97-33994. Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing and Immediate Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change by the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc., Relating to NASD Rule 2460 Concerning Payments for Market Making  

  • [Federal Register Volume 62, Number 250 (Wednesday, December 31, 1997)]
    [Notices]
    [Pages 68331-68334]
    From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
    [FR Doc No: 97-33994]
    
    
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
    
    (Release No. 34-39478; File No. SR-NASD-97-85)
    
    
    Self-Regulatory Organizations; Notice of Filing and Immediate 
    Effectiveness of Proposed Rule Change by the National Association of 
    Securities Dealers, Inc., Relating to NASD Rule 2460 Concerning 
    Payments for Market Making
    
    December 22, 1997.
        Pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 
    (``Exchange Act''),\1\ notice is hereby given that on December 1, 1997, 
    the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (``NASD''), 
    through its wholly owned subsidiary, NASD Regulation, Inc. (``NASD 
    Regulation'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission 
    (``SEC'' or ``Commission'') the proposed rule change as described in 
    Items I, II, and III below, which Items have been prepared by NASD 
    Regulation.\2\ The Commission is publishing this notice to solicit 
    comments on the proposed rule change from interested persons.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \1\ 15 U.S.C. Sec. 78s(b)(1).
        \2\ The proposal was originally filed with the Commission on 
    November 18, 1997, but was withdrawn on December 1, 1997. See Letter 
    from Alden S. Adkins, Vice President and General Counsel, NASD 
    Regulation, to Richard C. Strasser, Assistant Director, Division of 
    Market Regulation, Commission. (File No. SR-NASD-97-84). On December 
    22, 1997, the NASD filed Amendment No. 1 with the Commission. See 
    Letter from Alden S. Adkins, Vice President and General Counsel, 
    NASD Regulation, to Richard C. Strasser, Assistant Director, 
    Division of Market Regulation, Commission. In addition, several 
    minor technical corrections authorized by NASD Regulation are 
    included in this Notice. Telephone conversation between David A. 
    Spotts, Office of the General Counsel, NASD Regulation, and Elaine 
    M. Darroch, Office of Market Supervision, Division of Market 
    Regulation, Commission (December 4, 1997).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    I. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Terms of Substance 
    of the Proposed Rule Change
    
        NASD Regulation, pursuant to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Act \3\ 
    and Rule 19b-4(e)(i) under the Act,\4\ is proposing this interpretation 
    of NASD Rule 2460 concerning payments for market making. The text of 
    the letter setting forth the interpretation is attached as Exhibit 1.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \3\ 15 U.S.C. Sec. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i).
        \4\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e)(i).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    II. Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and 
    Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
    
        In its filing with the Commission, NASD Regulation included 
    statements concerning the purpose of, and basis for, the proposed rule 
    change and discussed any comments it received on the proposed rule 
    filing. The text of these statements may be examined at the places 
    specified in Item IV below. NASD Regulation has prepared summaries, set 
    forth in Sections (A), (B), and (C) below, of the most significant 
    aspects of such statements.
    
    (A) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement of the Purpose of, and 
    Statutory Basis for, the Proposed Rule Change
    
        NASD Regulation is proposing to issue a staff interpretation of 
    NASD Rule 2460 to clarify the position of NASD Regulation with respect 
    to the application of the rule to certain member broker-dealers that 
    participate in a Freddie Mac Interdealer Cash Market Trading 
    Initiative, as described below.
    NASD Rule 2460--Payments for Market Making
        On July 3, 1997, the SEC approved NASD Rule 2460 (``Rule''),\5\ 
    which explicitly prohibits an NASD member or person associated with a 
    member from accepting any payment or other consideration from issuers 
    or the issuers' affiliates or promoters, directly or indirectly, for: 
    (1) publishing a quotation, (2) acting as a market maker, or (3) 
    submitting an application in connection therewith. The rule was 
    intended, among other things, to assure that members act in an 
    independent capacity when publishing a quotation or making a market in 
    an issuer's securities.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \5\ Securities Exchange Act Release No. 38812 (July 3, 1997), 62 
    FR 37105 (July 10, 1997) (File No. SR-NASD-97-29).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        NASD Regulation originally proposed this new rule and requested 
    comment from members and the public in Notice to Members 96-83 (``NTM 
    96-83'') in December 1996. As stated in NTM 96-83, it has been a 
    longstanding policy and position of the NASD that a broker-dealer is 
    prohibited from receiving compensation or other payments from an issuer 
    for listing, quoting, or making a market in an issuer's securities or 
    for covering the member's out-of-pocket
    
    [[Page 68332]]
    
    expenses for making a market, or for submitting an application to make 
    a market in an issuer's securities.\6\ As stated in Notice to Members 
    75-16 (February 1975), such payments may be viewed as a conflict of 
    interest since they may influence the member's decision as to whether 
    to quote or make a market in a security and, thereafter, the prices 
    that the member would quote.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \6\ See Notices to Members 75-16 (February 1975) and 92-50 
    (October 1992).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        In the past, certain broker-dealers have entered into arrangements 
    with issuers to accept payments from the issuers, their affiliates or 
    promoters to make a market in the issuer's securities, or for covering 
    out-of-pocket expenses of the member incurred in the course of market 
    making, or for submitting an application to act as a market maker. As 
    stated above, NASD Regulation believes that such conduct may be viewed 
    as a conflict of interest. NASD Regulation believes that a market maker 
    should have considerable latitude and freedom to commence or terminate 
    market making activities in an issuer's securities. The decision by a 
    firm to make a market in a given security and the question of what 
    price the firm will quote for that security generally are dependent on 
    a number of factors, including, among others, supply and demand, the 
    firm's expectations toward the market, its current inventory position, 
    and exposure to risk and competition. This decision should not be 
    influenced by payments to the member from issuers or promoters.
        NASD Rule 2460 establishes a fair practice standard regarding a 
    particular course of conduct of a member. Members should be mindful 
    that certain actions of a member in accepting a fee from an issuer for 
    making a market, or accepting an unsolicited payment from an issuer 
    where the member makes a market in the issuer's securities, in addition 
    to violating NASD Rule 2460, could also violate the anti-fraud 
    provisions of the federal securities laws and NASD Rule 2120, an NASD 
    anti-fraud provision. Further, the payment by an issuer to a market 
    maker to facilitate market making activities could also violate the 
    registration requirements of Section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933 
    (``Securities Act'').\7\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \7\ 15 U.S.C. Sec. 77e.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    Freddie Mac Interdealer Cash Market Trading Initiative
        The Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (``Freddie Mac'') is a 
    government-sponsored enterprise created pursuant to the Federal Home 
    Loan Mortgage Corporation Act, Title III of the Emergency Home Finance 
    Act of 1970, as amended, to provide a continuous flow of funds for 
    residential mortgages.\8\ To finance its mortgage purchase activities, 
    Freddie Mac sells its securities to investors directly and through 
    securities dealers. The primary financing vehicle for its mortgage 
    purchases is the sale of Mortgage Passthrough Certificates (``PCs''). 
    These securities are exempt from registration under the Securities Act 
    and the Exchange Act. In 1990, Freddie Mac redesigned its fixed-rate PC 
    structure and issues a new type of PC, called Gold PC. Since the Gold 
    PCs were entirely new and a separate product, there was limited initial 
    liquidity in the Gold PC market. As a result, dealers responded to the 
    initial lack of liquidity in the Gold PC market, with its potential 
    volatility, by maintaining primary Federal National Mortgage 
    Association (``Fannie Mae'') security positions, and by entering into 
    synthetic transactions in the swap market.\9\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \8\ Freddie Mac's statutory purpose is to, among other things, 
    promote access to mortgage credit throughout the Nation by 
    increasing the liquidity of mortgage investments and improving the 
    distribution of investment capital available for residential 
    mortgage financing (12 U.S.C. Sec. 1451(b)).
        \9\ In the years following 1990, Freddie Mac has built a supply 
    of tradable Gold PCs in an attempt to achieve a liquid market of 30-
    year Gold PCs ($152 billion as of September 1, 1997). The dealer 
    response, however, has primarily remained unchanged in maintaining 
    Fannie Mae Mortgage-Backed Security (``MBS'') positions and entering 
    into synthetic transactions in the swap market despite the 
    availability of a sizable amount of tradable Gold PCs. Broker-
    dealers primarily enter into Gold PC transactions synthetically as 
    opposed to direct transactions in the Gold PC cash market. The 
    synthetic transactions are structured generally as follows: A dealer 
    will first purchase a 30-year Fannie Mae MBS in the cash market with 
    a forward delivery (with a fixed settlement date in the future). The 
    dealer will enter into another separate transaction in the swap 
    market. The dealer will swap the obligation to buy the Fannie Mae 
    MBS for a commitment to purchase (accept delivery at settlement) 
    Gold PCs.
        To gain an understanding of the relative size of the cash market 
    for MBS, the following statistics are provided. In 1996, the average 
    cash market volume on the interdealer broker screens for MBS was 
    approximately $20 billion per month. Of this, approximately 96% was 
    conducted in Fannie Mae MBS transactions and approximately 4% was 
    conducted directly in the cash market in 30-year Gold PCs.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        As a result of the above, Freddie Mac launched a program to 
    encourage dealers to purchase Gold PCs directly, rather than through 
    the swap market mechanism (the ``Initiative''). Freddie Mac and The 
    Bond Market Association (``BMA'') submitted to the staff of NASD 
    Regulation a letter dated October 7, 1997, regarding the application of 
    NASD Rule 2460 to members participating in the Initiative.
        The Initiative includes offering dealers ``credits'' for trading 
    directly on the interdealer cash market, as opposed to the swap market. 
    Freddie Mac has developed procedures and internal controls to calculate 
    trading volume credits monthly to the dealers and assure proper 
    administration of the program. According to the October 7, 1997 letter 
    from Freddie Mac and the BMA, this Initiative is intended to be 
    temporary, and the value of the credits were selected so as to provide 
    a nominal economic incentive over the transaction costs on the swap 
    market, while not providing so much of an incentive as to alter pricing 
    of the securities in the open market.\10\ The credits awarded under 
    this Initiative may only be redeemed through transactions with Freddie 
    Mac, that is, the credits are utilized by participating broker-dealers 
    to reduce the fees associated with future transactions with Freddie 
    Mac.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \10\ To normalize the environment for dealers to accumulate 
    credits) so as not to favor larger dealers who naturally conduct a 
    higher volume business), a system for accumulation of credits was 
    established that would be based on the individual dealer's level of 
    participation. Credits are awarded on the current volume traded on 
    the cash screens. Credits are awarded at an increasing rate when 
    dealers exceed their previous monthly cash trading volume, as 
    calculated since the beginning of the Initiative, that the dealers 
    have traded on the cash screens. This feature was designed to limit 
    the duration of the Initiative by creating momentum in moving 
    dealers progressively away from the swap market.
        Under this Initiative, credits are redeemable at a value of \1/
    64\th of a point (or $156.25 per million). This value was selected 
    so as to provide nominal economic incentive over the additional \1/
    4\th to \3/8\ths of a 32nd (or $78.13 to $117.20 per million) in the 
    transaction cost of executing a synthetic Gold PC in the MBS cash 
    and swap markets.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        Due to unique characteristics of the Initiative, Freddie Mac 
    presented principally three arguments why NASD Rule 2460 was not 
    intended to cover the Initiative: (1) The Initiative promotes Freddie 
    Mac's statutory purpose; (2) the Initiative does not affect the 
    integrity of the marketplace; and (3) the Initiative is intended to be 
    temporary.
        First, Freddie Mac represents that the Initiative appears to 
    promote Freddie Mac's statutory purpose, in that, Freddie Mac was 
    created by Congress to provide a conduit for ensuring a continuous 
    supply of funds from the capital markets to the mortgage markets. 
    Freddie Mac purchases mortgages daily and finances them primarily with 
    the issuance of MBS. The prices Freddie Mac pays for its mortgage 
    purchases is based directly on the prices at which its sells its PCs. 
    Freddie Mac represents that this Initiative was developed to eliminate 
    certain unnecessary costs in the mortgage finance system by improving 
    interdealer PC liquidity through
    
    [[Page 68333]]
    
    encouraging dealers to purchase Gold PCs directly, as opposed to 
    entering into transactions in the swap market.\11\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \11\ Currently, broker-dealers enter into gold PC transactions 
    synthetically, first by conducting a transaction in a 30-year Fannie 
    Mae MBS followed by a subsequent swap transaction into or out of 
    Gold PCs. This process subjects Gold PCs to an additional bid-ask 
    spread (that of the cash market and that of the swap market) of \1/
    8\th to \1/4\th of a 32nd (or up to $78.13 per million). In 
    addition, the two-step process results in broker fees for the 
    trading on the interdealer screens of an additional \1/16\th to \1/
    8\th of a 32nd (or up to $39.07 per million). Thus, this persistent 
    trading pattern creates additional costs in the marketplace, 
    preventing investors from obtaining up to \3/8\ths of \1/32\nd (or 
    $117.20 per million) of the true economic value of the Gold PCs that 
    an efficient market would produce.
        As of May 1997, the average monthly dollar volume of cash trades 
    in Fannie Mae MBS and Gold PCs approximated $19,239 million, $1,021 
    million, respectively. As of that date, the average monthly swap 
    trades in Gold PCs and MBS approximated $4,177 million.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        Second, Freddie Mac represents that the Initiative does not appear 
    to affect the integrity of the marketplace, since the nature and 
    characteristics of the agency mortgage pass-through securities market 
    is unique and appears outside of the intended scope of NASD Rule 2460. 
    The dealers in this market trade PCs and similar securities essentially 
    as fungible products and trade these securities indiscriminately on the 
    interdealer broker screens to meet customer demand. As a result, the 
    concept of market making a particular security in this market has 
    little application. In addition, Freddie Mac represents that the 
    incentives which lead a broker-dealer to make a quotation on a PC 
    differ from traditional equity trading. Customer demand in fixed-income 
    securities is based primarily on changes in interest rates, supply and 
    demand, and the quality of the credit backing the security. In the 
    agency MBS market, the credit of the three primary agencies (Freddie 
    Mac, Fannie Mae and Government National Mortgage Association) is 
    considered comparable, the supply of the securities is considered 
    plentiful, and a well-developed forward trading market permits ready 
    hedging of positions. This market differs from the characteristics of 
    the traditional equity market. Accordingly, Freddie Mac represents 
    that, given the number of comparable securities in the yield-driven 
    debt market, it is unlikely that certain dealer credits to purchase 
    Gold PCs would mislead market participants to purchase the Gold PCs 
    versus other comparable securities.
        Further, Freddie Mac represents that this Initiative is intended to 
    be temporary. It is expected that dealer behavior will eventually 
    become self-sustaining and no further incentives will be required.
        Based on the above information and representations presented by 
    Freddie Mac, and the importance of the role of Freddie Mac in promoting 
    liquidity of these instruments under statutory mandate, it is NASD 
    Regulation's opinion that the participation of member firms in the 
    Freddie Mac Initiative as described in the letter would not be deemed 
    in violation of NASD Rule 2460.
        NASD Regulation believes that this interpretation maintains 
    investor protection and clarifies a member's obligations under NASD 
    Rule 2460 while participating in the Freddie Mac Interdealer Cash 
    market Trading Initiative. Accordingly, NASD Regulation believes that 
    the interpretation is consistent with the provisions of Section 
    15A(b)(6) in that it protects investors and the public interest, and is 
    designed to promote just and equitable principles of trade.
    
    (B) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Burden on Competition
    
        NASD Regulation does not believe that the proposed rule change will 
    result in any burden on competition that is not necessary or 
    appropriate in furtherance of the purposes of the Act, as amended.
    
    (C) Self-Regulatory Organization's Statement on Comments on the 
    Proposed Rule Change Received from Members, Participants, or Others
    
        Written comments were neither solicited nor received.
    
    III. Date of Effectiveness of the Proposed Rule Change and Timing 
    for Commission Action
    
        The foregoing rule change has become effective upon filing pursuant 
    to Section 19(b)(3)(A)(i) of the Exchange Act \12\ and Rule 19b-4(e)(1) 
    \13\ thereunder in that it constitutes a stated policy, practice or 
    interpretation with respect to the meaning, administration, or 
    enforcement of an existing rule.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \12\ 15 U.S.C. Sec. 78s(b)(3)(A)(i).
        \13\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4(e)(1).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        At any time within 60 days of the filing of the proposed rule 
    change, the Commission may summarily abrogate such rule change if it 
    appears to the Commission that such action is necessary or appropriate 
    in the public interest, for the protection of investors, or otherwise 
    in furtherance of the purposes of the Act.
    
    IV. Solicitation of Comments
    
        Interested persons are invited to submit written data, views, and 
    arguments concerning the foregoing. Persons making written submissions 
    should file six copies thereof with the Secretary, Securities and 
    Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549. 
    Copies of the submission, all subsequent amendments, all written 
    statements with respect to the proposed rule change that are filed with 
    the Commission, and all written communications relating to the proposed 
    rule change between the Commission and any person, other than those 
    that may be withheld from the public in accordance with the provisions 
    of 5 U.S.C. Sec. 552, will be available for inspection and copying in 
    the Commission's Public Reference Room. Copies of such filing will also 
    be available for inspection and copying at the principal office of the 
    NASD. All submissions should refer to File No. SR-NASD-97-85 and should 
    be submitted by January 21, 1998.
    
        For the Commission, by the Division of Market Regulation, 
    pursuant to delegated authority.\14\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \14\ 17 C.F.R. 200.30-3(a)(12).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
    Margaret H. McFarland,
    Deputy Secretary.
    
    Exhibit 1
    
    November 25, 1997.
    Ms. Gail Vance, Associate General Counsel, Freddie Mac, 8200 Jones 
    Branch Drive, McLean, VA 22102-3110.
    Mr. George P. Miller, Vice President and Deputy General Counsel, The 
    Bond Market Association, 40 Broad Street, New York, NY 10004-9400.
    
    Re: Interpretive Guidance Under NASD Rule 2460.
    
        Dear Ms. Vance and Mr. Miller: We are in receipt of your letter 
    dated October 7, 1997 in which you request interpretive guidance of 
    NASD Rule 2460 (Rule) and its potential application to Freddie Mac's 
    Interdealer Cash Market Trading initiative (``Initiative''). As 
    represented in your letter, Freddie Mac launched this Initiative on 
    June 2, 1997 in an attempt to encourage dealers to purchase Gold PCs 
    directly, as opposed to entering into swap market transactions.
    
    Background
    
        As stated in your letter, Freddie Mac is a government-sponsored 
    enterprise created pursuant to the Federal Home Loan Mortgage 
    Corporation Act, Title III of the Emergency Home Finance Act of 
    1970, as amended, to provide a continuous flow of funds for 
    residential mortgages.\1\ To finance its mortgage purchase 
    activities, Freddie Mac sells its securities to investors directly 
    and
    
    [[Page 68334]]
    
    through securities dealers. The primary financing vehicle for its 
    mortgage purchases is the sale of Mortgage Passthrough Certificates 
    (PCs). These securities are exempt from registration under the 
    Securities Act of 1933 and the Exchange Act of 1934. In 1990, 
    Freddie Mac redesigned its fixed-rate PC structure and issued a new 
    type of PC, called Gold PC. Since the Gold PCs were entirely new and 
    a separate product, there was limited initial liquidity in the Gold 
    PC market. As a result, dealers responded to the initial lack of 
    liquidity in the Gold PC market, with its potential volatility, by 
    maintaining primary Fannie Mae security positions, and by entering 
    into synthetic transactions in the swap market.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        \1\ Freddie Mac's statutory purpose is to, among other things, 
    promote access to mortgage credit throughout the Nation by 
    increasing the liquidity of mortgage investments and improving the 
    distribution of investment capital available for residential 
    mortgage financing (12 U.S.C. Section 1451(b)).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    
        As a result of the above, Freddie Mac launched this Initiative 
    to encourage dealers to purchase Gold PCs directly, rather than 
    through the swap market mechanism. The Initiative includes offering 
    dealers ``credits'' for trading directly on the interdealer cash 
    market, as opposed to the swap market. Freddie Mac has developed 
    procedures and internal controls to calculate trading volume credits 
    monthly to the dealers and assure proper administration of the 
    program. According to your letter, this Initiative is intended to be 
    temporary, and the value of the credits were selected so as to 
    provide a nominal economic incentive over the transaction costs on 
    the swap market, while not providing so much of an incentive as to 
    alter pricing of the securities in the open market. More important, 
    the credits awarded under this Initiative may only be redeemed 
    through transactions with Freddie Mac.
    
    Discussion
    
        NASD Rule 2460 prohibits NASD members from receiving payments or 
    other consideration from an issuer for publishing a quotation or 
    acting as a maker in a security, or for submitting an application to 
    make a market in the issuer's securities. The definition of 
    ``consideration'' specifically includes offering securities products 
    on terms that are more favorable than those granted or offered to 
    the public. The Rule was intended to prevent certain conflicts of 
    interest that may influence a broker-dealer's decision regarding 
    whether to quote or make a market in a security and prices that are 
    quoted and to prevent a misleading appearance of market activity 
    based on such conflicts. Paragraph (b) of the Rule also provides an 
    exemption, among others, for certain payment to members for ``bona 
    fide'' services, including, but not limited to, investment banking 
    services.
        Due to unique characteristics of the Freddie Mac Initiative, you 
    principally present three arguments why the Rule was not intended to 
    cover your Initiative: (1) the Initiative promotes Freddie Mac's 
    statutory purpose; (2) the Initiative does not affect the integrity 
    of the marketplace; and (3) the Initiative is intended to be 
    temporary.
        First, you represent that the Initiative appears to promote 
    Freddie Mac's statutory purpose, in that, Freddie Mac was created by 
    Congress to provide a conduit for ensuring a continuous supply of 
    funds from the capital markets to the mortgage markets. Freddie Mac 
    purchases mortgages daily and finances them primarily with the 
    issuance of mortgage-backed securities. The prices Freddie Mac pays 
    for its mortgage purchases is based directly on the prices at which 
    it sells its PCs. It has been represented in your letter that this 
    Initiative was developed to eliminate certain unnecessary costs in 
    the mortgage finance system by improving interdealer PC liquidity 
    through encouraging dealers to purchase Gold PCs directly, as 
    opposed to entering into transactions in the swap market.
        Second, you represent that the Initiative does not appear to 
    affect the integrity of the marketplace, since the nature and 
    characteristics of the agency mortgage pass-through securities 
    market is unique and appears outside of the intended scope of the 
    Rule. Since the dealers in this market trade these securities as 
    fungible products (i.e., PCs, Mortgage-backed securities, Ginnie 
    Maes) and trade on the interdealer broker screens daily as a matter 
    of course to meet their customer's demand, the concept of market 
    making a particular security has little application in this 
    marketplace.
        In addition, you represent that the incentives which lead a 
    broker-dealer to make a quotation on a PC differ from traditional 
    equity trading. Customer demand in fixed-income securities is based 
    primarily on changes in interest rates, supply and demand, and the 
    quality of the credit backing the security. In the agency mortgage-
    backed securities market, the credit of the three primary agencies 
    (Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae and Ginnie Mae) is considered comparable, 
    the supply of the securities is considered plentiful, and a well-
    developed forward trading market permits ready hedging of positions. 
    This market differs from the characteristics of the traditional 
    equity market. Accordingly your letter represents that, given the 
    number of comparable securities in the yield driven debt market, it 
    is unlikely that certain dealer credits to purchase Gold PCs would 
    mislead market participants to purchase the Gold PCs versus other 
    comparable securities.
        Lastly, you represent that this Initiative is intended to be 
    temporary. According to your letter, it is expected that dealer 
    behavior will eventually become self-sustaining and no further 
    incentives will be required.
        Based on the above information and the representations presented 
    by Freddie Mac, and the importance of the role of Freddie Mac in 
    promoting liquidity of these instruments under statutory mandate, it 
    is the staff's opinion that the participation of member firms in the 
    Freddie Mac Initiative as described in your letter would not be 
    deemed in violation of Rule 2460.
        I hope this letter is responsive to your inquiry. Please note 
    that the opinions expressed herein are staff opinions only and have 
    not been reviewed or endorsed by the Board of Directors of NASD 
    Regulation. This letter responds only to the issues that you have 
    raised based on the facts as described, and does not address any 
    other rule or interpretation of the Association, or all the possible 
    regulatory and legal issues involved.
    
            Sincerely,
    David A. Spotts,
    Office of General Counsel, NASD Regulation, Inc.
    [FR Doc. 97-33994 Filed 12-30-97; 8:45 am]
    BILLING CODE 8010-01-M
    
    
    

Document Information

Published:
12/31/1997
Department:
Securities and Exchange Commission
Entry Type:
Notice
Document Number:
97-33994
Pages:
68331-68334 (4 pages)
PDF File:
97-33994.pdf