Request for Comment on Options for a Proposed Exemptive Order Relating to the Trading and Clearing of Precious Metal Commodity-Based ETFs; Concept Release, 60411-60415 [2010-24586]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 189 / Thursday, September 30, 2010 / Notices
This notice is published in
accordance with sections 751(b)(1) and
777(i)(1) of the Act and 19 CFR 351.216.
Dated: September 24, 2010.
Susan H. Kuhbach,
Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Antidumping and Countervailing Duty
Operations.
[FR Doc. 2010–24602 Filed 9–29–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510–DS–P
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
The Manufacturing Council: Meeting of
the Manufacturing Council
International Trade
Administration, U.S. Department of
Commerce.
ACTION: Notice of an Open Meeting.
AGENCY:
to Jennifer Pilat at the contact
information indicated above. To be
considered during the meeting,
comments must be received no later
than 5 p.m. Eastern Time on October 7,
2010, to ensure transmission to the
Council prior to the meeting. Comments
received after that date will be
distributed to the members but may not
be considered at the meeting.
Copies of Council meeting minutes
will be available within 90 days of the
meeting.
Dated: September 27, 2010.
Jennifer Pilat,
Executive Secretary, The Manufacturing
Council.
[FR Doc. 2010–24604 Filed 9–27–10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 3510–DR–P
The Manufacturing Council
will hold a meeting to discuss and
identify the priority issues affecting the
U.S. manufacturing industry, which
may include increasing exports, supply
chain and access to credit, among
others. The Council was re-chartered on
April 8, 2010, to advise the Secretary of
Commerce on matters relating to the
U.S. manufacturing industry.
DATES: October 14, 2010
Time: 10 a.m.
ADDRESSES: Department of Commerce,
1401 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room
4830, Washington, DC, 20230. Because
of building security, all non-government
attendees must pre-register. This
program will be physically accessible to
people with disabilities. Seating is
limited and will be on a first come, first
served basis. Requests for sign language
interpretation, other auxiliary aids, or
pre-registration, should be submitted no
later than October 7, 2010, to Jennifer
Pilat, the Manufacturing Council, Room
4043, 1401 Constitution Avenue, NW.,
Washington, DC, 20230, telephone 202–
482–4501, jennifer.pilat@trade.gov. Last
minute requests will be accepted, but
may be impossible to fill.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Jennifer Pilat, the Manufacturing
Council, Room 4043, 1401 Constitution
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, 20230,
telephone: 202–482–4501, e-mail:
jennifer.pilat@trade.gov.
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING
COMMISSION
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES6
SUMMARY:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
No time will be available for oral
comments from members of the public
attending the meeting. Any member of
the public may submit pertinent written
comments concerning the Council’s
affairs at any time before and after the
meeting. Comments may be submitted
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Sep 29, 2010
Jkt 220001
Request for Comment on Options for
a Proposed Exemptive Order Relating
to the Trading and Clearing of
Precious Metal Commodity-Based
ETFs; Concept Release
Commodity Futures Trading
Commission.
ACTION: Notice of options for a proposed
exemptive order and request for
comment; concept release.
AGENCY:
Recently, the Commodity
Futures Trading Commission
(‘‘Commission,’’ or ‘‘CFTC’’) has been
confronted with the question of how to
treat certain transactions on fractional
undivided interests, or shares, in single
commodity investment products
referred to as exchange traded funds
(‘‘ETF’’ or ‘‘ETFs’’),1 primarily in the
SUMMARY:
1 This Release is limited to those ‘‘Commodity
ETFs’’ that are structured as grantor trusts with an
investment objective of achieving the price
performance of the underlying commodity or
commodities held by such trust, less expenses.
Further, for purposes of this Release, the term or
label ‘‘ETF’’ is loosely applied to precious metal
commodity-based ETFs (as used interchangeably
herein, ‘‘Precious Metal Commodity-Based ETFs’’ or
‘‘Commodity-Based ETFs’’), see section 3(a)(1) of the
Investment Company Act of 1940 (the ‘‘1940 Act’’)
and Securities and Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’),
Exchange-Traded Funds, Investment Company Act
Release No. 28192 (March 11, 2008), 73 FR 14618,
14623 (March 18, 2008). As used herein, ‘‘Precious
Metal’’ indicates either gold, silver, palladium, or
platinum.
Additionally, when we refer to an ‘‘ETF’’ in this
Concept Release, we are not (unless the context
otherwise requires) referring to an entity that meets
the definition of an ‘‘investment company’’ and is
registered under the 1940 Act. This Release also
does not address those ‘‘ETF Commodity Pools’’ that
attempt to track a benchmark index or commodity
by engaging in the purchase of commodity futures
and/or options contracts. These ETF Commodity
Pools are subject to regulation by the Commission
as a commodity pool operator (‘‘CPO’’) and/or
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60411
metals complex. The ETFs have in all
relevant instances been structured as
trusts (singularly, ‘‘ETF Trust’’ or
‘‘Trust’’),2 the assets of which consist of
holdings of one specific physical
commodity.3 The explicit and sole
investment objective of each of these
ETF Trusts is to track as nearly as
possible the spot price of the underlying
physical commodity less the expenses
of trust operations. The listing of these
ETF shares provides shareholders with
efficient exposure to commodity market
price movements.4 These Precious
Metal Commodity-Based ETFs have
primarily focused on holding either gold
or silver, with a recent expansion into
palladium and platinum. The
Commission has issued Orders pursuant
to Section 4(c) of the Commodity
Exchange Act (the ‘‘Act’’) permitting the
trading and clearing of certain
transactions on these Trusts as,
respectively, options on securities and
security futures.5 The Previous Orders
have provided exemptions from certain
provisions of the Act, or the
Commission’s regulations thereunder,
which might have been transgressed by
trading or clearing, among other things,
options and futures on CommodityBased ETFs. The exemption mechanism
has enabled the Commission to reserve
judgment as to the jurisdictional
classification (i.e. commodity or
security) of Commodity-Based ETFs and
options and futures on CommodityBased ETFs while at the same time
providing a mechanism to ensure both
that the Commission’s regulatory
commodity trading adviser (‘‘CTA’’) and may not
implicate regulatory issues raised in this Release.
2 See e.g. NYSEArca Rule 8.201 (CommodityBased Trust Shares); NYSEAmex Rule 1200A
(Commodity-Based Trust Shares); NYSE Rule 1300
(streetTracks Gold Shares); and BATS Exchange
Rule 14.4.
3 See, however, Securities Exchange Act Release
Nos. 62402 (June 29, 2010), 75 FR 39292 (July 8,
2010) (notice of filing of a proposal to list and trade
shares of the ETFS Precious Metals Basket Trust
consisting of gold, silver, palladium, and platinum)
and 62620 (July 30, 2010) (notice of a proposal to
list and trade shares of ETFS White Metals Basket
Trust consisting of silver, palladium, and
platinum).
4 For a previous Commission discussion of the
structural and arbitrage mechanisms underlying a
physical gold ETF, see Description of the
Underlying Commodity in CFTC, Proposed
Exemptive Order for ST Gold Futures Contracts, 73
FR 13867, at 13868 (March 14, 2008).
5 See CFTC, Order Exempting the Trading and
Clearing of Certain Products Related to SPDR®
Gold Trust Shares, 73 FR 31981 (June 5, 2008),
CFTC, Order Exempting the Trading and Clearing
of Certain Products Related to iShares® COMEX
Gold Trust Shares and iShares® Silver Trust
Shares, 73 FR 79830 (December 30, 2008), and
CFTC, Order Exempting the Trading and Clearing
of Certain Products Related to ETFS Physical Swiss
Gold Shares and ETFS Physical Silver Shares, 75
FR 37406 (June 29, 2010) (collectively, the
‘‘Previous Orders’’).
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES6
60412
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 189 / Thursday, September 30, 2010 / Notices
oversight needs are satisfied (whether
through regulation by the Securities and
Exchange Commission (‘‘SEC’’) or by
attaching conditions to the exemption
orders) and that novel products may be
introduced without undue delay for
market participant and investor use.
More recently, the Options Clearing
Corporation (the ‘‘OCC’’) has sought
approval of rules permitting similar
treatment of options and futures on
certain ETFs based on palladium and
platinum.
The Commission is issuing this
Release to solicit comments on: (i)
Options for a proposed exemptive order
in connection with the OCC’s request
for approval of a rule change; and (ii)
the Commission’s treatment of Precious
Metal Commodity-Based ETFs
generally, including whether the
Commission should exempt the trading
and clearing of certain options and
futures transactions on gold and silver,
and/or palladium and platinum,
Commodity-Based ETFs on a categorical
basis.
DATES: Comments must be received on
or before November 1, 2010. All
comments must be in English, or if not
in English, accompanied by an English
translation.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be
submitted by any of the following
methods:
• Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://
www.regulations.gov. Follow the
instructions for submitting comments.
• E-mail: CommodityETFs@cftc.gov.
Include ‘‘Commodity Based ETFs’’ in the
subject line of the message.
• Fax: 202–418–5521.
• Mail: Send to David A. Stawick,
Secretary, Commodity Futures Trading
Commission, Three Lafayette Centre,
1155 21st Street, NW., Washington, DC
20581.
• Courier: Same as mail above.
All comments received will be posted
without change to https://
www.CFTC.gov/.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ryne Miller, Attorney Advisor, 202–
418–5921, rmiller@cftc.gov, or David
Van Wagner, Chief Counsel, 202–418–
5481, dvanwagner@cftc.gov, Division of
Market Oversight, Commodity Futures
Trading Commission, Three Lafayette
Centre, 1151 21st Street, NW.,
Washington, DC 20581.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Part I—Proposed Exemptive Order
A. Background
The first Commodity-Based ETF in
the U.S. was listed and traded on the
New York Stock Exchange (‘‘NYSE’’) in
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Sep 29, 2010
Jkt 220001
November 2004.6 Since that time,
Commodity-Based ETFs have generally
focused on the precious metals of gold
and silver,7 with palladium and
platinum 8 having been the subject of a
Commodity-Based ETF only recently.
The structure and trading of
Commodity-Based ETFs is virtually
identical to traditional ETFs listed and
traded on national securities exchanges.
Shares of ETFs are bought and sold
throughout the trading day on national
securities exchanges. Unlike traditional
mutual funds, ETFs do not sell or
redeem their individual shares at net
asset value (‘‘NAV’’).9 Instead, large
institutional investors known as
Authorized Participants (‘‘APs’’) buy
shares of the ETF directly from the Trust
in creation unit sizes (‘‘Creation Units’’),
varying from 25,000 to 200,000 shares,
generally in exchange for an in-kind
deposit of securities.10 Conversely, APs
may sell or redeem shares of an ETF
only in Creation Unit size and generally
in exchange for portfolio securities
(‘‘Redemption Baskets’’). In limited
cases, such as an ETF investing in
illiquid securities or derivatives, APs
may deposit cash instead of securities in
exchange for shares of an ETF. For
Commodity-Based ETFs, Creation Units
and Redemption Baskets require the
delivery of the relevant physical
commodity plus any cash based on the
ETF’s NAV. ETF shares are traded on
national securities exchanges at market
6 See NYSE Information Memo Number 04–59
(November 18, 2004) (trading of streetTRACKS Gold
Shares: Rules 1300 and 1301) and Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 50603 (October 28, 2004),
69 FR 64614 (November 5, 2004) (approval of the
listing and trading of streetTRACKS Gold Shares).
7 See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos.
51058 (January 19, 2005), 70 FR 3749 (January 26,
2005) (approval of the iShares COMEX Gold Trust
(IAU)); 53521 (March 20, 2006), 71 FR 14967
(March 24, 2006) (approval of the iShares Silver
Trust (SLV)); 59781 (April 17, 2009), 74 FR 18771
(April 24, 2009) (approval of the ETFS Silver Trust);
and 59895 (May 8, 2009), 74 FR 22993 (May 15,
2009) (approval of the ETFS Gold Trust).
8 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61220
(December 22, 2009), 74 FR 68895 (December 29,
2009) (approval of ETFS Palladium) and 60970
(November 9, 2009), 74 FR 59319 (November 17,
2009) (approval of ETFS Platinum).
9 NAV is the amount by which the value of an
entity’s assets exceeds the value of its liabilities.
NAV is typically calculated on a per-share basis by
dividing the total value of all assets in a portfolio,
less any liabilities, by the number of shares
outstanding.
10 See NYSE Explanation of ETFs, available at
https://www.nyse.com/pdfs/ETFs7109.pdf, and SEC
statement regarding ETFs, available at https://
www.sec.gov/answers/etf.htm. See also Kathleen
Moriarty, Exchange-Traded Funds: Legal and
Structural Issues Worldwide, 29 Int’l Bus. L. 346
(2001); Stuart M. Strauss, Exchange-Traded
Funds—the Wave of the Future? 7 Investment
Lawyer 1 (2000); and Stuart Strauss & Scott M.
Zoltowski, Exchange Traded Funds, in A.L.I.–
A.B.A., Investment Mgmt Reg. 67 (Aug. 2006).
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
prices that may, and do, differ from
NAV.
APs, who are typically exchange
market makers or specialists, use their
ability to exchange Creation Units with
their underlying assets to provide
liquidity for the ETF shares and help
ensure that their intraday market price
approximates the NAV of the ETF.
Other investors trade ETF shares on
national securities exchanges in the
secondary market. The ability to
purchase and redeem Creation Units
and Redemption Baskets gives ETFs an
inherent arbitrage mechanism intended
to minimize the potential deviation
between the market price and NAV of
ETF shares.11 Existing ETFs (including
Commodity-Based ETFs) have daily
transparent portfolios, so that APs and
investors know exactly what portfolio
assets they must assemble if they wish
to purchase a Creation Unit. The
national securities exchanges that trade
ETF shares disseminate an updated
indicative NAV throughout the trading
day, typically at 15-second intervals.
Although similar in practice to
traditional ETFs that invest in
securities, by law, Commodity-Based
ETFs are not subject to specific SEC
regulation under the 1940 Act. Instead,
Commodity-Based ETFs are subject to
SEC disclosure review by the SEC’s
Division of Corporation Finance as well
as exchange regulation.
Based on the belief that options and
security futures trading benefits the
liquidity and relative success of the
underlying ETF, the national securities
exchanges and ETF sponsors have
sought to be able to trade options and
futures on Commodity-Based ETFs. In
2008, the Commission and the SEC
provided regulatory approvals and
exemptions so that options on shares of
the streetTracks Gold Trust (predecessor
to the SPDR Gold Trust) (symbol: GLD)
would be able to be listed and traded on
the various options exchanges.12 Since
2008, the Commission has permitted
options and futures on several other
gold and silver Commodity-Based
ETFs.13
11 See Grimm, A Process of Natural Correction:
Arbitrage and the Regulation of Exchange-Traded
Funds Under the Investment Company Act, 1 U. Pa.
J. Bus & Emp. Law 95 (2008). See also Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 31591 (), 57 FR 60253
(December 18, 1992) (File No. SR–AMEX–92–18)
(order approving proposed rule change by the Amex
relating to Portfolio Depository Receipts), n. 25.
12 See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57894
(May 30, 2008), 73 FR 32061 (June 5, 2008)
(approval of SPDR Gold Trust options), and CFTC,
Order Exempting the Trading and Clearing of
Certain Products Related to SPDR Gold Trust
Shares, 73 FR 31981 (June 5, 2008), and Exemptive
Order for SPDR Gold Futures Contracts, 73 FR
31979 (June 5, 2008).
13 See footnote 5, supra.
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 189 / Thursday, September 30, 2010 / Notices
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES6
From a procedural standpoint, the
issue of the regulation of CommodityBased ETFs comes before the CFTC
through filings by a contract market or
a clearing organization in its capacity as
a CFTC registrant, requesting
Commission approval of certain
proposed rule change(s) which would
permit it to treat options and futures
transactions on such ETFs as options on
securities and security futures,
respectively. In order to approve such
rule changes, the Commission has
issued exemptive orders for the options
or futures in question pursuant to its
exemptive authority under Section
4(c)(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act
(‘‘Act’’), 7 U.S.C. 6(c).14 As noted above,
the Commission has issued three such
exemptive ETF orders, all of which have
been confined to options and futures on
shares of specific physical gold and
silver ETFs.15
Notably, in issuing the Previous
Orders providing Section 4(c)
exemptions for options and futures on
gold and silver ETF shares, the
Commission did not make any finding
that the options were either options on
securities or options subject to the Act,
nor did it make any finding that the
futures were, or were not, security
futures.16 Rather, the exemptions
14 Section 4(c)(1) of the Act provides in full that:
In order to promote responsible economic or
financial innovation and fair competition, the
Commission by rule, regulation, or order, after
notice and opportunity for hearing, may (on its own
initiative or on application of any person, including
any board of trade designated or registered as a
contract market or derivatives transaction execution
facility for transactions for future delivery in any
commodity under section 7 of this title) exempt any
agreement, contract, or transaction (or class thereof)
that is otherwise subject to subsection (a) of this
section (including any person or class of persons
offering, entering into, rendering advice or
rendering other services with respect to, the
agreement, contract, or transaction), either
unconditionally or on stated terms or conditions or
for stated periods and either retroactively or
prospectively, or both, from any of the requirements
of subsection (a) of this section, or from any other
provision of this chapter (except subparagraphs
(c)(ii) and (D) of section 2(a)(1) of this title, except
that the Commission and the Securities and
Exchange Commission may by rule, regulation, or
order jointly exclude any agreement, contract, or
transaction from section 2(a)(1)(D) of this title), if
the Commission determines that the exemption
would be consistent with the public interest.
15 See footnote 5, supra.
16 Under Section 4(c), the Commission is not
required to make an express finding of jurisdiction
over a product as a condition precedent to issuing
a Section 4(c) exemption. The 4(c) Conference
Report states: ‘‘The Conferees do not intend that the
exercise of exemptive authority by the Commission
would require any determination beforehand that
the agreement, instrument, or transaction for which
an exemption is sought is subject to the Act. Rather,
this provision provides flexibility for the
Commission to provide legal certainty to novel
instruments where the determination as to
jurisdiction is not straightforward. Rather than
making a finding as to whether a product is or is
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Sep 29, 2010
Jkt 220001
60413
permitted the trading and clearing of
options and/or futures on the
Commodity-Based ETFs as, respectively,
options on securities and security
futures. In doing so, the Commission
reserved making any affirmative
determination as to whether shares of
Commodity-Based ETFs are more
properly characterized as either
commodities or securities. That is, the
exemptions have enabled the
Commission to reserve judgment as to
the appropriate jurisdictional
classification of Commodity-Based ETFs
and options and futures on CommodityBased ETFs. The Commission’s
approach is consistent with the
framework envisioned by Congress. In
the future, and upon the Dodd-Frank
Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act’s (‘‘Dodd-Frank Act’’) 17
effective date, certain provisions in the
Dodd-Frank Act will provide the
Commission and the SEC with a legal
and procedural framework to use
exemptive authority to tailor joint
regulatory solutions for novel products
that raise jurisdictional questions—such
as those raised by Commodity-Based
ETFs and options and futures on
Commodity-Based ETFs.18
the Act provides that the Commission
must approve any such rules or rule
amendments, which includes a
proposed amendment of an
interpretation, submitted for approval
unless it finds that the rules or rule
amendments would violate the Act. The
Commission initially extended the
review period of the OCC’s submission
by forty-five days, pursuant to
Commission Regulation 40.5(c)(1), to
June 1, 2010. By letter dated June 1,
2010 and pursuant to Commission
Regulation 40.5(c)(2), the OCC
consented to a further extension of the
review period to September 30, 2010.
While the OCC’s pending rule
submission deals with options and
futures on two specific palladium and
platinum Commodity-Based ETFs (the
Palladium and Platinum Products), the
Commission is also requesting comment
on options for a proposed exemption
that would permit the trading and
clearing, as options on securities and
security futures, of options and futures
on gold and silver, and/or palladium
and platinum Commodity-Based ETFs
on a categorical basis, i.e., regardless of
issuer.
B. Pending OCC Submission—
Transactions on Palladium and
Platinum ETFs
By a submission dated March 1, 2010,
the OCC has submitted for Commission
approval, pursuant to Section 5c(c)(2) of
the Act and Commission Regulations
39.4(a) and 40.5, a proposed amendment
to an interpretation of Article I, Section
1.F.(8) of their By-Laws.19 The
interpretation, as amended, would state
that the OCC will clear and treat as
options on securities any options on
ETFS Palladium Shares (‘‘Palladium
Products’’) 20 or ETFS Platinum Shares
(‘‘Platinum Products’’),21 and will clear
and treat as security futures any futures
contracts on the Palladium and
Platinum Products. Section 5c(c)(3) of
C. Regulatory Implications of Precious
Metal Commodity-Based ETFs
not a futures contract, the Commission in
appropriate cases may proceed directly to issuing
an exemption.’’ See House Conf. Report No. 102–
978, 1992 U.S.C.C.A.N. 3179, 3214–3215 (‘‘4(c)
Conf. Report’’).
17 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act, Public Law 111–203, 124 Stat. 1376
(2010).
18 See e.g. §§ 717 and 718 of the Dodd-Frank Act,
which cover ‘‘New Product Approval CFTC—SEC
Process’’ and ‘‘Determining Status of Novel
Derivative Products’’, respectively.
19 The complete submission is made available on
the Commission’s Web site at: https://www.cftc.gov/
stellent/groups/public/@rulesandproducts/
documents/ifdocs/rul030110occ001.pdf.
20 Shares of the Palladium Products are traded on
NYSE Arca under the symbol ‘‘PALL’’.
21 Shares of the Platinum Products are traded on
NYSE Arca under the symbol ‘‘PPLT’’.
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
The Commission is issuing this
Release because, among other things,
the Commission believes that options
and futures on Commodity-Based ETFs
may raise certain regulatory issues due
to their economic similarity to options
on commodities and futures on
commodities traded on designated
contract markets. The Commission’s
concerns include the potential that
futures contracts based on the
commodities underlying the ETFs could
be affected by withdrawal of the
deliverable supply for futures contracts,
and also, that the Commission would
lack the jurisdictional capability to
surveil persons with positions in the
Commodity-Based ETFs.22
The concerns are heightened by the
reality that options and futures on
Commodity-Based ETFs allow market
participants to take positions in
instruments that appear economically
similar to Commission-regulated
products, including products that would
otherwise fall under, for example, the
Commission’s market and trade practice
surveillance and large trader reporting
22 These concerns arise from the Commission’s
statutory mandate under Section 6(c) of the Act,
which charges the Commission with manipulation
authority regarding price of ‘‘any commodity, in
interstate commerce, or for future delivery [* * *].’’
See Section 6(c) of the Act.
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
60414
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 189 / Thursday, September 30, 2010 / Notices
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES6
system.23 By taking positions in options
and futures on Commodity-Based ETFs
traded on national securities exchanges,
which can achieve the same investment
objectives and are functionally the same
as Commission-regulated products,
market participants potentially avoid
incurring any obligation to comply with
the Commission’s rules and regulations
(although the market participants do
remain subject to the existing regulatory
regime applicable to the securities
markets). Beyond this concern, the
Commission has examined, and
continues to examine, the palladium
and platinum markets relative to the
gold and silver markets to review
empirical findings which may justify a
different regulatory resolution for the
Palladium and Platinum Products as
compared to the Commission’s
approach to gold and silver ETF
products under the Previous Orders
(discussed further at section D, infra).
At the same time, the Commission is
seeking comment as to whether the
trading and clearing (as options on
securities or security futures) of options
and futures on all or some Precious
Metal Commodity-Based ETFs should
be categorically exempted from the Act
to the extent necessary to permit them
to be so traded and cleared, whether
absolutely or subject to conditions.
Related to that issue, the Commission
has been encouraged by market
participants to adopt a ‘‘generic’’
approach for addressing the transactions
in question on Precious Metal
Commodity-Based ETFs as opposed to
the existing process of performing a
23 The Commission has previously considered
whether special conditions should be attached to
related exemptions granted pursuant to Section 4(c)
of the Act:
In order to preserve the integrity of the price
discovery and risk management functions of
Commission regulated markets, it may be that
national securities exchanges that list the options
[on precious metal commodity-based ETFs] should
comply with market reporting requirements and
brokers and traders that carry accounts or trade in
options on gold and silver products should comply
with large trader reporting requirements.
See CFTC, Request for Comment on a Proposal
to Exempt, Pursuant to the Authority in Section 4(c)
of the Commodity Exchange Act, the Trading and
Clearing of Certain Products Related to ETFS
Physical Swiss Gold Shares and ETFS Physical
Silver Shares, 75 FR 19619 (April 15, 2010) at
19621. In its order exempting the trading and
clearing of products related to the ETFS Physical
Swiss Gold Shares and the ETFS Physical Swiss
Silver Shares, the Commission did not impose
market reporting and large trader reporting
requirements. However, the Commission noted the
comments received and future consideration with
respect to market and large trader reporting for
certain gold and silver option products. See CFTC,
Order Exempting the Trading and Clearing of
Certain Products Related to ETFS Physical Swiss
Gold Shares and ETFS Physical Swiss Silver
Shares, footnote 5, supra.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Sep 29, 2010
Jkt 220001
case-by-case basis review.24 This
Release is intended to assist in the
Commission’s consideration relating to
a potential ‘‘generic’’ approach, and the
Commission is seeking comments to
that end.
D. Empirical Observations: Palladium
and Platinum v. Gold and Silver
There are significant empirical
differences across the precious metal
markets which may support the
Commission taking a different
regulatory approach with respect to
options and futures on CommodityBased ETFs holding palladium and
platinum than it has previously taken
with respect to options and futures on
Commodity-Based ETFs holding gold
and silver.
Global palladium and platinum
supplies are considerably smaller in
volume than supplies of gold and silver,
and come predominantly from mine
production concentrated in a small
number of countries, namely, South
Africa and Russia (‘‘Producer
Countries’’).25 These factors make
palladium and platinum markets
potentially more susceptible to tightness
during periods of economic growth and
subject to potential supply shocks from
isolated events in either of the Producer
Countries. Palladium and platinum
futures markets consequently become
more susceptible to price volatility that
may result from relatively small changes
in demand. These concerns were
observed in January 2010 when the
Palladium and Platinum Products were
initially listed for trading on NYSE
Arca, resulting in an apparent one-time
increase in short-term demand for
physical palladium and platinum,26 and
24 Specifically, on April 15, 2010, the OCC and
the Chicago Board Options Exchange (‘‘CBOE’’)
jointly delivered a letter to the Chairmen of both the
Commission and the SEC, expressing their concern
about the delays incurred in the case-by-case review
method of these products. The letter is referenced
in a public presentation available on the CBOE’s
Web site at: https://cboenews.cboe.com/pdfs/
PressBriefingOIC2010FINAL.pdf, at page 7.
25 Data from the Johnson Matthey Platinum 2010
publication indicates that 76.5% of global platinum
supplies came from South Africa in 2009, while
51.1% of global palladium supplies came from
Russia. Global platinum and palladium supplies for
2009 totaled 5.9 million ounces and 7.1 million
ounces respectively (based on Johnson Matthey’s
data), compared to much larger 2009 global
supplies of gold (116.6 million ounces) and silver
(826.1 million ounces), based on data from the CPM
Group Gold and Silver Yearbooks for 2010.
26 For example, NYMEX settlement data shows
that the April 2010 to July 2010 active spread for
platinum futures was in backwardation on 18 out
of 19 trading days between January 14, 2010, and
February 10, 2010, ranging from +$0.20 to +$2.00.
The March 2010 to June 2010 active spread for
palladium futures was in backwardation on 5 of 6
trading days from January 14, 2010 to January 22,
2010, ranging from +$0.05 to +$1.00.
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
the NYMEX palladium and platinum
futures markets entered nearby
backwardation.27 Indeed, the
Prospectuses for the Palladium and
Platinum Products, dated December 30,
2009, and filed with the SEC,
acknowledge that purchase of the shares
may affect the prices of palladium and
platinum, respectively, and may impact
the supply of, and demand for,
palladium and platinum, respectively.28
In addition to these distinguishing
features, industrial demand constitutes
a greater percentage of the total demand
for both palladium and platinum 29 as
compared to industrial demand as a
percentage of total demand for gold and
silver,30 and palladium and platinum
have traditionally not been held for
investment purposes to nearly the same
extent as gold and silver.31 Accordingly,
the Commission requests comment on
whether these empirical differences
suggest the need for a different
regulatory approach for options and
futures on the Palladium and Platinum
Products, or any palladium or platinum
Commodity-Based ETF, as compared to
options and futures on the gold and
silver Commodity-Based ETFs covered
by the Previous Orders.
Part II—Issues for Comment
The Commission requests comment,
taking into account all of the issues
presented in this Release and
27 Nearby backwardation occurs when the price
for the nearby futures contract is higher than the
price for the next nearest expiring contract, a
generally unusual circumstance in the precious
metals markets.
28 See https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/
1459862/000093041310000057/c58962_424b3.htm,
at page 7; see also https://www.sec.gov/Archives/
edgar/data/1460235/000093041310000056/
c58731_424b3.htm, at page 7.
29 The Prospectus for the Palladium Products
states that ‘‘autocatalysts, automobile components
that use palladium, accounted for approximately
57% of the global demand in palladium in 2008.’’
See citation in footnote 26, at page 9. The
Prospectus for the Platinum Products states that
autocatalysts accounted for approximately 51% of
the 2008 global demand for platinum. See citation
in footnote 26, at page 9.
30 In comparison, the CPM Group Gold and Silver
Yearbooks for 2010 indicate that 12.5% of global
gold demand was for industrial purposes in 2009
(this includes electronics and dental/medical
products), while 45.3% of global silver demand was
for industrial purposes (this includes photography
and electronics and batteries). Jewelry demand is
not included in these figures.
31 The Johnson Matthey Platinum 2010
publication indicates that 9.4% of global demand
for platinum in 2009 was for investment purposes,
while 8.0% of global demand for palladium was for
investment. In contrast, the CPM Group Gold and
Silver Yearbooks for 2010 indicate that net private
investment in gold accounted for a larger 44.7%
share of global gold demand in 2009 (this includes
official coins, bullion and medallions), with net
private investment accounting for around 30.0% of
global silver demand in 2009 (this includes bullion
and coins).
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 189 / Thursday, September 30, 2010 / Notices
considering the Commission’s future
treatment of options and futures on
Precious Metal Commodity-Based ETFs
as required pursuant to the Dodd-Frank
Act, on each of the following options for
a proposed exemptive order:
1. Is there any reason the Commission
should not provide a categorical Section
4(c) exemption for the trading and
clearing of the transactions in question
on gold and/or silver Commodity-Based
ETFs?
2. Are the palladium and platinum
markets sufficiently distinct from the
gold and silver markets to justify a
different regulatory approach, for the
purposes of a Section 4(c) exemption,
for options and futures on the Palladium
and Platinum Products (i.e. the specific
ETF products identified in the OCC’s
pending submission) as compared to
that for options and futures on gold and
silver Commodity-Based ETFs.
3. More generally, should the
Commission consider extending such a
Section 4(c) exemption to options and
futures on palladium and platinum
Commodity-Based ETFs on a categorical
basis (i.e. without respect to issuer)?
4. If the Commission continues
granting Section 4(c) exemptions,
whether on an individual or categorical
basis, when presented with a request to
allow options and futures on
Commodity-Based ETFs, should the
Commission include additional
conditions and requirements? For
example, should the Commission
consider imposing large trader reporting
obligations, position limits,32 or other
analogous requirements when
exempting options and futures on
Precious Metal Commodity-Based ETFs
from the Commission’s jurisdiction?
Related Matters
A. Paperwork Reduction Act
mstockstill on DSKH9S0YB1PROD with NOTICES6
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(‘‘PRA’’) 33 imposes certain requirements
on federal agencies (including the
Commission) in connection with their
conducting or sponsoring any collection
of information as defined by the PRA.
At least some of the options for a
proposed exemptive order described
above, if issued with substantive
reporting or similar conditions, would
require a new collection of information
32 The Commission understands that certain
position and exercise limits on Commodity-Based
ETF options currently exist in the securities options
markets. See, e.g., ISE Rules 412 and 414; see also
NYSE Amex Rules 904 and 905. In addition, certain
position limits and position accountability rules
apply to security futures products listed and traded
on OneChicago. See OneChicago Rule 414.
33 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:48 Sep 29, 2010
Jkt 220001
from any entities that would be subject
to the proposed order.
B. Cost-Benefit Analysis
In considering the options for a
Section 4(c) exemption allowing the
trading and clearing as options on
securities any options on gold, silver,
palladium, and platinum CommodityBased ETFs, and to clear and treat as
security futures any futures contracts on
gold, silver, palladium, and platinum
Commodity-Based ETFs, Section 15(a)
of the Act,34 as amended by Section 119
of the Commodity Futures
Modernization Act of 2000, requires the
Commission to consider the costs and
benefits of its action before issuing an
order under the Act. By its terms,
Section 15(a) as amended does not
require the Commission to quantify the
costs and benefits of an order or to
determine whether the benefits of the
order outweigh its costs. Rather, Section
15(a) simply requires the Commission to
‘‘consider the costs and benefits’’ of its
action.
Section 15(a) of the Act further
specifies that costs and benefits shall be
evaluated in light of five broad areas of
market and public concern: protection
of market participants and the public;
efficiency, competitiveness, and
financial integrity of futures markets;
price discovery; sound risk management
practices; and other public interest
considerations. Accordingly, the
Commission could in its discretion give
greater weight to any one of the five
enumerated areas and could in its
discretion determine that,
notwithstanding its costs, a particular
order was necessary or appropriate to
protect the public interest or to
effectuate any of the provisions or to
accomplish any of the purposes of the
Act.
The Commission is considering the
costs and benefits of the options for a
proposed order described above in light
of the specific provisions of Section
15(a) of the Act, as follows:
1. Protection of market participants
and the public. National securities
exchanges, OCC, and their members
who would intermediate the abovedescribed options and security futures
on gold, silver, palladium, and platinum
Commodity-Based ETFs are subject to
extensive regulatory oversight; however,
this regulatory oversight in the
securities markets does not completely
parallel the oversight programs seen in
CFTC regulated markets.
2. Efficiency, competition, and
financial integrity. The options for a
proposed exemption may enhance
34 7
PO 00000
U.S.C. 19(a).
Frm 00012
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
60415
market efficiency and competition since
they could encourage potential trading
of options and security futures on the
gold, silver, palladium, and platinum
Commodity-Based ETFs through modes
other than those normally applicable;
that is, designated contract markets or
derivatives transaction execution
facilities. Financial integrity will not be
affected since the options and security
futures on gold, silver, palladium, and
platinum Commodity-Based ETFs will
be cleared by the OCC, a DCO and SECregistered clearing agency, and
intermediated by SEC-registered brokerdealers.
3. Price discovery. Price discovery
may be enhanced through market
competition.
4. Sound risk management practices.
The options and security futures on the
gold, silver, palladium, and platinum
Commodity-Based ETFs will be subject
to OCC’s current risk-management
practices including its margining
system.
5. Other public interest
considerations. The options for a
proposed exemption may encourage
development of derivative products
through market competition without
unnecessary regulatory burden.
After considering these factors, the
Commission has determined to seek
comment on the matters discussed
above. The Commission invites public
comment on its application of the costbenefit provision.
*
*
*
*
*
Issued in Washington, DC, on September
24, 2010 by the Commission.
David A. Stawick,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010–24586 Filed 9–29–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary
[Docket ID: DoD–2010–OS–0129]
Proposed Collection; Comment
Request
Office of the Under Secretary of
Defense (Personnel and Readiness),
DoD.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
In compliance with Section
3506(c)(2)(A) of the Paperwork
Reduction Act of 1995, the Office of the
Under Secretary of Defense (Personnel
and Readiness) announces the following
proposed extension of a public
information collection and seeks public
comment on the provisions thereof.
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\30SEN1.SGM
30SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 189 (Thursday, September 30, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60411-60415]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-24586]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION
Request for Comment on Options for a Proposed Exemptive Order
Relating to the Trading and Clearing of Precious Metal Commodity-Based
ETFs; Concept Release
AGENCY: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
ACTION: Notice of options for a proposed exemptive order and request
for comment; concept release.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Recently, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission
(``Commission,'' or ``CFTC'') has been confronted with the question of
how to treat certain transactions on fractional undivided interests, or
shares, in single commodity investment products referred to as exchange
traded funds (``ETF'' or ``ETFs''),\1\ primarily in the metals complex.
The ETFs have in all relevant instances been structured as trusts
(singularly, ``ETF Trust'' or ``Trust''),\2\ the assets of which
consist of holdings of one specific physical commodity.\3\ The explicit
and sole investment objective of each of these ETF Trusts is to track
as nearly as possible the spot price of the underlying physical
commodity less the expenses of trust operations. The listing of these
ETF shares provides shareholders with efficient exposure to commodity
market price movements.\4\ These Precious Metal Commodity-Based ETFs
have primarily focused on holding either gold or silver, with a recent
expansion into palladium and platinum. The Commission has issued Orders
pursuant to Section 4(c) of the Commodity Exchange Act (the ``Act'')
permitting the trading and clearing of certain transactions on these
Trusts as, respectively, options on securities and security futures.\5\
The Previous Orders have provided exemptions from certain provisions of
the Act, or the Commission's regulations thereunder, which might have
been transgressed by trading or clearing, among other things, options
and futures on Commodity-Based ETFs. The exemption mechanism has
enabled the Commission to reserve judgment as to the jurisdictional
classification (i.e. commodity or security) of Commodity-Based ETFs and
options and futures on Commodity-Based ETFs while at the same time
providing a mechanism to ensure both that the Commission's regulatory
[[Page 60412]]
oversight needs are satisfied (whether through regulation by the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC'') or by attaching conditions
to the exemption orders) and that novel products may be introduced
without undue delay for market participant and investor use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This Release is limited to those ``Commodity ETFs'' that are
structured as grantor trusts with an investment objective of
achieving the price performance of the underlying commodity or
commodities held by such trust, less expenses. Further, for purposes
of this Release, the term or label ``ETF'' is loosely applied to
precious metal commodity-based ETFs (as used interchangeably herein,
``Precious Metal Commodity-Based ETFs'' or ``Commodity-Based
ETFs''), see section 3(a)(1) of the Investment Company Act of 1940
(the ``1940 Act'') and Securities and Exchange Commission (``SEC''),
Exchange-Traded Funds, Investment Company Act Release No. 28192
(March 11, 2008), 73 FR 14618, 14623 (March 18, 2008). As used
herein, ``Precious Metal'' indicates either gold, silver, palladium,
or platinum.
Additionally, when we refer to an ``ETF'' in this Concept
Release, we are not (unless the context otherwise requires)
referring to an entity that meets the definition of an ``investment
company'' and is registered under the 1940 Act. This Release also
does not address those ``ETF Commodity Pools'' that attempt to track
a benchmark index or commodity by engaging in the purchase of
commodity futures and/or options contracts. These ETF Commodity
Pools are subject to regulation by the Commission as a commodity
pool operator (``CPO'') and/or commodity trading adviser (``CTA'')
and may not implicate regulatory issues raised in this Release.
\2\ See e.g. NYSEArca Rule 8.201 (Commodity-Based Trust Shares);
NYSEAmex Rule 1200A (Commodity-Based Trust Shares); NYSE Rule 1300
(streetTracks Gold Shares); and BATS Exchange Rule 14.4.
\3\ See, however, Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 62402
(June 29, 2010), 75 FR 39292 (July 8, 2010) (notice of filing of a
proposal to list and trade shares of the ETFS Precious Metals Basket
Trust consisting of gold, silver, palladium, and platinum) and 62620
(July 30, 2010) (notice of a proposal to list and trade shares of
ETFS White Metals Basket Trust consisting of silver, palladium, and
platinum).
\4\ For a previous Commission discussion of the structural and
arbitrage mechanisms underlying a physical gold ETF, see Description
of the Underlying Commodity in CFTC, Proposed Exemptive Order for ST
Gold Futures Contracts, 73 FR 13867, at 13868 (March 14, 2008).
\5\ See CFTC, Order Exempting the Trading and Clearing of
Certain Products Related to SPDR[reg] Gold Trust Shares, 73 FR 31981
(June 5, 2008), CFTC, Order Exempting the Trading and Clearing of
Certain Products Related to iShares[reg] COMEX Gold Trust Shares and
iShares[reg] Silver Trust Shares, 73 FR 79830 (December 30, 2008),
and CFTC, Order Exempting the Trading and Clearing of Certain
Products Related to ETFS Physical Swiss Gold Shares and ETFS
Physical Silver Shares, 75 FR 37406 (June 29, 2010) (collectively,
the ``Previous Orders'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
More recently, the Options Clearing Corporation (the ``OCC'') has
sought approval of rules permitting similar treatment of options and
futures on certain ETFs based on palladium and platinum.
The Commission is issuing this Release to solicit comments on: (i)
Options for a proposed exemptive order in connection with the OCC's
request for approval of a rule change; and (ii) the Commission's
treatment of Precious Metal Commodity-Based ETFs generally, including
whether the Commission should exempt the trading and clearing of
certain options and futures transactions on gold and silver, and/or
palladium and platinum, Commodity-Based ETFs on a categorical basis.
DATES: Comments must be received on or before November 1, 2010. All
comments must be in English, or if not in English, accompanied by an
English translation.
ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted by any of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments.
E-mail: CommodityETFs@cftc.gov. Include ``Commodity Based
ETFs'' in the subject line of the message.
Fax: 202-418-5521.
Mail: Send to David A. Stawick, Secretary, Commodity
Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20581.
Courier: Same as mail above.
All comments received will be posted without change to https://www.CFTC.gov/.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ryne Miller, Attorney Advisor, 202-
418-5921, rmiller@cftc.gov, or David Van Wagner, Chief Counsel, 202-
418-5481, dvanwagner@cftc.gov, Division of Market Oversight, Commodity
Futures Trading Commission, Three Lafayette Centre, 1151 21st Street,
NW., Washington, DC 20581.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Part I--Proposed Exemptive Order
A. Background
The first Commodity-Based ETF in the U.S. was listed and traded on
the New York Stock Exchange (``NYSE'') in November 2004.\6\ Since that
time, Commodity-Based ETFs have generally focused on the precious
metals of gold and silver,\7\ with palladium and platinum \8\ having
been the subject of a Commodity-Based ETF only recently.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See NYSE Information Memo Number 04-59 (November 18, 2004)
(trading of streetTRACKS Gold Shares: Rules 1300 and 1301) and
Securities Exchange Act Release No. 50603 (October 28, 2004), 69 FR
64614 (November 5, 2004) (approval of the listing and trading of
streetTRACKS Gold Shares).
\7\ See, e.g., Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 51058
(January 19, 2005), 70 FR 3749 (January 26, 2005) (approval of the
iShares COMEX Gold Trust (IAU)); 53521 (March 20, 2006), 71 FR 14967
(March 24, 2006) (approval of the iShares Silver Trust (SLV)); 59781
(April 17, 2009), 74 FR 18771 (April 24, 2009) (approval of the ETFS
Silver Trust); and 59895 (May 8, 2009), 74 FR 22993 (May 15, 2009)
(approval of the ETFS Gold Trust).
\8\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 61220 (December 22,
2009), 74 FR 68895 (December 29, 2009) (approval of ETFS Palladium)
and 60970 (November 9, 2009), 74 FR 59319 (November 17, 2009)
(approval of ETFS Platinum).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The structure and trading of Commodity-Based ETFs is virtually
identical to traditional ETFs listed and traded on national securities
exchanges. Shares of ETFs are bought and sold throughout the trading
day on national securities exchanges. Unlike traditional mutual funds,
ETFs do not sell or redeem their individual shares at net asset value
(``NAV'').\9\ Instead, large institutional investors known as
Authorized Participants (``APs'') buy shares of the ETF directly from
the Trust in creation unit sizes (``Creation Units''), varying from
25,000 to 200,000 shares, generally in exchange for an in-kind deposit
of securities.\10\ Conversely, APs may sell or redeem shares of an ETF
only in Creation Unit size and generally in exchange for portfolio
securities (``Redemption Baskets''). In limited cases, such as an ETF
investing in illiquid securities or derivatives, APs may deposit cash
instead of securities in exchange for shares of an ETF. For Commodity-
Based ETFs, Creation Units and Redemption Baskets require the delivery
of the relevant physical commodity plus any cash based on the ETF's
NAV. ETF shares are traded on national securities exchanges at market
prices that may, and do, differ from NAV.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ NAV is the amount by which the value of an entity's assets
exceeds the value of its liabilities. NAV is typically calculated on
a per-share basis by dividing the total value of all assets in a
portfolio, less any liabilities, by the number of shares
outstanding.
\10\ See NYSE Explanation of ETFs, available at https://www.nyse.com/pdfs/ETFs7109.pdf, and SEC statement regarding ETFs,
available at https://www.sec.gov/answers/etf.htm. See also Kathleen
Moriarty, Exchange-Traded Funds: Legal and Structural Issues
Worldwide, 29 Int'l Bus. L. 346 (2001); Stuart M. Strauss, Exchange-
Traded Funds--the Wave of the Future? 7 Investment Lawyer 1 (2000);
and Stuart Strauss & Scott M. Zoltowski, Exchange Traded Funds, in
A.L.I.-A.B.A., Investment Mgmt Reg. 67 (Aug. 2006).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
APs, who are typically exchange market makers or specialists, use
their ability to exchange Creation Units with their underlying assets
to provide liquidity for the ETF shares and help ensure that their
intraday market price approximates the NAV of the ETF. Other investors
trade ETF shares on national securities exchanges in the secondary
market. The ability to purchase and redeem Creation Units and
Redemption Baskets gives ETFs an inherent arbitrage mechanism intended
to minimize the potential deviation between the market price and NAV of
ETF shares.\11\ Existing ETFs (including Commodity-Based ETFs) have
daily transparent portfolios, so that APs and investors know exactly
what portfolio assets they must assemble if they wish to purchase a
Creation Unit. The national securities exchanges that trade ETF shares
disseminate an updated indicative NAV throughout the trading day,
typically at 15-second intervals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Grimm, A Process of Natural Correction: Arbitrage and
the Regulation of Exchange-Traded Funds Under the Investment Company
Act, 1 U. Pa. J. Bus & Emp. Law 95 (2008). See also Securities
Exchange Act Release No. 31591 (), 57 FR 60253 (December 18, 1992)
(File No. SR-AMEX-92-18) (order approving proposed rule change by
the Amex relating to Portfolio Depository Receipts), n. 25.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although similar in practice to traditional ETFs that invest in
securities, by law, Commodity-Based ETFs are not subject to specific
SEC regulation under the 1940 Act. Instead, Commodity-Based ETFs are
subject to SEC disclosure review by the SEC's Division of Corporation
Finance as well as exchange regulation.
Based on the belief that options and security futures trading
benefits the liquidity and relative success of the underlying ETF, the
national securities exchanges and ETF sponsors have sought to be able
to trade options and futures on Commodity-Based ETFs. In 2008, the
Commission and the SEC provided regulatory approvals and exemptions so
that options on shares of the streetTracks Gold Trust (predecessor to
the SPDR Gold Trust) (symbol: GLD) would be able to be listed and
traded on the various options exchanges.\12\ Since 2008, the Commission
has permitted options and futures on several other gold and silver
Commodity-Based ETFs.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 57894 (May 30,
2008), 73 FR 32061 (June 5, 2008) (approval of SPDR Gold Trust
options), and CFTC, Order Exempting the Trading and Clearing of
Certain Products Related to SPDR Gold Trust Shares, 73 FR 31981
(June 5, 2008), and Exemptive Order for SPDR Gold Futures Contracts,
73 FR 31979 (June 5, 2008).
\13\ See footnote 5, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 60413]]
From a procedural standpoint, the issue of the regulation of
Commodity-Based ETFs comes before the CFTC through filings by a
contract market or a clearing organization in its capacity as a CFTC
registrant, requesting Commission approval of certain proposed rule
change(s) which would permit it to treat options and futures
transactions on such ETFs as options on securities and security
futures, respectively. In order to approve such rule changes, the
Commission has issued exemptive orders for the options or futures in
question pursuant to its exemptive authority under Section 4(c)(1) of
the Commodity Exchange Act (``Act''), 7 U.S.C. 6(c).\14\ As noted
above, the Commission has issued three such exemptive ETF orders, all
of which have been confined to options and futures on shares of
specific physical gold and silver ETFs.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Section 4(c)(1) of the Act provides in full that:
In order to promote responsible economic or financial innovation
and fair competition, the Commission by rule, regulation, or order,
after notice and opportunity for hearing, may (on its own initiative
or on application of any person, including any board of trade
designated or registered as a contract market or derivatives
transaction execution facility for transactions for future delivery
in any commodity under section 7 of this title) exempt any
agreement, contract, or transaction (or class thereof) that is
otherwise subject to subsection (a) of this section (including any
person or class of persons offering, entering into, rendering advice
or rendering other services with respect to, the agreement,
contract, or transaction), either unconditionally or on stated terms
or conditions or for stated periods and either retroactively or
prospectively, or both, from any of the requirements of subsection
(a) of this section, or from any other provision of this chapter
(except subparagraphs (c)(ii) and (D) of section 2(a)(1) of this
title, except that the Commission and the Securities and Exchange
Commission may by rule, regulation, or order jointly exclude any
agreement, contract, or transaction from section 2(a)(1)(D) of this
title), if the Commission determines that the exemption would be
consistent with the public interest.
\15\ See footnote 5, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notably, in issuing the Previous Orders providing Section 4(c)
exemptions for options and futures on gold and silver ETF shares, the
Commission did not make any finding that the options were either
options on securities or options subject to the Act, nor did it make
any finding that the futures were, or were not, security futures.\16\
Rather, the exemptions permitted the trading and clearing of options
and/or futures on the Commodity-Based ETFs as, respectively, options on
securities and security futures. In doing so, the Commission reserved
making any affirmative determination as to whether shares of Commodity-
Based ETFs are more properly characterized as either commodities or
securities. That is, the exemptions have enabled the Commission to
reserve judgment as to the appropriate jurisdictional classification of
Commodity-Based ETFs and options and futures on Commodity-Based ETFs.
The Commission's approach is consistent with the framework envisioned
by Congress. In the future, and upon the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform
and Consumer Protection Act's (``Dodd-Frank Act'') \17\ effective date,
certain provisions in the Dodd-Frank Act will provide the Commission
and the SEC with a legal and procedural framework to use exemptive
authority to tailor joint regulatory solutions for novel products that
raise jurisdictional questions--such as those raised by Commodity-Based
ETFs and options and futures on Commodity-Based ETFs.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Under Section 4(c), the Commission is not required to make
an express finding of jurisdiction over a product as a condition
precedent to issuing a Section 4(c) exemption. The 4(c) Conference
Report states: ``The Conferees do not intend that the exercise of
exemptive authority by the Commission would require any
determination beforehand that the agreement, instrument, or
transaction for which an exemption is sought is subject to the Act.
Rather, this provision provides flexibility for the Commission to
provide legal certainty to novel instruments where the determination
as to jurisdiction is not straightforward. Rather than making a
finding as to whether a product is or is not a futures contract, the
Commission in appropriate cases may proceed directly to issuing an
exemption.'' See House Conf. Report No. 102-978, 1992 U.S.C.C.A.N.
3179, 3214-3215 (``4(c) Conf. Report'').
\17\ Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act,
Public Law 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376 (2010).
\18\ See e.g. Sec. Sec. 717 and 718 of the Dodd-Frank Act,
which cover ``New Product Approval CFTC--SEC Process'' and
``Determining Status of Novel Derivative Products'', respectively.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Pending OCC Submission--Transactions on Palladium and Platinum ETFs
By a submission dated March 1, 2010, the OCC has submitted for
Commission approval, pursuant to Section 5c(c)(2) of the Act and
Commission Regulations 39.4(a) and 40.5, a proposed amendment to an
interpretation of Article I, Section 1.F.(8) of their By-Laws.\19\ The
interpretation, as amended, would state that the OCC will clear and
treat as options on securities any options on ETFS Palladium Shares
(``Palladium Products'') \20\ or ETFS Platinum Shares (``Platinum
Products''),\21\ and will clear and treat as security futures any
futures contracts on the Palladium and Platinum Products. Section
5c(c)(3) of the Act provides that the Commission must approve any such
rules or rule amendments, which includes a proposed amendment of an
interpretation, submitted for approval unless it finds that the rules
or rule amendments would violate the Act. The Commission initially
extended the review period of the OCC's submission by forty-five days,
pursuant to Commission Regulation 40.5(c)(1), to June 1, 2010. By
letter dated June 1, 2010 and pursuant to Commission Regulation
40.5(c)(2), the OCC consented to a further extension of the review
period to September 30, 2010. While the OCC's pending rule submission
deals with options and futures on two specific palladium and platinum
Commodity-Based ETFs (the Palladium and Platinum Products), the
Commission is also requesting comment on options for a proposed
exemption that would permit the trading and clearing, as options on
securities and security futures, of options and futures on gold and
silver, and/or palladium and platinum Commodity-Based ETFs on a
categorical basis, i.e., regardless of issuer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ The complete submission is made available on the
Commission's Web site at: https://www.cftc.gov/stellent/groups/public/@rulesandproducts/documents/ifdocs/rul030110occ001.pdf.
\20\ Shares of the Palladium Products are traded on NYSE Arca
under the symbol ``PALL''.
\21\ Shares of the Platinum Products are traded on NYSE Arca
under the symbol ``PPLT''.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Regulatory Implications of Precious Metal Commodity-Based ETFs
The Commission is issuing this Release because, among other things,
the Commission believes that options and futures on Commodity-Based
ETFs may raise certain regulatory issues due to their economic
similarity to options on commodities and futures on commodities traded
on designated contract markets. The Commission's concerns include the
potential that futures contracts based on the commodities underlying
the ETFs could be affected by withdrawal of the deliverable supply for
futures contracts, and also, that the Commission would lack the
jurisdictional capability to surveil persons with positions in the
Commodity-Based ETFs.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ These concerns arise from the Commission's statutory
mandate under Section 6(c) of the Act, which charges the Commission
with manipulation authority regarding price of ``any commodity, in
interstate commerce, or for future delivery [* * *].'' See Section
6(c) of the Act.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The concerns are heightened by the reality that options and futures
on Commodity-Based ETFs allow market participants to take positions in
instruments that appear economically similar to Commission-regulated
products, including products that would otherwise fall under, for
example, the Commission's market and trade practice surveillance and
large trader reporting
[[Page 60414]]
system.\23\ By taking positions in options and futures on Commodity-
Based ETFs traded on national securities exchanges, which can achieve
the same investment objectives and are functionally the same as
Commission-regulated products, market participants potentially avoid
incurring any obligation to comply with the Commission's rules and
regulations (although the market participants do remain subject to the
existing regulatory regime applicable to the securities markets).
Beyond this concern, the Commission has examined, and continues to
examine, the palladium and platinum markets relative to the gold and
silver markets to review empirical findings which may justify a
different regulatory resolution for the Palladium and Platinum Products
as compared to the Commission's approach to gold and silver ETF
products under the Previous Orders (discussed further at section D,
infra).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ The Commission has previously considered whether special
conditions should be attached to related exemptions granted pursuant
to Section 4(c) of the Act:
In order to preserve the integrity of the price discovery and
risk management functions of Commission regulated markets, it may be
that national securities exchanges that list the options [on
precious metal commodity-based ETFs] should comply with market
reporting requirements and brokers and traders that carry accounts
or trade in options on gold and silver products should comply with
large trader reporting requirements.
See CFTC, Request for Comment on a Proposal to Exempt, Pursuant
to the Authority in Section 4(c) of the Commodity Exchange Act, the
Trading and Clearing of Certain Products Related to ETFS Physical
Swiss Gold Shares and ETFS Physical Silver Shares, 75 FR 19619
(April 15, 2010) at 19621. In its order exempting the trading and
clearing of products related to the ETFS Physical Swiss Gold Shares
and the ETFS Physical Swiss Silver Shares, the Commission did not
impose market reporting and large trader reporting requirements.
However, the Commission noted the comments received and future
consideration with respect to market and large trader reporting for
certain gold and silver option products. See CFTC, Order Exempting
the Trading and Clearing of Certain Products Related to ETFS
Physical Swiss Gold Shares and ETFS Physical Swiss Silver Shares,
footnote 5, supra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the same time, the Commission is seeking comment as to whether
the trading and clearing (as options on securities or security futures)
of options and futures on all or some Precious Metal Commodity-Based
ETFs should be categorically exempted from the Act to the extent
necessary to permit them to be so traded and cleared, whether
absolutely or subject to conditions. Related to that issue, the
Commission has been encouraged by market participants to adopt a
``generic'' approach for addressing the transactions in question on
Precious Metal Commodity-Based ETFs as opposed to the existing process
of performing a case-by-case basis review.\24\ This Release is intended
to assist in the Commission's consideration relating to a potential
``generic'' approach, and the Commission is seeking comments to that
end.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ Specifically, on April 15, 2010, the OCC and the Chicago
Board Options Exchange (``CBOE'') jointly delivered a letter to the
Chairmen of both the Commission and the SEC, expressing their
concern about the delays incurred in the case-by-case review method
of these products. The letter is referenced in a public presentation
available on the CBOE's Web site at: https://cboenews.cboe.com/pdfs/PressBriefingOIC2010FINAL.pdf, at page 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
D. Empirical Observations: Palladium and Platinum v. Gold and Silver
There are significant empirical differences across the precious
metal markets which may support the Commission taking a different
regulatory approach with respect to options and futures on Commodity-
Based ETFs holding palladium and platinum than it has previously taken
with respect to options and futures on Commodity-Based ETFs holding
gold and silver.
Global palladium and platinum supplies are considerably smaller in
volume than supplies of gold and silver, and come predominantly from
mine production concentrated in a small number of countries, namely,
South Africa and Russia (``Producer Countries'').\25\ These factors
make palladium and platinum markets potentially more susceptible to
tightness during periods of economic growth and subject to potential
supply shocks from isolated events in either of the Producer Countries.
Palladium and platinum futures markets consequently become more
susceptible to price volatility that may result from relatively small
changes in demand. These concerns were observed in January 2010 when
the Palladium and Platinum Products were initially listed for trading
on NYSE Arca, resulting in an apparent one-time increase in short-term
demand for physical palladium and platinum,\26\ and the NYMEX palladium
and platinum futures markets entered nearby backwardation.\27\ Indeed,
the Prospectuses for the Palladium and Platinum Products, dated
December 30, 2009, and filed with the SEC, acknowledge that purchase of
the shares may affect the prices of palladium and platinum,
respectively, and may impact the supply of, and demand for, palladium
and platinum, respectively.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Data from the Johnson Matthey Platinum 2010 publication
indicates that 76.5% of global platinum supplies came from South
Africa in 2009, while 51.1% of global palladium supplies came from
Russia. Global platinum and palladium supplies for 2009 totaled 5.9
million ounces and 7.1 million ounces respectively (based on Johnson
Matthey's data), compared to much larger 2009 global supplies of
gold (116.6 million ounces) and silver (826.1 million ounces), based
on data from the CPM Group Gold and Silver Yearbooks for 2010.
\26\ For example, NYMEX settlement data shows that the April
2010 to July 2010 active spread for platinum futures was in
backwardation on 18 out of 19 trading days between January 14, 2010,
and February 10, 2010, ranging from +$0.20 to +$2.00. The March 2010
to June 2010 active spread for palladium futures was in
backwardation on 5 of 6 trading days from January 14, 2010 to
January 22, 2010, ranging from +$0.05 to +$1.00.
\27\ Nearby backwardation occurs when the price for the nearby
futures contract is higher than the price for the next nearest
expiring contract, a generally unusual circumstance in the precious
metals markets.
\28\ See https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1459862/000093041310000057/c58962_424b3.htm, at page 7; see also https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1460235/000093041310000056/c58731_424b3.htm, at page 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to these distinguishing features, industrial demand
constitutes a greater percentage of the total demand for both palladium
and platinum \29\ as compared to industrial demand as a percentage of
total demand for gold and silver,\30\ and palladium and platinum have
traditionally not been held for investment purposes to nearly the same
extent as gold and silver.\31\ Accordingly, the Commission requests
comment on whether these empirical differences suggest the need for a
different regulatory approach for options and futures on the Palladium
and Platinum Products, or any palladium or platinum Commodity-Based
ETF, as compared to options and futures on the gold and silver
Commodity-Based ETFs covered by the Previous Orders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ The Prospectus for the Palladium Products states that
``autocatalysts, automobile components that use palladium, accounted
for approximately 57% of the global demand in palladium in 2008.''
See citation in footnote 26, at page 9. The Prospectus for the
Platinum Products states that autocatalysts accounted for
approximately 51% of the 2008 global demand for platinum. See
citation in footnote 26, at page 9.
\30\ In comparison, the CPM Group Gold and Silver Yearbooks for
2010 indicate that 12.5% of global gold demand was for industrial
purposes in 2009 (this includes electronics and dental/medical
products), while 45.3% of global silver demand was for industrial
purposes (this includes photography and electronics and batteries).
Jewelry demand is not included in these figures.
\31\ The Johnson Matthey Platinum 2010 publication indicates
that 9.4% of global demand for platinum in 2009 was for investment
purposes, while 8.0% of global demand for palladium was for
investment. In contrast, the CPM Group Gold and Silver Yearbooks for
2010 indicate that net private investment in gold accounted for a
larger 44.7% share of global gold demand in 2009 (this includes
official coins, bullion and medallions), with net private investment
accounting for around 30.0% of global silver demand in 2009 (this
includes bullion and coins).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Part II--Issues for Comment
The Commission requests comment, taking into account all of the
issues presented in this Release and
[[Page 60415]]
considering the Commission's future treatment of options and futures on
Precious Metal Commodity-Based ETFs as required pursuant to the Dodd-
Frank Act, on each of the following options for a proposed exemptive
order:
1. Is there any reason the Commission should not provide a
categorical Section 4(c) exemption for the trading and clearing of the
transactions in question on gold and/or silver Commodity-Based ETFs?
2. Are the palladium and platinum markets sufficiently distinct
from the gold and silver markets to justify a different regulatory
approach, for the purposes of a Section 4(c) exemption, for options and
futures on the Palladium and Platinum Products (i.e. the specific ETF
products identified in the OCC's pending submission) as compared to
that for options and futures on gold and silver Commodity-Based ETFs.
3. More generally, should the Commission consider extending such a
Section 4(c) exemption to options and futures on palladium and platinum
Commodity-Based ETFs on a categorical basis (i.e. without respect to
issuer)?
4. If the Commission continues granting Section 4(c) exemptions,
whether on an individual or categorical basis, when presented with a
request to allow options and futures on Commodity-Based ETFs, should
the Commission include additional conditions and requirements? For
example, should the Commission consider imposing large trader reporting
obligations, position limits,\32\ or other analogous requirements when
exempting options and futures on Precious Metal Commodity-Based ETFs
from the Commission's jurisdiction?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ The Commission understands that certain position and
exercise limits on Commodity-Based ETF options currently exist in
the securities options markets. See, e.g., ISE Rules 412 and 414;
see also NYSE Amex Rules 904 and 905. In addition, certain position
limits and position accountability rules apply to security futures
products listed and traded on OneChicago. See OneChicago Rule 414.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Related Matters
A. Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (``PRA'') \33\ imposes certain
requirements on federal agencies (including the Commission) in
connection with their conducting or sponsoring any collection of
information as defined by the PRA. At least some of the options for a
proposed exemptive order described above, if issued with substantive
reporting or similar conditions, would require a new collection of
information from any entities that would be subject to the proposed
order.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ 44 U.S.C. 3507(d).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Cost-Benefit Analysis
In considering the options for a Section 4(c) exemption allowing
the trading and clearing as options on securities any options on gold,
silver, palladium, and platinum Commodity-Based ETFs, and to clear and
treat as security futures any futures contracts on gold, silver,
palladium, and platinum Commodity-Based ETFs, Section 15(a) of the
Act,\34\ as amended by Section 119 of the Commodity Futures
Modernization Act of 2000, requires the Commission to consider the
costs and benefits of its action before issuing an order under the Act.
By its terms, Section 15(a) as amended does not require the Commission
to quantify the costs and benefits of an order or to determine whether
the benefits of the order outweigh its costs. Rather, Section 15(a)
simply requires the Commission to ``consider the costs and benefits''
of its action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ 7 U.S.C. 19(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Section 15(a) of the Act further specifies that costs and benefits
shall be evaluated in light of five broad areas of market and public
concern: protection of market participants and the public; efficiency,
competitiveness, and financial integrity of futures markets; price
discovery; sound risk management practices; and other public interest
considerations. Accordingly, the Commission could in its discretion
give greater weight to any one of the five enumerated areas and could
in its discretion determine that, notwithstanding its costs, a
particular order was necessary or appropriate to protect the public
interest or to effectuate any of the provisions or to accomplish any of
the purposes of the Act.
The Commission is considering the costs and benefits of the options
for a proposed order described above in light of the specific
provisions of Section 15(a) of the Act, as follows:
1. Protection of market participants and the public. National
securities exchanges, OCC, and their members who would intermediate the
above-described options and security futures on gold, silver,
palladium, and platinum Commodity-Based ETFs are subject to extensive
regulatory oversight; however, this regulatory oversight in the
securities markets does not completely parallel the oversight programs
seen in CFTC regulated markets.
2. Efficiency, competition, and financial integrity. The options
for a proposed exemption may enhance market efficiency and competition
since they could encourage potential trading of options and security
futures on the gold, silver, palladium, and platinum Commodity-Based
ETFs through modes other than those normally applicable; that is,
designated contract markets or derivatives transaction execution
facilities. Financial integrity will not be affected since the options
and security futures on gold, silver, palladium, and platinum
Commodity-Based ETFs will be cleared by the OCC, a DCO and SEC-
registered clearing agency, and intermediated by SEC-registered broker-
dealers.
3. Price discovery. Price discovery may be enhanced through market
competition.
4. Sound risk management practices. The options and security
futures on the gold, silver, palladium, and platinum Commodity-Based
ETFs will be subject to OCC's current risk-management practices
including its margining system.
5. Other public interest considerations. The options for a proposed
exemption may encourage development of derivative products through
market competition without unnecessary regulatory burden.
After considering these factors, the Commission has determined to
seek comment on the matters discussed above. The Commission invites
public comment on its application of the cost-benefit provision.
* * * * *
Issued in Washington, DC, on September 24, 2010 by the
Commission.
David A. Stawick,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-24586 Filed 9-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P