On July 23, 2019, AFR Education Fund submitted a letter to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) opposing a proposal that would create exemptions that would permit U.S. banks – and international banks active in the U.S. market – to do large-scale derivatives dealing in the U.S. without being designated as derivatives dealers under Dodd-Frank Act rules.
The requirement in the Dodd-Frank Act that major dealers in financial derivatives be regulated as such, and meet risk management and business conduct standards, is a direct response to derivatives market abuses that contributed to the 2008 financial crisis. The loophole created by today’s Final Rule could permit large-scale evasion of this requirement.
We strongly disapprove of the new proposal to change rules for derivatives trading announced in today’s meeting of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). The requirement that complex derivatives be traded whenever possible in open, competitive markets was a crucial element of Dodd-Frank derivatives market reforms.
A look back at the financial lobby’s robotic opposition to one proposed reform after another, and how Wall Street’s claims have squared with real-world events. This new AFR report homes in on three pre-financial-crisis case studies, involving credit cards, mortgages, and derivatives.
“By freezing the CFTC’s funding at its current inadequate level for the next five years, this legislation exacerbates the agency’s most fundamental problem – a lack of resources to accomplish its mission. After the 2008 financial crisis, the CFTC became newly responsible for hundreds of trillions of dollars in previously unregulated swaps markets. …Even as it fails to address the pressing problem of funding, HR 238 would also load down the CFTC with additional mandates that would drain resources and act as a roadblock to necessary oversight and enforcement.
We strongly support using Consolidated Foreign Subsidiary (FCS) status as the basis for cross border enforcement rather than the more amorphous and subjective “guaranteed subsidiary” status. …We strongly disagree with the Commission’s proposal to exclude a wide range of transactions involving foreign branches and affiliates of U.S. swap dealers from external business conduct requirements.
We are deeply concerned that the Investment Company Institute (ICI) Letter lays out a set of changes to the Proposed Rule which wold effectively negate the derivatives exposure limits in the rule and render them useless as a tool for controlling speculative leverage at registered funds, as is required by the 1940 Act. …This change would not simply modify the relative weighting of derivatives exposures, but would result in a massive increase in the absolute limit on derivatives risk exposure.
“AFR is disappointed at the continuing extension of exemptions from swaps reporting for foreign dealers active in the U.S. markets. Some of the transactions to which this relief applies, such as transactions with supposedly non-guaranteed affiliates of U.S. banks, could be highly relevant to derivatives risks within the U.S. economy.”
“At today’s meeting, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) will rule on whether derivatives margin rules required by Japanese regulators are comparable to U.S. margin requirements… Japanese margin rules are significantly weaker than U.S. rules in several important areas. These include margin protections in case of the bankruptcy or failure of a foreign counterparty, and the types of non-cash margin accepted. Permitting U.S. firms to operate under these weaker rules would constitute an unacceptable back-door weakening of U.S. margin rules. We are concerned that such a comparability determination would set a precedent for permitting similar weakening in other jurisdictions and in other areas of derivatives oversight.”