text: Sidley Derivatives | Q4 2015 • 1 IN THIS ISSUE Q4 2015 Sidley Derivatives QUARTERLY Visit sidley.com for more information on Sidley's securities & derivatives enforcement and regulatory practice. U.S. DERIVATIVES DEVELOPMENTS: CFTC AND NFA CFTC Proposes Regulation AT to Regulate Algorithmic Trading On November 24, 2015, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) voted unanimously to issue proposed rules regulating automated trading (Regulation AT). The proposal includes risk controls, transparency requirements, new and expanded registration requirements and other new protections designed as a comprehensive regulatory response to the evolution of automated trading on U.S. regulated futures markets. Specifically, the proposal would impose compliance and oversight obligations on market participants using algorithmic trading systems (AT Persons), clearing member futures commission merchants (FCMs) with respect to their AT Person customers and designated contract markets (DCMs) executing AT Persons' orders. Regulation AT also includes proposed definitions for important terms, such as "algorithmic trading" and "direct electronic access." The proposal would not only seek to regulate solely "high-frequency trading," but would also broadly reach activities that satisfy the applicable definitions under Regulation AT. Regulation AT would also require that certain trading firms not already registered with the CFTC in some other capacity, and which trade via direct electronic access, register with the CFTC as floor traders. Proposed Regulation AT represents a watershed in the development of the CFTC's regulation of automated trading. Although the proposal states that it is intended to be "principles-based" and provide market participants with flexibility, it nevertheless imposes detailed regulatory requirements on parties not previously subject to such regulations. Given the importance of this regulation to the regulated futures markets, the CFTC included 164 separate requests for comment. Comments are due on March 16, 2016. A copy of the CFTC proposal is available at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/ pkg/FR-2015-12-17/pdf/2015-30533.pdf. A copy of the Sidley Update regarding the CFTC proposal, entitled Ten Things You May Have Missed in the CFTC's Proposed Regulation AT, is available at: http://www.sidley.com/ news/2015-12-14-investment-funds-update. Prudential Regulators and CFTC Adopt Margin Rules for Non-Cleared Swaps On October 22, 2015, to implement the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (Dodd-Frank Act or Dodd-Frank) margin requirements for non-cleared swaps, five U.S. prudential bank regulators (collectively, the Prudential Regulators) adopted a joint final rule (PR Final Rule). On December 16, 2015, CFTC adopted its own final implementing rule (CFTC Final Rule). The PR Final Rule is applicable to swap dealers and major swap participants registered with the CFTC and U.S. DERIVATIVES DEVELOPMENTS CFTC and NFA .............................. 1 SEC ................................................. 8 Enforcement.................................. 9 Other.............................................11 EUROPEAN DERIVATIVES DEVELOPMENTS ............................. 12 ASIA DERIVATIVES DEVELOPMENTS ............................. 14 OTHER DERIVATIVES DEVELOPMENTS ............................. 19 U.S. Derivatives: CFTC & NFA Sidley Derivatives | Q4 2015 • 2 Sidley Derivatives QUARTERLY security-based swap dealers and major security-based swap participants registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) if they are supervised by one of the Prudential Regulators (Bank CSEs). The CFTC Final Rule is applicable to swap dealers and major swap participants registered with the CFTC that are not supervised by one of the Prudential Regulators (collectively, Non-Bank CSEs and, together with Bank CSEs, CSEs). The SEC has not yet adopted its implementing rule, which, once adopted, will apply to Non-Bank CSEs if they are registered with the SEC. As the SEC's registration requirements for security-based swap dealers and major security-based swap participants are not yet in effect, it is not clear when the SEC will adopt its margin rule. As required by legislation enacted after the Dodd-Frank Act, the Prudential Regulators and the CFTC also adopted companion interim final rules (collectively, the Interim Final Rules and, together with the PR Final Rule and the CFTC Final Rule, the Swap Margin Rules). The Interim Final Rules exempt from the margin requirements non-cleared swaps entered into with counterparties that qualify for certain exceptions or exemptions from the Dodd-Frank Act's mandatory clearing requirements. The Interim Final Rule proposed by the Prudential Regulators is open for public comment until January 31, 2016. The Interim Final Rule proposed by the CFTC will be open for public comment until February 5, 2016. The Swap Margin Rules address both initial margin, which is collateral collected or posted to secure potential future exposure under one or more non-cleared swaps, and variation margin, which is collateral provided by one party to its counterparty in light of changes in the current market value of such swap obligations since trade execution. The Swap Margin Rules do not directly impose requirements on non-CSE counterparties to CSEs. However, CSEs must collect margin from, and post margin to, certain counterparties in accordance with the Swap Margin Rules; accordingly, such counterparties will in effect become subject to the new margin requirements. The PR Final Rule and CFTC Final Rule are consistent with one another in most respects. The principal difference relates to how the rules treat swaps transactions between a CSE and its affiliates. Subject to certain conditions, the CFTC Final Rule generally exempts those transactions from the CSE's requirements to post and to collect initial margin, while the PR Final Rule exempts such transactions only from the CSE's requirement to post initial margin (but maintains the CSE's collection requirement for initial margin). A copy of the PR Final Rule is available at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-11-30/ pdf/2015-28671.pdf. A copy of the CFTC Final Rule is available at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/ pkg/FR-2016-01-06/pdf/2015-32320.pdf. A copy of the Sidley Update regarding the Swap Margin Rules, entitled Prudential Regulators and CFTC Adopt Margin Rules for Non-Cleared Swaps, is available at: http://www.sidley.com/en/news/2016-01-20-derivatives-update. CFTC Further Implements Trade Execution Requirement On October 14, 2015, the CFTC's Division of Market Oversight (DMO) issued CFTC Letter 15-55, extending relief from the trade execution requirement for specific swaps executed as part of a package transaction. The relief extends to the following package transactions: (i) made available to trade MAT/new issuance bonds; (ii) MAT/futures; (iii) MAT/Non-MAT (Uncleared) (e.g., an uncleared credit default swap); (iv) MAT/Non-Swap Instruments (e.g., single name credit default swap); and (v) MAT/Non-CFTC Swaps. In each case, the relief provided under CFTC Letter 14-137 is extended to November 15, 2016. A copy of CFTC Letter 15-55 is available at: http://www.cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@ lrlettergeneral/documents/letter/15-55.pdf. U.S. Derivatives: CFTC & NFA Sidley Derivatives | Q4 2015 • 3 Sidley Derivatives QUARTERLY NFA Requires Members to Establish Mandatory Information Security Programs On October 23, 2015, the National Futures Association (NFA) published Notice I-15-23, notifying its members that the CFTC had approved its previously proposed interpretive notice to NFA Compliance Rules 2-9, 2-36 and 2-49, which require each NFA member—including registered commodity pool operators (CPOs), commodity trading advisors (CTAs), FCMs and introducing brokers (IBs), as well as retail foreign exchange dealers, swap dealers and major swap participants—to establish and enforce an information systems security program (ISSP). Any such ISSP must include a written plan that is reasonably designed to provide safeguards (appropriate to the member's size, complexity of operations, type of customers and counterparties, the sensitivity of the data accessible within its systems, and its electronic connectivity with other entities) to protect against security threats or hazards to the member's technology systems. Additionally, in order to comply with the member's supervisory duties under the applicable NFA Compliance Rules, the member is required to undertake regular security and risk analyses of its information technology systems, document and describe the actual safeguards deployed to address the threats and vulnerabilities it has identified, develop an incident response plan to manage detected security events, address any risks posed by the member's critical third-party service providers, and maintain appropriate recordkeeping and employee training programs for the ISSP. These new requirements will become effective March 1, 2016. A copy of Notice I-15-23 is available at: https://www.nfa.futures.org/news/newsNotice. asp?ArticleID=4649. A copy of the interpretive notice is available at: http://www.nfa.futures. org/nfamanual/NFAManual.aspx?RuleID=9070&Section=9. CFTC Issues Orders of Exemption From Registration as a DCO On October 26, 2015, the CFTC issued separate orders of exemption from registration as a derivatives clearing organization (DCO) for the Korea Exchange, Inc. (KRX) and Japan Securities Clearing Corporation (JSCC). On December 21, 2015, the CFTC issued an order of exemption from registration as a DCO to OTC Clearing Hong Kong Limited (OTC Clear). Subject to the specific terms of each organization's CFTC order, each of KRX, JSCC and OTC Clear will be permitted to clear proprietary interest rate swap positions for U.S. persons that are clearing members of the respective clearing organization. The orders do not permit the U.S. person clearing members to clear customer transactions. The CFTC issued the orders based on its authority under Section 5b(h) of the Commodity Exchange Act, as amended (CEA), which permits the CFTC to exempt a clearing organization from DCO registration for the clearing of swaps to the extent that the CFTC has determined that such a clearing organization is subject to comparable, comprehensive supervision by appropriate government authorities in the clearing organization's home jurisdiction. Further information is available at: http://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/pr7269-15; http://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/pr7270-15; and http://www.cftc.gov/ PressRoom/PressReleases/pr7301-15. CFTC's DMO Extends Time-Limited No-Action Relief to Swap Execution Facilities From Certain "Block Trade" Requirements in CFTC Regulation 43.2 On November 2, 2015, the DMO issued time-limited relief in CFTC Letter 15-60 that extends relief previously granted to swap execution facilities (SEFs) in CFTC Letter 14-118. Specifically, CFTC Letter 15-60 provides time-limited no-action relief from the requirement under CFTC Regulation 43.2 that a publicly reportable swap transaction underlying a block trade may occur away from the SEF's trading system or platform. As a result, subject to certain U.S. Derivatives: CFTC & NFA Sidley Derivatives | Q4 2015 • 4 Sidley Derivatives QUARTERLY requirements, a SEF may execute block trades that are intended to be cleared. The relief under CFTC Letter 15-60 will expire on November 15, 2016. A copy of CFTC Letter 15-60 is available at: http://www.cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@ lrlettergeneral/documents/letter/15-60.pdf. CME Group Issues FAQ on Position Limits and Accountability On November 4, 2015, the CME Group issued Market Regulation Advisory Notice RA1518-5 (the Position Limits Advisory), providing interpretative guidance in the form of FAQs concerning the rules on positions limits and accountability levels of each of its constituent exchanges' (the New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX), Commodity Exchange, Inc., the Chicago Mercantile Exchange and the Chicago Board of Trade). The Position Limits Advisory discusses: (i) the differences between position limits, accountability levels and reportable levels; (ii) the differences between spot-month, second spot-month, single month and all months for purposes of position limits and position accountability levels; (iii) limits for holding delivery instruments; (iv) the impact of deliveries in the spot month for purposes of compliance with spot month position limits; (v) aggregation based on ownership and control, and the limited exemptions from aggregation available for CPOs and independently controlled positions; (vi) how options on futures are counted in calculating position limits; (vii) diminishing balance contracts and their futures equivalent contracts; (viii) applying for exemptions from position limits; (ix) position limits applicability to intraday positions; (x) positions established as a result of settlement, marker or index pricing conventions; (xi) orders that have been placed but not executed; and (xii) the potential liability of a clearing member for its customer's position limits violation. A copy of the Position Limits Advisory is available at: http://www.cmegroup.com/toolsinformation/lookups/advisories/market-regulation/files/RA1518-5.pdf?mkt_tok=3RkMMJWWfF 9wsRonv6rMd%2B%2FhmjTEU5z17O4lXa%2B%2FhYkz2EFye%2BLIHETpodcMTspkMrDYDBce EJhqyQJxPr3GLdkN0sV8RhjhCw%3D%3D. CFTC Staff Publishes FAQ on Forms CPO-PQR and CTA-PR On November 5, 2015, the CFTC's Division of Swap Dealer and Intermediary Oversight (DSIO) published responses to certain frequently asked questions regarding the CFTC's Forms CPO-PQR and CTA-PR. The FAQ is wide-ranging, addressing basic threshold questions regarding who is required to complete and file Forms CPO-PQR and CTA-PR and what pools and assets need to be included, as well as addressing more technical questions regarding the mechanics of filling out the various schedules to the forms and filing deadlines. A copy of the FAQ is available at: http://www.cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@newsroom/ documents/file/faq_cpocta110515.pdf. CFTC Extends Swap Data Reporting Relief to Certain Non-U.S. Swap Dealers On November 9, 2015, the CFTC's DMO issued a time-limited no-action letter (CFTC Letter 15-61) that extended the swap data reporting relief previously granted to certain non-U.S. swap dealers. Consistent with the prior relief made available under CFTC Letters 13-75 and 14-141, CFTC Letter 15-61 provides relief to eligible non-U.S. swap dealers from the requirement to report swap data pursuant to Parts 45 and 46 of the CFTC's regulations for swaps entered into with non-U.S. counterparties that are not guaranteed affiliates or conduit affiliates (as defined in the CFTC's July 2013 Cross-Border Guidance). Swap dealers eligible to rely on the relief are those that are: (i) non-U.S. persons established under the laws of Australia, Canada, the European Union (EU), Japan or Switzerland; and (ii) not part of an U.S. Derivatives: CFTC & NFA Sidley Derivatives | Q4 2015 • 5 Sidley Derivatives QUARTERLY affiliated group in which the ultimate parent entity is a U.S. swap dealer, U.S. bank, U.S. financial holding company or U.S. bank holding company. The relief is set to expire on the earlier of 30 days following the CFTC's issuance of an applicable substituted compliance determination or December 1, 2016. A copy of CFTC Letter 15-61 is available at: http://www.cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@ lrlettergeneral/documents/letter/15-61.pdf. CFTC Provides Time-Limited No-Action Relief for Certain Affiliated Counterparties On November 17, 2015, two divisions of the CFTC, the Division of Clearing and Risk (DCR) and the DMO, extended no-action relief for certain inter-affiliate transactions by issuing CFTC No-Action Letters 15-63 and 15-62, respectively. The DCR's no-action relief relates to the implementation of non-U.S. jurisdictions' mandatory clearing regimes and allows affiliate counterparties to continue to rely on the alternative compliance framework set forth in CFTC Regulation 50.52(b)(4)(ii)–(iii). To enable a more orderly transition as various non-U.S. jurisdictions create and implement clearing requirements, relief granted under No-Action Letter 14-135 was extended until the earlier of December 31, 2016 or 60 days after the date on which, with respect to a specified jurisdiction, the CFTC announces that it has made a comparability determination. The DMO's no-action relief extends the exemption for inter-affiliate swaps from the trade execution requirements, extending relief granted under No-Action Letters 14-126 and 14-136 until December 16, 2016. During this time, DMO will continue to assess whether the application of trade-execution requirements to inter-affiliate swap transactions promotes pre-trade price transparency in the swap market. A copy of CFTC Letter 15-63 is available at: http://www.cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@ lrlettergeneral/documents/letter/15-63.pdf. A copy of CFTC Letter 15-62 is available at: http:// www.cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@lrlettergeneral/documents/letter/15-62.pdf. CFTC Divisions Provide Conditional No-Action Relief to Wells Fargo From Compliance With Swap Dealer Transaction-Level Requirements for Swaps With Certain Non-U.S. Counterparties (CFTC Letter 15-64) On November 20, 2015, the DSIO, the DCR and the DMO (the Divisions) jointly issued CFTC Letter 15-64 granting conditional no-action relief to a provisionally-registered swap dealer. CFTC Letter 15-64 provides that the Divisions will not recommend any enforcement action against the provisionally registered swap dealer or its non-U.S. swap counterparties if the provisionally registered swap dealer, acting through its London branch, and the London branch's non-U.S. counterparties located in emerging market jurisdictions that do not have swap regulatory requirements that are as developed as the CFTC's and that are unprepared to comply with the CFTC's requirements, choose to comply with the relevant transaction-level requirements of their home jurisdictions rather than comply with the CFTC's requirements. The relief is limited to swaps transacted between the dealer's London branch and non-U.S. person counterparties that (i) are located outside of those jurisdictions for which the CFTC has made substituted compliance determinations; and (ii) are neither guaranteed affiliates nor conduit affiliates (as defined in the CFTC's July 2013 Cross-Border Guidance). The relief is based on the dealer's specific facts and circumstances and is subject to a number of conditions, including that the aggregate notional value of swaps entered into by the dealer's foreign branches with applicable non-U.S. counterparties located outside of Australia, Canada, the EU, Hong Kong, Japan or Switzerland remains below five percent of the aggregate notional value of all of the dealer's swaps. U.S. Derivatives: CFTC & NFA Sidley Derivatives | Q4 2015 • 6 Sidley Derivatives QUARTERLY A copy of CFTC Letter 15-64 is available at: http://www.cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@ lrlettergeneral/documents/letter/15-64.pdf. CFTC Publishes Preliminary Report on Swap Dealer De Minimis Threshold On November 25, 2015, the CFTC staff published a preliminary report regarding various aspects of the CFTC's swap dealer de minimis threshold. The report was prepared pursuant to CFTC Rule 1.3(ggg)(4)(ii)(B), which directs the CFTC staff to publish for public comment a report that analyzes swap data to assess the de minimis exception from the swap dealer registration requirement. Market participants that exceed US$8 billion in gross notional swap dealing activity over a rolling 12-month period are required to register with the CFTC as swap dealers during a phase-in period that is currently in effect. This phase-in period is scheduled to end, and the threshold scheduled to fall to US$3 billion, at the end of December 2017, unless the CFTC takes action. The report considers the swap data available to the CFTC in light of the current US$8 billion de minimis threshold, the potential effects of raising or lowering the threshold, and several possible alternatives to the current de minimis exception, including: (i) a notional de minimis threshold specific to each asset class; (ii) a multi-factor approach that would potentially include counterparty count and/or transaction count metrics in the de minimis exception, in addition to a gross notional dealing threshold; (iii) a multi-tiered approach where the regulatory requirements associated with swap dealer registration are commensurate with an entity's level of dealing activity; and (iv) the exclusion from an entity's de minimis calculation of swaps that are traded on a registered or exempted SEF or DCM and/or cleared. The report seeks public comment and is designed to allow the CFTC staff to consider those comments before making a final report to the CFTC. The final staff report will form the basis for the CFTC to take action with respect to the de minimis exception. A copy of the preliminary report is available at: http://www.cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@ swaps/documents/file/dfreport_sddeminis_1115.pdf. CFTC Staff Issues Advisory Reminding Swap Dealers and Major Swap Participants of Their Reporting Obligations On December 17, 2015, the CFTC staff issued an advisory to remind swap dealers of their swap data reporting obligations under CFTC Regulations 23.204 and 23.205. Those rules require swap dealers to report all swap information and data in the time and manner specified in Parts 43 and 45 of the CFTC regulations. The staff advisory also identifies certain common issues and failures the CFTC staff has observed with respect to swap data reporting, and provides guidance to assist market participants in addressing these issues and failures. The advisory comes on the heels of enforcement action taken by the CFTC with respect to swap data reporting violations and suggests that the CFTC is becoming increasingly focused on ensuring that swap data is reported properly and in a timely fashion in accordance with CFTC regulations. A copy of the staff advisory is available at: http://www.cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@ lrlettergeneral/documents/letter/15-66.pdf. CFTC Approves Final Rule on Records of Commodity Interest and Related Cash or Forward Transactions On December 18, 2015, the CFTC approved a final rule amending CFTC Regulation 1.35(a) with respect to recordkeeping obligations for certain market participants. CFTC Regulation U.S. Derivatives: CFTC & NFA Sidley Derivatives | Q4 2015 • 7 Sidley Derivatives QUARTERLY 1.35(a) generally requires each FCM, retail foreign exchange dealer, IB, and member of a DCM or SEF to keep full, complete and systematic records of all transactions relating to its business of dealing in commodity interest transactions and related cash or forward transactions, including records of written communications leading to the execution of commodity interest transactions and related cash or forward transactions and certain oral communications. CFTC Regulation 1.35(a), as amended, will: (i) require all records required under CFTC Regulation 1.35(a) to be maintained in a form and manner which permits prompt, accurate and reliable location, access and retrieval of any record, data or information; (ii) clarify that all records, other than records of oral and written communications leading to the execution of commodity interest transactions and related cash or forward transactions, must be kept in a form and manner allowing for the identification of a particular transaction; (iii) exclude members of unregistered DCMs and unregistered SEFs from the requirements relating to the form and manner of records and the retention of text messages and written communications leading to the execution of commodity interest transactions and related cash or forward transactions; and (iv) exclude CTAs from the oral recordkeeping requirement. The amendments to CFTC Regulation 1.35(a) became effective on December 24, 2015. Further information is available at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-12-24/pdf/2015- 32416.pdf; and http://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/pr7296-15. CFTC Approves Cybersecurity Systems Safeguards On December 16, 2015, the CFTC proposed amendments to existing regulations addressing cybersecurity testing and safeguards for the technological systems utilized by critical financial infrastructures under the CFTC's jurisdiction. The proposals purport to be clarifications of existing system safeguards requirements for derivatives industry "core infrastructures" such as exchanges, clearinghouses and data repositories. The proposals identify five distinct areas of cybersecurity testing as essential in developing a sound system safeguards program: (i) vulnerability testing, (ii) penetration testing, (iii) controls testing, (iv) security incident response plan testing, and (v) enterprise technology risk assessments. The proposals would require all DCOs, DCMs, SEFs and swap data repositories (SDRs) to conduct cybersecurity testing within each of the five areas listed above. The proposals were published in the Federal Register on December 23, 2015 and public comments will be accepted through February 22, 2016. A copy of the Federal Register release is available at: http://www.cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@lrfederalregister/documents/file/2015- 32143a.pdf. Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 Codifies CFTC Treasury Affiliate Relief Subject to specified conditions, an exception to Dodd-Frank's mandatory swap clearing requirement (End-User Exception) is available to non-financial swap counterparties that enter into swaps to hedge or mitigate commercial risk. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016, signed into law on December 18, 2015, includes amendments to the CEA and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (1934 Act), that expand the availability of the End-User Exception to certain treasury affiliates of end-user groups that enter into swaps as principal. These amendments for the most part follow the no-action relief previously provided by the CFTC's DCR under CFTC No-Action Letters 13-22 and 14-144. In addition to providing clearing relief to qualifying treasury affiliates, the amendments have the effect of providing qualifying treasury affiliates with relief from the recently-finalized margin rules of the CFTC and the prudential regulators and from Dodd-Frank's trade execution requirement. A copy of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2016 is available at: https://www.congress. gov/114/bills/hr2029/BILLS-114hr2029enr.pdf (see Division O, Title VII, Section 705). U.S. Derivatives: SEC Sidley Derivatives | Q4 2015 • 8 Sidley Derivatives QUARTERLY CFTC Issues No-Action Letter Regarding Post-Trade Allocation Audit Trail Records On December 22, 2015, the DMO issued CFTC Letter 15-68 granting SEFs time-limited relief from the requirements of CFTC Regulations 37.205(a) and (b)(2) to capture post-trade allocation information in SEF audit trail data and electronic transaction histories. In order to qualify for the relief, a SEF must: (i) have a rule requiring market participants to provide the SEF with post-trade allocation information for particular trades at the request of the SEF; and (ii) in the course of a trade practice surveillance or market surveillance investigation into trading activity involving post-trade allocations, (a) ascertain whether a post-trade allocation was made, and, if so, (b) request, obtain and review the post-trade allocation information as part of the SEF's investigation. The relief recognizes the difficulty SEFs currently have in capturing the required information because trade allocations generally occur away from the SEF at the relevant clearing firm or derivative clearing organization. The relief will expire on November 16, 2017. A copy of CFTC Letter 15-68 is available at: http://www.cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@ lrlettergeneral/documents/letter/15-68.pdf. CFTC Requests Comment on Draft Technical Specifications for Certain Swap Data Elements On December 22, 2015, the staff of the CFTC's DMO and Office of Data and Technology issued a request for comment on draft technical specifications for certain swap data elements and related questions. Under Part 45 of the CFTC's regulations, "reporting counterparties" to swap transactions are required to report to a SDR all "creation data" and "continuation data" relating to the primary economic terms of the swap, as well as certain ongoing valuation data. The staff request for comment seeks public input on a number of questions relating to 120 data elements for several swap data reporting topics including counterparty-related elements, dealing activity, price, clearing, product, periodic reporting, orders, package transactions, options, additional fixed payments, notional amount, events, rates and foreign exchange. The draft technical specifications include certain swap data elements that are not currently reportable under the CFTC's regulations, but which have been identified by CFTC staff as data elements that may assist the CFTC in overseeing the swap markets. Accordingly, depending on whether the CFTC takes final action in accordance with the draft technical specifications, the swap data elements required to be reported under Part 45 of the CFTC's regulations could be significantly expanded. Comments on the draft technical reporting specifications must be submitted by February 22, 2016. A copy of the draft is available at: http://www.cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@newsroom/ documents/file/specificationsswapdata122215.pdf. Establishing the Form and Manner in Which SBSDRs Must Make SBS Data Available to the SEC The SEC published for comment a proposed amendment to SEC Rule 13n–4(a)(5) to specify the form and manner in which security-based swap data repositories (SBSDRs) would be required to make security-based swap (SBS) data available to the SEC. SEC Rule 13n–4(b)(5) under the 1934 Act requires an SBSDR to provide direct electronic access to the SEC or any designee of the SEC. In turn, SEC Rule 13n–4(a)(5) currently defines the term "direct electronic access" to mean "access, which shall be in a form and manner acceptable to the [SEC], to data stored by [an SBSDR] in an electronic format and updated at the same time as the [SBSDR's] data is updated so as to provide the [SEC] or any of its designees with the ability to query or analyze the data in the same manner that the [SBSDR] can query or analyze the data" (emphasis added). In amending Rule 13n–4(a)(5), the SEC would establish the U.S. DERIVATIVES DEVELOPMENTS: SEC U.S. Enforcement Sidley Derivatives | Q4 2015 • 9 Sidley Derivatives QUARTERLY acceptable form and manner for direct electronic access. Accordingly, SBSDRs would be required to comply with either an FpML or FIXML schema that would be published on the SEC's website. The SBS data in the schema would represent the data elements required to be reported under SEC Regulation SBSR–Reporting and Dissemination of SBS Information and would be required to be formatted and structured consistently so that the SEC would be able to accurately analyze the data as it is made available by a single SBSDR or as it is made available in the aggregate by multiple SBSDRs. The proposal was published in the Federal Register on December 23, 2015, and comments are due on or before February 22, 2016. A copy of the proposal is available at: https://www.gpo. gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-12-23/pdf/2015-31703.pdf. CFTC Brings Futures Insider Trading Enforcement Case On December 2, 2015, the CFTC brought and settled an enforcement case for fraud against an energy futures trader alleging that the trader misappropriated confidential information about his employer's intended futures trades to benefit the trader's personal futures trading. This enforcement case is noteworthy because: (i) it confirms that the CFTC intends to use its enhanced authority to bring fraud cases, not just manipulation cases; (ii) for the first time since the CFTC was given enhanced anti-fraud powers under the Dodd-Frank Act, the CFTC used its broadened authority using the language of "insider-trading" cases; and (iii) it is a reminder to companies that trade futures or swaps to be mindful of the potential for compliance and supervision violations associated with this type of conduct, and to adopt appropriate procedures to prevent the misuse of confidential information by employees. A copy of In the Matter of Arya Motazedi, CFTC Docket No. 16-02, is available at: http://www. cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@lrenforcementactions/documents/legalpleading/ enfmotazediorder120215.pdf. A copy of the Sidley Update discussing the implications of the case is available at: http://www.sidley.com/~/media/update-pdfs/2015/12/20151223-clientalert-pdf.pdf. CFTC Charges Proprietary Trading Firm With Spoofing In July 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act amended the CEA to prohibit disruptive practices in futures and swaps markets, including a type of disruptive practice known as spoofing. The CEA defines spoofing as bidding or offering with the intent to cancel the bids or offers before execution. Section 9(a)(2) of the CEA makes it a felony, punishable by imprisonment for up to 10 years and a fine of up to US$1 million, for any person to engage in spoofing. On October 19, 2015, the CFTC filed a civil complaint in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois charging Igor B. Oystacher and his firm, 3Red Trading LLC (3Red), with spoofing and employment of a manipulative and deceptive device while trading on four different futures exchanges. According to the CFTC complaint, on at least 51 trading days between December 2011 and January 2014, Oystacher and 3Red allegedly engaged in a manipulative and deceptive spoofing scheme while trading in at least five futures products on at least four exchanges: (i) the E-Mini S&P 500 futures contracts on the CME; (ii) crude oil and natural gas futures contracts on the NYMEX; (iii) copper futures contracts on the COMEX; and (iv) the volatility index futures contract on CBOE Futures Exchange. The complaint alleges that that Oystacher and 3Red placed large passive orders on one side of the market either at or near the best bid/offer, that they did not intend to execute—such actions are regarded as "spoof orders." The alleged spoof orders were placed through trading accounts owned by 3Red in order to create the false impression of market interest to either U.S. ENFORCEMENT DEVELOPMENTS U.S. Enforcement Sidley Derivatives | Q4 2015 • 10 Sidley Derivatives QUARTERLY buy or sell and to induce market participants into placing orders on the same side of the market at price levels equivalent to the spoof orders. Then, according to the complaint, Oystacher and 3Red would cancel or attempt to cancel the spoof orders before they were executed and virtually simultaneously "flip" their position from buy to sell (or vice versa) by placing an aggressive order on the other side of the market at the same or better price to trade with market participants that had been induced to enter the market by the spoof orders. Ultimately, according to the complaint, this strategy permitted Oystacher and 3Red to trade in quantities and at price levels that would not have otherwise been available to them in the market, absent the alleged misconduct. Further information is available at: http://www.cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@ lrenforcementactions/documents/legalpleading/enfigorcomplnt101915.pdf; and http://www. cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/pr7264-15. Another Guilty Verdict in Spoofing Case On November 3, 2015, a jury in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois returned a guilty verdict for spoofing against high-speed commodities trader Michael J. Coscia and Coscia's firm, Panther Energy Trading LLC. This criminal case was a test of the government's authority to prosecute spoofing. According to the indictment, Coscia made US$1.4 million in a three-month stretch during 2011 utilizing automated trading systems designed to engage in what government contends was spoofing. Coscia's criminal prosecution followed his settlement in 2013 with various regulators, including the CFTC and the UK Financial Conduct Authority, on charges related to the same alleged conduct. As a result of his conviction, Coscia faces a maximum prison sentence of 25 years and a US$25,000 fine on each of the six counts of commodities fraud and a prison sentence of 10 years and a US$1 million fine on each of the six counts of spoofing. Sentencing has been set for March 2016. Particularly because of the novel issues presented in this case, it is widely anticipated that Coscia will appeal the verdict. Further information is available at: http://www.justice.gov/usao-ndil/pr/high-frequency-traderindicted-manipulating-commodities-futures-markets-first-federal. CFTC v. Kraft On December 18, 2015, Judge Blakey of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois ruled against Kraft Food Groups, Inc. and Mondelez Global LLC (collectively, the Companies) in connection with the Companies' motion to dismiss the CFTC's alleged manipulation of the commodities market (i) pursuant to Section 6(c)(1) of the CEA; and (ii) under the long-standing manipulation provisions of the CEA and CFTC regulation set out in Section 9(a)(2), Section 6(c)(3) and Regulation 180.2. Section 6(c)(1) is a new provision of the CEA which was added by the Dodd-Frank Act and modeled on Section 10(b) of the 1934 Act; related CFTC Regulation 180.1, which was modeled in turn on SEC Rule 10b-5, makes it unlawful to intentionally or recklessly employ manipulative devices. The CFTC alleged that the Companies purchased approximately US$90 million of wheat futures which, according to the CFTC, was far in excess of the Companies' actual commercial needs or even the Companies' ability to process and store such an amount of wheat. Instead, the CFTC has alleged that the Companies specifically sought to make the market believe that it would take delivery of this amount of wheat, intending thereby to artificially lower the price at the locations where the Companies normally purchased wheat in the cash market. Recognizing that interpretation of the new provisions presented questions of first impression, the Court rejected the CFTC's argument that there is a claim for manipulation that is separable from a fraud claim under those provisions, and instead held that any claim under those provisions "sounds in fraud" and Other U.S. Derivatives Sidley Derivatives | Q4 2015 • 11 Sidley Derivatives QUARTERLY must be pleaded with particularity. The Court held that the CFTC sufficiently pleaded "what manipulative acts were performed, which defendants performed them, when the manipulative acts were performed and what effect the scheme had on the [allegedly manipulated commodity or derivative] at issue," which the Court found to be the elements necessary to pleading a manipulation under the provisions. The Court also held that the CFTC had sufficiently pleaded the four elements necessary to a claim under the long-standing provisions of the CEA: "(1) the defendants possessed the ability to influence prices; (2) an artificial price existed; (3) the defendants caused the artificial price; and (4) the defendants specifically intended to cause the artificial price." U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Kraft Foods Group, Inc., et al., 15-cv-02881 (N.D. Ill. filed 12/18/15). A copy of the case is available at: http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/illinois/ ilndce/1:2015cv02881/308539/87. SEC Proposes Rules for Derivatives Trading by Registered Funds On December 11, 2015, the SEC proposed Rule 18f-4 under the Investment Company Act of 1940, which is intended to create a comprehensive approach to the use of derivatives trading by mutual funds, closed-end funds, exchange-traded funds and companies that elect to be treated as business development companies. Under the proposed rule, funds engaged in derivatives trading would require a fund to: (i) comply with one of two alternative exposurerelated portfolio limitations; (ii) maintain qualifying coverage assets and segregate such assets on its books and records; and (iii) in some cases, implement a formal derivatives trading risk management program and appoint a derivatives risk manager. The proposed rule would also impose asset coverage requirements in connection with financial commitment transactions as well as impose additional reporting and disclosure requirements to proposed Form N-PORT and proposed Form N-CEN. A copy of the proposed rule is available at: http://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2015/ic-31933. pdf. A preliminary review of Rule 18f-4 prepared by Sidley Austin LLP is available at: http:// www.sidley.com/en/news/2015-12-21-derivatives-update. Sidley Austin LLP will be publishing a comprehensive analysis of the SEC's proposal in January 2016. FAST Act Repeals Dodd-Frank Information Sharing Indemnification Provisions Dodd-Frank's amendments to the CEA and 1934 Act included provisions that required the CFTC and SDRs to obtain indemnification agreements prior to sharing certain information with U.S. and foreign regulators. These indemnification provisions have been repealed as part of the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act of 2015 (FAST Act) signed into law on December 4, 2015. CFTC Commissioner J. Christopher Giancarlo has commended the repeal, noting that these indemnification requirements have prevented critical international data sharing for swap transactions. A copy of the FAST Act is available at: http://transportation.house.gov/uploadedfiles/fastact_ xml.pdf. A copy of Commissioner Giancarlo's statement is available at: http://www.cftc.gov/ PressRoom/SpeechesTestimony/giancarlostatement120715. OTHER U.S. DERIVATIVES DEVELOPMENTS European Derivatives Sidley Derivatives | Q4 2015 • 12 Sidley Derivatives QUARTERLY REMIT Reporting On October 7, 2015, reporting commenced under the EU Regulation on Market Integrity and Transparency (REMIT) for wholesale energy market transactions (including orders to trade) executed through organized market places, and fundamental data from the European Network of Transmission Operators' central information transparency platforms. Reporting will commence on April 7, 2016 for the remaining categories of reportable wholesale energy contracts. A copy of the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators' statement on the commencement of reporting is available at: http://www.acer.europa.eu/Media/News/Pages/ ACER-starts-receiving-data-for-the-surveillance-of-the-energy-markets.aspx. Extension to Transitional Period Applying to CCP Capital Requirements On December 12, 2015, the European Commission published in the Official Journal of the EU an implementing act that extends the transitional period currently governing increased capital requirements for non-qualifying central counterparty (CCP) exposures under the EU Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR) by six months. This means that the transitional period will now run until June 15, 2016. The extension means that EU banks regulated under the CRR can continue to retain exposures to non-EU CCPs which have not yet gained recognition under the European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR) without being subject to the higher capital requirements contemplated under the CRR. Notably, the European Commission has not yet made the "equivalence" determination necessary for U.S. CCPs to become validly recognized for the purposes of the CRR. However, given the recent announcement of mandatory clearing of interest rate swaps on June 21, 2016 for "Category 1" clearing members, future extensions may become more difficult for the EU from a practical perspective. A copy of the Official Journal text is available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L:2015:328:FULL&from=EN. ESMA Consultation Paper on Liquidation Time Horizons On December 14, 2015, the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) published a consultation paper on liquidation time horizons (or "margin periods of risk") applying to EU CCPs under EMIR. ESMA has proposed in the consultation that, provided certain conditions are met (e.g., the identity of the client being known), CCPs should be permitted to offer both individually segregated accounts and gross omnibus accounts with a one day liquidation time horizon, in addition to the current requirement to offer both net omnibus accounts and individual segregated accounts with a minimum two-day liquidation time horizon. However, this ability to offer a one-day liquidation time horizon will only be available for client accounts and not for house accounts, which leaves a disparity between the treatment of house accounts in the EU and the U.S. This disparity may continue to pose issues in relation to the equivalence assessment required under EMIR before U.S. CCPs can become recognized to provide clearing services in the EU. A copy of the consultation is available at: https://www.esma.europa.eu/press-news/ consultations/consultation-paper-review-article-26-rts-no-1532013-respect-mpor-client. Delay to Application of MiFID II The EU MiFID II regime includes, amongst other things, rules on the mandatory trading of derivatives through certain prescribed "trading venues," straight-through-processing, transparency, and position limits and reporting for commodity derivatives. There have now been strong indications from EU regulators that the application of MiFID II will be delayed by 12 months, from January 3, 2017 to January 3, 2018. In particular, on November 27, 2015, the EUROPEAN DERIVATIVES DEVELOPMENTS European Derivatives Sidley Derivatives | Q4 2015 • 13 Sidley Derivatives QUARTERLY European Parliament published a statement by Markus Ferber (European Parliament Rapporteur for MiFID II) indicating that the European Parliament's MiFID II negotiation team will accept a one-year delay to the application of MiFID II in return for the European Commission finalizing the necessary implementing legislation "swiftly," and taking into account certain priorities of the European Parliament. Although no formal amending legislation has as yet been proposed in relation to the extension, the strong indication of a delay will come as a relief to many EU market participants. A copy of Markus Ferber's statement is available at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/ news-room/20151127IPR05110/Statement-on-MIFID-II-potential-delay-of-the-entry-into-force. ESMA Consultation on Indirect Clearing Arrangements On November 5, 2015, ESMA published a consultation paper on indirect clearing arrangements under both EMIR and MiFID II. An "indirect clearing arrangement" refers to the chain of contractual relationships between a CCP, its clearing member, the client of the clearing member and an "indirect" client (i.e., a client of the clearing member's direct client). These indirect clearing arrangements are intended to provide indirect clients with a way of meeting their obligation to clear over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives under EMIR and to clear exchange traded derivatives under MiFID II. Given that EU clearing members have so far struggled to implement a workable form of indirect clearing arrangement, ESMA is attempting to reach a practical solution to indirect clearing that can operate across both the exchange traded and OTC markets. The proposals contained in ESMA's consultation focus, in particular, on account structure and segregation models, default management requirements, and longer clearing chains. A copy of the consultation closed on December 17, 2015, and is available at: https://www. esma.europa.eu/sites/default/files/library/2015/11/2015-1628_-_consultation_paper_on_ indirect_clearing_under_emir_and_mifir.pdf. Updated Technical Standards on Data Reporting On November 13, 2015, ESMA published a final report setting out draft regulatory and implementing technical standards on derivatives transaction reporting under Article 9 of EMIR. The draft technical standards are primarily intended to update existing standards by incorporating certain "Q&A" guidance on reporting released following the date of EMIR's implementation into the standards themselves. In particular, the technical standards clarify certain data fields that appear in transaction reports and introduce a number of new fields and values to reflect market practice or other necessary regulatory requirements. The draft technical standards have now been sent to the European Commission, which has three months to approve them (or alternatively to propose amendments). A copy of the Final Report is available at: https://www.esma.europa.eu/sites/default/files/ library/2015/11/2015-esma-1645_-_final_report_emir_article_9_rts_its.pdf. EMIR Clearing Obligation On October 1, 2015, ESMA published draft Regulatory Technical Standards (RTS) on mandatory central clearing of certain credit default swaps (CDS). The draft RTS set out the type of CDS contracts that will need to be cleared and the dates on which clearing will come into effect. The RTS will now need to be approved by the European Commission, Parliament and Council of the EU before they can be finalized. Asia Derivatives Sidley Derivatives | Q4 2015 • 14 Sidley Derivatives QUARTERLY They are available at: https://www.esma.europa.eu/sites/default/files/ library/2015/11/2015-1481_final_report_clearing_obligation_index_cds.pdf. On November 11, 2015, ESMA published draft RTS requiring the central clearing of certain interest rate swaps under EMIR. The draft RTS propose mandatory central clearing of fixed-tofloat interest rate swaps and forward rate agreements denominated in NOK, PLN and SEK. The draft RTS have now been sent to the European Commission, which has three months to approve them (or alternatively to propose amendments). The draft RTS is available at: https://www.esma.europa.eu/databases-library/esma-library. On December 1, 2015, a Commission Delegated Regulation on mandatory clearing of certain EU, GBP, JPY and USD OTC interest rate contracts was published in the Official Journal of the EU. This Delegated Regulation confirms the effective dates for mandatory clearing of the relevant contracts, as follows: (i) June 21, 2016 for Category 1 counterparties (i.e., clearing members); (ii) December 21, 2016 for Category 2 counterparties (i.e., financial counterparties and non-financial AIFs each with more than EUR 8 billion in outstanding gross notional amount of uncleared derivatives); (iii) June 21, 2017 for Category 3 counterparties (i.e., financial counterparties and other AIFs with a level of activity in uncleared derivatives below the EUR 8 billion threshold); and (iv) December 21, 2018 for Category 4 counterparties (i.e., non-financial counterparties). The Delegated Regulation also sets the date of application for certain frontloading obligations applying to Category 1 and 2 counterparties. A copy of the full text of the Delegated Regulation is available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/ legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32015R2205&from=EN. HKEx Proposes to Build "London-Hong Kong Connect" On October 21, 2015, the Hong Kong Futures Exchange Limited (HKFE), the HKFE Clearing Corporation Limited (HKCC) (Hong Kong Exchanges), the London Metal Exchange (LME) and the LME Clear Limited (LME Clear), subsidiaries of the Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited Group (HKEx) and members of the HKEx Group signed a non-binding memorandum of understanding (MoU) for the proposed "London-Hong Kong Connect." Under the proposal, a trading link between the HKFE and the LME and a clearing link between HKCC and LME Clear will be developed. The proposed London-Hong Kong Connect will enable People's Republic of China (PRC) companies and investors to broaden, through the LME, the variety of investments which they may purchase and the manner in which they may otherwise participate in the international price-setting ecosystem. The proposal is subject to regulatory approval in Hong Kong, the United Kingdom and the EU. Currently, no formal agreement has been entered into. The types of products addressed, the operational model, system requirements and other related issues will be the subject of further discussion and development with the relevant regulators. Further information is available at: http://www.hkex.com.hk/eng/newsconsul/ hkexnews/2015/151021news.htm; and http://www.hkex.com.hk/eng/newsconsul/ hkexnews/2015/Documents/151021FAQ_e.pdf. ASIA DERIVATIVES DEVELOPMENTS HONG KONG/CHINA Asia Derivatives Sidley Derivatives | Q4 2015 • 15 Sidley Derivatives QUARTERLY HKEx Plans to Introduce More Asia Commodities Contracts On October 12, 2015, HKEx announced plans to introduce a second group of London Metal Mini Futures contracts, namely, the London Nickel Mini Futures, London Tin Mini Futures and London Lead Mini Futures. The plan is subject to regulatory approval. If approved, the three new mini metals contracts will be traded in Renminbi on the HKFE and cleared through HKCC. The HKEx first introduced the London Metal Mini Futures contracts in December 2014. These Renminbi-denominated contracts may provide additional hedging opportunities/capabilities and create further arbitrage opportunities for base metals users, producers and investors in different time zones. Further information is available at: https://www.hkex.com.hk/eng/newsconsul/ hkexnews/2015/151012news.htm. Consultation Response on the Establishment of an Effective Resolution Regime for Financial Institutions in Hong Kong; Related Legislation Published On October 9, 2015, the Hong Kong government, along with the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA), the Securities and Futures Commission of Hong Kong (SFC) and the Insurance Authority released a consultation response to the second stage of the public consultation on proposals relating to the establishment of a cross-section resolution regime for financial institutions (FIs) in Hong Kong. The proposal introduces resolutions to be adopted to enhance the resilience and stability of the financial system. The central premise is that if any FI fails, it should fail without disruption to the overall financial system. On November 20, 2015, the Hong Kong Government gazetted the Financial Institutions (Resolution) Bill (Bill). This follows the SFC's consultation on the establishment of a cross-sector resolution regime for financial institutions in Hong Kong. Further information regarding the consultation response is available at: http://www.sfc.hk/ edistributionWeb/gateway/EN/consultation/conclusion?refNo=15CP1. Further information regarding the Bill is available at: http://www.fstb.gov.hk/fsb/ppr/press/doc/pr13112015b_e.pdf. SFC Publishes Consultation Conclusions on Client Agreement Requirements On December 8, 2015, the SFC released its consultation conclusions on its "Further Consultation on the Client Agreement Requirements." Under the consultation conclusions, effective from June 9, 2017, the SFC will require licensed entities to include a new clause in all client agreements for the purpose of enhancing investor protection. The new clause should be in substantially the same form as set forth below: "If we [the licensed entity] solicit the sale of or recommend any financial product to you [the client], the financial product [securities, futures contracts or leveraged foreign exchange contracts as defined under the Securities and Futures Ordinance (as the case may be)] must be reasonably suitable for you having regard to your financial situation, investment experience and investment objectives. No other provision of this agreement or any other document we may ask you to sign and no statement we may ask you to make derogates from this clause." There will be very limited situations where licensed entities will have the discretion to determine that the new clause is not necessary. For example, if a licensed entity acts under a restricted mandate that clearly does not involve soliciting the sale of, or recommending, financial products, or if the licensed entity is exempted from entering into a client agreement in the first place. Asia Derivatives Sidley Derivatives | Q4 2015 • 16 Sidley Derivatives QUARTERLY Although this requirement will formally come into force on June 9, 2017, the SFC expects licensed entities to commence reviewing and revising their client agreements immediately to ensure timely completion of this exercise. Further information available at: http://www.sfc.hk/edistributionWeb/gateway/EN/news-andannouncements/news/doc?refNo=15PR120. HKMA Announces New Phase of System Implementation for the HKMA's OTC Derivative Trade Repository On December 29, 2015, the HKMA announced that a new phase of system implementation of the HKMA's OTC derivatives trade repository (HKTR) is scheduled for launch in May 2016. In this new phase: ■ The product scope of the HKTR will be further expanded in the new phase to cover all remaining OTC derivative products, including products in new asset classes (i.e. commodity and credit) and exotic products; ■ A number of data fields will be added to support the reporting of valuation information of OTC derivative transactions; and ■ Certain procedures and technical specifications for reporting will be refined. Although the new features may not be subject to mandatory reporting immediately after being launched, reporting institutions are encouraged to review the specifications and make preparations as soon as possible. The HKTR will make available a testing environment from the second quarter of 2016 for interested institutions to simulate reporting on the new features on a voluntary basis. Further information available at: http://www.sfc.hk/edistributionWeb/gateway/EN/circular/ doc?refNo=15EC65; and http://www.sfc.hk/edistributionWeb/gateway/EN/circular/openAppen dix?refNo=15EC65&appendix=0. China Regulator Published Proposed Administrative Measures for Program Trading in the Securities and Futures Markets On October 9, 2015, the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) published draft Administrative Measures for the Program Trading in the Securities and Futures Market (Draft Rules). Program trading refers to trading activities where transaction instructions are automatically generated or executed following established procedures or by using specific software. The Draft Rules provide that: ■ An application verification system and an instruction approval system will be established; ■ Trading order submission and supervision will be segregated; ■ Differential fee-charging will be adopted for program trading so that extra charges based on transaction reports and withdrawal amounts will be collected; ■ Securities and futures companies will establish a program trading access verification system and execute an access agreement with clients to ensure continuous system access management for program trading; ■ Prohibited behaviors for program trading will be specified; and ■ The use of overseas servers will be regulated in the case of domestic program traders engaged in securities and futures transactions. On the same date, the two stock exchanges and four futures exchanges in the PRC also issued their respective draft implementation rules (Implementation Rules) to implement the Draft Rules. Asia Derivatives Sidley Derivatives | Q4 2015 • 17 Sidley Derivatives QUARTERLY The Draft Rules and Implementation Rules have yet to become effective. The Draft Rules and Implementation Rules establish a framework under which the PRC government will significantly enhance control over program trading in the PRC securities and futures markets. SFC Proposes Changes to the Automated Trading Services Guidelines On November 20, 2015, the SFC issued a consultation paper on the proposed changes to the Guidelines for the Regulations of Automated Trading Services (ATS Guidelines). The SFC's proposals are intended to cover the following key areas: ■ Reflect the implementation of the OTC derivatives regime. In particular, the SFC proposes to impose specific requirements relating to automated trading services (ATS) providers that also serve as central counterparties of OTC derivative transactions; ■ Align the ATS Guidelines with international standards and practices, for example, with the Principles for Financial Market Infrastructures published by the Committee on Payment and Settlement Systems and the International Organization of Securities Commissions issued in April 2012; and ■ Update the ATS Guidelines to take into account developments in the design and operation of ATS platforms. The consultation closed on December 31, 2015. Subject to completion of this consultation, the SFC intends to implement the revised ATS Guidelines and the subsidiary legislation for mandatory clearing of OTC derivative transactions, simultaneously. This is expected to become effective in mid-2016. Further information is available at: http://www.sfc.hk/edistributionWeb/gateway/EN/news-andannouncements/news/doc?refNo=15PR113; and http://www.sfc.hk/edistributionWeb/gateway/ EN/consultation/doc?refNo=15CP5. SFC Proposes to Expand Short Position Reporting On November 27, 2015, the SFC issued a consultation paper on the proposed expansion of the short position reporting obligation. Under the proposed regime: ■ The obligation to report short positions will extend to all securities that can be short sold under the rules of The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong Limited, which will include collective investment schemes (CIS); and ■ The reporting threshold for stocks (which is currently the lower of 0.02 percent of the stock's market capitalization or HK$30 million) will remain unchanged, while the threshold for CIS will be set at HK$30 million. The consultation closed on December 31, 2015. Further information is available at: http://www. sfc.hk/edistributionWeb/gateway/EN/news-and-announcements/news/doc?refNo=15PR114; and http://www.sfc.hk/edistributionWeb/gateway/EN/consultation/doc?refNo=15CP6. Asia Derivatives Sidley Derivatives | Q4 2015 • 18 Sidley Derivatives QUARTERLY SFC Signs MoU With ESMA on Cooperation Arrangements and Exchange of Information Regarding Derivatives Contracts Reported to Trade Repositories On November 26, 2015, the SFC announced that it has entered in a MoU with the ESMA to facilitate information exchanges in relation to derivative contracts reported to trade repositories in Hong Kong and the EU. Under the MoU, the SFC and ESMA will have indirect access to information on derivatives contracts in order to fulfill their respective responsibilities and mandates. The MoU came into effect on November 19, 2015. Further information is available at: http:// www.sfc.hk/edistributionWeb/gateway/EN/news-and-announcements/news/ doc?refNo=15PR115. Securities and Futures (Amendment) Ordinance 2015 Gazetted On November 13, 2015, the Hong Kong Government gazetted the Securities and Futures (Amendment) Ordinance 2015, which provides the SFC with the ability to enter into supervisory MoUs with regulators outside Hong Kong to enable reciprocal supervisory assistance. Further information is available at: http://www.fstb.gov.hk/fsb/ppr/press/doc/pr13112015b_e.pdf. CFTC and Hong Kong Regulator Reach Understanding Regarding Cross-Border Supervision On December 21, 2015, the CFTC and the SFC signed an MoU setting forth how they intend to cooperate and exchange information in connection with the supervision of certain regulated entities that are simultaneously within their respective jurisdictional reach (Cross-Border Covered Entity). In addition to a general agreement to comply with requests for information from the other regulator and to help facilitate on-site examination visits in each other's jurisdictions, the CFTC and SFC agreed to endeavor to promptly inform the other when they become aware of any pending regulatory changes that may have a significant impact on the operations, activities or reputation of a Cross-Border Covered Entity, or any material event that may adversely impact the financial or operational stability of a Cross-Border Covered Entity, including the commencement of any enforcement action. These information sharing efforts will be useful to regulators in furtherance of their objective to more effectively supervise Cross-Border Covered Entities that have been designated to be systemically important in one or more jurisdictions. A copy of the MoU is available at: http://www.cftc.gov/idc/groups/public/@internationalaffairs/ documents/file/cftc-sfc-supervisorymou1221201.pdf. PRC State Council Passed a Draft Decision Proposing to Adopt Registration-based IPO System at the Shanghai Stock Exchange and the Shenzhen Stock Exchange On December 9, 2015, the executive meeting of the PRC State Council proposed the adoption of a registration-based IPO system for the Shanghai Stock Exchange and the Shenzhen Stock Exchange. The proposed implementation is to be effected by December 9, 2017. The next step is for the decision to be approved by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPC). Following notification by the NPC, other relevant Government agencies, including the CSRC, will promulgate the subsidiary regulations, such as the Regulations on Initial Public Offering Registration, to further specify and clarify the new registration requirements, registration authority and procedures. It is expected that the new IPO system will launch in June 2016. However, a formal timetable for introduction has not been released. Further information is available at: http://english.gov.cn/news/policy_briefings/2015/12/25/ content_281475260549380.htm. Other Derivatives Sidley Derivatives | Q4 2015 • 19 Sidley Derivatives QUARTERLY MAS Consultation on Margin Requirements for Non-Centrally Cleared OTC Derivatives The Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) issued a consultation paper on October 1, 2015, setting out proposals to implement margin requirements for non-centrally cleared derivatives. These proposals take into account the margin requirements set out by the Working Group on Margin Requirements, established jointly by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision and the International Organization of Securities Commissions. The MAS proposals include: ■ Scope of Margin Requirements–All OTC derivative contracts that are not centrally cleared by a qualifying CCP will be subject to margin requirements. These requirements are intended to be applicable to entities conducting regulated activities under the Securities and Futures Act, Chapter 289 of Singapore. However, the MAS will adopt a phased-in approach and initially, such requirements will only apply to (i) banks licensed under the Banking Act, Chapter 19 of Singapore; (ii) merchant banks approved as financial institutions under the MAS Act, Chapter 186 of Singapore; and (iii) other licensed financial institutions (MAS Covered Entities). ■ Margin Obligations on MAS Covered Entities–A MAS Covered Entity will be subject to both the initial margin (IM) and variation margin (VM) requirements when the following conditions are met: (i) it is a legal counterparty to the transaction; (ii) the transaction is booked in Singapore; and (iii) the transaction is entered into with a counterparty that is either a MAS Covered Entity or an overseas regulated financial firm. The MAS has also proposed margin calculations and methodologies for IM and VM models. ■ Eligible Collateral and Haircuts–The MAS has proposed a range of eligible collateral to be used for meeting the IM and VM requirements. MAS Covered Entities will be required to consistently adopt either the schedule-based haircut approach or the risk-sensitive modelbased haircut approach. ■ Treatment of Intra-Group/Cross-Border Transactions– Intra-group transactions may, upon application by a MAS Covered Entity, be exempted from the scope of the proposed margin requirements, subject to the condition that the MAS Covered Entity comes under groupwide supervision by the MAS or regulators in other jurisdictions. For cross-border transactions where the transaction is subject to the margin requirements of two or more jurisdictions, the MAS has provided proposals on what would constitute deemed compliance by the MAS Covered Entity. A copy of the complete set of proposals is available at: http://www.mas.gov.sg/~/media/MAS/ News%20and%20Publications/Consultation%20Papers/Policy%20Consultation%20on%20 Margin%20Requirements%20for%20NonCentrally%20Cleared%20OTC%20Derivatives%20 1Oct.pdf. The consultation paper was open to public feedback until November 1, 2015. ISDA Publishes 2015 Universal Resolution Stay Protocol On November 12, 2015, the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. (ISDA) announced the publication and launch of the ISDA 2015 Universal Resolution Stay Protocol (2015 Protocol). Eighteen of the largest banking organizations worldwide (G-18) and three other large international banking organizations adhered to it upon publication. The ISDA 2014 Resolution Stay Protocol (Original Protocol) was published in November 2014, and the G-18 adhered to it upon publication in connection with regulatory efforts to reduce risks associated with "too-big-to-fail" institutions. The Original Protocol is being replaced by the 2015 Protocol and by an additional protocol expected in 2016 (Jurisdictional Modular Protocol). The Original Protocol was intended to help ensure, via short-term stay mechanisms, the preservation of OTHER DERIVATIVES DEVELOPMENTS ASIA DERIVATIVES DEVELOPMENTS SINGAPORE Other Derivatives Sidley Derivatives | Q4 2015 • 20 Sidley Derivatives QUARTERLY swap transactions of any G-18 organization that became subject to certain resolution or reorganization proceedings. Two important limitations of the Original Protocol were acknowledged at its inception, and they are now the reason for its replacement: (i) the Original Protocol applied only to swap transactions under ISDA master agreements—and not to repurchase agreements or other security financing transactions (SFTs) such as securities lending; and (ii) the Original Protocol applied principally to transactions between G-18 institutions—and not to transactions of G-18 institutions with other market participants, such as buy-side counterparties. These limitations are being addressed by the new ISDA protocols and by related legislative and regulatory initiatives in Financial Stability Board (FSB) jurisdictions. Effective January 1, 2016, the 2015 Protocol will replace the Original Protocol for those institutions that have adhered to both. Although it is expected that additional banking organizations will also adhere to the 2015 Protocol, including other firms that the FSB has designated as global systemically important banks (GSIBs), it is not expected that other market participants, such as buy-side firms, will adhere to the 2015 Protocol. More significant for such market participants will be the Jurisdictional Modular Protocol, which ISDA is expected to publish in 2016. The Jurisdictional Modular Protocol will be developed in response to anticipated legislation and in various jurisdictions, including the United States and other major FSB countries. sidley.com Attorney Advertising - For purposes of compliance with New York State Bar rules, our headquarters are Sidley Austin LLP, 787 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10019, 212.839.5300; One South Dearborn, Chicago, IL 60603, 312 853 7000; and 1501 K Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005, 202 736 8000. Sidley and Sidley Austin refer to Sidley Austin LLP and affiliated partnerships as explained at www.sidley. com/disclaimer. Prior results described herein do not guarantee a similar outcome. AMERICA • ASIA PACIFIC • EUROPE Sidley Derivatives | Q4 2015 • 21 CONTACTS For further information about this newsletter and our practice, please contact: For U.S. Developments Geoffrey F. Aronow Partner +1 202 736 8023 firstname.lastname@example.com Nathan A. Howell Partner +1 312 853 2655 firstname.lastname@example.com Kenneth A. Kopelman Partner +1 212 839 5834 firstname.lastname@example.com Michele Navazio Partner +1 212 839 5310 email@example.com William J. Nissen Partner +1 312 853 7742 email@example.com Ellen P. Pesch Partner +1 212 839 5569 email@example.com Robert J. Robinson Partner +1 212 839 5762 firstname.lastname@example.com Michele Ilene Ruiz Partner +1 312 853 7187 firstname.lastname@example.com Michael S. Sackheim Partner +1 212 839 5503 email@example.com Elizabeth M. Schubert Partner +1 312 853 2935 firstname.lastname@example.com Lisa A. Dunsky Counsel +1 312 853 4098 firstname.lastname@example.com William Shirley Counsel +1 212 839 5965 email@example.com Azad Assadipour Associate +1 212 839 5415 email@example.com Andrew P. Blake Partner +1 202 736 8977 firstname.lastname@example.com Julian L. Brody Associate +1 212 839 7339 email@example.com Robert Brown Associate +1 312 853 4147 firstname.lastname@example.com Kate L. Lashley Associate +1 212 839 5435 firstname.lastname@example.com Kunal Malhotra Associate +1 312 853 0631 firstname.lastname@example.com Andrew E. Nelson Associate +1 312 853 7894 email@example.com Joseph E. Schwartz Associate +1 312 853 7665 firstname.lastname@example.com For UK & EU Developments For Hong Kong & China Developments Matthew Dening Partner +44 20 7360 3646 firstname.lastname@example.com Leonard Ng Partner +44 20 7360 3667 email@example.com Heather A. Cheyne Senior Associate +44 20 7360 2099 email@example.com Caitlin McErlane Associate +44 20 7360 3743 email@example.com Effie Vasilopoulos Partner +852 2509 7860 email@example.com Felicity Wong Counsel +852 2509 7825 firstname.lastname@example.com For Singapore Developments Han Ming Ho Partner +65 6230 3966 email@example.com Josephine Law Counsel +65 6230 3916 email@example.com Sidley Derivatives QUARTERLY


text: Some Visual Inspection Problems in the Belgian Industry (Invited)Patrick Wambacq, Piet Dewaele, Rudi Bartels, Johan Vandeneede, Dirk Van Den Oudenhoven, André OosterlinckMVA1988In this paper, we will review some visual inspection problems that were presented to our laboratory by a consortium of Belgian industrial companies. These problems were selected to serve as a test vehicle for a software package, called LILY (Leuven Image processing Library), that was developed for the consortium by our laboratory. Therefore, this paper… (More)

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Thanks for a great 2017 Spartan Stampede!
Be on the lookout for tickets for the 2018 Spartan Stampede!
For any inquiries or questions regarding the Wharton Center call 1-(800)-WHARTON or visit whartoncenter.com
For information on local hotels and pricing, local restaurants, and other local places of interest, please click HERE and visit this wonderful microsite made by Greater Lansing Sports Authority.
Here is a list of frequently asked questions with answers:
Visit this link for entry information:
For more information about our Stock Contractor, Twisted P Rodeo, click HERE.
Charity Jackpot Results:
Here are the results from the 2017 Spartan Stampede Rodeo! Thank you to all who participated and a huge thank you to Twisted P Rodeo Company!


text:
Clifford Chance has appointed Mark Hyde as global head of its insolvency group – the latest global head to be announced by the newly merged firm.
Hyde returns to the London insolvency and corporate recovery group from Hong Kong, where for the last two years he has been leading the team advising the Peregrine liquidators.
The merger with Rogers & Wells and Punder Volhard Weber & Axster has added two partners in New York and three in Germany to the firm's four specialist insolvency partners.
Hyde says: "It's not like being global head of banking where you've got 200 partners under your belt.
"But for the first time as a formal UK firm, we have a New York bankruptcy capability, which is something I do not think any of our competitors have. The same applies to Germany.
"We have had to use other US law firms for anything with an American angle, including Shearman & Sterling.
He adds that having that capability is an advantage.
"It is one firm, with all the benefits that flow from that.
"In continental Europe we will have real experts on the ground. Frankfurt was very transactional oriented, but with the Punders people on board we will now figure in the European restructurings and insolvencies that are likely to follow."
Hyde will concentrate on co-ordinating business initiatives and overseeing the growth of the practice.
"New York is important and Hong Kong is a key jurisdiction," he says.


text:
But Wildlands' setting and open world make it a very different beast, so you might want to try the game out prior to making a purchase.
Starting on February 23 and running until February 27, PlayStation 4, Xbox One, and PC players will be able to participate in the Ghost Recon: Wildlands open beta, with preloading available on February 21.
As a reward for playing the Beta, you will unlock access to an exclusive mission for the full game - the Unidad Conspiracy mission, in which players will spark a war between the Unidad, a local corrupt militia group, and the Santa Blanca cartel. But players can of course confront Montuyoc right away. As with the closed beta, players can hook up with three friends and play the missions cooperatively.
Ubisoft has been championing the open-ended nature of Wildlands since its announcement in 2015, having stated previously that a wide range of "vehicles, weapons, and equipment" are available for operatives in order to get the job done however they see fit. The latter area will pose a much greater challenge to would-be Wildlands players, as this is home to Santa Blanca's elite training centres.
Ubisoft has confirmed that the Ghost Recon: Wildlands Open Beta will be going live next week, ahead of the full game's launch in March.
"The massive and responsive open world encourages a variety of playstyles, allowing players the freedom to choose how they execute any and all missions".
More Than Half Of Americans Are Stressed By Politics
Trump-related stress levels of Americans with different levels of education also correspond to the election results. The survey found that 66 percent of Americans reported stress about the future of the country.
ADHD Might Be A Brain Disorder
The differences between the two types of brain are not monumental however, according to the study's lead author, Martine Hoogman. Hoogman points to other conditions where brain size differences are commonplace, such as major depressive disorder (MDD).
Singer Wears 'Make America Great Again' Dress To The Grammys
This year, Villa pushed things further than ever-even though she was significantly more covered up than in years past. A singer who sported a President Trump-inspired dress to the Grammy Awards is seeing a sudden spike in sales.


text:
Posts Tagged: Purim Results 53
Ivanka Ignites Instagram With Purim Picture
Not since Hillary Clinton's infamous cookie-making comment on "60 Minutes" in 1992 ("I suppose I could have stayed home and baked cookies…") has the act of baking been so politicized — until now.
A Savory Twist On Tradition
Purim is on Sunday, and on Purim, we eat hamantaschen. Usually, the triangular pastries are made with sweet fillings. But on a day where candy is abundantly consumed, the thought of more sweet eats can be just too much to bear.
14 Fun, Fabulous Purim Drinks
There are so many ways to enjoy the libation-focused holiday of Purim. With the instruction to drink until you don't know the difference between the good Mordechi and the evil Haman, you have Jewish tradition egging on indulgence. (Having said that, we recommend you indulge wisely.)
Orthodox Union: Friends Don't Let Friends Get Smashed On Purim
Purim's on Saturday night this year, making the Jewish Halloween a particularly opportune time for excessive drinking.
Joan Nathan's Perfect Poppy-Seed Hamantaschen
When I was asked to speak to the student body at Phillips Exeter Academy, I thought about the irony of the situation. When I was young, Exeter had very few Jewish students, all male, and those who were open about their Judaism felt isolated.


text:
Becca Fitzpatrick Quotes About LifetimeQuotes about: Lifetime
Angels Blame Books Cars Chocolate Choices Dad Dogs Dreams Eyes Fathers Feelings Fighting Fun Girlfriends Giving Heart Heaven Home Homework House Human Body Hurt Kissing Laughter Leaving Letting Go Lifetime Losing Lying Memories Mom Morning Past Rain Regret Rings Running Sacrifice School Silence Skins Soul Study Summer Today Water Writing
Scott: Friends don't let friends drive drunk. Nora: Are you trying to appeal to my conscience? Scott: How can you turn down a once-in-a-lifetime chance to drive the 'Stang? Nora: How about you sell me the 'Stang for thirty dollars? I can even pay cash. Scott: Drunk, but not that drunk, Grey.
You May Also Like:
Becca Fitzpatrick
- Born: February 3, 1979
- Occupation: Author
- Cite this Page: Citation


text:
The Myth of the Democratic Leader
3 hours ago
Posted by pathickey at 12:58 PM
Labels: KInks, Ray Davies
Dad always said that I couldn't find my butt with both hands. I can. Allow me to add this imperative -"Defend the unborn against abortion even if they persecute you, calumniate you, set traps for you, take you to court or kill you." - Pope Francis to celebrate Pro-life Mass, Vatican
I am a
What Flower
Are You?


text:
Oct. 2017
As a Realtor myself in the Sun Valley area, Rose Ann has handled three homes we've listed for sale and I have never been disappointed. Rose Ann and her team are very thorough, professional and successful. I know Rose Ann will accurately price my property for a reasonably quick offer, assess the qualifications of the buyer and make sure the transaction closes. I can't imagine using anyone else in the Twin Falls area. -Suzanne W.
June 23, 2017
Terry listened to what I was needing for a home. He knew I was in a crunch for time and acted quickly writing up an offer. He went above and beyond to show me the little BIG things about my home; how to change my furnace filters, how to work my sprinklers. Very kind and sincere. I am very appreciative for everything he had done for me. I would highly recommend him. -Karin B.
June 6, 2017
Our agent was very professional and responsive to our wants and needs.
Our agent had all paperwork ready; we didn't waste a lot of time on anything.
Our agent was very easy to work with; he was always responsive and worked with our schedules.
We would recommend The Twin Falls Home Finder Team to anyone and everyone we know; they're awesome! -Tammy C.
May 12, 2017
Terry Winkle is by far the best realtor we've ever worked with (and we've worked with several!) He knows the market and made the effort to know and understand what I–and more importantly–my wife wanted and needed in a home and was incredibly patient with us. Most importantly, it wasn't about the transaction–we consider him a good friend now.
Everyone that worked with Terry in helping us–from the very beginning of the process all the way through closing–was friendly, professional, and incredibly helpful when questions came up. -Dan B.
May 2, 2017
Very professional and very knowledgeable agents. Friendly and great communication skills.I felt very comfortable and cared for the whole way through. My best real estate experience by far. Just love her! (Rose Ann) – Scott J.
April 4, 2017
We appreciated that we always felt like Terry's only client even though we were sure that he had other clients. We appreciate that he always took the time with us and was not working on his next deal when he was taking care of us.
We appreciate the painlessness of the transaction. This was our first home sale and it was quite overwhelming for us as we have been through a difficult home purchase with another agent. Terry took great care of us and advised us on every step and allowed us to make decisions about our home sale.
We appreciated that we had feedback with all of the showings. We did not anticipate the showing would have feedback from the real estate agent. This was very important to Terry and his team to follow up with each real estate agent that showed our home so we could know why it wasn't selling. This allowed us to slightly adjust the price and sell our home very quickly.
Gary and I are very satisfied with the work that Terry and his team have done and will definitely recommend them to other people looking to buy or sell a home (pain free). -Gary and Lindsey R.
March 20, 2017
Rose Ann came recommended by an agent I had come to trust. I felt like Rose Ann was working for me and not for a quick sale/commission. She worked with my schedule and kept me informed as soon as homes popped on the market so that I could compete in a competitive market. I really like my new home and I am glad I worked with Rose Ann to find it. I will recommend her to anyone I know looking for a home in the Twin Falls area. -Keith V.
March 16, 2017
We were kept well informed throughout the entire process.
Rose Ann went above and beyond when it came to making sure utilities and power and cleaning the home was presentable for buyers.
Very very satisfied. -Samantha L.
March 14, 2017
Rose Anne was confident and professional. She explained each step before it happened so there were no surprises.
Every person from the front desk and beyond was familiar with our listing and knew the current status each time we called or came to the office.
Rose Anne was a great advocate and ensured we were treated fairly by each potential buyer. -Jason C.
March 6, 2017
Terry was a pleasure to work with, his professionalism, dedication and keeping us aprised throughout the process was amazing. He was always available, informing us of our options at every step which made the process very easy and painless.
We have been trying to sell our property for over three years without so much as a single signed offer. Terry had brought us multiple offers in a realtivly short period of time and ultimatly for what we were asking. We will absolutly use and reccomend Terry to our family and friends in the future.
Thanks Terry! -Rob and Zina W.
Feb. 27, 2017
Your prompt way of handling things. Constant communication and updates. Pictures taken and viral tour set up immediately for exposure was great. The way you go beyond selling the house but handling details as repairs and closing arrangements for those of us out of state. Just amazing service. Friendly efficiency at it's best. Thank you once again for being our agents. – Patti S.
Feb. 1, 2017
I felt that Terry and company did a fantastic job marketing my house, sending current reports, communication with me on the housing trends and negotiating on my behalf.
Thanks for all you have done. -Greg and Debbie C.
Jan. 26, 2017
- A true expert partner in the home buying experience and not a salesperson.
- Goes above and beyond to make sure our interest is always represented.
- Trusted confidant to assure we truly get what we are looking for, not just to sale a home. -Brandon and Shaylah D.
Dec. 5, 2016
We liked that he(Terry) went to bat for us to get us the highest price for the house. We talked to another realtor before Terry that wanted us to list it for much lower. I feel Terry tried hard to get us what we wanted. He and his assistant were always good to respond quickly and answer whatever questions we had. We are very happy that we chose to go with Terry and would recommend him to anyone. -Jeremy and Kalyn P.
Nov. 11, 2016
We really enjoyed finding and buying a house with him (Terry). We really liked how hard Terry worked for us and would keep us in the loop on everything. He kept showing us houses until we found the one we liked. He never pushed or pressured us on anything. Terry is very friendly and easy to work with and we would not hesitate recommending him to anyone looking for a new home. -Thanks Eric S.
Nov. 12, 2016
Rose Ann is extremely professional and knowledgeable. She takes her job very seriously and that reflects in her quality of work. I have the utmost confidence in her and her team's ability to represent me, no stone is ever left unturned or detail too small. I would highly recommend Rose Ann and her team. From a first time home buyer to a savvy investor, Rose Ann will reflect and represent you appropriately. She's the best I've ever worked with. -Aaron B.
Nov. 11, 2016
Here are three reasons we liked working with Rose Ann…..
1). Rose Ann was very professional. She was true to her word and patient.
2). Rose Ann was very easy to work with and communicated regularly with us even though we were not "technically" represented by her.
3). Rose Ann is/was a pleasure to work with.
-Jill & Paul B.
Oct 24, 2016
- Rose Ann was extremely professional, and courteous every time we spoke with her.
- Rose Ann exceeded our expectations when it came to selling our home. She did her research and gave us all the facts to make an informed decision on how to proceed with the selling of our home. Extremely professional.
- Our overall experience with Berkshire Hathaway has been extremely pleasant. Every time we walked into their office we were always greeted pleasantly and our agent was always there ready to help and answer questions. We were always kept up to date as to the progress of the selling of our home and never had a worry that things were not going as planned. I would highly recommend Berkshire Hathaway, Rose Ann Eckrote and her team of professionals. -Dave W.
Oct 9, 2016
Terry is great to deal with! Very organized and I believe somewhat OCD like myself. His most important trait is he listens to what his clients/ customers want and help them find it! Just an all around great person to deal with and couldn't be happier with his service in helping with the purchase of our home!
-Ryan N.
Oct 17, 2016
I really like working with Terry. He has always been great to my grandparents and myself. We really trust him but I think that is because we have known Terry for so long. Terry is really reliable and always looking out for my best interest. We cannot say enough great things about him. -Meleah H.
Sept. 16, 2016
Terry was always very prepared when we talked with him, from the first interview we did to pick an agent and through the last steps of closing. Terry was responsive to us and our questions/needs. When there needed to be a water sample gathered to when we needed the gauge photographed on our propane tank, Terry was eager to even fight off wasps to get it done. We heard from Terry every week, even if there was no activity on the listing that week. Terry did a great job of keeping in contact with agents as they showed our place and giving us feedback. Terry was open to any suggestions we offered for additional marketing ideas and willingly implemented them. Terry demonstrated integrity in every interaction. And, last but not least, he has a great sense of humor! -Janet H.
Aug. 31, 2016
Terry listens to what you are looking for and helps match that to the perfect house.
Terry is knowledgeable about the home buying/selling process, helps you through all the steps, and makes buying/selling a home an enjoyable experience.
Terry is honest, fun, and very responsive! -Kathy H.
Aug. 25, 2016
We recently had the pleasure to work with Terry Winkle
We could not be happier with the final outcome thanks to
Terry and the Team. Would of course ask them to handle
Any future real estate be it buying or selling.
We were blessed to find them as they are simply best in Twin.
-David and Inez G.
Aug. 8, 2016
Rose Ann went above and beyond to help the sale of our house go through. I have a hard time believing that another agent would have been as helpful as Rose Ann. She lined up all the services that we needed to complete the sale of our home. She did a great job. We would recommend her highly.
-Del E.
July 15, 2016
Terry has a warm, pleasant personality with a good sense of humor. We liked him immediately.
He is square-shooting, honest and honorable. We knew he'd do his best for us.
He kept us informed and contacted us immediately when he had something pertinent to say. -Richard A.
May 16, 2016
The most important thing for us was that Rose Ann really listened to what we were looking for and she found it. She understands how important is the process and how stressful it could be. She makes everything easier. She is super knowledgeable about this business so it is very easy to trust her. She goes above and beyond her job to help people to find the house of their dreams. She is kind and she has the skill of making you feel confident that you are going to find what you are looking for. She takes cares of everything and explains things to you in a way that is not overwhelming. We love her and we recommend her 100%.
-Margarita H.


text:
Strategy meeting EEMCS
Wednesday, 27 August
Discussions on the implementation of Vision 2020 were held on 27 August for the Faculty of
EEMCS. The discussion was focused on three subjects:
- The contribution of the Faculty to achieve synergy between disciplines
- Digitalisation of Education and
- The influx of Master students
After a short introduction of the Dean, Jaco van de Pol presented his ideas about the challenges for the Faculty to create societal impact with the converging technologies of our University. During the meeting it was evident that collaboration of disciplines of the University was necessary; "When you start to combine things, great things can happen," thus Van der Pol.
Therefore additional funding is vital. The criteria for regular funding from Brussels for instance, subscribe that research projects need to be realized within an international cooperation. It is not sufficient to combine the disciplines of the University of Twente, we also need to collaborate with foreign companies. It is useful to realize a platform where staff easily can meet other disciplines which simplifies the use of each other's network and sharing each other's technologies. It would also be better to coordinate research proposals and focus on specific topics. The Design Lab could facilitate these thoughts.
Digitalisation of Education was presented by Djoerd Hiemstra. He encouraged the audience to think about new (digital) methods of education. We should be aware of the fact that complete academic courses are available on line. It is important to anticipate these digital developments and make good use of them. We should evaluate their added value and see them as an addition to local meetings and personal contact between teachers and students. Face-to-face dialogue will always play an important role in education.
In that respect we should turn our campus to good account.
The reactions of the staff during the meeting were ambivalent. We shouldn't be afraid of the upcoming changes in education. But someone also mentioned: "We shouldn't overestimate MOOCs; we will always need books." Often students prefer the personal explanations of a teacher, with a simple Black chalkboard, over for instance the online lectures.
Hiemstra emphasizes that technology in education should support the regular educational methods. It is a creative way of bringing the message. Not all students are the same, we have to offer different ways of learning our programmes, accommodating different learning styles. And last but not least, in the process of education we also need to think about efficiency.
Jan Willem Polderman introduced the subject to the audience. In the current situation EEMCS offers eight Master courses. Most of the students come from corresponding Bachelor programmes. From Universities of Applied Sciences and Universities of foreign countries we welcome about 40 students a year. We would like to have an increasing influx from other (Dutch) universities
Polderman gives an outline of some factors that affect the influx. One of the bottlenecks is a lack of scholarships and the fact that the University of Twente hasn't got a top of mind position for prospective students.
Polderman points out that the UT has always had great ambitions. Therefore Polderman pleads for learning from the successes of the past. For instance the international MSc in Applied Mathematics had 30-40 students each year, has been very successful for several years. The Master track in Financial Engineering had 5-10 new students per year. It was based on the needs of the students, and it was based on uniqueness and good reputation, that is why it was successful.
The main issue that was addressed in the discussion was the importance of scholarships in order to attract international talent. Several professors of EEMCS made an appeal to the Executive Board to meet with CEO's of big companies like Philips and achieve that those companies are willing to offer scholarships. Professors are not easily in the position of communicating at the level of CEO's, they often liaise with other scientists in companies.
Two more issues were raised. The UT should work on international visibility. In connection with the need for a strong international profile, the suggestion came up to make more use of the personal academic network of the staff to the benefit of our University. At the end of the discussion the ineffiency of the enrollment process was highlighted.


text:
American Dream Miami Mega Mall Unveils Floor Planby Sun-Sentinel.com
Miami, FL – Here's a look at the floor plan for American Dream Miami, the mega-mall in development at the intersection of Interstate 75 and the Florida Turnpike in northwest Miami-Dade County.
Shoppers had best wear shoes with thick tread because this thing is going to be huge.
The 6.2-million-square-foot mall, under development by the Triple Five Group, would be the largest in North America with 3.5 million square feet of retail stores, 2,000 hotel rooms, a 370,000-square-foot theme park, 370,000-square-foot water park, a 200,000-square-foot indoor ski slope, movie theaters, a sports center, outdoor fishing center, miniature golf course, live entertainment venue, plus attractions the developer is calling Submarine Lake, Art Deco Village and Tivoli Garden.


text:
Credit Advice
Have a question? Have advice to share? The combined knowledge and experience of everyone in the Credit Karma community can help you. Enter your question or help others below to get started!
QuestionPosted in Auto Loans
Question By
0 People Helped
But is it normal that the same finance company running 1 more inquiriy after a week when they already financed the car during the 1st credit check?
All Responses
1886 People Helped
No, it's abnormal to have another inquiry a week after it was financed. You would need to call that particular lender and asks why, they might have a reason to run your credit again week apart.
3211 People Helped
2 things,
1) how many different auto lots did your friend go to and look at buying a car? ( that could be the finance company running it twice a 2 differ places )
2) ARE YOU NUTS, Co-Sign for a Friend?
--- Hope you are willing to make all the payments once they stop!
Folks NEVER CO-SIGN for ANYONE, Not your Kids, Not your Friends, Not your Bother, Sister or PARENTS!
NEVER Every CO-SIGN a Loan for anyone!
Reply to this Question
Write your response:
The Credit Advice pages of the Site may contain messages submitted by users over whom Credit Karma has no control. Credit Karma cannot guarantee the accuracy, integrity or quality of any such messages. Some users may post messages that are misleading, untrue or offensive. You must bear all risk associated with your use of the Credit Advice pages and should not rely on messages in making (or refraining from making) any specific financial or other decisions.