FINRA Manual: Contents
FINRA Manual
Notices
1995
95-104 Expanded Sign-In Procedures At The PROCTOR Centers, Effective February 1, 1996; And PROCTOR Adds Remote Delivery Sites
95-103 SEC Approves A Policy That Delegates Authority To The NASD Staff And The NASD Fixed Income Committee To Review Member Requests For Exemptions From MSRB Rule G-37(b)
95-101 Mail Vote—NASD Solicits Member Vote On Amendments To The NASD By-Laws To Reconfigure The NASD Board And Establish A National Nominating Committee;
95-88 Treasury Delays Effective Date Of Wire Transfer Recordkeeping Requirements Until April 1, 1996; Proposes Clarifying Amendments
95-85 Clarification Of NASD Notice to Members 95-16 And NYSE Information Memorandum 95-16: Content And Enforcement Of Provisions In Customer Agreements And Predispute Arbitration Clauses
95-83 SEC Approves Rules Permitting Arbitration Participants To Seek Injunctive Relief From Arbitrators
95-81 SEC Approves Rules For Reporting Customer Complaint Information; Special NASD Notices to Members
95-80 NASD Further Explains Members Obligations And Responsibilities Regarding Mutual Funds Sales Practices
95-76 SEC Permits NASD To Discipline Members And Associated Persons Who Fail To Honor Arbitration Or Mediation Settlement Agreements
95-73 NASD Requests Comment On Member Obligations To File Certain Exchange Offers That Result In Public Distributions;
95-69 Treasury Amends Bank Secrecy Act; Requires Additional Recordkeeping Requirements For Wire Transfers
95-64 SEC Approves Amendments To Article III, Section 34 Of The NASD Rules Of Fair Practice And Part I Of Schedule D To The NASD By-Laws Relating To Limited Partnership Rollup Transactions
95-63 SEC Approves Amendments To Article III, Section 34 Of The NASD Rules Of Fair Practice Relating To Freely Tradeable Direct Participation Program Securities
95-61 Mail Vote—NASD Solicits Member Vote On Amendments To The By-Laws To Include Statutory Disqualification Provisions Adopted By Congress;
95-56 NASD Files With The SEC Proposals Related To Non-Cash Incentive Programs, Disclosure Of Cash Compensation, And Direct Payments To Associated Persons
95-54 SEC Approves Amendments To Article III, Section 21 Of The NASD Rules Of Fair Practice Relating To Cold-Calling Requirements
95-50 Availability Of New Qualification Examination For Registered Options Limited Representative (Series 42)
95-47 SEC Approves NASD Proposal To Raise Position Limits For Certain Equity Securities Not Subject To Standardized Options Trading
95-45 SEC Approves Amendments To NASD Interpretation Of Forwarding Of Proxy And Other Materials Under Article III, Section 1 Of The Rules Of Fair Practice
95-44 Request For Comments On Proposed Amendments To The Exception To The Qualified Independent Underwriter Requirement In Schedule E To The NASD By-Laws;
95-37 SEC Approves NASD Proposal Amending The Foreign-Associate Provisions Of Schedule C To The NASD By-Laws
95-36 SEC Approves T+3-Related Amendments To The NASD Uniform Practice Code And Rules Of Fair Practice
95-33 Mail Vote—NASD Solicits Member Vote On Measures To Discipline Members And Registered Persons For Failing To Honor Arbitration And Mediation Settlement Agreements; Last Voting Date: June 15, 1995
95-29 Treasury Approves Amendments To Capital Requirements Under The Government Securities Act Of 1986
95-28 Treasury Provides Government Securities Broker/Dealers With Exemptive Relief In Calculating Haircuts For Options On Certain Mortgage-Backed Securities
95-24 SEC Approves Recordkeeping And Reporting Requirements For Trading Systems Operated By Broker/Dealers
95-22 SEC Approves Amendments To Article III, Section 44 Of The NASD Rules Of Fair Practice About Filing Requirements For Modified Guaranteed Annuity And Life Insurance Contracts
95-21 Request For Comments On Proposed Suitability Obligations To Institutional Customers Interpretation;
95-20 NASD Solicits Member Comment On Proposals For Comprehensive Improvements To The Regulation And Operation Of The Nasdaq Stock Market;
| View Whole Section | Text only | Print Manager | Link |
95-68 Fed. Proposes Changes To Reg. T;
Comment Period Expires: August 28, 1995
| SUGGESTED ROUTING |
Senior Management
|
Executive Summary
The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (Fed.) is requesting comments on proposed changes to Regulation T (Reg. T), which covers extensions of credit by and to broker/dealers. The proposed amendments address a number of topics, including options, foreign securities, the special memorandum account, and cash accounts. Many of the proposed changes place increased reliance on the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and self-regulatory organizations (SROs). Comments are due on or before August 28, 1995.
Explanation Of Proposed Changes
Reprinted below is a section-by-section explanation of the proposed changes as published in the June 29, 1995, Federal Register. A more detailed discussion of these changes is found in that release, which follows this Notice.
Section 220.2 Definitions
The following new definitions are being proposed: cash equivalent, covered option transaction, exempted securities mutual fund, foreign person, money market mutual fund, non-U.S. traded foreign security, and permitted offset position. The following definitions will be modified; escrow agreement, in the money, margin security, OTC margin bond, OTC margin stock, short call or short put, and underlying security. The definition of "in or at the money" will be deleted and SEC-approved rules of the appropriate SRO will govern permitted offsets for specialists.
Section 220.3 General Provisions
Section 220.3(e)(4), "Receipt of funds or securities," is used by creditors to temporarily finance the exercise of a customer's employee stock option. The section will be reworded to permit such short-term financing for anyone entitled to receive or acquire any securities pursuant to an SEC-registered employee benefit plan.
Section 220.3(i) "Variable annuity contracts issued by insurance companies," will be deleted, although no substantive change is intended.
Section 220.4 Margin Account
Section 220.4(b) will contain all provisions of Section 220.5, except for those covering specific options transactions. The options provisions will be deleted and SEC-approved rules of the SROs will apply to these transactions.
Section 220.4(c) will no longer prohibit a margin excess in a foreign currency subaccount from offsetting a margin deficiency in another foreign currency subaccount.
Section 220.5 Special Memorandum Account
This account will be moved from Section 220.6. No substantive changes are proposed.
Section 220.6 Government Securities Account
This account will be moved from Section 220.18. No substantive changes are proposed.
Section 220.8 Cash Account
Section 220.8(a), "Permissible transactions," will be amended in two ways:
- Cash account will recognize industry practice and specifically permit the sale to a customer of any asset on a cash basis.
- Covered options transactions permitted under Section 220.8(a)(3) will be broadened to include any eligible transaction designated by the SEC-approved rules of the SROs.
Section 220.8(b), "Time periods for payment, cancellation or liquidation," will permit creditors to accept full cash payment from customers for the purchase of foreign securities up to one day after the regular-way settlement date.
Section 220.11 Broker/Dealer Credit Account
Three substantive changes are being proposed to Section 220.11(a), "Permissible transactions:"
- Foreign broker/dealers will be permitted to use the account for delivery-versus payment transactions with U.S. broker/dealers.
- Joint back-office arrangements will require a reasonable relationship between the owners' equity interest and the amount of business effected or financed by the joint back office.
- "Prime broker" arrangements set up under SEC guidelines will be able to use this account for transactions effected at executing broker/dealers.
Section 220.12 Market Functions Account
Section 220.12(b), "Specialists," will be amended to allow SEC-approved rules for the SROs to determine which permitted offsets can be effected on a good-faith basis.
Section 220.13 Arranging For Loans By Others
Changes are proposed for this section in two areas:
- The provision allowing U.S. broker/dealers to arrange for customers to obtain credit from a foreign lender to purchase foreign securities will be expanded to cover short sales, while the overall coverage of this provision will be limited to foreign securities that are not publicly traded in the United States.
- The regulation will explicitly permit U.S. broker/dealers to sell their customers foreign securities with installment features, if the offering has only a small U.S. component.
Section 220.16 Borrowing And Lending Securities
Two changes are proposed for this section:
- The required collateral will be expanded to include marginable foreign sovereign debt securities and any collateral that is acceptable to the SEC when a broker/dealer borrows securities from its customer.
- U.S. broker/dealers will be able to lend foreign securities to a foreign person for any legal purpose and against any legal collateral.
Section 220.18 Supplement: Margin Requirements
Several changes are being proposed.
Options will be given 50 percent loan value if listed on a national securities exchange. Mutual funds whose portfolio is limited to exempted securities will be given good-faith loan value, as will money market mutual funds.
NASD members are urged to review the Fed.'s proposal in its entirety. Members that wish to comment on this proposal should do so by August 28, 1995. Comment letters should refer to Docket No. R-0772 and be sent to:
William W. Wiles
Secretary
Board of Governors of the Federal
Reserve System
20th St. and Constitution Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20551
Members are asked to send copies of their comment letters to:
Joan Conley
Corporate Secretary
National Association of
Securities Dealers, Inc.
1735 K Street, NW
Washington, DC 20006
Questions concerning this Notice may be directed to Anne Harpster, Compliance Department, at (202) 728-8092.
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
12 CFR Part 220
[Regulation T: Docket No. R-0772]
RIN 7100-AB28
Securities Credit Transactions: Review of Regulation T, "Credit by Brokers and Dealers"
AGENCY: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
ACTION: Proposed Rule.
SUMMARY: As part of a program to periodically review its regulations, the Board is proposing amendments to Regulation T, the regulation that covers extensions of credit by and to broker and dealers (also known as creditors). These amendments reflect consideration of the comments submitted in response to the Board's Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. Many of the proposed amendments feature increased reliance on rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and self-regulatory organizations (SROs) and others would make Regulation T consistent with Regulation G and Regulation U, the regulations covering securities credit by lenders other than broker-dealers. Proposed changes in the options area include permitting loan value for long positions in exchange-traded options and increasing reliance on the margin rules of the exchange that trades the option for customer and specialist transactions. These changes would also allow creditors to recognize the offsetting nature of financial futures in calculating margin for securities options. Proposed amendments in the international area will reduce restrictions on transactions involving foreign securities that are not publicly traded in the United States and foreign securities being sold on an installment basis if the U.S. component is a relatively small percentage of the offering. Broker-dealers would also be given more flexibility in computing overall margin requirements for customer accounts with securities denominated in one or more foreign currencies. In addition to these and other amendments, technical changes are being proposed to clarify areas that have raised questions, update references, or restore language inadvertently deleted. The Board is also soliciting comments on a number of specific proposals. Finally, a number of questions regarding the existing regulation raised by commenters are being answered.
DATES: Comments should be received on or before August 28, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Comments should refer to Docket No. R-0772, and may be mailed to William W. Wiles, Secretary, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, 20th Street and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20551. Comments also may be delivered to Room B-222 of the Eccles Building between 8:45 a m and 5:15 p m weekdays, or to the guard station in the Eccles Building courtyard on 20th Street, N.W. (between Constitution Avenue and C Street, N.W.) at any time. Comments received will be available for inspection in Room MP-500 of the Martin Building between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. weekdays, except as provided in 12 CFR 261.8 of the Board's rules regarding availability of information.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Holz, Senior Attorney, or Angela Desmond, Senior Counsel, Division of Banking Supervision and Regulation (202) 452–2781; for the hearing impaired only, Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD), Dorothea Thompson (202) 452–3544.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In 1992, the Board issued an advance notices proposed rulemaking and request for comment concerning a general review of Regulation T.1 Comments were received from 31 respondents, some of whom commented more than once. The comments have been analyzed to help prepare proposed amendments to the regulation. These proposed amendments are consistent with the current tenor of the regulation and statutory requirements; however, the comments raised broad issues as to purposes that Regulation T serves in light of the current regulatory environment and market practices. One comment questioned the continuing need for the Regulation T requirements, noting that possible purposes for the regulation, such as broker dealer financial integrity and customer protection, also are addressed by SEC oversight of brokers and dealers by means of net capital and customer protection rules. Comments also suggested broad changes to Regulation T that the commenters believe are appropriate in the current environment. These changes included, but were not limited to: (1) Delegating all responsibility for margins and related requirements to the self-regulatory organizations under the oversight of the SEC; (2) applying the restrictions on arranging credit only to credit that otherwise violates margin rules; (3) eliminating margin requirements on loans to brokers and dealers; (4) exempting from the margin rules transactions in all exempt securities; (5) exempting transactions with sophisticated customers; (6) expansion of permissible arrangements for borrowing and lending securities; and (7) exempting transactions in investment grade securities. While the Board believes that it is important to proceed with the proposed amendments in order to address particular problems, the Board also believes regulatory structures should be reviewed continually, not merely to update them, but also to assess whether different structures would better meet regulatory objectives and even whether regulation is still necessary. Accordingly, the Board requests comments including particular proposals and supporting legal and policy rationale, not only on the specific changes to Regulation T set forth in this notice, but also on the proposals enumerated above, the continuing need for Regulation T, and appropriate changes to its scope and architecture. The supplementary information that follows explains what is being proposed and reasons therefor.
All securities listed on a national securities exchange have loan value under Regulation T except for options. The Board proposes to eliminate this disparate treatment, which was adopted in the early 1970s, and allow exchange-traded options the same 50 percent loan value currently afforded other margin equity securities. In light of the successful growth of standardized options trading since the 1970s, the positive performance of the Options Clearing Corporation, and the development of new types of options, other securities and financial futures, the Board is proposing to treat long positions in exchange-traded options the same as other registered equity securities for margin purposes.
Granting 50 percent loan value to exchange-traded options would also address a disparity that has arisen in the past few years with the listing of so-called index warrants. Although index warrants resemble long-term options, the use of the word "warrant" to describe this product has led many broker-dealers to allow 50 percent loan value for these instruments while long-term options, such as LEAPs, are not permitted any loan value under the current regulation. Treating exchange-traded options the same as other exchange-traded equity securities would eliminate this disparity.
When Regulation T was adopted in 1934, the amount of margin required for writing a put or call was the amount "customarily required" by the creditor. In the 1970s the Board adopted specific requirements based on existing rules of one of the self-regulatory organizations (SROs). Starting in the 1980s, the Board has on more than one occasion amended Regulation T to incorporate by reference SRO margin rules for options transactions. The Board is proposing to continue this process by increasing reliance on SRO options margin rules for customers and specialists.
Many commenters expressed support for a risk-based options margin system and/or a recognition of the offsetting nature of financial futures based on similar indexes, rates, or assets. Under the Board's proposal, the SROs would be able to further these goals in setting cover requirements for all types of securities options.
In 1991, Board staff raised no objection to a broker-dealer that sought to "arrange" for its customer to write an OTC option on foreign securities.3 This position would be codified by the proposed amendments to the arranging section concerning foreign securities. The Board is not proposing to extend this position to OTC options on securities which are publicly traded in the United States.-Allowing broker-dealers to arrange for customers to write OTC options without collecting margin would not be consistent with the requirements of the organized options exchanges. Rules of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) both provide that margin is required for the "issuance, guarantee or sale (other than a 'long' sale) for a customer of a put or call." The Board is proposing to add the word "sell" to the language in the cash account to make clear that the Board's rules cover the same situations covered by NYSE and NASD rules.
Section 220.3(e)(4) of Regulation T was added in 1988 to allow creditors to help customers with valuable employee stock options exercise their options by providing short-term financing of the exercise price. The short-term loan is either paid off from the sale of the securities received pursuant to the employee stock option or replaced with a conventional margin loan extended against those securities. This practice has come to be known in the industry as "cashless exercise." Over the last five years, Board staff has not objected to the expansion of the application of § 220.3(e)(4) to other types of securities customers receive under employee benefit plans, such as certain employee stock warrants. In addition, Board staff has allowed brokers to temporarily finance withholding taxes due on stock received under employee benefit plans. New language is being proposed to reflect these staff opinions. The new language would also allow the use of § 220.3(e)(4) for outside directors and consultants who are eligible to participate in employee benefit plans under SEC rules.
Any entity required to register as a broker or dealer with the SEC under section 15(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Act) is a creditor under Regulation T. Although the definitions of "broker" and "dealer" in the Act do not refer to nationality, the SEC's policy is to require registration of foreign broker-dealers only when they are physically operating in the United States.4 The Board generally follows the SEC in this area and does not consider foreign broker-dealers not required to register with the SEC as creditors under Regulation T.
Although the commenters were mixed on whether the definition of creditor should be amended to include or exclude foreign broker-dealers, there was general agreement that U.S. broker-dealers purchasing securities from or selling securities to a foreign broker-dealer on a DVP basis should be able to effect the trades on a broker-to-broker basis. Proposed language is being added to the Broker-Dealer Credit Account that will make clear that foreign broker-dealers may use this account for DVP transactions with U.S. broker-dealers.
Since 1990, creditors have been able to extend margin credit denominated in foreign currency if it is secured by foreign margin securities denominated or traded in the same foreign currency. If a customer has securities of various denominations, margin subaccounts (and, if desired, SMA subaccounts) are set up so that credit computed in U.S. dollars and each separate currency can be isolated. Under the current rule, an increase in the value of securities used to support specific foreign currency-denominated debt cannot be used to offset a deficiency in another margin subaccount. At the request of commenters, the Board is proposing to delete this limitation and permit margin requirements denominated in any currency to be offset by equity in any marginable security or a foreign currency deposit made in connection with a security denominated in that currency. Creditors would be free to retain the current system of separate SMAs for each foreign currency denomination.
Another comment concerning foreign currency comes from the Securities Industry Association (SIA), which believes that any freely convertible currency should be able to be treated at its U.S. dollar equivalent for all purposes of Regulation T. Under the current version of Regulation T, foreign currency received in connection with the purchase, sale or loan of a security denominated in that currency may be accounted for in that currency or at its U.S. dollar equivalent. If there is no security denominated in that currency, creditors should convert the currency into its U.S. dollar equivalent upon receipt. The conversion can be effected in a customer's cash or margin account, with the resulting balance maintained in U.S. dollars.
In 1990, the Board added an exception concerning foreign stocks to the arranging section of Regulation T which permits a creditor to arrange for its customer to receive more credit than the creditor could extend when its customer is purchasing a foreign security with credit from a foreign lender. The exception, found in section 220.13(d), was based on the theory that transactions involving foreign securities do not require the same strictness of regulation because they do not have a substantial effect on the U.S. securities market. Commenters have asked for the Board to expand the foreign stock exception to cover short sales as well. The Board agrees that equal treatment in the arranging area should be afforded to both long and short sales.
In gaining experience with the 1990 amendment, however, it has been noticed that there is an increasing trend for corporations that have issued stock abroad to list the securities for trading in the United States. Therefore, the Board is proposing a somewhat more restricted definition of what constitutes a foreign security for purposes of this section to assure equal treatment of foreign and domestic securities that are publicly traded in the United States. For example, the German conglomerate Daimler-Benz recently listed its shares on the New York Stock Exchange, thereby enabling U.S. broker-dealers to extend 50 percent credit against the stock. Under the current arranging exception for foreign securities, a creditor can arrange for its customer to borrow more than 50 percent on Daimler-Benz stock if the credit is extended by a foreign lender (often a foreign affiliate of the creditor). In contrast, a creditor may not arrange for its customer to buy AT&T stock with less than 50 percent margin, even if the credit were extended by a foreign lender. Proposed language would address this situation and ensure equal treatment for all stocks that are publicly traded in the United States by permitting a creditor to arrange for the purchase or short sale of a "non-U.S. traded foreign security," defined as a security issued abroad that does not trade on a national securities exchange or NASDAQ.
Under Regulation T, a creditor may borrow or lend securities for the purpose of making delivery pursuant to a short sale or "fail" transaction. In addition, the regulation limits the type of collateral that must be pledged to secure a loan of securities. Several commenters, such as the SIA and the SIA-Credit Division, request an amendment to permit U.S. broker-dealers to lend foreign securities to a foreign person for any purpose that is lawful in the foreign country. The NYSE would like to ensure that foreign securities loaned abroad do not come back to the U.S. to cover short sales or fails. The Board is therefore proposing to allow loans of foreign securities for any lawful purpose if the securities are "non-U.S. traded foreign securities." This should prevent these securities from being used for transactions in the United States. In addition, the SIA notes that many securities lending transactions occurring outside the U.S. would not meet the collateral requirements of Regulation T. The proposed amendment would allow a creditor to accept any collateral that may be pledged in the foreign country for loans of securities, providing the collateral's value is at least equal to 100 percent of the market value of the securities borrowed.
The United Kingdom began a series of privatizations of state-owned companies in the late 1970s. Investors in the shares of these companies paid for them on an installment basis over a period of at least six months. Installment sales are not uncommon in the U.K., but are generally prohibited in this country under section II(d) of the Act.5 The practice is also prohibited under Regulation T if the first installment is less than the initial margin requirement.
Participation of U.S. investors in the U.K. privatizations was accommodated by letters written by Board staff.6 The Board proposes to amend the arranging provision of Regulation T to state that a creditor is not deemed to have arranged for credit subject to the margin regulations if it sells a foreign security that is being offered on an installment basis, provided that less than 15 percent of the issue is offered to U.S. persons. This generic language would allow U.S. investors to participate in installment sales of foreign securities when the U.S. component of the offering is a relatively small portion of the overall offering and would cover offerings by foreign governments and other foreign issuers.
In 1990, the Board amended Regulation T to establish a List of Foreign Margin Stocks (the "Foreign List"). These stocks are treated in the same manner as domestic margin equity securities. The Board established criteria for initial inclusion on the Foreign List and for continued listing. U.S. broker-dealers certify to an SRO that specific foreign securities meet the criteria. The Board uses the information submitted by the SRO in publishing the Foreign List. The Foreign List has grown from approximately 40 stocks in August 1990 to over 700 stocks this year.
Many commenters state that the system is cumbersome and results in all broker-dealers benefitting from the research done by a small number of firms. Some commenters have suggested that a stock included in a major foreign stock index should be automatically marginable if it meets two criteria: (1) the SEC or CFTC has approved trading in the United States of options, warrants, or futures on a foreign securities index that contains the foreign equity security and (2) the SEC has determined that the stock has a "ready market" for purposes of its net capital rule.7 The Board is soliciting comment whether such a test should be adopted, which securities would be covered under the criteria, and suggestions on how this information could be integrated into the Board's Foreign List.
Most customer transactions involving credit take place in a margin account, which may be maintained in conjunction with a special memorandum account (SMA). Several commenters recommend that more than one customer, such as members of a family, be permitted to share a single SMA. One broker-dealer notes that this would allow the individual customers' accounts to be cross-collateralized and cross-guaranteed. The Board is not proposing to change the SMA at this time. In addition to operational problems raised by linked SMAs, Regulation T and the Board's other margin regulations do not allow a guarantee to have loan value for securities credit transactions.
The SIA-Credit Division suggests elimination of the provision in § 220.4(f)(2)(ii) concerning withdrawals of securities received as part of a distribution attributed to securities already in the margin account. This section is permissive in that it permits some withdrawals which create or increase a margin deficiency. Nevertheless, the Board is soliciting comment on whether such an exception is still warranted.
Under Regulations G and U (12 CFR Parts 207 and 221), a debt security convertible into a margin stock is considered a margin stock. Although no comparable rule exists in Regulation T, in 1990 the Board defined foreign margin stock to include a debt security convertible into a margin security. The SIA-Credit Division and several broker-dealers recommend applying this concept to all convertible debt securities in Regulation T and the Board is proposing language to accomplish this.
Several commenters suggest that the Board adopt a rating requirement for all debt securities as an alternative to the current requirement that domestic debt securities be registered with the SEC. The Board has adopted the rating requirement for foreign securities because the concept of comity argues against requiring SEC registration. The fact that "mortgage-related securities" require a rating but not SEC registration was Congressionally mandated in the Secondary Mortgage Market Enhancement Act of 1984.
The Board is proposing to strike the word "mortgage" from the second section of the definition of "OTC margin bond" to clarify that all pass-through securities can meet this definition. The Board also confirms that the minimum principal amount required for "OTC margin bonds" applies to shelf registrations of a single issue once the minimum amount has been issued, even though some of the individual tranches sold may be smaller.
Although a 1984 staff opinion took the position that privately-issued Treasury receipts were not exempted securities and not entitled to loan value,8 the Board, SEC and Treasury Department have become more comfortable over time with viewing these securities as equivalent to exempt securities. For example, a 1994 Board staff opinion concerning the Glass-Steagall Act concluded that the holder of a privately-issued Treasury receipt is, for virtually all purposes, a holder of an interest in the underlying Treasury security.9 The Board therefore does not object to the treatment of privately-issued Treasury receipts as exempted securities for purposes of Regulation T. The staff opinion to the contrary will be deleted.
A comment was received from an investor who believes stock which does not trade on NASDAQ should be marginable if the issuer has another class of marginable stock whose price is used to determine the sale price of the nonmargin stock. This situation is not being addressed by the proposed amendments. In addition to the complexity of covering such a limited group of stocks, this type of stock cannot be purchased by the general public and therefore no bid prices are available.
The Public Securities Association (PSA) and a broker-dealer comment that creditors should be able to extend credit on commercial paper, certificates of deposit (CDs), and bankers acceptances (BAs). All of these instruments may be used collateral for a nonpurpose loan (i.e., a loan that is not made for the purpose of purchasing, carrying, or trading in securities). Section 7(c) of the Act10 prohibits the Board from permitting broker-dealers to accept nonsecurities as collateral in a margin account. Although commercial paper is a security and can be held in a margin account, Regulation T denies loan value to domestic debt securities that are not SEC-registered. Therefore, commercial paper is a nonmargin, nonexempted security and the Supplement to Regulation T requires a margin of 100 percent if held in a margin account.
Proposed changes to the cash account concerning options are discussed in this preamble in section I.B.2. In addition, one commenter would like confirmation that customers may purchase CDs and other nonsecurities products in the cash account. A 1988 staff opinion confirmed that industry practice is to use the cash account to record the purchase of both securities and nonsecurities,11 and the Board is proposing to add language to the cash account section of the regulation to codify this position.
In order to guard against free-riding, net settlement of trades in a cash account generally is not permitted. Customers are required to pay for all purchases in full without netting sale proceeds from securities purchased and sold on the same day in order to avoid imposition of the 90-day freeze described in § 220.8(c) of Regulation T. In 1988, Board staff confirmed two statutory exceptions to this general rule for transactions in mortgage-related securities 12 and exempted securities.13 Some broker-dealers comment that customers should be able to net settle all transactions in a cash account as long as the regulation states that day trading is not permitted in that account. No changes are being proposed in this area as allowing net settlement of all trades in the cash account would complicate a creditor's ability to prevent free-riding in the cash account.
A customer who sells a security purchased in a cash account before making full cash payment must have sufficient funds in the account by trade date for any purchases during the next 90 days. This restriction is known as the "90-day freeze." One broker-dealer suggested the freeze should not apply if the cash account holds marginable securities with sufficient loan value to pay for the securities that have been sold before having been paid for. This suggestion is contrary to the nature of the cash account. A customer who contemplates the need for credit to settle securities purchases should be using a margin account and not a cash account.
Another broker-dealer believes the freeze should not apply if a customer decides to liquidate a purchase made on a DVP basis when the customer is ready to make full payment but the selling broker does not make timely delivery and the security is otherwise unavailable. The Board agrees that a customer should not be subject to the 90-day restriction when it decides to liquidate a transaction that the counterparty cannot complete.
Transactions effected in the arbitrage account are not subject to Regulation T margin requirements. The SIA and a broker-dealer have requested that the arbitrage account no longer require that the transactions be entered into to take advantage of a concurrent disparity in prices. However, elimination of the requirement that the two transactions yield an immediate gain would expand this special provision beyond those transactions which perform a market function by bringing together the prices of securities or markets which should be the same. Therefore no changes are being proposed to the arbitrage account.
The broker-dealer credit account is normally available only for broker-dealers.14 However, the brokerage industry has developed a service known as "prime brokerage" in which a customer maintains a cash and/or margin account with a "prime broker" to record transactions executed at one or more executing brokers. Industry practice has been for the executing broker to use the broker-dealer credit account to record the transactions sent to the prime broker (who enforces Regulation T vis-a-vis the customer). After discussions with Board staff and an SIA committee, the SEC issued a no action letter last year-describing requirements that must be followed in connection with prime brokerage.15 The Board is proposing to add language to the broker-dealer credit account to officially acknowledge its use in prime brokerage transactions.
A repurchase agreement from a broker-dealer's point of view may be viewed as a borrowing by the creditor and should not generally be covered by the Board's margin regulations as long as the security is not subject to the restrictions imposed by section 8(a) of the Act. The repurchase agreements addressed herein are reverse repurchase agreements in which a customer sells a security to a creditor with an agreement to repurchase from the creditor at a later time. Repurchase agreements in government securities are permitted in the government securities account created last year.16
In addition to repurchase agreements on government securities the PSA, SIA and several broker-dealers request an amendment that would permit repurchase agreements on all fixed income securities with good faith loan value, although the PSA acknowledges that it may be appropriate to treat these transactions as margin loans. However, broker-dealers traditionally require 20 percent margin when financing nonexempted debt securities and do not lend the 100 percent implied in structuring the transaction as a repurchase agreement. Although the PSA acknowledges the resemblance between repurchase agreements and margin loans, it states that practical problems make the cash account or a new account more appropriate. Although the collection of margin from a customer by a broker-dealer would seem to indicate that the transaction is properly recorded in the margin account, the Board is soliciting comment on the advisability of creating a new account for repurchase agreements on securities other than government securities in which margin would be collected as if the transaction were a conventional margin loan. The PSA, SIA, and a law firm also request creation of a new account to allow forward transactions, which are not permitted under Regulation T unless the security is trading on a when-issued basis or is a government or mortgage-related security. Comment is also invited on the advisability of accommodating forward transactions accompanied by the deposit required for a conventional margin loan in an account other than a margin account.
The PSA and SIA would also like creditors to be able to effect repurchase agreements on money market instruments that may not qualify as securities. Such transactions are permissible in the nonsecurities credit account as long as the proceeds are not used for purpose credit.
The SIA and several broker-dealers believe the Board should establish an account or subaccount where creditors may effect and finance all securities transactions on a good faith basis for customers who meet some level of financial sophistication. In the past, the Board has amended the arranging section of Regulation T to permit creditors to arrange for certain types of credit for sophisticated customers.17 No further relaxation of the regulation is being proposed in this area at this time.
As noted above,18 the Board is proposing to add money market mutual funds to the list of cash equivalents available to cover a put written in the cash account and give the fund shares good faith loan value in a margin account. The SIA-Credit Division and two other broker-dealers believe money market mutual funds should be treated as cash without having to be liquidated. Although the Board recognizes that money market shares are often viewed as cash equivalents, they are not cash. A customer who is required to deposit cash pursuant to Regulation T must liquidate the shares to realize cash.
The commenters were split on the question of whether broker-dealers should continue to be treated as customers under Regulation T. The principal argument in favor of special treatment for broker-dealers is that they are subject to minimum net capital requirements that impose a limit on leverage, albeit greater leverage than that permitted public customers. The Board continues to believe special credit (i.e., lower margin) is appropriate when broker-dealers perform a market function, but is not proposing treatment that differs from that for public customers for reasons of equity.
Regulation T permits special credit for broker-dealers performing a market function. The Board is proposing clarifying language to the provisions describing OTC market makers and third-market makers to respond to questions that have arisen since the regulation was last revised.
The SIA would like the Board to permit deficit financing of specialists, eliminate restrictions on their permitted offsets and eliminate the restriction in § 220.12(b)(4) of Regulation T concerning free-riding by specialists. As discussed in this preamble in section I.A.2.C., the Board is proposing to allow any permitted offset that is permissible under SEC-approved rules of the creditor's examining authority. Although the Board supports the concept of good faith credit for specialist transactions, deficit financing is a form of unsecured credit, which is prohibited by section 7(c) of the Act.19 The restriction on free-riding by specialists by its terms does not apply to any specialist on an exchange that has an SEC-approved rule on the same subject.
One broker-dealer suggested expanding the definition of OTC market-maker to include market makers of convertible bonds who post their prices in the "yellow sheets" or deal in convertible bonds traded pursuant to SEC Rule 144A.20 Convertible bonds are equity securities under the Act21 and the Board has designated convertible bonds as OTC margin stock when they meet the criteria in section 220.17 of Regulation T. OTC market-makers are registered with NASDAQ as such and are required to engage in a certain level of market-making, as are specialists. The Board does not permit good faith credit for broker-dealers making a market in equity securities via the "pink sheets." Consistency argues against permitting such credit for broker-dealers making a market in convertible bonds via the "yellow sheets" or those trading pursuant to SEC Rule 144A.
Section 220.11(a)(2) of Regulation T allows broker-dealers to set up a joint back office (JBO). The owners of the JBO are not considered customers of the clearing organization and therefore no Regulation T margin is required, although the clearing firm generally obtains the appropriate securities haircut from its participants. When the JBO section was adopted, the Board assumed there would be a reasonable relationship between the creditors' ownership interests and the amount of business conducted and did not adopt an explicit requirement for the amount of ownership each broker-dealer should have in the JBO. Since adoption of the provision, several stock exchanges have expressed concern that JBOs are permitting credit far in excess of the participant's interest. Much of the activity was attributed to index options specialists seeking good faith financing for stock baskets, which is not otherwise permitted under Regulation T. As discussed in the section on the market functions account under options, the Board is proposing to permit such financing under SEC-approved rules of the exchanges and this change should reduce the pressure on JBOs to extend credit greatly disproportionate to the amount of equity ownership. Nevertheless, the Board is also proposing to state explicitly that the participants' ownership interest in the JBO should be reasonably related to the amount of business conducted through it. Three stock exchanges and one other commenter support changes along these lines.
Several commenting broker-dealers suggest additional classes of creditors that should be entitled to good faith credit. One broker-dealer suggests creating a new category of broker-dealers entitled to beneficial margin treatment that would be under some affirmative obligation to add liquidity to the market but would not be required to be present on the trading floor. The Board has traditionally allowed good faith credit for specialists engaged in specialist transactions and deferred to the SEC to determine who is a specialist under the Act. It is unclear what the effect would be on specialists if other broker-dealers with lesser market-making obligations were permitted good faith credit on certain transactions.
The SIA-Credit Division believes that self-clearing broker-dealers who choose to go through another broker-dealer should not be required to post customer margin. Board staff has addressed this issue several times22 and reiterated that the treatment of a broker-dealer depends on whether it clears the transaction itself and not whether it could clear the transaction. In addition, a broker-dealer suggested that affiliated broker-dealers should not be treated as customers. Board staff has indicated that affiliated (sister) firms are treated as customers23 and no policy reasons for changing this have been presented.
Section 220.16 of Regulation T covers the borrowing and lending of securities. Securities may be borrowed or lent in connection with the need to make delivery in short sales and fails to receive. The section covers the borrowing and lending of all types of securities,24 including those with good faith loan value, and requires enumerated types of collateral worth at least 100 percent of the market value of the securities on a daily basis. Although stock loans are economically equivalent to repurchase agreements, the former are based on the need to make delivery and are not meant to be financing arrangements for the owner of the securities being lent.25
The Board is not proposing to include dividend reinvestment and stock purchase plans as a permitted purpose for borrowing securities. Permitting such borrowing would not be consistent with existing Board policy concerning borrowing and lending securities. The Board has permitted securities lending where it is needed for the smooth operation of the securities markets, i.e. short sales and fails to receive securities. This view was echoed by the Group of Thirty when they recommended removing impediments to securities lending to allow delivery of securities. Participation in dividend reinvestment and stock purchase plans does not help the securities markets complete transactions as broker-dealers do not actually want or need possession of the securities. Nevertheless, in light of comments received indicating that many issuers view these programs as a less costly means of raising capital, the Board is soliciting comment on whether section 220.16 of Regulation T should be amended to accommodate these plans.
All of the commenters addressing section 8(a) of the Act, which limits the source of certain loans to broker-dealers to member banks and some nonmember banks, support expansion of the types of lenders described in section 8(a) or a reduction in the types of transactions subject to the restriction. The SEC has recently exempted all listed debt securities from the scope of section 8(a) of the Act,32 with the result that only loans secured by exchange-traded equity securities are still subject to the restriction.
A wide variety of commenters recommend legislation be introduced to loosen the restrictions of section 8(a). Such legislation is currently pending in Congress.33
The following new definitions are being proposed: cash equivalent, covered option transaction, exempted securities mutual fund, foreign person, money market mutual fund, non-U.S. traded foreign security, and permitted offset position. The following definitions would be modified: escrow agreement, in the money, margin security, OTC margin bond, OTC margin stock, short call or short put, and underlying security. The definition of in or at the money would be deleted and SEC-approved rules of the appropriate SRO would govern permitted offsets for specialists.
Section 220.3(e)(4), "Receipt of funds or securities," is used by creditors to temporarily finance the exercise of a customer's employee stock option. The section would be reworded to permit such short-term financing for anyone entitled to receive or acquire any securities pursuant to an SEC-registered employee benefit plan.
Section 220.3(i), "Variable annuity contracts issued by insurance companies," would be deleted, although no substantive change is intended.
Section 220.4(b) would contain all provisions of section 220.5, except for those covering specific options transactions. The options provisions would be deleted and SEC-approved rules of the SROs would apply to these transactions.
Section 220.4(c) would no longer prohibit a margin excess in a foreign currency subaccount from offsetting a margin deficiency in another foreign currency subaccount.
This account would be moved from section 220.6. No substantive changes are proposed.
This account would be moved from section 220.18. No substantive changes are proposed.
Section 220.8(a), Permissible transactions," would be amended in two ways. First, the cash account would recognize industry practice and specifically permit the sale to a customer of any asset on a cash basis. Second, the covered options transactions permitted under section 220.8(a)(3) would be broadened to include any eligible transaction designated by the SEC-approved rules of the SROs.
Section 220.8(b), "Time periods for payment; cancellation or liquidation," would permit creditors to accept full cash payment from customers for the purchase of foreign securities up to one day after the regular way settlement date.
Three substantive changes are being proposed to section 220.11(a), "Permissible transactions." First, foreign broker-dealers would be permitted to use the account for delivery-versus-payment transactions with U.S. broker-dealers. Second, joint back office arrangements would require a reasonable relationship between the owners' equity interest and the amount of business effected or financed by the joint back office. Third, "prime broker" arrangements set up under SEC guidelines would be able to use this account for transactions effected at executing broker-dealers.
Section 220.12(b), "Specialists," would be amended to allow SEC-approved rules of the SROs to determine which permitted offsets can be effected on a good faith basis.
Changes are proposed for this section in two areas. First, the provision allowing U.S. broker-dealers to arrange for customers to obtain credit from a foreign lender to purchase foreign securities would be expanded to cover short sales while the overall coverage of this provision would be limited to foreign securities that are not publicly traded in the United States. Second, the regulation would explicitly permit U.S. broker-dealers to sell its customers foreign securities with installment features if the offering has only a small U.S. component.
Two changes are proposed for this section. First, the required collateral would be expanded to include marginable foreign sovereign debt securities and any collateral that is acceptable to the SEC when a broker-dealer borrows securities from its customer. Second, U.S. broker-dealers would be able to lend foreign securities to a foreign person for any legal purpose and against any legal collateral.
Several changes are being proposed. Options would be given fifty percent loan value if listed on a national securities exchange. Mutual funds whose portfolio is limited to exempted securities would be given good faith loan value, as would money market mutual funds.
The Board believes there will be no significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities if this proposal is adopted. Comments are invited on this statement.
No additional reporting requirements or modification to existing reporting requirements are proposed.
Banks, banking, Bonds, Brokers, Credit, Federal Reserve System, Margin, Margin requirements, Investment companies, Investments, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Board proposes to amend 12 CFR Part 220 as follows:
PART 220—CREDIT BY BROKERS AND DEALERS (REGULATION T)
Authority: 15 U.S.C. 78c, 78g, 78h, 78q, and 78w.
| Sec. | |
| 220.1 | Authority, purpose, and scope. |
| 220.2 | Definitions. |
| 220.3 | General provisions. |
| 220.4 | Margin account. |
| 220.5 | Special memorandum account. |
| 220.6 | Government securities account. |
| 220.7 | Arbitrage account. |
| 220.8 | Cash account. |
| 220.9 | Nonsecurities credit and employee stock ownership account. |
| 220.10 | Omnibus account. |
| 220.11 | Broker-dealer credit account. |
| 220.12 | Market functions account. |
| 220.13 | Arranging for loans by others. |
| 220.14 | Clearance of securities, options, and futures. |
| 220.15 | Borrowing by creditors. |
| 220.16 | Borrowing and lending securities. |
| 220.17 | Requirements for the list of marginable OTC stocks and the list of foreign margin stocks. |
| 220.18 | Supplement: Margin requirements. |
The terms used in this part have the meanings given them in section 3(a) of the Act or as defined in this section.
Cash equivalent means securities issued or guaranteed by the United States or its agencies, negotiable bank certificates of deposit, bankers acceptances issued by banking institutions in the United States and payable in the United States, or money market mutual funds.
Covered option transaction means:
Creditor means any broker or dealer (as defined in sections 3(a)(4) and 3(a)(5) of the Act), any member of a national securities exchange, or any person associated with a broker or dealer (as defined in section 3(a)(18) of the Act), except for business entities controlling or under common control with the creditor.
Customer includes:
Nonexempted security means any security other than an exempted security (as defined in section 3(a)(12) of the Act).
Nonmember bank means a bank that is not a member of the Federal Reserve System.
Non-U.S. traded foreign security means a foreign security that is neither a registered security nor one listed on NASDAQ.
OTC margin bond means:
Overlying option means:
Permitted offset position means a position in securities or other assets underlying options in which a specialist makes a market or a position in options overlying the securities in which a specialist makes a market, provided the positions qualify as permitted offsets under the rules of the national securities exchange with which the specialist is registered, provided that all such rules have been approved or amended by the SEC.
Purpose credit means credit for the purpose of:
In a government securities account, a creditor may effect and finance transactions involving government securities, provided the transaction is not prohibited by section 15C of the Act or any rule thereunder.
In an arbitrage account a creditor may effect and finance for any customer bona fide arbitrage transactions. For the purpose of this section, the term "bona fide arbitrage" means;
The required margin for each security position held in a margin account shall be as follows:
By order of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, June 21, 1995.
William W. Wiles,
Secretary of the Board
[FR Doc. 95–15680 Filed 6–28–95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE B210–01-P
1 57 FR 37109, August 18, 1992.
2 See, e.g., Staff Opinion of July 12, 1991, Federal Reserve Regulatory Service (FRRS) 5–666.251 and Staff Opinion of October 11, 1991, FRRS 5–666.26.
3 Staff Opinion of October 22, 1991, FRRS 5–666.27.
4 SEC Release No. 34–27017; 54 FR 30013 (July 18, 1989).
5 15 U.S.C. 78k(d).
6 See, e.g., Staff Opinion of October 24, 1984. FRRS 5–615.92.
7 17 CFK 240.15c3–1(c)(11).
8 Staff Opinion of December 13, 1984, FRRS 5–628.13.
9 Staff Opinion of January 10, 1994. FRRS 4–655.5.
10 15 U.S.C. 78g(c).
11 FRRS 5–615.955.
12 FRRS 5–615.952.
13 FRRS 5–628.17.
14 As noted in the section on foreign broker-dealers, the Board is proposing to allow foreign broker-dealers to use the broker-dealer credit account when purchasing securities on a DVP basis.
15 Letter of January 25, 1994. from Brandon Becker, Esq. to Mr. Jeffrey C. Bernstein, reprinted in CCH Federal Securities Law Reporter at ¶ 76,819.
16 See 59 FR 53565 (October 25, 1994).
17 For example, the exemption in section 220.13(b) requires that the sale of securities be effected pursuant to the SEC's private placement exception from registration. Such sales must be made to sophisticated investors.
18 See section I.A.2.b. on the cash account under options and section III.A.2.b. on mutual funds above.
19 15U.S.C. 78g(c).
20 17CFR230.144A.
21 Section 3(a)(11) of the Act (15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(11)) defines equity security to include any security convertible into an equity security.
22 See, e.g., Staff Opinion of August 18, 1986, FRRS 5–621.16.
23 Staff Opinion of December 16, 1988, FRRS 5–621.18.
24 The government securities account can be used to conduct all types of permissible transactions involving government securities, including borrowing and lending.
25 The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) is currently debating the differing treatment of-repurchase agreements and stock loans and has tentatively concluded that repurchase agreements should be accounted for as collateralized borrowings if the repurchase agreement entitles the party receiving financial assets subject to repurchase to repledge them but not sell them. Most securities lending transactions that entitle the party receiving the financial assets to sell them would be accounted for as sales. Staff plans to review the Regulation T treatment in this area once FASB reaches a decision on the matter.
26 Staff Opinion of September 23, 1988, FRRS 5–615.15.
27 SEC Rule 15c3–3, 17 CFR 240.15c3–3.
28 SEC Release No. 34–26608, 54 FR 10680 (March 15, 1989).
29 Board staff has indicated that a permissible alternative to pre-borrowing is the payment of a commitment fee to a stock lender. See staff opinion of October 22, 1990. FRRS 5–615.18.
30 Staff Opinions of March 2, 1984. FRRS 5–615.1 and July 6, 1984, FRRS 5–615.01; see also In re RFG Options, SEC Administrative Proceeding File No. 3–6370, September 26, 1988.
31 As noted in footnote 29, all transactions involving government securities may be effected in the government securities account without regard to other provisions of Regulation T.
32 SEC Rule 3a12–11, 17 CFR 240.3a12–11, published at 59 FR 55342, November 7, 1994.
33 H.R. 1062, 104th Cong., 1st Sess.
Help
Corporate Organization
