CFTC Staff Letters Archive

CFTC Staff Letters Archive provides Letters from 2007 and earlier. For Letters published 2008 or later visit the All Letters page.

There are no Advisory Letters or Other Written Communications for 2007 or earlier.

Date	PDF and Description
02/13/2003	03-07 ; Section 2(a);; No-Action Singapore Exchange Derivatives Trading Limited's request for no-action relief to offer and sell its futures contracts on the MSCI Japan Index in the United States.
02/13/2003	03-06 ; Section 2(a);; No-Action Osaka Securities Exchange's request for no-action relief in connection with the offer and sale of its futures contracts based on the FTSE Japan Index and the MSCI Japan Index in the United State.
02/07/2003	03-10 ; Regulation 4.22;; No-Action The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight provided exemptive relief to registered CPOs from the periodic and annual reporting requirements of Rule 4.22 in connection with their joint operation of master funds that have as their sole participants feeder funds or other master funds that are jointly operated by the CPOs or other CPOs with the same ownership and management. This relief is subject to, among other things: (1) the CPOs retaining identical ultimate ownership, officers and directors; (2) participation in the Master Funds being limited to the Feeder Funds, and any fund for which the CPOs are the sole CPOs; and (3) the annual reports of the Feeder Funds containing financial statements that include, among other information, the fees associated with the operation of the applicable Master Funds.
01/23/2003	03-05 ; Section 4m(1);; No-Action The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight took a CPO and CTA registration "no-action" position with respect to a state-regulated insurance company's operation of one or more insurance company separate accounts. The premiums paid by purchasers of a life insurance product would fund the separate accounts, the assets of which would be invested in commodity pools operated by registered CPOs. Factors supporting granting the request included: (1) the investee pools would all be operated by registered CPOs and advised by registered CTAs; (2) the requester was a state-regulated insurance company and the insurance product would be sold by SEC-registered broker-dealers; (3) the requester would design the insurance features of the proposed program and would not participate in the commodity interest-related activities; (4) separate account assets would not invest directly in commodity interests but would only invest through limited liability trading vehicles; and (5) purchasers of the product would be limited to QEPs.
01/22/2003	03-11 ; Regulation 4.22;; No-Action The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight provided exemptive relief to registered CPOs from the periodic and annual reporting requirements of Rule 4.22 in connection with their joint operation of a sub fund, that has as its sole participants two feeder funds that are jointly operated by the CPOs. The Division also confirmed that the exemption granted to the CPOs by prior no-action letters continues to apply with respect to the operation of the sub funds and feeder funds identified in the prior no-action letters. This relief is subject to the conditions that: (1) the CPOs remain the CPOs of the sub funds; (2) participation in the sub fund is limited to any fund for which the CPOs are the sole CPOs; and (3) the annual reports of the feeder funds contain financial statements that include, among other information, the fees associated with the operation of the sub funds in which they invest.
01/14/2003	03-09 ; Regulation 4.7(b)(4);; No-Action The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight provided exemptive relief to CPOs X and Y, located in state A, from requirements of Rule 4.7(b)(4) that they maintain certain books and records at their main business office and in accordance with Rule. 1.31. An affiliate of X and Y, Z, will maintain the books and records at Z's main office in State B. Relief is subject to the conditions that: (1) X and Y notify the Division if the location of any of the required books and records changes from that as represented to the Division; (2) X and Y remain responsible for ensuring, among other things, that all of their required books and records are maintained in accordance with Rule 1.31 and for assuring the availability of the records to the Commission, NFA, or any other agency authorized to review such books and records. This exemption is further subject to the condition that X and Y remain responsible for compliance with Rule. 4.7(b)(4).
01/14/2003	03-04 ; Section 4m(1) and Rule 4.4(a)(8);; No-Action The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight took: (1) a CTA registration no-action position regarding an SEC-registered investment adviser providing commodity interest trading advice to Japanese investment trusts in which only Japanese nationals may participate; and (2) a CPO registration no-action position regarding a Japanese sponsor and organizer operating the Japanese investment trusts. The Division also advised that neither the CTA no-action position taken in this letter nor a similar position taken in a prior letter would bar the SEC-registered adviser from subsequently claiming relief under Rule 4.14(a)(8), should it decide to provide commodity interest trading advice to Rule 4.5 entities in a manner consistent with Rule 4.14(a)(8).
12/24/2002	03-03 ; Section 4m(1);; No-Action The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight took CPO and CTA registration no-action positions with respect to the manager of a limited liability company that sought to trade commodity interests, where both members of the LLC were commonly owned and controlled, and the LLC's manager was a registered investment adviser and a wholly-owned subsidiary of one of the LLC's members.
12/23/2002	03-02 ; Section 4m(1);; No-Action The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight affirmed previously-taken CPO registration no-action positions (the Prior Relief) with respect to a co-general partner of a commodity pool (Pool 1) and directors of a second pool (Pool 2) that was the sole limited partner of Pool 1, notwithstanding that participation in Pool 2 would now be open to any QEP. Among the representations made in requesting the Prior Relief had been a representation that only non-U.S. persons and tax-exempt U.S. persons could participate in Pool 2. In affirming the Prior Relief, the Division noted that it had taken similar positions (subsequent to the Prior Relief) that were based on factors that did not include participant restrictions (i.e., co-general partners were affiliated and the co-general partner that solicited participants or invested pool assets was a registered CPO; the co-general partner seeking registration relief performed only administrative functions; and the co-general partners acknowledged joint and several liability for Commodity Exchange Act or Commission rule violations).
12/23/2002	03-01 ; Section 4m(1);; No-Action The Division of Clearing and Intermediary Oversight confirmed that an insurance company could engage an unregistered CTA (the Advisor) to advise certain of the insurance company's separate accounts pursuant to relief previously-granted to the insurance company, notwithstanding that the previously-granted relief specified that only registered CTAs would advise the separate accounts. The Division based its action on the following: (1) the Advisor is a Commission registrant (albeit as an IB and not as a CTA); (2) ach of the Advisor's principals is listed and its APs are registered; and (3) because the insurance company, the separate accounts and all separate account participants are QEPs, even if the Advisor were required to register as a CTA, it could claim relief under Rule 4.7 from otherwise applicable disclosure and recordkeeping requirements.