Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Notice of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Physical Settlement of CDS Contracts, 16471-16475 [2015-06992]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 59 / Friday, March 27, 2015 / Notices
subject line if email is used. To help the
Commission process and review your
comments more efficiently, please use
only one method. The Commission will
post all comments on the Commission’s
Internet Web site (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
submission, all subsequent
amendments, all written statements
with respect to the proposed rule
change that are filed with the
Commission, and all written
communications relating to the
proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than
those that may be withheld from the
public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission’s Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549 on official
business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of the
filing also will be available for
inspection and copying at the principal
office of the MSRB. All comments
received will be posted without change;
the Commission does not edit personal
identifying information from
submissions. You should submit only
information that you wish to make
available publicly. All submissions
should refer to File Number SR–MSRB–
2015–02 and should be submitted on or
before April 17, 2015.
For the Commission, pursuant to delegated
authority.20
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015–06993 Filed 3–26–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–74563; File No. SR–ICC–
2015–004]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE
Clear Credit LLC; Notice of Filing of
Proposed Rule Change Relating to
Physical Settlement of CDS Contracts
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
March 23, 2015.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(‘‘Act’’) 1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on March 11,
2015, ICE Clear Credit LLC (‘‘ICC’’ or the
‘‘clearinghouse’’) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
change as described in Items I, II and III
below, which Items have been prepared
20 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
2 17 CFR 240.19b–4.
1 15
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:59 Mar 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
primarily by ICC. The Commission is
publishing this notice to solicit
comments on the proposed rule change
from interested persons.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The purpose of the proposed rule
change is to amend ICC rules to modify
the terms and conditions for physical
settlement of cleared CDS Contracts,
and to adopt certain new delivery
procedures relating to physical
settlement.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission, ICC
included statements concerning the
purpose of and basis for the proposed
rule change and discussed any
comments it received on the proposed
rule change. The text of these statements
may be examined at the places specified
in Item IV below. ICC has prepared
summaries, set forth in sections A, B,
and C below, of the most significant
aspects of these statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
ICC submits proposed amendments to
the ICC Clearing Rules (‘‘ICC Rules’’)
relating to physical settlement of CDS
Contracts. Upon the occurrence of a
credit event under a cleared CDS
Contract, the contract is typically settled
in cash in accordance with the terms of
the ICC Rules, which incorporate the
applicable ISDA Credit Derivatives
Definitions (the ‘‘ISDA Definitions’’)
and the market-standard credit default
swap auction methodology for
determining the cash settlement price.
However, in certain circumstances, such
as where the Credit Derivatives
Determinations Committee decides not
to hold a cash settlement auction for a
particular credit event, or such an
auction is cancelled under the terms of
the auction methodology (including
because of a failure to determine the
auction settlement price), the CDS
Contracts provide for a fallback
settlement method of physical
settlement. Under physical settlement of
a CDS contract generally, the protection
buyer will be entitled to deliver one or
more qualifying deliverable obligations
to the protection seller, in which case
the protection seller will be required to
pay the protection buyer a defined
physical settlement amount. Under the
current ICC Rules, if physical settlement
PO 00000
Frm 00113
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
16471
applies,3 the clearinghouse will match
clearing participants (‘‘Participants’’)
that are protection buyers with
Participants that are protection sellers in
the relevant contract, and the two
Participants will be responsible for
effecting physical settlement between
them. ICC does not itself perform or
guarantee performance of physical
settlement between the matched
Participants. Once matching occurs, the
contract is purely a bilateral contract
between the matched Participants, and
the clearinghouse has no further rights
or obligations with respect to the
contract. ICC does, however, collect and
hold physical settlement margin as
collateral agent on behalf of the
protection buyer to secure the
protection seller’s obligations to the
protection buyer under physical
settlement.
At the request of its Participants, and
following extensive consultation with
them, ICC proposes to amend the ICC
Rules relating to physical settlement
such that the clearinghouse will be
responsible for financial performance of
physical settlement. ICC understands
that Participants and other market
participants view the current approach,
in which cash settlement of credit
events is guaranteed by the
clearinghouse but physical settlement is
not, as creating a potentially anomalous
result in the unlikely case that physical
settlement may apply. The application
of physical settlement would be a
circumstance that is generally not
within any Participant’s control, and
under the current rules may expose
Participants to a significantly different
credit risk profile than under cash
settlement (where the Participant is
exposed to the credit of the
clearinghouse). In light of these
discussions, ICC has determined that it
is appropriate to extend the clearing
guarantee to the financial performance
of physical settlement. ICC notes that
under the amended approach, it would
still require payments and deliveries in
the ordinary course under physical
settlement to be made directly between
the matched buying Participant and
selling Participant, with the
clearinghouse only being obligated to
make direct payments in the case of
certain defined settlement failure
scenarios. ICC believes that this
proposed rule change will further the
general policy goals of central clearing
for CDS transactions, and is consistent
with the clearinghouse’s financial
3 ICC notes that to date, physical settlement has
not been necessary for any of the CDS Contracts
cleared by ICC.
E:\FR\FM\27MRN1.SGM
27MRN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
16472
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 59 / Friday, March 27, 2015 / Notices
resources, risk management procedures
and operational capabilities.4
ICC proposes to make certain
amendments to Chapters 1, 4, 5, 21 and
22 of the ICC Rules. ICC also proposes
to adopt a related set of Delivery
Procedures and Physical Settlement and
Notices Terms. ICC also proposes to
make certain related and conforming
changes to its Risk Management
Framework. All capitalized terms not
defined herein are defined in the ICC
Rules.
In Chapter 1 of the ICC Rules, the
definition of ‘‘Client-Related Initial
Margin’’ has been amended so that it
now includes Physical Settlement
Margin collected with respect to ClientRelated Positions. As discussed below,
such Physical Settlement Margin will
now secure the obligations of a
Participant to ICC in connection with
physical settlement. Similarly, in Rule
403, the definition of ‘‘Physical
Settlement Margin’’ has been amended
to refer to such obligations to ICC (as
opposed to the obligations to the
matched Participant under the current
ICC Rules). In Rule 502(b), a conforming
reference to Physical Settlement Margin
has been updated. A conforming change
is also made in Rule 2101–02(a)(iv).
In Chapter 22 (which covers physical
settlement), a new Rule 2200 is added
with definitions relating to the revised
physical settlement provisions,
including ‘‘Matched Delivery Buyer’’
and ‘‘Matched Delivery Seller,’’ and the
related terms ‘‘Matched Delivery
Contract,’’ ‘‘Matched Delivery Buyer
Contract,’’ ‘‘Matched Delivery Seller
Contract’’ and ‘‘MP Delivery Amount.’’
As discussed below, these terms are
used in connection with the matching of
buying Participants and selling
Participants in the revised settlement
procedures. A new definition of ‘‘Asset
Package Delivery Notice’’ has also been
added to address notices in connection
with Asset Package delivery under the
2014 ISDA Credit Derivatives
Definitions (the ‘‘2014 ISDA
Definitions’’).
Rule 2201(a), which provides for
matching of buying Participants and
selling Participants into a Matched
Delivery Pair in the case of physical
settlement, has been revised to address
scenarios where a Participant’s CDS
contracts must be split and matched
with multiple other Participants for
purposes of physical settlement.
Conforming changes to use applicable
defined terms (such as Relevant
Restructuring Credit Event) have also
4 ICC notes that a substantially similar approach
to physical settlement is used in the ICE Clear
Europe Limited CDS clearing service.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:59 Mar 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
been made. Rule 2201(b), which
addresses delivery of certain notices
between a Matched Delivery Pair, has
been revised to include references to
Asset Package Delivery Notices. Rule
2201(c) has been deleted at the request
of Participants as being inconsistent
with the terms of uncleared CDS and
unnecessary in light of the provisions of
the ISDA Definitions and Rule 2202.
Rule 2202, which addresses
resolution of disputes related to
permissible deliverable obligations, has
been revised to incorporate the concept
of Asset Package Delivery under the
2014 ISDA Definitions, as well as
related concepts of Prior Deliverable
Obligations, Package Observable Bonds
and Asset Package Delivery Notices.
Rules 2202(b) and (c) have also been
revised to address the consequences of
a selling Participant’s refusal to accept
delivery of a particular obligation,
including for the offsetting transaction
between ICC and the buying Participant.
Rule 2203 has been replaced with
new provisions addressing the
clearinghouse’s role in physical
settlement. When a Matched Delivery
Pair is established, the CDS Contract
between the Matched Delivery Buyer
and ICC is referred to as the Matched
Delivery Buyer Contract, and the
corresponding CDS Contract between
ICC and the Matched Delivery Seller is
referred to as the Matched Delivery
Seller Contract. Under the revised
physical settlement approach, ICC
remains party to each such contract, but
requires certain notices, payments and
deliveries to take place directly between
the Matched Delivery Buyer and
Matched Delivery Seller. Accordingly,
under Rule 2203(a), for each Matched
Delivery Buyer Contract, ICC designates
the Matched Delivery Seller to receive
on ICC’s behalf notices and deliveries
from the Matched Delivery Buyer and to
make payments on ICC’s behalf to the
Matched Delivery Buyer. Similarly,
under Rule 2203(b), for each Matched
Delivery Seller Contract, ICC designates
the Matched Delivery Buyer to deliver
on ICC’s behalf notices and deliveries to
the Matched Delivery Seller, and to
receive on ICC’s behalf payments from
the Matched Delivery Seller. The result
is that notices, payments and deliveries
will be made directly between the
Matched Delivery Buyer and Matched
Delivery Seller, in satisfaction of the
parties and ICC’s respective obligations
under both the Matched Delivery Buyer
Contract and Matched Delivery Seller
Contract. Rule 2203(c) further clarifies
that the exercise of rights by Matched
Delivery Buyer against ICC will be
deemed the exercise by ICC of the
corresponding rights against Matched
PO 00000
Frm 00114
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
Delivery Seller, and vice versa. Rules
2203(d) and (e) provide for copies of
relevant notices to be provided to ICC,
as well as notice of the completion of
settlement between the Matched
Delivery Buyer and Matched Delivery
Seller. Rule 2203(f) clarifies the
obligations of the respective parties to a
Matched Delivery Contract, and
addresses a scenario where an Asset
Package being delivered is deemed to
have a value of zero under the 2014
ISDA Definitions. Rule 2203(g) allocates
costs and expenses that may be incurred
by ICC in connection with physical
settlement.
Rule 2204, as revised, addresses
physical settlement of certain
deliverable obligations that do not settle
in the ordinary course on a deliveryversus-payment basis (‘‘Non-DVP
Obligations’’). The rule establishes a
procedure under which the Matched
Delivery Seller pays the physical
settlement amount owed to ICC, which
in turn will not pay such amount to the
Matched Delivery Buyer until ICC
receives notice that the obligation has
been received by the Matched Delivery
Seller from the Matched Delivery Buyer.
If the obligation is not delivered, the
physical settlement amount is returned
to the Matched Delivery Seller.
Rule 2205 addresses settlement
failures by the Matched Delivery Seller
or Matched Delivery Buyer. Under
subsection (a), if the Matched Delivery
Seller fails to pay the physical
settlement amount when due, the
Matched Delivery Buyer Contract will
be cash settled as between the Matched
Delivery Buyer and ICC. ICC thus will
not be obligated to take delivery of the
relevant deliverable obligations (and
dispose of them in a situation where the
Matched Delivery Seller has failed to
perform), but will compensate the
Matched Delivery Buyer for the value of
the Matched Delivery Buyer Contract
through the cash settlement process.
Pursuant to subsection (b), ICC may, in
addition to its other default remedies,
terminate the Matched Delivery Seller
Contract, in which case the Matched
Delivery Seller will owe ICC an amount
equal to the cash settlement amount ICC
paid the Matched Delivery Buyer,
together with other losses and expenses
incurred by ICC as a result of the failure.
Rule 2205(c) provides that, consistent
with the terms of the ISDA Definitions
applicable to a protection buyer
generally, any failure by ICC to deliver
any deliverable obligations to the
Matched Delivery Seller (including as a
result of a failure by the Matched
Delivery Buyer to make a delivery) will
not constitute a default by ICC, and the
Matched Delivery Seller’s sole remedy
E:\FR\FM\27MRN1.SGM
27MRN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 59 / Friday, March 27, 2015 / Notices
will be as set forth in the Matched
Delivery Seller Contract (which may
include, for example, buy-in remedies of
the Matched Delivery Seller). ICC will
not have any obligation to purchase or
acquire deliverable obligations (other
than in settlement of the Matched
Delivery Buyer Contract) in order to
settle the Matched Delivery Seller
Contract. This is consistent with the
clearinghouse’s guarantee of finance
performance, but not actual delivery. In
the event of a delivery failure by a
Matched Delivery Buyer, such party will
be liable to ICC for any costs incurred
by ICC in settling the corresponding
Matched Delivery Seller Contract (in
addition to ICC’s other remedies for a
default).
Rule 2206 covers certain other, nondefault scenarios in which physical
settlement fails to occur. Under Rule
2206(a) and (b), if physical settlement of
the Matched Buyer Delivery Contract
does not occur because the deliverable
obligation is in less than the relevant
minimum denomination or the Matched
Delivery Seller is not a permitted
transferee of the obligation, the failure
will be treated as an illegality or
impossibility outside of the parties’
control, which will result in cash
settlement 5 under the ISDA Definitions.
In this and other scenarios where a cash
settlement fallback applies, the same
cash settlement amount will apply to
both the Matched Delivery Buyer
Contract and Matched Delivery Seller
Contract under Rule 2206(c). Similarly,
in the case of a buy-in, the same buyin price will apply to both contracts.
Rule 2206(d) provides for cash
settlement of both the Matched Delivery
Buyer Contract and Matched Delivery
Seller Contract in certain cases where
delivery does not occur between the
Matched Delivery Buyer and the
customer for which it is acting. Rule
2206(e) specifies the date of any cash
settlement and provides for notice of the
relevant amount owed.
Rule 2207(a) provides for certain
standard representations and related
provisions for physical settlement in the
ISDA Definitions to apply as between
the Matched Delivery Buyer and
Matched Delivery Seller, and clarifies
ICC’s authority to designate a
Participant to make or receive physical
settlement on its behalf as provided in
Rules 2203 and 2204 for purposes of
Section 9.2(c)(iv) of the 2003 Definitions
or Section 11.2(c)(iv) of the 2014
5 Cash settlement in this context is different from
the auction cash settlement that normally applies to
CDS contracts under the ISDA Definitions, and is
based on price quotations obtained by the relevant
party to the contract for the obligation or obligations
that cannot be delivered.
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:59 Mar 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
Definitions, even though the Participant
is not its Affiliate. Rule 2207(b) clarifies
certain procedures for obtaining price
quotations for the relevant deliverable
obligations in the event that a cash
settlement fallback applies.
Rule 2208 allows the Matched
Delivery Buyer and Matched Delivery
Seller to settle their rights and
obligations as to physical settlement
through an alternative arrangement
agreed between them (referred to as a
‘‘CADP’’), in lieu of settlement pursuant
to Chapter 22 of the Rules. If they so
agree, ICC will have no obligation in
respect of such alternative arrangement.
Rule 2209(a) and (c) provide that
margin (including physical settlement
margin) will continue to be called and
held through settlement. Rule 2209(b)
provides that ICC will apply physical
settlement margin to satisfy the Matched
Delivery Seller’s obligation to pay the
physical settlement amount, and call
such seller for any shortfall.
ICC also proposes to adopt Delivery
Procedures that further specify certain
operational and other details for the
physical settlement process. Paragraph 1
provides certain definitions used in the
Delivery Procedures. Paragraph 3.2 sets
out certain requirements for providing
notices in connection with physical
settlement. Paragraphs 3.3(a)–(e)
establish the procedures and timetable
for ICC to allocate Matched Delivery
Pairs and notify Participants
accordingly. Paragraph 3.3(g) addresses
additional procedures concerning
delivery of notices by Participants in
connection with physical settlement,
including as to relevant notice
deadlines, requirements for providing
copies of notices to the clearinghouse,
treatment of late notices and procedures
for disputes involving notices.
Paragraph 4 of the Delivery Procedures
specifies certain deadlines in
connection with the physical settlement
of Non-DVP Obligations under Rule
2204. Paragraph 5 specifies the deadline
for notices that parties have elected a
CADP.
ICC also proposes to adopt a set of
Physical Settlement and Notices Terms
(‘‘Notices Terms’’) with respect to
physical settlement. The Notices Terms
are intended to set forth in a uniform
way certain matters between a
Participant and its customer in
connection with physical settlement,
including delivery of physical
settlement notices and delivery and
receipt of deliverable obligations as
between the Participant and its
customer. The Notices Terms also
address the operation of certain cash
settlement and other fallbacks as
between the Participant and its
PO 00000
Frm 00115
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
16473
customer. The Notices Terms do not
bind ICC and do not form part of the ICC
Rules or ICC Procedures. The Notices
Terms are published for the
convenience and use of Participants and
their customers, and are designed to be
incorporated by reference in customer
clearing documentation. However, a
Participant and its customer may agree
to vary the Notices Terms as between
them.
ICC also proposes to make certain
changes to its Risk Management
Framework to accommodate the changes
relating to physical settlement that are
being made to the Rules and procedures
as set forth herein. As revised, the Risk
Management Framework reflects the
clearinghouse’s obligations in respect of
physical settlement as provided in the
amended Rules and procedures. It sets
out the steps in the physical settlement
process to be taken by the clearinghouse
if physical settlement applies, including
the matching of Participants into
Matched Delivery Pairs, consistent with
the Rules and procedures. The revisions
also address the calculation, collection
and use of margin (including physical
settlement margin) where physical
settlement applies.
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act 6
requires, among other things, that the
rules of a clearing agency be designed to
promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities
transactions, and to the extent
applicable, derivative agreements,
contracts and transactions and to
comply with the provisions of the Act
and the rules and regulations
thereunder. ICC believes that the
proposed rule change is consistent with
the requirements of the Act and the
rules and regulations thereunder
applicable to ICC, in particular, Section
17(A)(b)(3)(F) 7 and Rule 17Ad–22,8
because the proposed rule change will
assure the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities
transactions and derivatives agreements,
contracts, and transactions. Specifically,
ICC believes that the proposed
amendments will enhance the clearance
and settlement of CDS transactions in
circumstances where physical
settlement applies. Although physical
settlement applies only rarely, and as a
fallback to the normal procedure for
auction cash settlement, ICC and its
Participants believe that the
amendments will benefit the CDS
market generally by making the physical
settlement process more robust and
providing greater certainty around the
6 15
U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F).
7 Id.
8 17
CFR 240.17Ad–22.
E:\FR\FM\27MRN1.SGM
27MRN1
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
16474
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 59 / Friday, March 27, 2015 / Notices
physical settlement process. ICC
proposes to extend its clearing
guarantee to the financial performance
of physical settlement, which eliminates
the existing gap in coverage where
contracts go to physical settlement and
avoids exposing Participants to the
direct credit of other Participants in the
case of physical settlement. At the same
time, ICC has designed the revised
procedures so that it is not itself
required to make or take delivery of
underlying deliverable obligations. In
the ordinary course, payments and
deliveries (and related notices) will be
made directly between the matched
buying and selling Participants. In the
case of a settlement failure, the
clearinghouse’s obligations will be
settled in cash, avoiding the need for the
clearinghouse to obtain or dispose of
deliverable obligations. In ICC’s view,
this allows it to appropriately limit and
manage its risks with respect to physical
settlement of cleared CDS contracts. As
a result, ICC believes that the
amendments will promote the accurate
clearing and settlement of CDS
contracts, and are therefore consistent
with the requirements of Section
17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.9
In addition, the amendments are
consistent with the requirements of Rule
17Ad–22.10 In particular, Rule 17Ad–
22(d)(15) 11 requires that ICC ‘‘state to its
participants the clearing agency’s
obligations with respect to physical
deliveries and identify and manage the
risks from these obligations.’’ As
discussed above, revised chapter 22 of
the Rules clearly states ICC’s obligations
with respect to physical settlement of
CDS Contracts. The revised Rules
establish the clearinghouse’s
responsibility for financial performance
of physically settled contracts, while
establishing the procedures for
settlement in the ordinary course to take
place directly between the buying
Participant and the selling Participant.
The Rules also establish the procedures
to be followed in the case of a
settlement failure and the
responsibilities of the relevant
Participants and ICC with respect
thereto, and provide a mechanism for
ICC to effect settlement in cash without
having to acquire or dispose of the
underlying deliverable obligations. In
ICC’s view, these arrangements permit it
to appropriately manage the risks to the
clearinghouse from the physical
settlement obligations it would
undertake under the proposed
amendments, and are therefore
consistent with the requirements of Rule
17Ad–22(d)(15).12
In terms of financial resources, ICC
will continue to collect initial and markto-market margin for CDS Contracts
through the completion of physical
settlement, and does not propose to
change its margin methodology with
respect thereto in connection with these
amendments. In addition, ICC will
collect physical settlement margin to
cover the specific obligations of
Participants to the clearinghouse with
respect to physical settlement. In ICC’s
view, its financial resources will as a
result be sufficient to support its
clearing operations, including under the
amended physical settlement
procedures, in a manner consistent with
the requirements of Rule 17Ad–
22(d)(2).13
In terms of default management, the
amendments provide additional
procedures for addressing settlement
failures in the physical settlement
process, in a manner that provides
financial protection to non-defaulting
Participants while avoiding the need for
the clearinghouse to make or take
physical delivery. ICC believes that
these additional provisions, together
with its existing default management
rules and procedures, will permit it to
take timely action to contain losses and
liquidity pressures and continue
meeting its obligations in the case of a
default, including in connection with
physical settlement, within the meaning
of Rule 17Ad–22(d)(11).14
ICC also believes that its operational
systems and capabilities are sufficient to
support the changes to physical
settlement. As discussed above, ICC
proposes to adopt Delivery Procedures
that would specify certain key
operational aspects of the physical
settlement process. These procedures, as
well as related systems and
arrangements, address relevant sources
of operational risk in the physical
settlement process and are designed to
minimize such risks, within the
meaning of Rule 17Ad–22(d)(4).15
remote circumstance, the amendments
are intended to extend the benefit of the
clearing guarantee to that process in the
event it occurs, and therefore would
generally be expected to benefit all
market participants. Although ICC may
collect additional physical settlement
margin in connection with physical
settlement, such margin is, in ICC’s
view, necessary to protect the operation
of the clearinghouse and will affect all
Participants with positions that go to
physical settlement. In other respects,
ICC does not anticipate that these
enhancements will materially affect the
cost of clearing for Participants or other
market participants. In addition, ICC is
not otherwise proposing to change its
standards for access to the
clearinghouse or the terms and
conditions of cleared contracts (which
already provide for physical settlement
in these limited circumstances, but
without the benefit of the clearinghouse
guarantee). As a result, ICC does not
believe the amendments will adversely
affect the ability of Participants or other
market participants to continue to clear
CDS contracts. ICC also does not believe
the enhancements will limit the
availability of clearing in CDS products
for Participants or their customers or
otherwise limit market participants’
choices for selecting clearing services in
CDS. Therefore, ICC does not believe the
proposed rule change imposes any
burden on competition that is not
appropriate in furtherance of the
purpose of the Act.
B. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Burden on Competition
ICC does not believe the proposed
amendments would have any impact, or
impose any burden, on competition not
necessary or appropriate in furtherance
of the purpose of the Act. The
amendments will apply uniformly
across all Participants. Although
physical settlement is expected to be a
Within 45 days of the date of
publication of this notice in the Federal
Register or within such longer period
up to 90 days (i) as the Commission may
designate if it finds such longer period
to be appropriate and publishes its
reasons for so finding or (ii) as to which
the self-regulatory organization
consents, the Commission will:
(A) By order approve or disapprove
the proposed rule change, or
(B) institute proceedings to determine
whether the proposed rule change
should be disapproved.
12 Id.
9 15
U.S.C. 78q–1(b)(3)(F).
10 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22.
11 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(d)(15).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:59 Mar 26, 2015
13 17
CFR 240.17Ad–22(d)(2).
CFR 240.17Ad–22(d)(11).
15 17 CFR 240.17Ad–22(d)(4).
14 17
Jkt 235001
PO 00000
Frm 00116
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
C. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement on Comments on the
Proposed Rule Change Received From
Members, Participants or Others
Written comments relating to the
proposed rule change have not been
solicited or received. ICC will notify the
Commission of any written comments
received by ICC.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the
Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
E:\FR\FM\27MRN1.SGM
27MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 80, No. 59 / Friday, March 27, 2015 / Notices
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to
submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing,
including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act.
Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
• Use the Commission’s Internet
comment form (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml); or
• Send an email to rule-comments@
sec.gov. Please include File Number SR–
ICC–2015–004 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES
• Send paper comments in triplicate
to Secretary, Securities and Exchange
Commission, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549–1090.
All submissions should refer to File
Number SR–ICC–2015–004. This file
number should be included on the
subject line if email is used. To help the
Commission process and review your
comments more efficiently, please use
only one method. The Commission will
post all comments on the Commission’s
Internet Web site (https://www.sec.gov/
rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the
submission, all subsequent
amendments, all written statements
with respect to the proposed rule
change that are filed with the
Commission, and all written
communications relating to the
proposed rule change between the
Commission and any person, other than
those that may be withheld from the
public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be
available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission’s Public
Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official
business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such
filings will also be available for
inspection and copying at the principal
office of ICE Clear Credit and on ICE
Clear Credit’s Web site at https://
www.theice.com/clear-credit/regulation.
All comments received will be posted
without change; the Commission does
not edit personal identifying
information from submissions. You
should submit only information that
you wish to make available publicly. All
submissions should refer to File
Number SR–ICC–2015–004 and should
be submitted on or before April 17,
2015.
16 17
CFR 200.30–3(a)(12).
VerDate Sep<11>2014
20:59 Mar 26, 2015
Jkt 235001
For the Commission, by the Division of
Trading and Markets, pursuant to delegated
authority.16
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015–06992 Filed 3–26–15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011–01–P
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
[Release No. 34–74565; File No. SR–BATS–
2015–22]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; BATS
Exchange, Inc.; Notice of Filing and
Immediate Effectiveness of a Proposed
Rule Change To Adopt New Rule 21.17,
Exchange Sharing of User Designated
Risk Settings
March 23, 2015.
Pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
‘‘Act’’),1 and Rule 19b–4 thereunder,2
notice is hereby given that on March 13,
2015, BATS Exchange, Inc. (the
‘‘Exchange’’ or ‘‘BATS’’) filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) the proposed rule
change as described in Items I and II
below, which Items have been prepared
by the Exchange. The Exchange has
designated this proposal as a ‘‘noncontroversial’’ proposed rule change
pursuant to section 19(b)(3)(A) of the
Act 3 and Rule 19b–4(f)(6)(iii)
thereunder,4 which renders it effective
upon filing with the Commission. The
Commission is publishing this notice to
solicit comments on the proposed rule
change from interested persons.
I. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Terms of Substance of
the Proposed Rule Change
The Exchange filed a proposal to
authorize the BATS Options Market
(‘‘BATS Options’’) to share a User’s 5
risk settings with the Clearing Member 6
that clears transactions on behalf of the
User.
The text of the proposed rule change
is available at the Exchange’s Web site
at www.batstrading.com, at the
principal office of the Exchange, and at
1 15
U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
CFR 240.19b–4.
3 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(3)(A).
4 17 CFR 240.19b–4(f)(6)(iii).
5 A User is defined as ‘‘any Options member or
Sponsored Participant who is authorized to obtain
access to the System pursuant to Rule 11.3
(Access).’’ See Exchange Rule 16.1(a)(63).
6 A Clearing Member is defined as ‘‘an Options
Member that is self-clearing or an Options Member
that clears BATS Options Transactions for other
Members of BATS Options.’’ See Exchange Rule
16.1(a)(15).
16475
the Commission’s Public Reference
Room.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
In its filing with the Commission, the
Exchange included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for
the proposed rule change and discussed
any comments it received on the
proposed rule change. The text of these
statements may be examined at the
places specified in Item IV below. The
Exchange has prepared summaries, set
forth in sections A, B, and C below, of
the most significant parts of such
statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization’s
Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule
Change
1. Purpose
The Exchange is proposing to adopt
new Rule 21.17, Exchange Sharing of
User Designated Risk Settings, in order
to authorize the Exchange to share any
of a User’s risk settings with the
Clearing Member that clears
transactions on behalf of the User.
Under BATS Rule 17.2(b), Options
Members 7 must be Clearing Members or
establish a clearing arrangement with a
Clearing Member. Rule 21.13(a)
provides that every Clearing Member is
responsible for the clearance of BATS
Options Transactions 8 of such Clearing
Member and of each User that gives up
such Clearing Member’s name pursuant
to a letter of authorization, letter of
guarantee, or other authorization given
by such Clearing Member to such User,
which authorization must be submitted
to the Exchange. Further, no Options
Member may make any transactions on
the Exchange unless a letter of guarantee
providing that the issuing Clearing
Member accepts financial
responsibilities for all BATS Options
Transactions made by the Options
Member (a ‘‘Letter of Guarantee’’) has
been issued for such Options Member
by a Clearing Member and filed with the
Exchange.
Thus, while not all Options Members
are Clearing Members, all Options
2 17
PO 00000
Frm 00117
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
7 An Options Member is defined as ‘‘a firm, or
organization that is registered with the Exchange
pursuant to Chapter XVII of these Rules for
purposes of participating in options trading on
BATS Options as an ‘Options Order Entry Firm’ or
‘Options Market Maker.’ ’’ See Exchange Rule
16.1(a)(38).
8 A BATS Options Transactions is defined as ‘‘a
transaction involving an options contract that is
effected on or through BATS Options or its facilities
or systems.’’ See Exchange Rule 16.1(a)(11).
E:\FR\FM\27MRN1.SGM
27MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 59 (Friday, March 27, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16471-16475]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-06992]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-74563; File No. SR-ICC-2015-004]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Notice of
Filing of Proposed Rule Change Relating to Physical Settlement of CDS
Contracts
March 23, 2015.
Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ notice is hereby given that
on March 11, 2015, ICE Clear Credit LLC (``ICC'' or the
``clearinghouse'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in Items I, II
and III below, which Items have been prepared primarily by ICC. The
Commission is publishing this notice to solicit comments on the
proposed rule change from interested persons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance
of the Proposed Rule Change
The purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend ICC rules to
modify the terms and conditions for physical settlement of cleared CDS
Contracts, and to adopt certain new delivery procedures relating to
physical settlement.
II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
In its filing with the Commission, ICC included statements
concerning the purpose of and basis for the proposed rule change and
discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule change. The
text of these statements may be examined at the places specified in
Item IV below. ICC has prepared summaries, set forth in sections A, B,
and C below, of the most significant aspects of these statements.
A. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and
Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
ICC submits proposed amendments to the ICC Clearing Rules (``ICC
Rules'') relating to physical settlement of CDS Contracts. Upon the
occurrence of a credit event under a cleared CDS Contract, the contract
is typically settled in cash in accordance with the terms of the ICC
Rules, which incorporate the applicable ISDA Credit Derivatives
Definitions (the ``ISDA Definitions'') and the market-standard credit
default swap auction methodology for determining the cash settlement
price. However, in certain circumstances, such as where the Credit
Derivatives Determinations Committee decides not to hold a cash
settlement auction for a particular credit event, or such an auction is
cancelled under the terms of the auction methodology (including because
of a failure to determine the auction settlement price), the CDS
Contracts provide for a fallback settlement method of physical
settlement. Under physical settlement of a CDS contract generally, the
protection buyer will be entitled to deliver one or more qualifying
deliverable obligations to the protection seller, in which case the
protection seller will be required to pay the protection buyer a
defined physical settlement amount. Under the current ICC Rules, if
physical settlement applies,\3\ the clearinghouse will match clearing
participants (``Participants'') that are protection buyers with
Participants that are protection sellers in the relevant contract, and
the two Participants will be responsible for effecting physical
settlement between them. ICC does not itself perform or guarantee
performance of physical settlement between the matched Participants.
Once matching occurs, the contract is purely a bilateral contract
between the matched Participants, and the clearinghouse has no further
rights or obligations with respect to the contract. ICC does, however,
collect and hold physical settlement margin as collateral agent on
behalf of the protection buyer to secure the protection seller's
obligations to the protection buyer under physical settlement.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ ICC notes that to date, physical settlement has not been
necessary for any of the CDS Contracts cleared by ICC.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
At the request of its Participants, and following extensive
consultation with them, ICC proposes to amend the ICC Rules relating to
physical settlement such that the clearinghouse will be responsible for
financial performance of physical settlement. ICC understands that
Participants and other market participants view the current approach,
in which cash settlement of credit events is guaranteed by the
clearinghouse but physical settlement is not, as creating a potentially
anomalous result in the unlikely case that physical settlement may
apply. The application of physical settlement would be a circumstance
that is generally not within any Participant's control, and under the
current rules may expose Participants to a significantly different
credit risk profile than under cash settlement (where the Participant
is exposed to the credit of the clearinghouse). In light of these
discussions, ICC has determined that it is appropriate to extend the
clearing guarantee to the financial performance of physical settlement.
ICC notes that under the amended approach, it would still require
payments and deliveries in the ordinary course under physical
settlement to be made directly between the matched buying Participant
and selling Participant, with the clearinghouse only being obligated to
make direct payments in the case of certain defined settlement failure
scenarios. ICC believes that this proposed rule change will further the
general policy goals of central clearing for CDS transactions, and is
consistent with the clearinghouse's financial
[[Page 16472]]
resources, risk management procedures and operational capabilities.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ ICC notes that a substantially similar approach to physical
settlement is used in the ICE Clear Europe Limited CDS clearing
service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ICC proposes to make certain amendments to Chapters 1, 4, 5, 21 and
22 of the ICC Rules. ICC also proposes to adopt a related set of
Delivery Procedures and Physical Settlement and Notices Terms. ICC also
proposes to make certain related and conforming changes to its Risk
Management Framework. All capitalized terms not defined herein are
defined in the ICC Rules.
In Chapter 1 of the ICC Rules, the definition of ``Client-Related
Initial Margin'' has been amended so that it now includes Physical
Settlement Margin collected with respect to Client-Related Positions.
As discussed below, such Physical Settlement Margin will now secure the
obligations of a Participant to ICC in connection with physical
settlement. Similarly, in Rule 403, the definition of ``Physical
Settlement Margin'' has been amended to refer to such obligations to
ICC (as opposed to the obligations to the matched Participant under the
current ICC Rules). In Rule 502(b), a conforming reference to Physical
Settlement Margin has been updated. A conforming change is also made in
Rule 2101-02(a)(iv).
In Chapter 22 (which covers physical settlement), a new Rule 2200
is added with definitions relating to the revised physical settlement
provisions, including ``Matched Delivery Buyer'' and ``Matched Delivery
Seller,'' and the related terms ``Matched Delivery Contract,''
``Matched Delivery Buyer Contract,'' ``Matched Delivery Seller
Contract'' and ``MP Delivery Amount.'' As discussed below, these terms
are used in connection with the matching of buying Participants and
selling Participants in the revised settlement procedures. A new
definition of ``Asset Package Delivery Notice'' has also been added to
address notices in connection with Asset Package delivery under the
2014 ISDA Credit Derivatives Definitions (the ``2014 ISDA
Definitions'').
Rule 2201(a), which provides for matching of buying Participants
and selling Participants into a Matched Delivery Pair in the case of
physical settlement, has been revised to address scenarios where a
Participant's CDS contracts must be split and matched with multiple
other Participants for purposes of physical settlement. Conforming
changes to use applicable defined terms (such as Relevant Restructuring
Credit Event) have also been made. Rule 2201(b), which addresses
delivery of certain notices between a Matched Delivery Pair, has been
revised to include references to Asset Package Delivery Notices. Rule
2201(c) has been deleted at the request of Participants as being
inconsistent with the terms of uncleared CDS and unnecessary in light
of the provisions of the ISDA Definitions and Rule 2202.
Rule 2202, which addresses resolution of disputes related to
permissible deliverable obligations, has been revised to incorporate
the concept of Asset Package Delivery under the 2014 ISDA Definitions,
as well as related concepts of Prior Deliverable Obligations, Package
Observable Bonds and Asset Package Delivery Notices. Rules 2202(b) and
(c) have also been revised to address the consequences of a selling
Participant's refusal to accept delivery of a particular obligation,
including for the offsetting transaction between ICC and the buying
Participant.
Rule 2203 has been replaced with new provisions addressing the
clearinghouse's role in physical settlement. When a Matched Delivery
Pair is established, the CDS Contract between the Matched Delivery
Buyer and ICC is referred to as the Matched Delivery Buyer Contract,
and the corresponding CDS Contract between ICC and the Matched Delivery
Seller is referred to as the Matched Delivery Seller Contract. Under
the revised physical settlement approach, ICC remains party to each
such contract, but requires certain notices, payments and deliveries to
take place directly between the Matched Delivery Buyer and Matched
Delivery Seller. Accordingly, under Rule 2203(a), for each Matched
Delivery Buyer Contract, ICC designates the Matched Delivery Seller to
receive on ICC's behalf notices and deliveries from the Matched
Delivery Buyer and to make payments on ICC's behalf to the Matched
Delivery Buyer. Similarly, under Rule 2203(b), for each Matched
Delivery Seller Contract, ICC designates the Matched Delivery Buyer to
deliver on ICC's behalf notices and deliveries to the Matched Delivery
Seller, and to receive on ICC's behalf payments from the Matched
Delivery Seller. The result is that notices, payments and deliveries
will be made directly between the Matched Delivery Buyer and Matched
Delivery Seller, in satisfaction of the parties and ICC's respective
obligations under both the Matched Delivery Buyer Contract and Matched
Delivery Seller Contract. Rule 2203(c) further clarifies that the
exercise of rights by Matched Delivery Buyer against ICC will be deemed
the exercise by ICC of the corresponding rights against Matched
Delivery Seller, and vice versa. Rules 2203(d) and (e) provide for
copies of relevant notices to be provided to ICC, as well as notice of
the completion of settlement between the Matched Delivery Buyer and
Matched Delivery Seller. Rule 2203(f) clarifies the obligations of the
respective parties to a Matched Delivery Contract, and addresses a
scenario where an Asset Package being delivered is deemed to have a
value of zero under the 2014 ISDA Definitions. Rule 2203(g) allocates
costs and expenses that may be incurred by ICC in connection with
physical settlement.
Rule 2204, as revised, addresses physical settlement of certain
deliverable obligations that do not settle in the ordinary course on a
delivery-versus-payment basis (``Non-DVP Obligations''). The rule
establishes a procedure under which the Matched Delivery Seller pays
the physical settlement amount owed to ICC, which in turn will not pay
such amount to the Matched Delivery Buyer until ICC receives notice
that the obligation has been received by the Matched Delivery Seller
from the Matched Delivery Buyer. If the obligation is not delivered,
the physical settlement amount is returned to the Matched Delivery
Seller.
Rule 2205 addresses settlement failures by the Matched Delivery
Seller or Matched Delivery Buyer. Under subsection (a), if the Matched
Delivery Seller fails to pay the physical settlement amount when due,
the Matched Delivery Buyer Contract will be cash settled as between the
Matched Delivery Buyer and ICC. ICC thus will not be obligated to take
delivery of the relevant deliverable obligations (and dispose of them
in a situation where the Matched Delivery Seller has failed to
perform), but will compensate the Matched Delivery Buyer for the value
of the Matched Delivery Buyer Contract through the cash settlement
process. Pursuant to subsection (b), ICC may, in addition to its other
default remedies, terminate the Matched Delivery Seller Contract, in
which case the Matched Delivery Seller will owe ICC an amount equal to
the cash settlement amount ICC paid the Matched Delivery Buyer,
together with other losses and expenses incurred by ICC as a result of
the failure. Rule 2205(c) provides that, consistent with the terms of
the ISDA Definitions applicable to a protection buyer generally, any
failure by ICC to deliver any deliverable obligations to the Matched
Delivery Seller (including as a result of a failure by the Matched
Delivery Buyer to make a delivery) will not constitute a default by
ICC, and the Matched Delivery Seller's sole remedy
[[Page 16473]]
will be as set forth in the Matched Delivery Seller Contract (which may
include, for example, buy-in remedies of the Matched Delivery Seller).
ICC will not have any obligation to purchase or acquire deliverable
obligations (other than in settlement of the Matched Delivery Buyer
Contract) in order to settle the Matched Delivery Seller Contract. This
is consistent with the clearinghouse's guarantee of finance
performance, but not actual delivery. In the event of a delivery
failure by a Matched Delivery Buyer, such party will be liable to ICC
for any costs incurred by ICC in settling the corresponding Matched
Delivery Seller Contract (in addition to ICC's other remedies for a
default).
Rule 2206 covers certain other, non-default scenarios in which
physical settlement fails to occur. Under Rule 2206(a) and (b), if
physical settlement of the Matched Buyer Delivery Contract does not
occur because the deliverable obligation is in less than the relevant
minimum denomination or the Matched Delivery Seller is not a permitted
transferee of the obligation, the failure will be treated as an
illegality or impossibility outside of the parties' control, which will
result in cash settlement \5\ under the ISDA Definitions. In this and
other scenarios where a cash settlement fallback applies, the same cash
settlement amount will apply to both the Matched Delivery Buyer
Contract and Matched Delivery Seller Contract under Rule 2206(c).
Similarly, in the case of a buy-in, the same buy-in price will apply to
both contracts. Rule 2206(d) provides for cash settlement of both the
Matched Delivery Buyer Contract and Matched Delivery Seller Contract in
certain cases where delivery does not occur between the Matched
Delivery Buyer and the customer for which it is acting. Rule 2206(e)
specifies the date of any cash settlement and provides for notice of
the relevant amount owed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Cash settlement in this context is different from the
auction cash settlement that normally applies to CDS contracts under
the ISDA Definitions, and is based on price quotations obtained by
the relevant party to the contract for the obligation or obligations
that cannot be delivered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rule 2207(a) provides for certain standard representations and
related provisions for physical settlement in the ISDA Definitions to
apply as between the Matched Delivery Buyer and Matched Delivery
Seller, and clarifies ICC's authority to designate a Participant to
make or receive physical settlement on its behalf as provided in Rules
2203 and 2204 for purposes of Section 9.2(c)(iv) of the 2003
Definitions or Section 11.2(c)(iv) of the 2014 Definitions, even though
the Participant is not its Affiliate. Rule 2207(b) clarifies certain
procedures for obtaining price quotations for the relevant deliverable
obligations in the event that a cash settlement fallback applies.
Rule 2208 allows the Matched Delivery Buyer and Matched Delivery
Seller to settle their rights and obligations as to physical settlement
through an alternative arrangement agreed between them (referred to as
a ``CADP''), in lieu of settlement pursuant to Chapter 22 of the Rules.
If they so agree, ICC will have no obligation in respect of such
alternative arrangement.
Rule 2209(a) and (c) provide that margin (including physical
settlement margin) will continue to be called and held through
settlement. Rule 2209(b) provides that ICC will apply physical
settlement margin to satisfy the Matched Delivery Seller's obligation
to pay the physical settlement amount, and call such seller for any
shortfall.
ICC also proposes to adopt Delivery Procedures that further specify
certain operational and other details for the physical settlement
process. Paragraph 1 provides certain definitions used in the Delivery
Procedures. Paragraph 3.2 sets out certain requirements for providing
notices in connection with physical settlement. Paragraphs 3.3(a)-(e)
establish the procedures and timetable for ICC to allocate Matched
Delivery Pairs and notify Participants accordingly. Paragraph 3.3(g)
addresses additional procedures concerning delivery of notices by
Participants in connection with physical settlement, including as to
relevant notice deadlines, requirements for providing copies of notices
to the clearinghouse, treatment of late notices and procedures for
disputes involving notices. Paragraph 4 of the Delivery Procedures
specifies certain deadlines in connection with the physical settlement
of Non-DVP Obligations under Rule 2204. Paragraph 5 specifies the
deadline for notices that parties have elected a CADP.
ICC also proposes to adopt a set of Physical Settlement and Notices
Terms (``Notices Terms'') with respect to physical settlement. The
Notices Terms are intended to set forth in a uniform way certain
matters between a Participant and its customer in connection with
physical settlement, including delivery of physical settlement notices
and delivery and receipt of deliverable obligations as between the
Participant and its customer. The Notices Terms also address the
operation of certain cash settlement and other fallbacks as between the
Participant and its customer. The Notices Terms do not bind ICC and do
not form part of the ICC Rules or ICC Procedures. The Notices Terms are
published for the convenience and use of Participants and their
customers, and are designed to be incorporated by reference in customer
clearing documentation. However, a Participant and its customer may
agree to vary the Notices Terms as between them.
ICC also proposes to make certain changes to its Risk Management
Framework to accommodate the changes relating to physical settlement
that are being made to the Rules and procedures as set forth herein. As
revised, the Risk Management Framework reflects the clearinghouse's
obligations in respect of physical settlement as provided in the
amended Rules and procedures. It sets out the steps in the physical
settlement process to be taken by the clearinghouse if physical
settlement applies, including the matching of Participants into Matched
Delivery Pairs, consistent with the Rules and procedures. The revisions
also address the calculation, collection and use of margin (including
physical settlement margin) where physical settlement applies.
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act \6\ requires, among other things,
that the rules of a clearing agency be designed to promote the prompt
and accurate clearance and settlement of securities transactions, and
to the extent applicable, derivative agreements, contracts and
transactions and to comply with the provisions of the Act and the rules
and regulations thereunder. ICC believes that the proposed rule change
is consistent with the requirements of the Act and the rules and
regulations thereunder applicable to ICC, in particular, Section
17(A)(b)(3)(F) \7\ and Rule 17Ad-22,\8\ because the proposed rule
change will assure the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
securities transactions and derivatives agreements, contracts, and
transactions. Specifically, ICC believes that the proposed amendments
will enhance the clearance and settlement of CDS transactions in
circumstances where physical settlement applies. Although physical
settlement applies only rarely, and as a fallback to the normal
procedure for auction cash settlement, ICC and its Participants believe
that the amendments will benefit the CDS market generally by making the
physical settlement process more robust and providing greater certainty
around the
[[Page 16474]]
physical settlement process. ICC proposes to extend its clearing
guarantee to the financial performance of physical settlement, which
eliminates the existing gap in coverage where contracts go to physical
settlement and avoids exposing Participants to the direct credit of
other Participants in the case of physical settlement. At the same
time, ICC has designed the revised procedures so that it is not itself
required to make or take delivery of underlying deliverable
obligations. In the ordinary course, payments and deliveries (and
related notices) will be made directly between the matched buying and
selling Participants. In the case of a settlement failure, the
clearinghouse's obligations will be settled in cash, avoiding the need
for the clearinghouse to obtain or dispose of deliverable obligations.
In ICC's view, this allows it to appropriately limit and manage its
risks with respect to physical settlement of cleared CDS contracts. As
a result, ICC believes that the amendments will promote the accurate
clearing and settlement of CDS contracts, and are therefore consistent
with the requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
\7\ Id.
\8\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22.
\9\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition, the amendments are consistent with the requirements of
Rule 17Ad-22.\10\ In particular, Rule 17Ad-22(d)(15) \11\ requires that
ICC ``state to its participants the clearing agency's obligations with
respect to physical deliveries and identify and manage the risks from
these obligations.'' As discussed above, revised chapter 22 of the
Rules clearly states ICC's obligations with respect to physical
settlement of CDS Contracts. The revised Rules establish the
clearinghouse's responsibility for financial performance of physically
settled contracts, while establishing the procedures for settlement in
the ordinary course to take place directly between the buying
Participant and the selling Participant. The Rules also establish the
procedures to be followed in the case of a settlement failure and the
responsibilities of the relevant Participants and ICC with respect
thereto, and provide a mechanism for ICC to effect settlement in cash
without having to acquire or dispose of the underlying deliverable
obligations. In ICC's view, these arrangements permit it to
appropriately manage the risks to the clearinghouse from the physical
settlement obligations it would undertake under the proposed
amendments, and are therefore consistent with the requirements of Rule
17Ad-22(d)(15).\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22.
\11\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(d)(15).
\12\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In terms of financial resources, ICC will continue to collect
initial and mark-to-market margin for CDS Contracts through the
completion of physical settlement, and does not propose to change its
margin methodology with respect thereto in connection with these
amendments. In addition, ICC will collect physical settlement margin to
cover the specific obligations of Participants to the clearinghouse
with respect to physical settlement. In ICC's view, its financial
resources will as a result be sufficient to support its clearing
operations, including under the amended physical settlement procedures,
in a manner consistent with the requirements of Rule 17Ad-22(d)(2).\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(d)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In terms of default management, the amendments provide additional
procedures for addressing settlement failures in the physical
settlement process, in a manner that provides financial protection to
non-defaulting Participants while avoiding the need for the
clearinghouse to make or take physical delivery. ICC believes that
these additional provisions, together with its existing default
management rules and procedures, will permit it to take timely action
to contain losses and liquidity pressures and continue meeting its
obligations in the case of a default, including in connection with
physical settlement, within the meaning of Rule 17Ad-22(d)(11).\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(d)(11).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ICC also believes that its operational systems and capabilities are
sufficient to support the changes to physical settlement. As discussed
above, ICC proposes to adopt Delivery Procedures that would specify
certain key operational aspects of the physical settlement process.
These procedures, as well as related systems and arrangements, address
relevant sources of operational risk in the physical settlement process
and are designed to minimize such risks, within the meaning of Rule
17Ad-22(d)(4).\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(d)(4).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
ICC does not believe the proposed amendments would have any impact,
or impose any burden, on competition not necessary or appropriate in
furtherance of the purpose of the Act. The amendments will apply
uniformly across all Participants. Although physical settlement is
expected to be a remote circumstance, the amendments are intended to
extend the benefit of the clearing guarantee to that process in the
event it occurs, and therefore would generally be expected to benefit
all market participants. Although ICC may collect additional physical
settlement margin in connection with physical settlement, such margin
is, in ICC's view, necessary to protect the operation of the
clearinghouse and will affect all Participants with positions that go
to physical settlement. In other respects, ICC does not anticipate that
these enhancements will materially affect the cost of clearing for
Participants or other market participants. In addition, ICC is not
otherwise proposing to change its standards for access to the
clearinghouse or the terms and conditions of cleared contracts (which
already provide for physical settlement in these limited circumstances,
but without the benefit of the clearinghouse guarantee). As a result,
ICC does not believe the amendments will adversely affect the ability
of Participants or other market participants to continue to clear CDS
contracts. ICC also does not believe the enhancements will limit the
availability of clearing in CDS products for Participants or their
customers or otherwise limit market participants' choices for selecting
clearing services in CDS. Therefore, ICC does not believe the proposed
rule change imposes any burden on competition that is not appropriate
in furtherance of the purpose of the Act.
C. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the Proposed
Rule Change Received From Members, Participants or Others
Written comments relating to the proposed rule change have not been
solicited or received. ICC will notify the Commission of any written
comments received by ICC.
III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing for
Commission Action
Within 45 days of the date of publication of this notice in the
Federal Register or within such longer period up to 90 days (i) as the
Commission may designate if it finds such longer period to be
appropriate and publishes its reasons for so finding or (ii) as to
which the self-regulatory organization consents, the Commission will:
(A) By order approve or disapprove the proposed rule change, or
(B) institute proceedings to determine whether the proposed rule
change should be disapproved.
[[Page 16475]]
IV. Solicitation of Comments
Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and
arguments concerning the foregoing, including whether the proposed rule
change is consistent with the Act. Comments may be submitted by any of
the following methods:
Electronic Comments
Use the Commission's Internet comment form (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml); or
Send an email to rule-comments@sec.gov. Please include
File Number SR-ICC-2015-004 on the subject line.
Paper Comments
Send paper comments in triplicate to Secretary, Securities
and Exchange Commission, 100 F Street NE., Washington, DC 20549-1090.
All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICC-2015-004. This file
number should be included on the subject line if email is used. To help
the Commission process and review your comments more efficiently,
please use only one method. The Commission will post all comments on
the Commission's Internet Web site (https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro.shtml). Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all
written statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are
filed with the Commission, and all written communications relating to
the proposed rule change between the Commission and any person, other
than those that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the
provisions of 5 U.S.C. 552, will be available for Web site viewing and
printing in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 100 F Street NE.,
Washington, DC 20549, on official business days between the hours of
10:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. Copies of such filings will also be available
for inspection and copying at the principal office of ICE Clear Credit
and on ICE Clear Credit's Web site at https://www.theice.com/clear-credit/regulation.
All comments received will be posted without change; the Commission
does not edit personal identifying information from submissions. You
should submit only information that you wish to make available
publicly. All submissions should refer to File Number SR-ICC-2015-004
and should be submitted on or before April 17, 2015.
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Brent J. Fields,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-06992 Filed 3-26-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P