Calamos Convertible Opportunities and Income Fund, et al.; Notice of Application, 4268-4271 [E9-1299]
Download as PDF
4268
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 14 / Friday, January 23, 2009 / Notices
‘‘ARTICLES THE PRODUCT OF AUSTRIA, BELGIUM, BULGARIA, CYPRUS, CZECH REPUBLIC, DENMARK, ESTONIA, FINLAND,
FRANCE, GERMANY, GREECE, HUNGARY, IRELAND, ITALY, LATVIA, LITHUANIA, LUXEMBOURG, MALTA, THE NETHERLANDS, POLAND, PORTUGAL, ROMANIA, SLOVAKIA, SLOVENIA, SPAIN OR SWEDEN:—Continued
Articles the product of Italy:
9903.02.82 ..................
Mineral waters and aerated waters, not containing added sugar or other sweetening matter nor flavored
(provided for in subheading 2201.10).
B. Effective with respect to articles entered,
or withdrawn from warehouse for
consumption, on or after March 23, 2009,
subchapter III of chapter 99 of the
Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United
States (HTS) is modified by deleting the
following HTS subheadings: 9903.02.21,
9903.02.22, 9903.02.23, 9903.02.24,
9903.02.25, 9903.02.26, 9903.02.27,
9903.02.28, 9903.02.29, 9903.02.30,
9903.02.31, 9903.02.32, 9903.02.33,
9903.02.34, 9903.02.35, 9903.02.36,
9903.02.37, 9903.02.38, 9903.02.39,
9903.02.40, 9903.02.41, 9903.02.42,
9903.02.43, 9903.02.44, 9903.02.45,
9903.02.46 and 9903.02.47.
[FR Doc. E9–1257 Filed 1–22–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3190–W9–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. IC–28603; 812–13552]
Calamos Convertible Opportunities
and Income Fund, et al.; Notice of
Application
January 14, 2009.
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange
Commission (‘‘Commission’’).
ACTION: Notice of application for an
order under section 6(c) of the
Investment Company Act of 1940
(‘‘Act’’) for an exemption from sections
18(a)(1)(A) and (B) of the Act.
APPLICANTS: Calamos Convertible
Opportunities and Income Fund
(‘‘CHI’’), Calamos Convertible and High
Income Fund (‘‘CHY’’), Calamos
Strategic Total Return Fund (‘‘CSQ’’),
and Calamos Global Dynamic Income
Fund (‘‘CHW’’) (each, a ‘‘Fund’’ and
collectively, ‘‘Funds’’).
SUMMARY OF APPLICATION: Applicants
request an order (‘‘Order’’) granting an
exemption from sections 18(a)(1)(A) and
(B) of the Act for a period from the date
of the Order until October 31, 2010. The
Order would permit each Fund to issue
or incur debt subject to asset coverage
of 200% that would be used to refinance
all of the Fund’s auction rate preferred
shares (‘‘ARPS’’) issued prior to
February 1, 2008 that are outstanding at
the time of the Order. The Order also
would permit each Fund to declare
dividends or any other distributions on,
or purchase, capital stock during the
term of the Order, provided that any
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:32 Jan 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
such debt has asset coverage of at least
200% after deducting the amount of
such transaction.
FILING DATES: The application was filed
on July 24, 2008, and amended on
October 14, 2008, December 18, 2008,
January 12, and January 14, 2009.
HEARING OR NOTIFICATION OF HEARING: An
order granting the application will be
issued unless the Commission orders a
hearing. Interested persons may request
a hearing by writing to the
Commission’s Secretary and serving
applicants with a copy of the request,
personally or by mail. Hearing requests
should be received by the Commission
by 5:30 p.m. on February 9, 2009, and
should be accompanied by proof of
service on applicants, in the form of an
affidavit or, for lawyers, a certificate of
service. Hearing requests should state
the nature of the writer’s interest, the
reason for the request, and the issues
contested. Persons who wish to be
notified of a hearing may request
notification by writing to the
Commission’s Secretary.
ADDRESSES: Secretary, Securities and
Exchange Commission, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549–1090.
Applicants: c/o James J. Boyne, Calamos
Advisors LLC, 2020 Calamos Court,
Naperville, IL 60563.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Courtney S. Thornton, Senior Counsel,
at (202) 551–6812, or Janet M.
Grossnickle, Assistant Director, at (202)
551–6821 (Division of Investment
Management, Office of Investment
Company Regulation).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The
following is a summary of the
application. The complete application
may be obtained for a fee at the SEC’s
Public Reference Room, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549–1520 (tel.
202–551–5850).
Applicants’ Representations
1. Each of the Funds is organized as
a Delaware statutory trust and is
registered under the Act as a diversified,
closed-end management investment
company. Each Fund is advised by
Calamos Advisors LLC (‘‘Calamos’’) and
has issued and outstanding a class of
common shares and several series of
ARPS.
2. Applicants state that the Funds
issued their outstanding ARPS for
PO 00000
Frm 00135
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
100%
purposes of investment leverage to
augment the amount of investment
capital available for use in the pursuit
of their investment objectives.
Applicants state that, through the use of
leverage, the Funds seek to enhance the
investment return available to the
holders of their common shares by
earning a rate of portfolio return (which
includes the return related to
investments made with proceeds from
leverage) that exceeds the leverage costs,
which have been the amount of
dividends that the Funds paid to
holders of the ARPS. Applicants
represent that ARPS shareholders are
entitled to receive a stated liquidation
preference amount of $25,000 per share
(plus any accumulated but unpaid
dividends) in any liquidation,
dissolution, or winding up of the
relevant Fund before any distribution or
payment to holders of the Fund’s
common shares. They state that
dividends declared and payable on
ARPS have a similar priority over
dividends declared and payable on the
Fund’s common shares. In addition,
applicants state that ARPS are
‘‘perpetual’’ securities and are not
subject to mandatory redemption by a
Fund so long as certain asset coverage
tests are met. Further, applicants state
that ARPS are redeemable at each
Fund’s option.
3. Applicants state that prior to
February 2008, dividend rates on the
ARPS for each dividend period were set
at the market clearing rate determined
through an auction process that brought
together bidders, who sought to buy
ARPS, and holders of ARPS, who sought
to sell their ARPS. Applicants explain
that if an auction failed to clear (because
of an imbalance of sell orders over bids),
the dividend payment rate over the next
dividend period was set at a specified
maximum applicable rate (the
‘‘Maximum Rate’’) determined by
reference to a short-term market interest
rate (either the LIBOR or ‘‘AA’’
commercial paper rate for an equivalent
period). Applicants state that an
unsuccessful auction is not a default;
the relevant Fund continues to pay
dividends to all holders of ARPS, but at
the specified Maximum Rate rather than
a market clearing rate. Prior to February
2008, the Maximum Rate had never
E:\FR\FM\23JAN1.SGM
23JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 14 / Friday, January 23, 2009 / Notices
been triggered due to failed auctions for
any of the Funds.
4. Applicants state that if investors
did not purchase all of the ARPS
tendered for sale at an auction prior to
the failure of the auction market, dealers
historically would enter into the auction
and purchase any excess shares to
prevent the auction from failing.
Applicants represent that this auction
mechanism had generally provided
readily available liquidity to holders of
ARPS for more than twenty years.
Applicants believe that many investors
invested short-term cash balances in
ARPS believing they were safe shortterm investments and, in many cases,
the equivalent of cash.
5. Applicants state that in February
2008, the financial institutions that
historically provided ‘‘back stop’’
liquidity to ARPS auctions stopped
participating in them and the auctions
began to fail. Applicants state that,
beginning in February 2008, the Funds
experienced auction failures due to an
imbalance between buy and sell orders.
Applicants believe that there is no
established secondary market that
would provide holders of ARPS with
the liquidation preference of $25,000
per share. Applicants state that each of
the Funds to date has secured debt
financing enabling it to refinance (and
accordingly redeem) a significant
portion of its outstanding ARPS.1
Applicants state that CSQ, CHI and
CHY’s financing arrangements provide a
commitment level that, if completely
drawn upon, would allow them to retire
all (or almost all) of their ARPS.
However, Applicants represent that
these Funds have been prohibited from
utilizing these facilities in their entirety
to redeem their remaining ARPS
because they would not have the 300%
asset coverage required by section
18(a)(1)(A) of the Act after a full
redemption of the ARPS. Similarly,
Applicants state that CHW has obtained
the authorization of its board of trustees
(‘‘Board’’) to issue a further $50 million
in extendible notes and believes there is
a market for them, but is unable to issue
additional notes in order to redeem its
remaining outstanding ARPS because it
would not have 300% asset coverage
immediately following the issuance of
those notes. As a result, applicants state
that there is currently no reliable
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
1 CSQ
obtained a 180 day rolling margin loan that
enabled it to redeem 81.5% of its ARPS. CHI and
CHY redeemed 72.9% and 81.4% of their ARPS,
respectively, with the proceeds of a renewable
commercial paper conduit facility with a maturity
of 364 days. CHW issued extendible notes in a Rule
144A offering with a term of 364 days and used the
proceeds of such notes to redeem 85.7% of its
ARPS.
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:32 Jan 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
mechanism for holders of their ARPS to
obtain liquidity, and believe that,
industry-wide, the current lack of
liquidity is causing distress for a
substantial number of ARPS
shareholders and creating severe
hardship for many investors.
6. Applicants seek relief for a period
from the date of any Order until October
31, 2010 (‘‘Exemption Period’’) to
facilitate temporary borrowings by the
Funds that would enhance their ability
to provide a liquidity solution to the
holders of their ARPS in the near term 2
while they either pay down or seek a
more permanent form of replacement
leverage, such as a new type of preferred
stock that provides liquidity at
liquidation value.3 Applicants submit
that the gradual reduction of leverage
through the use of proceeds of any
common share issuances or the
development of an alternative form of
preferred stock might take several
months, if at all, after the Order has
been issued. Applicants state that it is
uncertain when, or if, the securities and
capital markets will return to conditions
that would enable the Funds to achieve
compliance with the asset coverage
requirements that would apply in the
absence of the Order. Given the
uncertainty and the current and
continuing unsettled state of the
securities and capital markets,
applicants believe that the Exemption
Period is reasonable and appropriate.
Each Fund’s refinancing of its ARPS
would be subject to the approval of the
refinancing arrangements by the Fund’s
Board.
Applicants’ Legal Analysis
1. Section 18(a)(1)(A) of the Act
provides that it is unlawful for any
registered closed-end investment
company to issue any class of senior
security representing indebtedness, or to
sell such security of which it is the
issuer, unless the class of senior security
will have an asset coverage of at least
300% immediately after issuance or
sale. Section 18(a)(2)(A) of the Act
provides that it is unlawful for any
registered closed-end investment
company to issue any class of senior
security that is a stock, or to sell any
such security of which it is the issuer,
unless the class of senior security will
have an asset coverage of at least 200%
2 Each Applicant believes that refinancing would
be appropriate and, over the longer term would
provide additional investment income net of
borrowing costs, and thus would be beneficial to its
common shareholders.
3 See, e.g., Eaton Vance Management, SEC NoAction Letter (June 13, 2008) (permitting the
issuance of ‘‘liquidity protected preferred shares’’ to
supplement or replace Eaton Vance funds’ auction
rate preferred stock).
PO 00000
Frm 00136
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
4269
immediately after such issuance or
sale.4
2. Section 18(a)(1)(B) prohibits a
closed-end fund from declaring a
dividend or other distribution on, or
purchasing, its own capital stock unless
its outstanding indebtedness will have
an asset coverage of at least 300%
immediately after deducting the amount
of such dividend, distribution or
purchase price.5 Section 18(a)(2)(B)
prohibits a closed-end fund from
declaring a dividend or other
distribution on, or purchasing, its own
common stock unless its outstanding
preferred stock will have an asset
coverage of at least 200% immediately
after deducting the amount of such
dividend, distribution or purchase
price.
3. Section 6(c) of the Act provides, in
relevant part, that the Commission, by
order upon application, may
conditionally or unconditionally
exempt any person, security, or
transaction from any provision of the
Act if and to the extent necessary or
appropriate in the public interest and
consistent with the protection of
investors and the purposes fairly
intended by the policy and provisions of
the Act.
4. Applicants request that the
Commission issue an Order under
section 6(c) of the Act to exempt each
Fund from the 300% asset coverage
requirements set forth in sections
18(a)(1)(A) and (B) of the Act.
Specifically, the Funds seek relief from
the section 18 asset coverage
requirements for senior securities
representing indebtedness for the
Exemption Period to permit the Funds
to refinance any ARPS issued prior to
4 Section 18(h) of the Act defines asset coverage
of a senior security representing indebtedness of an
issuer as the ratio which the value of the total assets
of the issuer, less all liabilities and indebtedness
not represented by senior securities, bears to the
aggregate amount of senior securities representing
indebtedness of the issuer. The section defines asset
coverage of the preferred stock of an issuer as the
ratio which the value of the total assets of the
issuer, less all liabilities and indebtedness not
represented by senior securities, bears to the
aggregate amount of senior securities representing
indebtedness of the issuer plus the amount the class
of senior security would be entitled to on
involuntary liquidation.
5 An exception is made for the declaration of a
dividend on a class of preferred stock if the senior
security representing indebtedness has an asset
coverage of at least 200% at the time of declaration
after deduction of the amount of such dividend. See
section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Act. Further, section 18(g)
of the Act provides, among other things, that
‘‘senior security,’’ for purposes of section
18(a)(1)(B), does not include any promissory note
or other evidence of indebtedness issued in
consideration of any loan, extension or renewal
thereof, made by a bank or other person and
privately arranged, and not intended to be publicly
distributed.
E:\FR\FM\23JAN1.SGM
23JAN1
4270
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 14 / Friday, January 23, 2009 / Notices
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
February 1, 2008 that are outstanding at
the time of the Order with debt subject
to the 200% asset coverage requirement
for stock, rather than the 300% asset
coverage that would ordinarily apply
under section 18 to senior securities
representing indebtedness, (a) when
they incur that debt, and (b) when they
declare dividends or any other
distributions on, or purchase, their
capital stock, after deduction of the
amount of such dividend, distribution
or purchase price. Applicants state that,
except as permitted under the requested
Order, if issued, the Funds would meet
all of the asset coverage requirements of
section 18(a) of the Act. In addition,
applicants state that within the
Exemption Period each Fund that
borrows in reliance on the Order will
either pay down or refinance the debt so
that the Fund would, then and
thereafter, comply with the applicable
asset coverage requirements (200% for
equity or 300% for debt) under section
18 of the Act.
5. Applicants state that section 18
reflects congressional concerns
regarding preferential treatment for
certain classes of shareholders, complex
capital structures, and the use of
excessive leverage. Applicants submit
that another concern was that senior
securities gave the misleading
impression of safety from risk.
Applicants believe that the request for
temporary relief is necessary,
appropriate and in the public interest
and that such relief is consistent with
the protection of investors and the
purposes intended by the policy and
provisions of the Act.
6. Applicants note that the illiquidity
of ARPS is a unique, exigent situation
that is posing urgent, and in some cases
devastating, hardships on ARPS
shareholders. Applicants represent that
the proposed replacement of the ARPS
with debt would provide liquidity for
the Funds’ ARPS shareholders while the
Funds continue their efforts to obtain a
more permanent form of financing (such
as through the issuance of preferred
equity-based instruments) that fully
complies with the asset coverage
requirements of section 18.6
7. Applicants represent that the Order
would help avoid the potential harm to
common shareholders that could result
if the Funds were to deleverage their
portfolios in the current difficult market
environment 7 or that could result if a
6 See
supra note 4.
state that a significant portion of
each Fund’s portfolio is in convertible securities.
Applicants believe that it is difficult to sell such
securities in the current market without artificially
depressing market prices because the liquidity of
that market has been reduced due to deleveraging
7 Applicants
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:32 Jan 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
reduction in investment return reduced
the market price of common shares.
Applicants also state that the requested
Order would permit the Funds to
continue to provide their common
shareholders with the enhanced returns
that leverage may provide.
8. Applicants believe that the interests
of both classes of the Funds’ current
investors would be well served by the
requested order—the ARPS
shareholders because they would
achieve the liquidity that the market
currently cannot provide (as well as full
recovery of the liquidation value of their
shares), and the common shareholders
because the adverse consequences of
forced deleveraging would be avoided
and each Fund’s investment return
would be enhanced to the extent that
the cost of the new form of leverage is
lower than the investment return on the
capital raised through the borrowings.
9. Applicants represent that the
proposed borrowing would be obtained
from banks, insurance companies or
qualified institutional buyers (as
defined in Rule 144(a)(1) under the
Securities Act of 1933) who would be
capable of assessing the risk associated
with the transaction. Applicants also
state that, to the extent the Act’s asset
coverage requirements were aimed at
limiting leverage because of its potential
to magnify losses as well as gains, they
believe that the proposal would not
unduly increase the speculative nature
of the Funds’ common shares because
the relief is temporary and the Funds
would be no more highly leveraged if
they replace the existing ARPS with
borrowing.8 Applicants also state that
the proposed liquidity solution actually
would simplify the Funds’ capital
structures, not make them more
complex, opaque, or hard to understand
or result in pyramiding or inequitable
distribution of control.
10. Applicants state that the current
state of the credit markets, which has
by hedge funds and as a result of market makers’
own impaired capital positions. Applicants believe,
however, that convertible securities generally
remain sound even though they are presently
trading below their intrinsic value. Applicants thus
believe it would be disadvantageous to sell these
securities in the current market.
8 Applicants acknowledge that managing any
portfolio that relies on borrowing for leverage
entails the risk that, when the borrowing matures
and must be repaid or refinanced, an economically
attractive form of replacement leverage may not be
available in the capital markets. For that reason, any
portfolio that relies on borrowing for leverage is
subject to the risk that it may have to forcibly
deleverage, which could be disadvantageous to the
portfolio’s common shareholders. Applicants
therefore state that they regard leveraging through
borrowing as potentially a temporary, interim step,
with the issuance of new preferred equity-based
instruments as a possible longer-term replacement
source of portfolio leverage.
PO 00000
Frm 00137
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
affected the ARPS, is an historic event
of unusual severity, which requires a
creative and flexible response on the
part of both the public and private
sectors. Applicants believe that these
issues have created an urgent need for
limited, quick, thoughtful and
responsive solutions. Applicants believe
that the request meets the standards for
exemption under section 6(c) of the Act.
Applicants’ Conditions
Applicants agree that any order
granting the requested relief shall be
subject to the following conditions:
1. Each Fund that borrows subject to
200% asset coverage under the order
will do so only if such Fund’s Board,
including a majority of the trustees who
are not ‘‘interested persons’’ (as defined
in section 2(a)(19) of the Act)
(‘‘Independent Trustees’’), shall have
determined that such borrowing is in
the best interests of such Fund, its
common shareholders, and its ARPS
shareholders. Each Fund shall make and
preserve for a period of not less than six
years from the date of such
determination, the first two years in an
easily accessible place, minutes
specifically describing the deliberations
by the Board and the information and
documents supporting those
deliberations, the factors considered by
the Board in connection with such
determination, and the basis of such
determination.
2. Upon expiration of the Exemption
Period, each Fund will have asset
coverage of at least 300% for each class
of senior security representing
indebtedness.
3. The Board of any Fund that has
borrowed in reliance on the order shall
receive and review, no less frequently
than quarterly during the Exemption
Period, detailed progress reports
prepared by management (or other
parties selected by the Independent
Trustees) regarding and assessing the
efforts that the Fund has undertaken,
and the progress that the Fund has
made, towards achieving compliance
with the appropriate asset coverage
requirements under section 18 by the
expiration of the Exemption Period. The
Board, including a majority of the
Independent Trustees, will make such
adjustments as it deems necessary or
appropriate to ensure that the applicant
comes into compliance with section 18
of the Act within a reasonable period of
time, not to exceed the expiration of the
Exemption Period. Each Fund will make
and preserve minutes describing these
reports and the Board’s review,
including copies of such reports and all
other information provided to or relied
upon by the Board, for a period of not
E:\FR\FM\23JAN1.SGM
23JAN1
Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 14 / Friday, January 23, 2009 / Notices
less than six years from the date of such
determination, the first two years in an
easily accessible place.
For the Commission, by the Division of
Investment Management, under delegated
authority.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9–1299 Filed 1–22–09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–59254; File No. SR–FINRA–
2008–054]
Self-Regulatory Organizations;
Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority, Inc.; Order Approving
Proposed Rule Change To Adopt
FINRA Rule 5280 (Trading Ahead of
Research Reports) in the Consolidated
FINRA Rulebook
January 15, 2009.
I. Introduction
On October 29, 2008, the Financial
Regulatory Authority, Inc. (‘‘FINRA’’) (f/
k/a National Association of Securities
Dealers, Inc. (‘‘NASD’’)) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘SEC’’ or ‘‘Commission’’), pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule
19b–4 thereunder,2 a proposed rule
change to adopt NASD Interpretive
Material 2110–4 (Trading Ahead of
Research Reports) as a FINRA rule,
subject to certain amendments. The
proposed rule change was published for
comment in the Federal Register on
November 6, 2008.3 The Commission
received two comment letters in
response to the proposed rule change.
This order approves the proposed rule
change.
II. Description of the Proposed Rule
Change
As part of the process of developing
the new consolidated rulebook
(‘‘Consolidated FINRA Rulebook’’),4
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
3 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58905
(November 6, 2008), 73 FR 67237 (November 13,
2008) (SR–FINRA–2008–054) (notice).
4 The current FINRA rulebook includes, in
addition to FINRA Rules, (1) NASD Rules and (2)
rules incorporated from NYSE (‘‘Incorporated NYSE
Rules’’) (together, the NASD Rules and Incorporated
NYSE Rules are referred to as the ‘‘Transitional
Rulebook’’). While the NASD Rules generally apply
to all FINRA members, the Incorporated NYSE
Rules apply only to those members of FINRA that
are also members of the NYSE (‘‘Dual Members’’).
For more information about the rulebook
consolidation process, see FINRA Information
FINRA proposed to adopt in the
Consolidated FINRA Rulebook NASD
Interpretive Material (‘‘IM’’) 2110–4
(Trading Ahead of Research Reports)
with certain modifications.
IM–2110–4 states that it is conduct
inconsistent with just and equitable
principles of trade for a member to
establish or adjust an inventory position
in an exchange-listed security traded
over-the-counter or a derivative of such
security in anticipation of the issuance
of a research report on that security. The
IM further recommends—but does not
require—that firms establish policies
and procedures to develop and
implement effective internal controls to
isolate specific information within
research and other relevant departments
so as to prevent the trading department
from utilizing advance knowledge of the
issuance of research reports. Those
members that choose not to establish
such procedures bear the burden to
show that changes in inventory
positions in advance of research reports
were not purposeful.5
The proposed rule change would
amend the IM in three respects. First, it
would extend the application of the IM
to cover inventory positions with
respect to any security—including
debt—or derivative thereof, irrespective
of whether the security is exchangelisted. FINRA believes the purpose of
the IM—to prevent the manipulation of
the supply of a security for the benefit
of a firm and to the detriment of
investors—applies equally to inventory
positions in non-exchange-listed
securities.
Second, the proposed rule change
would apply the rule only to
circumstances where a member
establishes or adjusts its inventory
based on non-public advance
knowledge of the content or timing of a
research report in that security. As such,
it would not be a violation of the rule
for a member to increase or decrease
inventory of a security based on
publicly available information regarding
the likely timing of a research report. By
way of example, when a member’s
trading desk adjusts an inventory
position in anticipation of a research
mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with NOTICES
2 17
VerDate Nov<24>2008
18:32 Jan 22, 2009
Jkt 217001
Notice, March 12, 2008 (Rulebook Consolidation
Process).
5 Incorporated NYSE Rule Interpretation 401/01
includes aspects similar to IM–2110–4. FINRA
deleted that Interpretation as part of an earlier filing
to transfer NASD Rule 2110 (Standards of
Commercial Honor and Principles of Trade) and
2120 (Use of Manipulative, Deceptive or Other
Fraudulent Devices) to the Consolidated FINRA
Rulebook, as the conduct addressed in the
Interpretation is subsumed by those rules. See
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 58643
(September 24, 2008) 73 FR 57174 (October 1, 2008)
(Order Approving SR–FINRA–2008–028).
PO 00000
Frm 00138
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
4271
report because of a publicly discernible
trend that a member’s report tends to
follow an earnings announcement, the
prohibitions of the rule would not be
triggered. However, having knowledge
of a publicly discernible trend is not a
viable alternative basis for the member’s
trading desk to adjust its inventory
position when the trading desk is also
the recipient of non-public advance
knowledge of the content or timing of a
research report in that security.
Finally, the proposal would eliminate
the option to establish internal controls
to manage the flow of information
between the research and trading
departments and instead mandate that
firms establish policies and procedures
reasonably designed to restrict or limit
the information flow between research
department personnel, or other persons
with knowledge of the content or timing
of a research report, and trading
department personnel, so as to prevent
trading department personnel from
utilizing non-public advance knowledge
of the issuance or content of a research
report for the benefit of the member or
any other person.
FINRA believes that a member should
have an affirmative obligation to manage
conflicts of interest in its trading of
securities. Moreover, this approach is
more consistent with existing and
proposed rules regarding supervision
and the requirements of NASD Rule
2711 and NYSE Rule 472 to eliminate
conflicts involving the publication and
distribution of research reports.
III. Comments
The SEC received two comment
letters.6 The commenters’ concerns, as
well as FINRA’s responses are discussed
below.
The first comment letter expressed
general support for the proposed rule
change, but requested a few
clarifications. First, the commenter
sought clarification that the term
‘‘research report’’ in the proposed rule
change has the same definition as that
in NASD Rule 2711(a)(9). The latter
defines research report as ‘‘any written
(including electronic) communication
that includes an analysis of equity
securities of individual companies or
industries, and that provides
information sufficient upon which to
base an investment decision.’’ Rule
2711(a) also includes several exceptions
to the definition, among them
communications limited to
6 Letter from Amal Aly, Managing Director and
Associate General Counsel, Securities Industry and
Financial Markets Association (‘‘SIFMA’’),
December 5, 2008; Letter from Peter C.
Chepucavage, General Counsel, Plexus Consulting,
LLC, January 12, 2009.
E:\FR\FM\23JAN1.SGM
23JAN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 14 (Friday, January 23, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4268-4271]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-1299]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. IC-28603; 812-13552]
Calamos Convertible Opportunities and Income Fund, et al.; Notice
of Application
January 14, 2009.
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'').
ACTION: Notice of application for an order under section 6(c) of the
Investment Company Act of 1940 (``Act'') for an exemption from sections
18(a)(1)(A) and (B) of the Act.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicants: Calamos Convertible Opportunities and Income Fund
(``CHI''), Calamos Convertible and High Income Fund (``CHY''), Calamos
Strategic Total Return Fund (``CSQ''), and Calamos Global Dynamic
Income Fund (``CHW'') (each, a ``Fund'' and collectively, ``Funds'').
Summary of Application: Applicants request an order (``Order'')
granting an exemption from sections 18(a)(1)(A) and (B) of the Act for
a period from the date of the Order until October 31, 2010. The Order
would permit each Fund to issue or incur debt subject to asset coverage
of 200% that would be used to refinance all of the Fund's auction rate
preferred shares (``ARPS'') issued prior to February 1, 2008 that are
outstanding at the time of the Order. The Order also would permit each
Fund to declare dividends or any other distributions on, or purchase,
capital stock during the term of the Order, provided that any such debt
has asset coverage of at least 200% after deducting the amount of such
transaction.
Filing Dates: The application was filed on July 24, 2008, and amended
on October 14, 2008, December 18, 2008, January 12, and January 14,
2009.
Hearing or Notification of Hearing: An order granting the application
will be issued unless the Commission orders a hearing. Interested
persons may request a hearing by writing to the Commission's Secretary
and serving applicants with a copy of the request, personally or by
mail. Hearing requests should be received by the Commission by 5:30
p.m. on February 9, 2009, and should be accompanied by proof of service
on applicants, in the form of an affidavit or, for lawyers, a
certificate of service. Hearing requests should state the nature of the
writer's interest, the reason for the request, and the issues
contested. Persons who wish to be notified of a hearing may request
notification by writing to the Commission's Secretary.
ADDRESSES: Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street,
NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090. Applicants: c/o James J. Boyne, Calamos
Advisors LLC, 2020 Calamos Court, Naperville, IL 60563.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Courtney S. Thornton, Senior Counsel,
at (202) 551-6812, or Janet M. Grossnickle, Assistant Director, at
(202) 551-6821 (Division of Investment Management, Office of Investment
Company Regulation).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following is a summary of the
application. The complete application may be obtained for a fee at the
SEC's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street, NE., Washington, DC 20549-
1520 (tel. 202-551-5850).
Applicants' Representations
1. Each of the Funds is organized as a Delaware statutory trust and
is registered under the Act as a diversified, closed-end management
investment company. Each Fund is advised by Calamos Advisors LLC
(``Calamos'') and has issued and outstanding a class of common shares
and several series of ARPS.
2. Applicants state that the Funds issued their outstanding ARPS
for purposes of investment leverage to augment the amount of investment
capital available for use in the pursuit of their investment
objectives. Applicants state that, through the use of leverage, the
Funds seek to enhance the investment return available to the holders of
their common shares by earning a rate of portfolio return (which
includes the return related to investments made with proceeds from
leverage) that exceeds the leverage costs, which have been the amount
of dividends that the Funds paid to holders of the ARPS. Applicants
represent that ARPS shareholders are entitled to receive a stated
liquidation preference amount of $25,000 per share (plus any
accumulated but unpaid dividends) in any liquidation, dissolution, or
winding up of the relevant Fund before any distribution or payment to
holders of the Fund's common shares. They state that dividends declared
and payable on ARPS have a similar priority over dividends declared and
payable on the Fund's common shares. In addition, applicants state that
ARPS are ``perpetual'' securities and are not subject to mandatory
redemption by a Fund so long as certain asset coverage tests are met.
Further, applicants state that ARPS are redeemable at each Fund's
option.
3. Applicants state that prior to February 2008, dividend rates on
the ARPS for each dividend period were set at the market clearing rate
determined through an auction process that brought together bidders,
who sought to buy ARPS, and holders of ARPS, who sought to sell their
ARPS. Applicants explain that if an auction failed to clear (because of
an imbalance of sell orders over bids), the dividend payment rate over
the next dividend period was set at a specified maximum applicable rate
(the ``Maximum Rate'') determined by reference to a short-term market
interest rate (either the LIBOR or ``AA'' commercial paper rate for an
equivalent period). Applicants state that an unsuccessful auction is
not a default; the relevant Fund continues to pay dividends to all
holders of ARPS, but at the specified Maximum Rate rather than a market
clearing rate. Prior to February 2008, the Maximum Rate had never
[[Page 4269]]
been triggered due to failed auctions for any of the Funds.
4. Applicants state that if investors did not purchase all of the
ARPS tendered for sale at an auction prior to the failure of the
auction market, dealers historically would enter into the auction and
purchase any excess shares to prevent the auction from failing.
Applicants represent that this auction mechanism had generally provided
readily available liquidity to holders of ARPS for more than twenty
years. Applicants believe that many investors invested short-term cash
balances in ARPS believing they were safe short-term investments and,
in many cases, the equivalent of cash.
5. Applicants state that in February 2008, the financial
institutions that historically provided ``back stop'' liquidity to ARPS
auctions stopped participating in them and the auctions began to fail.
Applicants state that, beginning in February 2008, the Funds
experienced auction failures due to an imbalance between buy and sell
orders. Applicants believe that there is no established secondary
market that would provide holders of ARPS with the liquidation
preference of $25,000 per share. Applicants state that each of the
Funds to date has secured debt financing enabling it to refinance (and
accordingly redeem) a significant portion of its outstanding ARPS.\1\
Applicants state that CSQ, CHI and CHY's financing arrangements provide
a commitment level that, if completely drawn upon, would allow them to
retire all (or almost all) of their ARPS. However, Applicants represent
that these Funds have been prohibited from utilizing these facilities
in their entirety to redeem their remaining ARPS because they would not
have the 300% asset coverage required by section 18(a)(1)(A) of the Act
after a full redemption of the ARPS. Similarly, Applicants state that
CHW has obtained the authorization of its board of trustees (``Board'')
to issue a further $50 million in extendible notes and believes there
is a market for them, but is unable to issue additional notes in order
to redeem its remaining outstanding ARPS because it would not have 300%
asset coverage immediately following the issuance of those notes. As a
result, applicants state that there is currently no reliable mechanism
for holders of their ARPS to obtain liquidity, and believe that,
industry-wide, the current lack of liquidity is causing distress for a
substantial number of ARPS shareholders and creating severe hardship
for many investors.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ CSQ obtained a 180 day rolling margin loan that enabled it
to redeem 81.5% of its ARPS. CHI and CHY redeemed 72.9% and 81.4% of
their ARPS, respectively, with the proceeds of a renewable
commercial paper conduit facility with a maturity of 364 days. CHW
issued extendible notes in a Rule 144A offering with a term of 364
days and used the proceeds of such notes to redeem 85.7% of its
ARPS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
6. Applicants seek relief for a period from the date of any Order
until October 31, 2010 (``Exemption Period'') to facilitate temporary
borrowings by the Funds that would enhance their ability to provide a
liquidity solution to the holders of their ARPS in the near term \2\
while they either pay down or seek a more permanent form of replacement
leverage, such as a new type of preferred stock that provides liquidity
at liquidation value.\3\ Applicants submit that the gradual reduction
of leverage through the use of proceeds of any common share issuances
or the development of an alternative form of preferred stock might take
several months, if at all, after the Order has been issued. Applicants
state that it is uncertain when, or if, the securities and capital
markets will return to conditions that would enable the Funds to
achieve compliance with the asset coverage requirements that would
apply in the absence of the Order. Given the uncertainty and the
current and continuing unsettled state of the securities and capital
markets, applicants believe that the Exemption Period is reasonable and
appropriate. Each Fund's refinancing of its ARPS would be subject to
the approval of the refinancing arrangements by the Fund's Board.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Each Applicant believes that refinancing would be
appropriate and, over the longer term would provide additional
investment income net of borrowing costs, and thus would be
beneficial to its common shareholders.
\3\ See, e.g., Eaton Vance Management, SEC No-Action Letter
(June 13, 2008) (permitting the issuance of ``liquidity protected
preferred shares'' to supplement or replace Eaton Vance funds'
auction rate preferred stock).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Applicants' Legal Analysis
1. Section 18(a)(1)(A) of the Act provides that it is unlawful for
any registered closed-end investment company to issue any class of
senior security representing indebtedness, or to sell such security of
which it is the issuer, unless the class of senior security will have
an asset coverage of at least 300% immediately after issuance or sale.
Section 18(a)(2)(A) of the Act provides that it is unlawful for any
registered closed-end investment company to issue any class of senior
security that is a stock, or to sell any such security of which it is
the issuer, unless the class of senior security will have an asset
coverage of at least 200% immediately after such issuance or sale.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Section 18(h) of the Act defines asset coverage of a senior
security representing indebtedness of an issuer as the ratio which
the value of the total assets of the issuer, less all liabilities
and indebtedness not represented by senior securities, bears to the
aggregate amount of senior securities representing indebtedness of
the issuer. The section defines asset coverage of the preferred
stock of an issuer as the ratio which the value of the total assets
of the issuer, less all liabilities and indebtedness not represented
by senior securities, bears to the aggregate amount of senior
securities representing indebtedness of the issuer plus the amount
the class of senior security would be entitled to on involuntary
liquidation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Section 18(a)(1)(B) prohibits a closed-end fund from declaring a
dividend or other distribution on, or purchasing, its own capital stock
unless its outstanding indebtedness will have an asset coverage of at
least 300% immediately after deducting the amount of such dividend,
distribution or purchase price.\5\ Section 18(a)(2)(B) prohibits a
closed-end fund from declaring a dividend or other distribution on, or
purchasing, its own common stock unless its outstanding preferred stock
will have an asset coverage of at least 200% immediately after
deducting the amount of such dividend, distribution or purchase price.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ An exception is made for the declaration of a dividend on a
class of preferred stock if the senior security representing
indebtedness has an asset coverage of at least 200% at the time of
declaration after deduction of the amount of such dividend. See
section 18(a)(1)(B) of the Act. Further, section 18(g) of the Act
provides, among other things, that ``senior security,'' for purposes
of section 18(a)(1)(B), does not include any promissory note or
other evidence of indebtedness issued in consideration of any loan,
extension or renewal thereof, made by a bank or other person and
privately arranged, and not intended to be publicly distributed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Section 6(c) of the Act provides, in relevant part, that the
Commission, by order upon application, may conditionally or
unconditionally exempt any person, security, or transaction from any
provision of the Act if and to the extent necessary or appropriate in
the public interest and consistent with the protection of investors and
the purposes fairly intended by the policy and provisions of the Act.
4. Applicants request that the Commission issue an Order under
section 6(c) of the Act to exempt each Fund from the 300% asset
coverage requirements set forth in sections 18(a)(1)(A) and (B) of the
Act. Specifically, the Funds seek relief from the section 18 asset
coverage requirements for senior securities representing indebtedness
for the Exemption Period to permit the Funds to refinance any ARPS
issued prior to
[[Page 4270]]
February 1, 2008 that are outstanding at the time of the Order with
debt subject to the 200% asset coverage requirement for stock, rather
than the 300% asset coverage that would ordinarily apply under section
18 to senior securities representing indebtedness, (a) when they incur
that debt, and (b) when they declare dividends or any other
distributions on, or purchase, their capital stock, after deduction of
the amount of such dividend, distribution or purchase price. Applicants
state that, except as permitted under the requested Order, if issued,
the Funds would meet all of the asset coverage requirements of section
18(a) of the Act. In addition, applicants state that within the
Exemption Period each Fund that borrows in reliance on the Order will
either pay down or refinance the debt so that the Fund would, then and
thereafter, comply with the applicable asset coverage requirements
(200% for equity or 300% for debt) under section 18 of the Act.
5. Applicants state that section 18 reflects congressional concerns
regarding preferential treatment for certain classes of shareholders,
complex capital structures, and the use of excessive leverage.
Applicants submit that another concern was that senior securities gave
the misleading impression of safety from risk. Applicants believe that
the request for temporary relief is necessary, appropriate and in the
public interest and that such relief is consistent with the protection
of investors and the purposes intended by the policy and provisions of
the Act.
6. Applicants note that the illiquidity of ARPS is a unique,
exigent situation that is posing urgent, and in some cases devastating,
hardships on ARPS shareholders. Applicants represent that the proposed
replacement of the ARPS with debt would provide liquidity for the
Funds' ARPS shareholders while the Funds continue their efforts to
obtain a more permanent form of financing (such as through the issuance
of preferred equity-based instruments) that fully complies with the
asset coverage requirements of section 18.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See supra note 4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
7. Applicants represent that the Order would help avoid the
potential harm to common shareholders that could result if the Funds
were to deleverage their portfolios in the current difficult market
environment \7\ or that could result if a reduction in investment
return reduced the market price of common shares. Applicants also state
that the requested Order would permit the Funds to continue to provide
their common shareholders with the enhanced returns that leverage may
provide.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Applicants state that a significant portion of each Fund's
portfolio is in convertible securities. Applicants believe that it
is difficult to sell such securities in the current market without
artificially depressing market prices because the liquidity of that
market has been reduced due to deleveraging by hedge funds and as a
result of market makers' own impaired capital positions. Applicants
believe, however, that convertible securities generally remain sound
even though they are presently trading below their intrinsic value.
Applicants thus believe it would be disadvantageous to sell these
securities in the current market.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. Applicants believe that the interests of both classes of the
Funds' current investors would be well served by the requested order--
the ARPS shareholders because they would achieve the liquidity that the
market currently cannot provide (as well as full recovery of the
liquidation value of their shares), and the common shareholders because
the adverse consequences of forced deleveraging would be avoided and
each Fund's investment return would be enhanced to the extent that the
cost of the new form of leverage is lower than the investment return on
the capital raised through the borrowings.
9. Applicants represent that the proposed borrowing would be
obtained from banks, insurance companies or qualified institutional
buyers (as defined in Rule 144(a)(1) under the Securities Act of 1933)
who would be capable of assessing the risk associated with the
transaction. Applicants also state that, to the extent the Act's asset
coverage requirements were aimed at limiting leverage because of its
potential to magnify losses as well as gains, they believe that the
proposal would not unduly increase the speculative nature of the Funds'
common shares because the relief is temporary and the Funds would be no
more highly leveraged if they replace the existing ARPS with
borrowing.\8\ Applicants also state that the proposed liquidity
solution actually would simplify the Funds' capital structures, not
make them more complex, opaque, or hard to understand or result in
pyramiding or inequitable distribution of control.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Applicants acknowledge that managing any portfolio that
relies on borrowing for leverage entails the risk that, when the
borrowing matures and must be repaid or refinanced, an economically
attractive form of replacement leverage may not be available in the
capital markets. For that reason, any portfolio that relies on
borrowing for leverage is subject to the risk that it may have to
forcibly deleverage, which could be disadvantageous to the
portfolio's common shareholders. Applicants therefore state that
they regard leveraging through borrowing as potentially a temporary,
interim step, with the issuance of new preferred equity-based
instruments as a possible longer-term replacement source of
portfolio leverage.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. Applicants state that the current state of the credit markets,
which has affected the ARPS, is an historic event of unusual severity,
which requires a creative and flexible response on the part of both the
public and private sectors. Applicants believe that these issues have
created an urgent need for limited, quick, thoughtful and responsive
solutions. Applicants believe that the request meets the standards for
exemption under section 6(c) of the Act.
Applicants' Conditions
Applicants agree that any order granting the requested relief shall
be subject to the following conditions:
1. Each Fund that borrows subject to 200% asset coverage under the
order will do so only if such Fund's Board, including a majority of the
trustees who are not ``interested persons'' (as defined in section
2(a)(19) of the Act) (``Independent Trustees''), shall have determined
that such borrowing is in the best interests of such Fund, its common
shareholders, and its ARPS shareholders. Each Fund shall make and
preserve for a period of not less than six years from the date of such
determination, the first two years in an easily accessible place,
minutes specifically describing the deliberations by the Board and the
information and documents supporting those deliberations, the factors
considered by the Board in connection with such determination, and the
basis of such determination.
2. Upon expiration of the Exemption Period, each Fund will have
asset coverage of at least 300% for each class of senior security
representing indebtedness.
3. The Board of any Fund that has borrowed in reliance on the order
shall receive and review, no less frequently than quarterly during the
Exemption Period, detailed progress reports prepared by management (or
other parties selected by the Independent Trustees) regarding and
assessing the efforts that the Fund has undertaken, and the progress
that the Fund has made, towards achieving compliance with the
appropriate asset coverage requirements under section 18 by the
expiration of the Exemption Period. The Board, including a majority of
the Independent Trustees, will make such adjustments as it deems
necessary or appropriate to ensure that the applicant comes into
compliance with section 18 of the Act within a reasonable period of
time, not to exceed the expiration of the Exemption Period. Each Fund
will make and preserve minutes describing these reports and the Board's
review, including copies of such reports and all other information
provided to or relied upon by the Board, for a period of not
[[Page 4271]]
less than six years from the date of such determination, the first two
years in an easily accessible place.
For the Commission, by the Division of Investment Management,
under delegated authority.
Florence E. Harmon,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. E9-1299 Filed 1-22-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P