPO functions, and a separate registered CPO was authorized to perform such functions. The Division further 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.
The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight issued an interpretation that a charitable foundation would not be a commodity pool, and that its directors would not be commodity pool operators, if the foundation traded commodity interests. This interpretation was based on, among others, representations that: (1) no current or future donor to the foundation will be entitled to receive any of the assets, net earnings, income or profits of the foundation; and (2) no (other) charitable organization has any entitlement, on an annual or other basis, to a contribution from the foundation.
The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight confirmed that a person registered as an investment adviser with the Securities and Exchange Commission: (1) would come within the CTA definition in Section 1a(6) of the Act if it offered as part of its comprehensive portfolio management a “managed futures account” component; and (2) would be required to register as a CTA with the Commission unless an exemption from registration was available to it.
