Tag: Davis Polk

Are You a CPO?

The first question is what is a CPO and why should I care? The Commodities and Futures Trading Commission decided to tighten the exemptions from registration potentially pulling some hedge funds and private equity funds that previously ignored the CFTC. Davis Polk held a webinar on this topic. Some private fund managers may get the CPO label and have to deal with the CFTC regulatory regime.

CPO is the CFTC acronym for “Commodity Pool Operator”, which refers to any person engaged in the business of soliciting investors for an investment trust operated for the purpose of trading in commodity interests.

  • Commodity interests include futures (including agricultural, metal and financial futures), commodity options and, upon the issuance of final rules under Dodd-Frank, swaps.
  • Swaps include a wide variety of transactions, including interest rate swaps, many types of currency swaps, energy and metal swaps, agricultural swaps, commodity swaps, swaps on broad-based indices, and swaps on government securities.

The CFTC has long expressed the view that transacting in any amount of futures contracts (either directly or indirectly) would cause a fund sponsor to be deemed a commodity pool operator. There is no de minimis exception in the definition. So the CFTC position results in the conclusion that fund sponsors who have interest rate swaps or foreign exchange swaps will likely be deemed to be commodity pool operators and will need to evaluate whether an exemption is available. Even a funds of funds may also be deemed to be commodity pools depending on the investment activities of underlying funds.

There used to be a broad exemption. CFTC Rule 4.13(a)(4) provides a blanket exemption from CPO registration for sophisticated investor funds (i.e., those offered to Qualified Purchasers). The CFTC has decided to rescind this exemption.

A private fund sponsor will be required to register unless each of its funds satisfies the de minimis trading limitations under the terms of Rule 4.13(a)(3). Under these requirements, either:

  • Initial margin and premiums for commodity interest transactions must be less than 5% of the liquidation value of the fund; or
  • Aggregate net notional value of commodity interest transactions must be less than 100% of the liquidation value of the fund.

In addition to those de minimis trading requirement, Rule 4.13(a)(3) is available so long as:

  • the fund is offered privately to certain types of investors; and
  • the fund is not marketed as a vehicle for trading in the commodity futures or commodity options markets.

Investors in a Rule 4.13(a)(3) vehicle may include, among others:

  • any accredited investors under Reg D; and
  • knowledgeable employees as defined under Rule 3c-5 under the 1940 Act and certain other employees.

Most private equity and real estate private equity fund should be able to meet these hurdles and can focus on the 5% margin test and the 100% net notional exposure test.

5% margin test: The aggregate initial margin and premiums for commodity interest transactions (and minimum security deposits for retail forex transactions) must be less than 5% of liquidation value of the fund (including unrealized profits and losses to date).

100% net notional exposure test: The aggregate net notional value of commodity interest positions must not exceed 100% of the liquidation value of the fund.

  • Notional value is defined by asset class.
  • Futures contracts are valued by multiplying the number of contracts by the size of the contract.
  • Futures options are based on the strike price per unit and adjusted by the option’s delta.
  • Futures contracts with the same underlying commodity may be netted across markets.
  • Notional value of swaps cleared by the same DCO may be netted, “where appropriate”.

The 5% margin test or 100% net notional exposure tests are required to be met at each time that a commodity position is established.

The CFTC has requested comments during the 60-day period beginning on Friday, February 11, 2011.  If the proposed rule is adopted, the CFTC will issue a final rule that will specify when hedge fund and other private fund managers relying on CFTC Rules 4.13(a)(3) and 4.13(a)(4) will need to revise or cease their commodity interest trading or register as CPOs (and, if applicable, CTAs) and become members of the NFA.

The text of the proposed rule can be found here: http://www.cftc.gov/ucm/groups/public/@lrfederalregister/documents/file/2011-2437a.pdf

Side-by-Side Comparison Chart of Financial Reform Bills

The Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009, passed by the House on December 11, 2009 is over 1300 pages long. The Restoring American Financial Stability Act of 2010, passed by the Senate on May 20, 2010, is over 1600 pages long.

You have lots of reading to figure out the differences between the two bills.

Davis Polk put together a great side-by-side chart that compares key issues in the Senate and House Bills. At a 160 pages, the chart provides a much more detailed analysis than any other I have seen published.

Guidance Concerning the National Security Review Conducted by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States

On December 8, the Committee on Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States published a notice in the Federal Register of that provides guidance to U.S. businesses and foreign persons that are parties to transactions that are covered by section 721 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended by the Foreign Investment and National Security Act of 2007, and the regulations at 31 CFR part 800.

Section 721 requires CFIUS to review covered transactions notified to it ‘‘to determine the effects of the transaction[s] on the national security of the United States,’’ but does not define ‘‘national security,’’ other than to note that the term includes issues relating to homeland security. Instead, section 721 provides an illustrative list of factors, listed below, for CFIUS to consider.

This notice provides examples and insight into what types of transaction could trigger a CFIUS review.

CFIUS notes that a just because a transaction presents national security considerations does not mean that CFIUS will necessarily determine that the transaction poses national security risk.

See:

Implementation of Foreign Investment and National Security Act

Davis Polk & Wardwell attorneys Margaret M. Ayres and Jeanine P. McGuinness prepared a memorandum entitled FINSA Final Regulations (.pdf) discussing the final regulations issued by the U.S. Department of the Treasury to implement the Foreign Investment and National Security Act of 2007. That law amended the 1988 “Exon-Florio” statute and made significant changes to the scope of review and process for evaluating foreign acquisitions of U.S. businesses for national security risks. The regulations also codify recent improvements to the practices of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States.

The new regulations include the concept of a “covered transaction” and give additional guidance on key terms, including “control.”

A “covered transaction” is a transaction that could result in control of a U.S. businesss by a foreign person.

“Transaction” is broadly defined [§800.224] to include acquisitions, mergers, joint ventures and long term leases.

“U.S. Business” is also broadly defined [§800.226] to include any entity engaged in interstate commerce in the U.S. For real estate that excluded raw land and equipment. If contracts go along with the assets, then you could have a U.S. Business. Although raw land is excluded a leased building probably would be a U.S. business.

“Control” is broadly defined [§800.204] to give the CFIUS broad discretion. A list of minority shareholder protections are listed in §800.204(c) as not in themselves conferring control. This list is fairly short compared to most minority shareholder protections. There is another relatively safe harbor in §800.302(b) that a transaction with a foreign person holding 10% or less of the voting interest and holding that interest solely for passive investment will not be a covered transaction.

The final regulations were published in the Federal Register on November 21 and will become effective on December 22, 2008.