White House pushes for futures fees
The Bush administration has asked the US House of Representatives to approve a proposed transaction fee on futures and options contracts.
In the statement, the President’s office of management and budget recommended that the House approve the transaction fees as recommended recently in a report by the Senate homeland security and governmental affairs’ permanent subcommittee on investigations, which looked to increase the powers of the CFTC following the collapse of Amaranth Advisors, an energy hedge fund, in 2006.
“The CFTC is the only federal financial regulator that does not derive its funding from the specialised entities it regulates, and because its programmes provide clear benefits to participants in these markets, it is appropriate for those participants to contribute toward their cost,” the statement said.
It also encouraged the House to “join the Senate appropriations committee in matching the [Bush administration] requested $116 million for the CFTC, which will allow more effective monitoring of the markets the Commission oversees and strengthen enforcement in cases where market abuses may have occurred.” The House bill seeks only $102.5 million.
The notion of transaction fees has been rejected by participants in the futures industry who view the move as a tax on futures transactions that would raise the costs while discouraging institutions and individuals from using futures contracts for risk-management purposes.
The renewed recommendation follows the July request by the securities, insurance and investment subcommittee of the committee on banking, housing and urban affairs for a study on whether the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the CFTC should merge some of their oversight functions.
Currently the CFTC regulates trading in commodity futures and options, while the SEC monitors key players in the securities world, including securities exchanges, securities brokers and dealers, investment advisers and mutual funds.
The CFTC will hold hearings next month to examine its oversight of trading on regulated futures exchanges and other commercial markets.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Will Iosco’s guidance solve pre-hedging puzzle?
Buy-siders doubt consent requirement will remove long-standing concerns
Responsible AI is about payoffs as much as principles
How one firm cut loan processing times and improved fraud detection without compromising on governance
Could one-off loan losses at US regional banks become systemic?
Investors bet Zions, Western Alliance are isolated problems, but credit risk managers are nervous
SEC poised to approve expansion of CME-FICC cross-margining
Agency’s new division heads moving swiftly on applications related to US Treasury clearing
ECB bank supervisors want top-down stress test that bites
Proposal would simplify capital structure with something similar to US stress capital buffer
Clearing houses warn Esma margin rules will stifle innovation
Changes in model confidence levels could still trip supervisory threshold even after relaxation in final RTS
BlackRock, Citadel Securities, Nasdaq mull tokenised equities’ impact on regulations
An SEC panel recently debated the ramifications of a future with tokenised equities
CCPs trade blows over EU’s new open access push
Cboe Clear wants more interoperability; Euronext says ‘not with us’