Back to Journal

Rule Submission Letter Regarding CFTC Rule 1.71

N
Written by
NIBA
Published
Reading time
3 min

by Email

June 1, 2012
Mr. David Stawick, Secretary
Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Three LaFayette Centre
1155 21st Street, NW
Washington, DC 20581

Re: CFTC Rule 1.71 - Conflict of Interest Policies and Procedures by Futures Commission Merchants and Introducing Brokers: Scheduled to be Effective June 4, 2012

Mr. Stawick:

I write in behalf of the National Introducing Brokers Association (NIBA). Founded in 1991, the NIBA represents Introducing Brokers, Commodity Trading Advisors and Associated Persons who are primarily engaged in the retail sector of the futures and options business. NIBA, a not-for-profit association, also has the support of 11 major Futures Commission Merchants and all the U.S. domestic exchanges.

I write in behalf of our Introducing Broker (IB) membership, both Guaranteed IBs (GIBs) and Independent (IIBs), with regard to Rule 1.71 concerning conflicts of interest policies and procedures as they relate to research, advice and recommendations to the public. NIBA urges the Commission to delay the effective date of Rule 1.71 for a minimum of 120 days from the now scheduled date of June 4, 2012.

While some IBs may be not be subject to Rule 1.71 due to the de minimis exemption built in, many more will be subject to its regulation. IBs who transact business in the agricultural markets will be particularly affected. For most of those offices, compliance with Rule 1.71 involves an actual, and in some cases, total restructuring of their businesses. IBs - and the FCMs who clear and guarantee them, are put to an expensive, time-consuming and in many cases, nearly impossible task by the implementation of Rule 1.71.

The NIBA stands ready to provide the Commission with additional information regarding the potential effects of Rule 1.71 on the IB community and to continue the conversation begun in our Opinion Letter filed with the Commission January 11, 2011. That letter described the workings of virtually every full-service IB office in which advice/ research functions and trading and supervision functions exist side-by-side. Indeed, at many IBs, these functions are performed by the same person or by all the Associated Persons in the office.

The NIBA also pointed out in our January 11, 2011 letter, that rather than protecting the public, implementation of Rule 1.71 will quite likely have the opposite effect because it could prevent market participants from receiving timely information about the markets necessary to make good risk management and trading decisions.

The NIBA urges the Commission to consider our comments together with those of other industry participants and delay the effective date of Rule 1.71. for a minimum of 120-days. Please contact me at the above number or by email at melinda@futuresrep.com to discuss this matter further.

Respectfully submitted,
/Melinda Schramm/

Melinda Schramm, Chairman
National Introducing Brokers Association

cc:
Futures Industry Association
National Futures Association
FCM Members of the NIBA
Frank Fisanich, CFTC

» View Letter as a PDF

Stay Informed

Subscribe to the NIBA Journal for the latest insights and industry updates

Related Articles

View All
MF Global Updates

MF Global customers to be fully reimbursed, trustee says

Today marks the beginning of a $6.7 billion payout to the former customers of MF Global Holdings. The process is expected to take several weeks but will return all the money that is owed to the approximately 26,500 former commodities and securities customers of the failed brokerage. "Checks are going in the mail that will make all public customers of MF Global Inc. 100% whole," trustee James Giddens said in a statement. Read Full Article at FIA SmartBrief

MF Global Updates

Request for Comments – CPO/CTA Capital Requirement and Customer Protection Measures-Comments Due by April 15, 2014

NFA regularly reviews the continued effectiveness of its regulatory requirements. Over the past three years, NFA has issued 26 Member Responsibility Actions (MRAs), and 92% of those MRAs were against CPO and/or CTA Members. Most of these matters involved misuse of customer funds (including one CPO that improperly used pool funds because it had insufficient assets to operate as a going concern) and/or misstating net asset values and/or performance information. In light of these actions, NFA is reviewing the current regulatory structure applicable to CPO and CTA operations. In particular, NFA is looking at ways to strengthen the regulatory structure governing CPO operations to provide greater protection for customer funds. Additionally, NFA is exploring ways to ensure that CPOs and...

MF Global Updates

Peregrine Financial Trustee Seeks to Return $41 Mln to Clients

Peregrine Financial Group's bankruptcy trustee plans to return up to $41 million to former customers of the failed futures brokerage in the second payout since the firm collapsed 17 months ago. Court-appointed trustee Ira Bodenstein is seeking to return about 7 percent, or $27.5 million, to Peregrine customers who traded on U.S. exchanges, according to court filings. In the first payout last year, the group, which comprised the bulk of the firm's clients, received back about 30 percent of the money they had in accounts when Peregrine failed. Clients who traded on foreign markets would get back about 45 percent more of their money, or $13.5 million, in the second payout, court documents show. They received back about 40 percent...