Notice2022-01463
Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Order Approving Proposed Rule Change Relating to the ICC Clearing Rules and ICC Exercise Procedures
Primary source
Metadata and text below are from the Federal Register, a public-domain U.S. government work. Always verify the official published version before relying on it for any legal matter.
Published
January 26, 2022
Issuing agencies
Securities and Exchange Commission
Full Text
<html>
<head>
<title>Federal Register, Volume 87 Issue 17 (Wednesday, January 26, 2022)</title>
</head>
<body><pre>
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 17 (Wednesday, January 26, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4069-4072]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [<a href="http://www.gpo.gov">www.gpo.gov</a>]
[FR Doc No: 2022-01463]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
[Release No. 34-94014; File No. SR-ICC-2021-023]
Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Order
Approving Proposed Rule Change Relating to the ICC Clearing Rules and
ICC Exercise Procedures
January 20, 2021.
I. Introduction
On November 19, 2021, ICE Clear Credit LLC (``ICC'') filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to
Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
``Act''),\1\ and Rule 19b-4,\2\ a proposed rule change to revise Rule
26R-319 of the ICC Clearing Rules (``Rules'') and the ICC Exercise
Procedures (``Exercise Procedures'') \3\ in connection with the
clearing of credit default index options (``Index Swaptions''). The
proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal Register
on December 7, 2021.\4\ The Commission did not receive comments
regarding the proposed rule change. For the reasons discussed below,
the Commission is approving the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
\2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
\3\ Capitalized terms used but not defined herein have the
meanings specified in the Rules and Exercise Procedures.
\4\ Self-Regulatory Organizations; ICE Clear Credit LLC; Notice
of Filing of Proposed Rule Change Relating to the ICC Clearing Rules
and ICC Exercise Procedures; Exchange Act Release No. 34-93690 (Dec.
1, 2021); 86 FR 69308 (Dec. 7, 2021) (SR-ICC-2021-023) (``Notice'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Description of the Proposed Rule Change
A. Background
Pursuant to an Index Swaption, one party (the ``Swaption Buyer'')
has the right (but not the obligation) to cause the other party (the
``Swaption Seller'') to enter into an index credit default swap
transaction at a pre-determined strike price on a specified expiration
date on specified terms. In the case of Index Swaptions cleared by ICC,
the underlying index credit default swap is limited to certain CDX and
iTraxx index credit default swaps that are accepted for clearing by
ICC, and which would be automatically cleared by ICC upon exercise of
the Index Swaption by the Swaption Buyer in accordance with its terms.
B. Revisions to Rule 26R-319
ICC Rule 26R-319 describes what happens upon the exercise of an
Index Swaption. ICC Rule 26R-319 consists of three parts: 26R-319(a),
26R-319(b), and 26R-319(c). 26R-319(a) applies when a Swaption Buyer
effectively exercises an Index Swaption and the underlying index is not
subject to a restructuring due to a credit event, while (b) and (c)
apply when an Index Swaption is effectively exercised and the
underlying index is subject to a restructuring due to a credit event.
Under 26R-319(a), upon the effective exercise of an Index Swaption,
a contract in the form of the underlying index comes into effect
between the Swaption Buyer and ICC and an exactly
[[Page 4070]]
offsetting contract comes into effect between ICC and the Swaption
Seller. The proposed rule change would not amend 26R-319(a).
26R-319(b) describes what happens when an Index Swaption is
effectively exercised and one or more Event Determination Dates have
occurred with respect to the underlying index on or prior to the
Expiration Date. In that case, in addition to the new contracts that
come into effect under 26R-319(a), certain additional settlements may
be required, as further described in 26R-319(b).
The proposed rule change would make two amendments to 26R-319(b).
The proposed rule change would add a parenthetical to clarify that 26R-
319(b) does not apply to an Event Determination Date in respect of an
M(M)R Restructuring Credit Event because 26R-319(c) would apply in that
case, as described below. The proposed rule change would further modify
subpart (i) of 26R-319(b) by adding a note that the settlement
contemplated by that subsection would be subject to any modification
with respect to fixed rate payments or accrual rebates as specified by
ICC by Circular.
26R-319(c) describes what happens when an Index Swaption is
effectively exercised and one or more M(M)R Restructuring Credit Events
have occurred with respect to the underlying index on or prior to the
Expiration Date. 26R-319(c) is only applicable to iTraxx Index
Swaptions. Under 26R-319(c) as currently written, upon settlement the
Swaption Buyer would receive a re-versioned underlying index plus a
single name CDS contract.
The proposed rule change would amend 26R-319(c) so that, in certain
circumstances, the Swaption Buyer would receive a re-versioned
underlying index plus a single name CDS contract and a cash payment.
Settlement under 26R-319(c) as amended therefore could result in the
re-versioned underlying index and a blend of single name position and
cash. This settlement would be similar to what occurs when a buyer and
seller settle an index swaption bilaterally. Thus, the proposed
amendments would make settlement of a cleared Index Swaption at ICC
similar to the settlement that occurs in the bilateral market, outside
of the clearinghouse.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Notice, 86 FR at 69309.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
26R-319(c) as currently written has an introductory sentence and
four subparts. The proposed rule change first would revise the
introductory sentence of 26R-319(c) to incorporate text currently found
in subparts (ii) and (iii) of 26R-319(c). Specifically, the proposed
rule change would incorporate from subpart (ii) language referring to
the effective exercise of the Index Swaption and rights and obligations
under 26-319(b). The proposed rule change also would incorporate from
subpart (iii) language regarding the Relevant Index Swaption Untranched
Terms Supplement.
Subpart (i) of 26R-319(c) as currently written is intentionally
omitted. The proposed rule change would not revise subpart (i).
Under subpart (ii) as currently written, if an Index Swaption is
effectively exercised, then in addition to the rights and obligations
under 26R-319(b), a Contract constituting an Underlying New Trade for
purposes of the Relevant Index Swaption Untranched Terms Supplement
comes into effect between the exercising Swaption Buyer and ICC and an
exactly offsetting Contract constituting an Underlying New Trade comes
into effect between ICC and the assigned Swaption Seller. As mentioned
above, the proposed rule change would move to the introductory clause
of 26R-319(c) language currently found in subpart (ii), and therefore,
the proposed rule change would delete this language from subpart (ii).
The proposed rule change also would add a statement to subpart (ii)
that it would be subject to a new subpart (v), as applicable (discussed
below).
Subpart (iii) as currently written applies to two situations.
First, it applies when the Expiration Date occurs prior to the
commencement of the CEN Triggering Period (as defined in the
Restructuring Procedures) for Open Positions in single-name Contracts
referencing the relevant Reference Entity. Second, it applies when the
Expiration Date occurs on or following the commencement of the CEN
Triggering Period for Open Positions in single-name Contracts
referencing the relevant Reference Entity. The proposed rule change
would split current subpart (iii) into a revised subpart (iii) and a
new subpart (iv).
Like the current subpart (iii), revised subpart (iii) would apply
when the Expiration Date occurs prior to the commencement of the CEN
Triggering Period (as defined in the Restructuring Procedures) for Open
Positions in single-name Contracts referencing the relevant Reference
Entity. Under subpart (iii) as revised, the Underlying New Trade
described in subpart (ii) would be subject to the provisions of the CDS
Restructuring Rules (and may become a Triggered Restructuring CDS
Transaction thereunder) in the same manner as other Open Positions in
single-name Contracts referencing the relevant Reference Entity. This
would be the same as currently found in subpart (iii). Moreover, the
proposed rule change would delete from subpart (iii) language regarding
the Relevant Index Swaption Untranched Terms Supplement, which would be
moved to the introductory sentence of 26R-319(c), as described above.
The proposed rule change also would add a reference to the Existing
Restructuring (a termed defined in the introductory sentence of 26R-
319(c)) and a reference to subpart (ii) of 26R-319(c).
New subpart (iv) generally would apply to the second situation
described in current subpart (iii)--when the Expiration Date occurs on
or following the commencement of the CEN Triggering Period. The
proposed rule change would specify further that subpart (iv) only
applies when the Expiration Date occurs on or following the
commencement of the CEN Triggering Period and prior to the Auction
Settlement Date. Under new subpart (iv), with respect to the Underlying
New Trade described in subpart (ii), neither party would be permitted
to deliver an MP Notice in respect of the Existing Restructuring for
such Underlying New Trade, such Underlying New Trade could not become a
Triggered Restructuring CDS Transaction with respect to the Existing
Restructuring, and no Event Determination Date or settlement would
occur in respect of the Existing Restructuring for purposes of the
Underlying New Trade. This language generally would be the same as
currently found in subpart (iii).
New subpart (v) would apply in the situation not covered by subpart
(iii) or subpart (iv)--if the Expiration Date occurs on or following
the Auction Settlement Date. In that situation, ICC would: (a)
determine the extent to which positions in relevant single-name CDS
contracts of the relevant tenor referencing the Reference Entity
subject to the Existing Restructuring are settled based on CDS auctions
for particular maturity categories and (b) determine, if applicable, a
cash settlement amount payable from one party to the other with respect
to the corresponding portion of the notional amount of the Index
Swaption applicable to such Reference Entity, with such settlement to
be based on the applicable final settlement prices under such auctions.
Moreover, with respect to the remaining portion of such notional
amount, an Underlying New Trade would come into effect, provided that
neither party would be permitted to deliver an MP Notice in respect of
the Existing Restructuring for such
[[Page 4071]]
Underlying New Trade, such Underlying New Trade could not become a
Triggered Restructuring CDS Transaction with respect to the Existing
Restructuring, and no Event Determination Date or settlement would
occur in respect of the Existing Restructuring for purposes of the
Underlying New Trade, as set forth in further detail in the ICC
Exercise Procedures or other applicable ICC Procedures. Thus, this new
subpart (v) would set out the framework for the blend of deliverables
described above and would be applicable if the expiration date occurs
on or following the Auction Settlement Date.
C. Revisions to the Exercise Procedures
The Exercise Procedures supplement the provisions of Subchapter 26R
of the Rules with respect to Index Swaptions. The proposed rule change
would amend the Exercise Procedures in connection with amended 26R-319
discussed above, as well as to incorporate a new defined term,
``Minimum Intrinsic Value''.
With respect to amended 26R-319, the proposed rule change would add
a new paragraph 3 (Restructuring Settlement) to the Exercise
Procedures. New paragraph 3 would apply in connection with 26R-
319(c)(v), discussed above. Under new paragraph 3.1, however, ICC could
modify or supplement these provisions pursuant to an ICC Circular.
New paragraph 3.3 (Settlement with respect to Existing
Restructuring under Exercised Index Swaption) would describe how ICC
would determine the amount of the cash settlement and the notional
amount of the Underlying New Trade contemplated under new 26R-
319(c)(v). ICC would determine these amounts using the Triggered
Portion and Untriggered Portion of the aggregate notional amount of
Relevant CDS Transaction. New paragraph 3.2 (Determination of Settled
Portions) would describe how ICC would determine such Triggered Portion
and Untriggered Portion.
With respect to the new defined term Minimum Intrinsic Value, the
proposed rule change would define it as a minimum intrinsic value below
which an Index Swaption position would not be identified as ``in the
money'' for paragraph 2.2(e)(ii) or 2.8. ICC could establish a Minimum
Intrinsic Value and/or permit an exercising party to specify a Minimum
Intrinsic Value for its Index Swaptions for a relevant pre-exercise
notification period or exercise period.
The proposed rule change would incorporate this new term into the
existing fallback provisions described in paragraphs 2.2(e)(ii) and 2.8
of the Exercise Procedures. Specifically, ICC would take into account
any applicable Minimum Intrinsic Value as part of its procedures for
submitting preliminary exercise notices on behalf of the Exercising
Party during the pre-exercise notification period (during which
preliminary exercise notices can be submitted, modified, and/or
withdrawn) in paragraph 2.2(e)(ii). ICC also would take into account
any applicable Minimum Intrinsic Value in determining whether an Index
Swaption is ``in the money'' for automatic exercise during an Exercise
System Failure in paragraph 2.8.
III. Discussion and Commission Findings
Section 19(b)(2)(C) of the Act directs the Commission to approve a
proposed rule change of a self-regulatory organization if it finds that
such proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the
Act and the rules and regulations thereunder applicable to such
organization.\6\ For the reasons discussed below, the Commission finds
that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F)
of the Act \7\ and Rule 17Ad-22(e)(1).\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2)(C).
\7\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
\8\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A. Consistency with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act
Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act requires, among other things, that
the rules of ICC be designed to promote the prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of securities transactions and, to the extent
applicable, derivative agreements, contracts, and transactions.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As discussed above, the proposed rule change would revise Rule 26R-
319 and the Exercise Procedures to allow for a settlement consisting of
the re-versioned underlying index and a blend of single name position
and cash, similar to settlement in the bilateral market outside of the
clearinghouse. The Commission believes that increasing consistency
between cleared and non-cleared transactions should in general
encourage market participants to clear transactions in Index Swaptions.
The Commission therefore believes these changes would promote the
prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of such transactions.
Similarly, the Commission believes that amending the Exercise
Procedures to incorporate the new defined term Minimum Intrinsic Value
should encourage market participants to clear transactions in Index
Swaptions. As discussed above, Minimum Intrinsic Value would be a value
below which an Index Swaption position would not be identified as ``in
the money,'' and therefore would not be exercised by ICC under
paragraphs 2.2(e)(ii) and 2.8 of the Exercise Procedures. The
Commission therefore believes that incorporating this new defined term
could help establish a threshold below which ICC would not exercise
Index Swaptions, thereby allowing Clearing Participants to better
understand and anticipate when ICC would exercise their Index Swaption
positions. The Commission believes that this change should in general
encourage market participants to clear transactions in Index Swaptions,
thereby promoting the prompt and accurate clearance and settlement of
such transactions.
Moreover, the Commission believes that both sets of changes would
establish clear and predictable procedures for settlement and exercise
of Index Swaptions by ICC, thereby promoting ICC's prompt and accurate
clearance and settlement of such transactions. Specifically, the
Commission believes the amendments to Rule 26R-319 and the Exercise
Procedures would establish clear and effective procedures for ICC to
use in effecting settlement with a re-versioned underlying index and a
blend of single name position and cash. Similarly, the Commission
believes that incorporating a Minimum Intrinsic Value below which ICC
would not exercise Index Swaptions positions, in the circumstances
contemplated by paragraphs 2.2(e)(ii) and 2.8 of the Exercise
Procedures, would make ICC's exercise of Index Swaptions in such
situations more predictable and reliable.
Therefore, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the Act.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
B. Consistency With Rule 17Ad-22(e)(1) Under the Act
Rule 17Ad-22(e)(1) requires that ICC establish, implement,
maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably
designed to provide for a well-founded, clear, transparent, and
enforceable legal basis for each aspect of its activities in all
relevant jurisdictions.\11\ As discussed above, the Commission believes
that the amendments to Rule 26R-319 and the Exercise Procedures would
establish
[[Page 4072]]
clear and effective procedures for ICC to use in effecting settlement
with a re-versioned underlying index and a blend of single name
position and cash, and therefore would provide a clear and transparent
basis for ICC's settlement of Index Swaptions. Moreover, the Commission
believes that incorporating Minimum Intrinsic Value into paragraphs
2.2(e)(ii) and 2.8 of the Exercise Procedures would make ICC's exercise
of Index Swaptions in such circumstances more predictable and reliable,
and therefore well-founded and clear.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, the Commission finds that the proposed rule change is
consistent with Rule 17Ad-22(e)(1).\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
IV. Conclusion
On the basis of the foregoing, the Commission finds that the
proposed rule change is consistent with the requirements of the Act,
and in particular, with the requirements of Section 17A(b)(3)(F) of the
Act \13\ and Rule 17Ad-22(e)(1).\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 15 U.S.C. 78q-1(b)(3)(F).
\14\ 17 CFR 240.17Ad-22(e)(1).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is therefore ordered pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act
\15\ that the proposed rule change (SR-ICC-2021-023), be, and hereby
is, approved.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
\16\ In approving the proposed rule change, the Commission
considered the proposal's impact on efficiency, competition, and
capital formation. 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2022-01463 Filed 1-25-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
</pre></body>
</html>Indexed from Federal Register on January 26, 2022.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.