ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Corporate & Securities Law Blogs -> Jim Hamilton's World of Securities Regulation

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Corporate & Securities Law

: Jim Hamilton's World of Securities Regulation

By Jim Hamilton

ADVERTISEMENTS


Frank-Peterson Colloquy Clarifies Systemic Risk Status of Exchanges

During the House floor debate on HR 4173, a colloquy between Agriculture Commitee Chair Peterson and Financial Services Commitee Chair Frank clarified that the legislation does not subect derivatives exchanges and securities exchanges to systemic risk regulation. Title I of this legislation creates a systemic risk oversight and regulatory structure that enables regulators to raise capital requirements and impose heightened prudential standards on large, interconnected firms that could pose a threat to financial stability. The legislation also empowers the Federal Reserve Board to impose a host of additional requirements on institutions and activities deemed systemically important.

According to Chairman Peterson, it appears that this new structure is not intended to replace or duplicate regulation of securities or derivative exchanges that are already subject to regulation by the SEC or the CFTC. In looking at the statutory criteria for determining whether a financial company should be subjected to stricter prudential standards, he noted, it is hard to visualize the application of these criteria to derivatives and securities exchanges. Exchanges are not the players who perform the trading, but the administrators of the marketplace where such trading occurs. He asked Chairman Frank is he agreed that, while derivatives and security exchanges would certainly qualify for the definition of a financial company in Title I, the intent of the legislation is targeted more at the players in the marketplace as opposed to the administration of the marketplace. Chairman Frank replied, yes, and agreed completely, as they have operated, as they are almost certainly going to operate, as they are intended to function as marketplaces rather than themselves, it is inconceivable to me that they could be designated in that way.

Full post as published by Jim Hamilton's World of Securities Regulation on December 10, 2009 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0021 secs (from cache 11/05/26 07:14:06)