MFA Comment Letters

Please contact Scott McDonald with any questions or technical difficulties. You can email your request to smcdonald@managedfunds.org or call 202-730-2600. MFA is continuously updating the database, so check back often when searching for comment letters.

Advanced Search Options

Comment Letter Responding to FSB’s Background Note, ‘Shadow Banking: Scoping the Issues’05.16.11


MFA submitted a comment letter in response to the FSBs Background Note on Shadow Banking. In our letter, we discussed […]

Click to expand relevant topics

Topics: Financial Stability Board Shadow Banking: Scoping the Issues, shadow banking system, banks, broker dealers, Background Note, hedge fund industry, concentration of assets, low leverage, borrowing arrangements, derivatives contracts, stable capital, regulation, credit intermediation chain, Distribution/Wholesale Funding, non-bank institutional investors, long-only mutual funds, insurance companies, Pension Funds, private equity funds, large corporate investors, systemic risk concerns, maturity transformation, liquidity transformation, individual adviser, hedge fund adviser, asset concentration, asset management structures, interconnectedness of hedge funds, systemic impact of hedge funds, The UK Financial Services Authority, FSA, legal separation of different funds, bank holding companies, nonbank financial institutions, secured borrowings, manage liquidity risk, investors, bank/broker counterparts, secured basis, short term liability, repo liabilities, ABCP conduits, mutual funds, collateral, margining process, haircuts, initial margin, mark-to market margining, repo sellers, repo collateral, highly leveraged financial institutions, hedge fund borrowings, Long Term Capital Management, LTCM, U.S. President's Working Group on Financial Markets, counterparty risk management, Counterparty Risk Management Policy Group, hedge fund leverage, regulatory arbitrage, regulatory arbitrage concerns, off-balance sheet vehicles, direct regulation of entities, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, macro-prudential approach,

Comment Letter on Joint Release Regarding Reporting by Investment Advisors to Private Funds and Certain Commodity Pool Operators and Commodity Trading Advisors on Form PF04.08.11


MFA filed a comment letter with the SEC and CFTC in response to their joint proposal to require private fund […]

Click to expand relevant topics

Topics: private funds commodity pool operators, commodity trading advisors, Form PF, systemic risk, Financial Stability Oversight Council, market participants, managed futures, absolute return strategies, SEC, CFTC, Dodd-Frank Act, Council and Office of Financial Research, OFR, global regulators, overcounting, undercounting, threshold for enhanced performance, assets under management, reporting period, confidentiality protections, inadvertent disclosure, non-bank financial companies, lending institutions, interconnectedness, liquidity risk, maturity mismatch, regulatory scrutiny, systemically significant, Federal Reserve System, the Fed, Form CPO, Form PQR, Form CTA-PR, targeted requests, tiered reporting system, threshold, trading and investment strategies, borrowing arrangements, collateral practices, operational capabilities, illiquid assets, investment advisers, bespoke contracts, private equity, privately issued convertible bonds, equity derivatives, distressed debt, unaffiliated third party sources, generally accepted accounting principles, GAAP, Level 2 inputs, Level 3 inputs, Financial Accounting Standards Board, audited financial statements, UK Financial Services Authority, FSA, Form 13F, public companies, Form 10-K, Form 10-Q, portfolio management, CUSIP number, semi-annual reporting, counterparty exposures, market noise, short-term market fluctuations, margin requirements, hedge fund defaults, large private fund manager, qualifying fund, hedge fund assets under management, Form ADV, proposed reporting thresholds, interpretive guidance, private fund managers, recordkeeping requirements, section 404, confidentiality of information, proprietary information, Investment Adviser Registration Depository, Schedule 13G, individual certification, valuation methodology, proprietary methodology, alternative methodology, de minimis, master-feeder, parallel funds, equity prices, interest rates, currency rates, Form PF question 36, form PF questions 28 and 35, funds of funds, direct investments, aggregate gross asset value, collateral, operational efficiency, ten-year option, five-year option, master agreement, regulatory assets under management, net assets under management, leverage, parallel managed accounts, net asset value, gross asset value, creditor, net borrowings, aggregate borrowings, beneficial owners, record owners, fixed advisory fees, investment expenses, performance fees, inception class, statistical arbitrage-equity, other quantitative strategies, strategy exposure, risk capital allocation, NAV, futures commission merchants, FCMs, direct clearing members, DCMs, prime brokers, clause (iii), loan commitments, offsetting exposure, tri-party collateral accounts, market value, asset-backed securities, debt securities, swap contracts, futures contracts, foreign currency contracts, notional value of derivatives, notional amount, long positions, short positions, LMV, SMV, maturity brackets, short-term interest rate, DV01, CR01, duration, non-rated issues, short term high quality corporate debt, foreign exchange derivatives, turnover rate, GMV, Bloomberg, risk methodology, repos, sensitivity analyses, liquidity management, balance sheet value, delta adjusted, variation margin, equity exposure, rehypothecated initial margin, CCPs, central clearing counterparties, Value at Risk, VaR, CDS, CDX, default rates, corporate bonds, short borrowing, synthetic borrowing, uncommitted lines of credit, side pocket arrangement,

Supplementary Letter to the SEC in Response to its Proposed Antifraud Rule with Respect to Security-Based Swaps03.29.11


MFA submitted a letter to supplement our December 23, 2010 letter to the SEC in response to its proposed antifraud […]

Click to expand relevant topics

Topics: Securities and Exchange Commission SEC, Fraud, Manipulation, Deception, security-based swaps, anti-fraud rule, security based swaps market, cost-benefit analysis, honest markets, legitimate market activity, US OTC derivatives market, derivatives market, swaps market, legitimate market participation, purchase, sale, definitions, statutory authorization, security based swap anti-fraud rule, Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, International Swaps and Derivatives Association Inc, The Loan Syndications and Trading Association, maturity date, context, bilateral contracts, novations, unwinds, assignments, execution, termination, assignment, exchange, transfer of rights/obligations, conveyance of rights/obligations, extinguishment of rights/obligations, total return swaps, credit default swaps, transferor, credit events, corporate actions, underlying shares, disruption events, termination events, collateral, systemic risk, interim payments, premium payments, spread payments, material non-public information, ISDA master agreement, clearing agreement, counterparty defaults, bankruptcy proceedings, Bankruptcy Code, automatic stay provisions, price discovery process, fair dealing, competition, capital formation, Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, single name credit default swaps, non-index multi-name credit default swaps, equity linked forwards, equity-linked swaps, unallocated swaps, Bank of International Settlements, BIS, price discovery, primary participant, secondary participant, credit exposure, equity exposure, institutional leveraged loans, investment grade bonds, Financial Stability Board, primary debt issuance, investment grade loans, leveraged loans, LBO-related loans, corporate loans, high yield bonds, Loan market Review, Reuters, SEC v. Rotech, FCIC, CDS market, swap market, financial crisis, price efficiency, investor confidence, material dislocation,

Comment Letter in Response to the FDICs Interim Final Rule Implementing Certain Provisions of the Orderly Liquidation Authority (OLA),03.28.11


MFA filed a comment letter in response to the FDICs interim final rule implementing certain provisions of the orderly liquidation […]

Click to expand relevant topics

Topics: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation FDIC, Liquidation Authority provisions, orderly liquid authority, OLA, creditor losses, shareholder losses, liquidation process, systemically significant firm, non-statutory considerations, Bankruptcy Code, Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, financial market meltdown, covered financial institution, insolvency laws, insolvency proceeding, investor, systemic risk, transparency, estate, creditor participation, creditor involvement, market expertise, Disclosure, claim disallowance, judicial review, distress, volatility, moral hazard, market discipline, receivership, short-term creditors, debt instrument, allocation of capital, short-term financing, longer-term financing, bond holders, short-term lenders, providers of lines of credit, preferred creditors, equality of distribution, critical vendors, doctrine of necessity, Union Bank v. Wolas, chapter 7 liquidation, favored creditors, unsecured creditors, Board of Directors of FDIC, ratable payments, liquidation value, valuation of collateral, underlying collateral, unsecured claim, fair market value, US government securities, valuation rules, true market valuation, unsecured deficiency claim, quotes, market data, third-party market participants, valuation date, publicly traded securities, secured creditor, receivership estate, market fluctuations, swaps, repurchase agreements, securities contracts, bridge financial company, default, contingent claims, unduly delay, liquidation framework,

Letter to Mary Schapiro; Attachments: (Industry Letter on Buy Side Access to Clearing) and (Recommended Timeline for Adoption and Implementation of Final Rules Pursuant to Title VII of The Dodd-Frank Act)03.24.11


MFA submitted a letter to Chairmen Schapiro and Gensler, and each of the SEC and CFTC Commissioners, providing our recommendations […]

Click to expand relevant topics

Topics: Securities and Exchange Commission OTC derivatives market, reform, systemic risk, efficiency, global financial system, central clearing, liquid contracts, clearable contracts, trade repositories, cleared swaps, bilateral swaps, price transparency, liquid swap transactions, broad industry clearing, trade repository data, electronic data, trade transparency, buy-side participants, buy-side access, New York Fed, ISDA Governance Committee, IIGC, standardizing contracts, trade compression, OTC derivatives reform, milestones, phase-in period, sell-side firms, clearinghouses, Regulators, current clearable swaps, future clearable swaps, broad-based index credit default swaps, CDS, interest rate markets, single-name CDS, asset managers, end-users, CCPs, CMs, customer clearing services, open interest caps, waterfalls, block trading, risk compression, customer funds, pre-default portability, give-up agreements, US bankruptcy, non-US bankruptcy, cleared OTC derivatives, 14d order, 17f6 order, SEC exemptions, FINRA exemptions, margin methodology, CME rules, CME, ClearPort, migration, TBF, Bloomberg, MarkitWire, ICELink, end to end production testing, front-office processing, middle-office processing, back-office processing, back loading facility, end-to-end systems flow, fallback processing, post-default portability, risk waterfall process, net client omnibus margin account, price challenge protocol, financial disclosure requirements, clearing, commission fee, trading annex, give up process, transparency, default waterfall, futures, CDS books, margin segregation, Basel I capital requirements, FCMs, commodity contracts, Bankruptcy Code, roll-out schedule, margin regime, vendor, streamlined netting process, trade rejection rights, segregation framework, alternative margin segregation schemes, title transfer regime, English law CSAs, US banking regulators, US bank CM, non-US bankruptcy laws, non-US CM's default, position limits, real-time reporting, big bang approach, phase-in approach, derivatives clearing organizations, interest rate swaps, exchange trading, MSPs, hedge funds, dealer-to-dealer clearing, SEF trading, onboarding, mixed swap, swap dealer, eligible contract participant, DCO governance, DCO registration, collateral, Business Conduct Standards, capital requirements, margin requirements, MSP recordkeeping requirements, SD recordkeeping requirements, public reporting, liquidity, individual risk concentrations, block trade. swap initial margin, post-trade reporting, pre-trade reporting, interdealer reporting, Dodd-Frank clearing requirements, clearing agreement, execution agreement, clearing members, FIA, CFTC rules, SEC rules, mandatory clearing date, CCP implementation period, CCP risk management, end-user exemptions, Phase 1 mandatory cleared products, counterparty risk, OTC derivatives, standardized documentation, onboarding work streams, voluntary period, direct clearing participants, indirect clearing participants, voluntary targets, scale readiness, volume targets, simpler instruments, complex instruments, credit, voluntary back loading, compression, systemic counterparty risk, industry-level metrics, DTCC data, cleared settlement, uncleared settlement, tear-ups, long-only accounts, asset manager accounts, investor,

Comment Letter to the CFTC on its Proposed Rules on Risk Management Requirements for Derivatives Clearing Organizations03.21.11


MFA submitted a comment letter to the CFTC on its proposed rules on Risk Management Requirements for Derivatives Clearing Organizations. […]

Click to expand relevant topics

Topics: Commodity Futures Trading Commission CFTC, Risk Management Requirements, derivatives clearing organizations, DCO, participant eligibility, eligibility standards, fair and open access, clearing member, DCO concentration risk, diversity of market participants, competition, capital requirements, clearinghouses, swap portfolio size, transaction volume, antitrust considerations, $50 million upper limit, minimum capital requirements, net capital obligation, risk exposure, risk-based methodologies, stress and default scenarios, tiers, threshold guaranty fund contribution, direct clearing members, DCO margin methodologies, guaranty fund scaling methodologies, margin, obligations, cleared trade volumes, scaling requirements, Chicago Board of Trade, committee on payment and settlement systems and technical committee of the International Organization of Securities Commissions, CPSS-IOSCO standards, product eligibility, Designated Contract Market, DCM, Swap Execution Facility, SEF, electronic execution, connectivity, standard two-way protocols, executing counterparty, risk management, margin requirements, market liquidity, initial margin, five-day liquidation horizon, highly liquid instruments, market volatility, on-the-run 10 year interest rate swaps, initial margin requirements, excess margin, default management framework, customer initial margin, direct clearing members' initial margin, credit risk, Columbia University, leverage ratio, investment banks, hedge fund industry, non-hedge positions, product portfolio, swap portfolio, margin methodology, creditworthiness, counterparty credit assessment practices, margin calls, mark-to-market variations, volatility, bilateral trades, greater market concentration, systemic risk mitigation, Bank of America-Merrill Lynch, The Turner Review, global banking crisis, margin calculation utility, effective date, phase-in period, mandatory central clearing, differentiated margining, portfolio margining, cross product margin, swaps, futures, federal register, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, ISDA, SEC, Securities and Exchange Commission,

Comment Letter on Proposed Rulemaking for Systemically Significant Institutions02.25.11


MFA submitted a letter to the Financial Stability Oversight Council in response to the Councils proposed rule regarding the criteria […]