Author Archives: Hedge Fund Lawyer

Definition of a Hedge Fund and Hedge Fund Background Information

Oftentimes government sources of information provide us with good, comprehensive definitions like the discussion below on hedge funds.  The Government Accountability Office released a report on Defined Benefit Plans Investing in Hedge Funds that detailed pension plan investments in hedge funds (for our account of the complete article, please see Hedge Fund Report by GAO).  Below is an except from that report which provides a good overview of the hedge fund industry and regulatory environment.  The full report can be found here.

****

Although there is no statutory or universally accepted definition of hedge funds, the term is commonly used to describe pooled investment vehicles that are privately organized and administered by professional managers and that often engage in active trading of various types of securities, commodity futures, options contracts, and other investment vehicles. In recent years, hedge funds have grown rapidly. As we reported in January 2008, according to industry estimates, from 1998 to early 2007, the number of funds grew from more than 3,000 to more than 9,000 and assets under management from more than $200 billion to more than $2 trillion globally.

Hedge funds also have received considerable media attention as a result of the high-profile collapse of several hedge funds, and consequent losses suffered by investors in these funds. Although hedge funds have the reputation of being risky investment vehicles that seek exceptional returns on investment, this was not their original purpose, and is not true of all hedge funds today. Founded in the 1940s, one of the first hedge funds invested in equities and used leverage and short selling to protect or “hedge” the portfolio from its exposure to movements in the stockmarket.* Over time, hedge funds diversified their investment portfolios and engaged in a wider variety of investment strategies. Because hedge funds are typically exempt from registration under the Investment Company Act of 1940, they are generally not subject to the same federal securities regulations as mutual funds. They may invest in a wide variety of financial instruments, including stocks and bonds, currencies, futures contracts, and other assets. Hedge funds tend to be opportunistic in seeking positive returns while avoiding loss of principal, and retaining considerable strategic flexibility. Unlike a mutual fund, which must strictly abide by the detailed investment policy and other limitations specified in its prospectus, most hedge funds specify broad objectives and authorize multiple strategies. As a result, most hedge fund trading strategies are dynamic, often changing rapidly to adjust to market conditions.

Hedge funds are typically structured and operated as limited partnerships or limited liability companies exempt from certain registration, disclosure and other requirements under the Securities Act of 1933, Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Investment Company Act of 1940, and Investment Advisers Act of 1940 that apply in connection to other investment pools, such as mutual funds. For example, to allow them to qualify for various exemptions under such laws, hedge funds usually limit the number of investors, refrain from advertising to the general public, and solicit fund participation only from large institutions and wealthy individuals. The presumption is that investors in hedge funds have the sophistication to understand the risks involved in investing in them and the resources to absorb any losses they may suffer. Although many workers may be impacted by any losses resulting from pension fund investment in hedge funds, a pension plan counts as a single investor that does not prevent a hedge fund from qualifying for the various statutory exemptions.

Individuals and institutions may also invest in hedge funds through funds of hedge funds, which are investment funds that buy shares of multiple underlying hedge funds. Fund of funds managers invest in other hedge funds rather than trade directly in the financial markets, and thus offer investors broader exposure to different hedge fund managers and strategies. Like hedge funds, funds of funds may be exempt from various aspects of federal securities and investment law and regulation.

* Leverage involves the use of borrowed money or other techniques to potentially increase an investment’s value or return without increasing the amount invested. A short sale is the sale of a security that the seller does not own or a sale that is consummated by the delivery of a security borrowed by, or for, the account of the seller. Short selling is used to profit by a decline in the price of the security.

Other HFLB articles which relate to items in this article include:

Discussion of New Forex Registration Requirements

Forex hedge funds have escaped registration requirements so far, but that is expected to change very shortly. Yesterday the NFA released a report which provided some detail on the proposed new Forex registration requirements.  While the NFA notes that the CFTC has not yet published its proposed forex rules, the NFA is still getting prepared for the Forex registrations.  The NFA specifically stated that managers of forex account (including hedge fund managers) will need to register with the CFTC and be a member of the NFA.  From the report:

The legislation also requires firms that solicit retail forex customers, manage retail forex accounts or operate pools for retail customers to register with the CFTC and be Members of NFA. FCMs, IBs, CPOs and CTAs whose activities involve retail forex will be designated Forex FCMs, Forex IBs, Forex CPOs and Forex CTAs, while APs of those firms will be designated as Forex Associated Persons.

New Series 34 Exam

The NFA also announced that there will be a new exam which forex managers will need to pass in order to be a Forex CPO and a Forex AP.  According to the release, the NFA’s Vice President of Registration Greg Prusik said “We have developed a new proficiency examination specific to retail forex activity, called the Series 34 exam, and have recommended to the CFTC that its forex rules require any individual applying for registration as a Forex AP to take and pass both the Series 3 exam and the Series 34.”

For information on the likely Series 34 exam topics, please see Series 34 exam topics.

Other HFLB articles:

** Please note that this release is different from the NFA release of last week (see NFA Begins Regulating Forex above).  The release from last week alerted managers who are already registered with the CFTC as CPOs or CTAs that, if they also provide advice to clients regarding off-exchange forex, they will need provide such clients with a disclosure document.   Previously the registered CPOs and CTAs did not need provide clients with a disclosure document if the trading program focused only on spot forex.

Advantages of the Hedge Fund Structure over the Separately Managed Account Structure

There are many reasons why a registered investment advisor will choose to become a hedge fund manager.  Or, manage a hedge fund in addition to managing separately managed accounts.  Besides higher fees, there are other advantages of the hedge fund structure over the traditional asset management business.

Advantages of the Hedge Fund Structure

The three central advantages of the hedge fund structure over the separately managed account structure are (1) ease of management, (2) potentially lower transaction costs, and (3) tax efficiencies.

1.  Ease of management – one of the great things about running a hedge fund is that the manager only has to manage one single brokerage account.  With a separately managed account business a manager will need to make separate trades for each account or do a block trade and then allocate the trade among a number of clients.  Either way the separately managed account manager is subject to much more back office and paperwork which is not only time consuming, but costly as well.

2.  Potentially lower costs – depending on the structure, the hedge fund structure could potentially save on costs to the account holders.  Whereas the individual accounts would be subject to trading fees on each transaction, the costs are lower for the hedge fund which only manages one account.

3.  Tax efficiencies – probably one of the more attractive aspects for an advisor to a hedge fund is the ability for the manager to receive more attractive tax results.  As a general partner in the hedge fund, the manager will generally receive an “allocation” of income instead of a fee.   When the manager receives an “allocation” instead of a fee then the underlying tax attributes will remain.  That is to say if the fund allocates the manager gains and a portion of those gains are characterized as long term at the fund level, then the gains will also be long term for the manager which will result in a lower tax bill.  In a separately managed account structure the manager would not be able to get the allocation.

Other Potential Hedge Fund Structure Advantages

In addition there is the possibility that the manager which was registered as an investment adviser with the SEC or state securities commission would not need to be registered.  For example if a manager had 20 SMA clients and managed more than $30 million, it would be required to register with the SEC.   However, if all of the clients subscribed to a hedge fund managed by the manager, the manager would not need to be required to register with the SEC because of the exemption from registration provided by Section 203(b)(3) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940.

One of the other things to note is that in the hedge fund structure the manager will usually invest alongside the investors.  Sometimes the investment can represent a large percentage of the manager’s liquid net worth; this should provide some comfort to investors to know that the manager’s interests are aligned with their own.  This is not usually present in the typical separately managed account structure.

Potential Objections from Separate Account Clients

Generally the above Most of the above benefit the manager instead of the SMA client, who will lose transparency and freedom to pull assets at any time.  For a manager switching SMA clients to a hedge fund clients they may encounter these objections – in these instances the maanger may decided to accommodate the client by providing certain transparency or liquidity preferences to the (former) SMA client through a side letter arrangement.

Please contact us if you have a question or would like to start up a hedge fund.  Related HFLB articles:

Do Commodity Pool Operators also need to be registered as Commodity Trading Advisors?

A common question for hedge fund managers which are registered as commodity pool operators is whether they also need to be registered as commodity trading advisors (CTA) with the NFA.  The answer is generally no.

There is no need for a commodity-based hedge fund manager (i.e., CPO) to register as a CTA so long as the manager’s commodity trading advice is restricted solely to advising the pool it is running.  This applies to BOTH CFTC/NFA Registered AND unregistered pool operators.  However, if the CPO has clients outside of the pool which the CPO provides advice to regarding commodities, then the manager may need to be registered as a CTA.

Rule 4.14(a)(4) applies to those managers which are registered as CPOs with the NFA.  Rule 4.14(a)(5) applies to those managers which are not registered (exempt) as CPOs.  The full rules are below.

Rule 4.14(a)(4)

A person is not required to register under the Act as a commodity trading advisor if it is registered under the Act as a commodity pool operator and the person’s commodity trading advice is directed solely to, and for the sole use of, the pool or pools for which it is so registered.

Rule 4.14(a)(5)

A person is not required to register under the Act as a commodity trading advisor if it is exempt from registration as a commodity pool operator and the person’s commodity trading advice is directed solely to, and for the sole use of, the pool or pools for which it is so exempt.
Please contact us if you have any questions.  Other HFLB articles related to this topic include:

Related HFLB articles:

New Hedge Fund Podcast Posted

We have just posted a new podcast which covers many of the issues which we’ve discussed over the last week.  These issues include: NFA increases net capital requirements for Forex Dealers; DOL sues IA firm for ERISA violations; SEC Chairman Cox talks to Congress about hedge fund regulation; and, Barney Frank and Hedge fund Regulation.  Please vist http://www.hedgefundcast.com/ to listen to the new podcast.

Hedge Fund End of Year Reminders

It is that time of the year when hedge fund managers need to start making sure that everything is order in their back office for the beginning on next year.  As there are many things that can slip through the cracks as focus is usually on trading and performance, we’ve provided a list of year end reminders.  We will continue to post these reminders as they come closer.

IARD Renewals

Each year hedge fund managers which are registered as investment advisors (with either the SEC or state securities commission) will need to renew their IA application.  To do this the adviser will need to post his yearly dues to the IARD system.  Managers can gain access to this system on Monday, November 10 and are urged to have payment in by December 10 so that the payment will post by the deadline of December 12 (it usually takes a couple of days for payment to post to the account).  Please also note that the payment should be posted to the “Renewal” account and not the “Daily” account.

Update of Form ADV and Form ADV Part II

Registered investment advisors must update their Form ADV and ADV Part II on a yearly basis.  This must be completed within 90 days of the end of the advisor’s fiscal year, which is typically the end of the calendar year.  We recommend that advisors go through the form on a question by question basis.  The advisor’s attorney or compliance consultant can answer any questions which arise.  This service is typically provided by consultants or attorneys on a flat fee, or sometimes hourly, basis.

Corporate Registered Agent

Most hedge funds are established as limited partnerships or limited liability companies in the state of Delaware and use local corporate registered agent services.  Depending on the corporate agent, annual registered agent fees may be due soon.  If you have any questions, you should talk with your corporate agent or attorney.

Offshore Entities

Offshore hedge funds will consist of one or more offshore entities.  Typically these offshore entities will be formed by the local registered agent who will inform the manager when the yearly corporate and registered agent fees are due.  If you have questions you should discuss with your contact person in the offshore jurisdiction.

The Series 7 Exam

The Series 7 exam, also known as the General Securities Representative Examination, is the central exam which brokers need to pass before accepting commissions from clients.  The exam allows brokers to engage in the following trasactions through the broker-dealer firm they are registered with: solicitation, purchase, and/or sale of all securities products, including corporate securities, municipal securities, municipal fund securities, options, direct participation programs, investment company products, and variable contracts.

In order to take the exam a person must be sponsored by a FINRA registered broker-dealer; some states used to sponsor the series 7 but I am not aware of any states which currently sponsor individuals for the exam. In order for a broker-dealer firm to register a person to take the exam, the broker-dealer will need to collect information on the person to fill out the Form U4 which will be submitted to FINRA through the CRD system.  The information that will be requested includes: prior addresses, prior securities industry affiliations, prior work history, among other items.

Overview of the Series 7 Exam

Questions: 260 multiple choice questions (10 questions do not count toward total)

Cost: $250 (usually paid by the sponsoring firm)

Time: 6 hours (two 3 hour sessions – bathroom breaks allowed; manadatory minimum 30 minute break between sessions)

Topic Areas: Prospecting for and Qualifying Customers, Evaluating Customer Needs and Objectives, Providing Customers with Investment Information and Making Suitable Recommendations, Handling Customer Accounts and Account Records, Understanding and Explaining the Securities Markets’ Organization and Participants to Customers, Processing Customer Orders and Transactions, Monitoring Economic and Financial Events, Performing Customer Portfolio Analysis and Making Suitable Recommendations

Passing score: 70%

Testing centers: Pearson or Prometric

Process to register: BD submits U4 through FINRA’s CRD system

Prerequisite: none

After the Series 7 Exam

It is often said that the perfect score on the Series 7 is 70% because that is the score where you studied just enough to pass.  I would not recommend studying just enough because I have heard of people who have not passed the exam.  If you do not pass you will be able to take the exam again.

If you do pass the Series 7 you will also need to pass the Series 63 in order to become a licensed broker in most states.  In addition you will need to submit fingerprint cards to your firm’s compliance officer who will then send them into FINRA for filing.  You should discuss this step with your firm’s compliance officer.  I have also included information on the Series 7 from the SEC below, you can also find the same information on the SEC’s site here.

Series 7 Examination

Individuals who want to enter the securities industry to sell any type of securities must take the Series 7 examination—formally known as the General Securities Representative Examination. Individuals who pass the Series 7 are eligible to register with all self-regulatory organizations to trade.

The Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) administers the Series 7 examination. For more information, visit FINRA’s website where you can learn about the Series 7 exam and its qualification and registration process.

Other related HFLB articles include:

Treasury Announces Hedge Fund “Best Practices” to be Issued Soon

Deputy Treasury Secretary Anthony Ryan spoke at the Annual Meeting of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA) today.  In his speech he discussed the recent turmoil in the markets and the measures the Treasury Department has taken to help unfreeze the credit markets and stabilize the economy.  He also mentioned hedge funds and other pooled investment vehicles and noted that groups associated with the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets issued hedge fund best practices earlier this year.  He mentioned that finalized versions of these best practices will be forthcoming shortly.  An excerpt from the speech is reprinted here and the full speech is reprinted below and can be found here.

Another PWG effort, which pre-dates the current turmoil, concerns private pools of capital, including hedge funds. Recognizing that private pools of capital bring significant benefits to the financial markets, but also can present challenges for market participants and policymakers, the PWG in February 2007 issued a set of principles and guidelines to address public policy issues associated with the rapid growth of private pools of capital and to serve as a framework for evaluating market developments, including investor protection and systemic risk issues. These principles contained guidelines for all links in the pooled investment chain: pool managers, creditors, counterparties, investors, and supervisors. In September 2007, the PWG facilitated the formation of two private-sector groups to develop voluntary industry best practices: the Asset Managers’ Committee and the Investors’ Committee. In April of this year, the two groups issued draft best practices for hedge fund managers and for investors in pools, and they expect to issue finalized practices very soon.

****

October 28, 2008
HP-1240

Acting Under Secretary for Domestic Finance Anthony Ryan

Remarks at the SIFMA Annual Meeting

New York – Good morning. I am pleased to represent the Treasury Department at the Annual Meeting of the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA). I welcome this opportunity to update you on the state of the capital markets and the global economy, and on Treasury’s efforts to implement the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act, the EESA, which was recently passed by Congress and signed into law by President Bush.

Our primary focus at Treasury is to strengthen U.S. financial institutions and restore the flow of financing that is necessary to support and build our economy. This conference presents the ideal venue and is particularly timely given the convergence of financial market events, the critical contributions of private sector participants, the broader policy perspectives that need to be addressed, and the breadth of SIFMA’s reach to the financial community. Moreover, this discussion is also opportune given SIFMA’s mission to enhance the public’s trust and confidence in the markets, to deliver an efficient, enhanced member network of access and forward-looking services, and to be the premier educational resource for professionals in the industry. We at Treasury appreciate SIFMA’s efforts on disclosure, securitization, credit ratings, the restoration of investor and public confidence, and securities fails in the Treasury market. But the work is not complete. SIFMA must continue to address the current challenges as well as provide material and meaningful input to future policy issues.

Financial Markets

The stresses on U.S. and world financial markets are the most serious in recent memory. The disruptions of recent months have their roots in the housing correction. As housing prices have declined and the values of mortgage loans became more opaque, uncertainty spread to the investors and institutions that owned these assets. While some argue that this uncertainty has its roots in the subprime and the Alt-A markets, there are numerous factors to review and to understand before coming to any conclusions. Credit as a whole – not just in the housing sector – has been plentiful over the past decade and we have benefited by being able to finance the spectrum of assets and services, from complex collateralized obligations, to tender option bonds, to student loans, and to household spending with credit cards. Today, we are experiencing the repercussions of this unbridled expansion and access to credit. We needed to strike a balance between strong market discipline and regulatory oversight and we have not. Investor confidence was undermined, illiquidity then compromised our credit markets, and now the housing and financial market turmoil has spilled over into the rest of the U.S. economy.

Equity, credit, and funding markets remain under considerable strain, as banks have been forced to delever aggressively and risk appetite has abated. However, policy measures enacted by the Treasury, the Federal Reserve, the FDIC, other U.S. policymakers and our counterparts around the world have helped relieve some pressures in the funding market.

For example, Treasury implemented the temporary Money Market Mutual Fund Guarantee Program, which has been well received by funds and has helped to relieve large-scale redemption pressure among money market mutual funds–a key buyer of commercial paper. The Federal Reserve also introduced three programs: (i) the Asset-Backed Commercial Paper (ABCP) Money Market Liquidity Facility (AMLF) to provide investors the opportunity to sell ABCP through broker/dealers to the Fed; (ii) the Commercial Paper Funding Facility to enhance the availability of 90-day term funding for issuers of both secured and unsecured paper; and (iii) the Money Market Investor Funding Facility to further restore liquidity to the money market mutual fund industry by purchasing commercial paper, certificates of deposits, and bank notes with maturities of 90 days or less. The first two Fed facilities are already operational, and indications are that they too are helping to stabilize financial institutions’ access to the commercial paper market. Accordingly, commercial paper yields are adjusting, volumes across the maturity spectrum are expanding and maturities have lengthened, although we are still far from what might be called “normal” conditions.

Several other funding market sectors, including London Interbank Offer Rates (LIBOR), have also experienced improvements in response to the passage of the EESA and the announcement of the FDIC’s guarantee of short-term bank debt.

In the longer term credit markets; however, conditions remain quite challenging and U.S. companies are finding it very difficult to issue long-term debt at attractive rates.

Mortgage markets are also continuing to experience strain. While the yield on the current coupon mortgage-backed security issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac has increased, overall consumer mortgage rates have improved, and currently average around 6.04 percent on fixed rate 30-year mortgages according to Freddie Mac’s weekly survey, down from 6.35 percent before the GSEs were placed into conservatorship by their regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA).

It is important to remember that as part of the Treasury’s actions regarding Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and in consultation with FHFA, the GSEs entered into a Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement with Treasury that effectively guarantees all debt issued by the GSEs, both existing and to be issued. The U.S. Government stands behind these enterprises, their debt and the mortgage backed securities they guarantee. Their mission is critical to the housing markets in the United States and no one will deny the importance of these institutions in assisting our housing markets in this downturn.

To further address other market issues and offer a comprehensive plan for tackling challenges in the financial system, the President worked with Congress over the past 21 days to move quickly to grant the Treasury Department extraordinary authority to address these unprecedented situations facing Americans. Congress recognized that frozen credit markets pose a significant threat to our economy and to all Americans. With unprecedented speed, Congress enacted a rescue package with a broad set of tools —including authority to purchase or insure troubled assets which in turn assists Americans by permitting the extension of credit, and implementing temporary increases in the FDIC deposit guarantee. These tools are being deployed aggressively to strengthen large and small financial institutions across the country that serve businesses and families and directly impact the well being of Americans.

Treasury is moving rapidly to implement these and other programs and is continuing collaborative efforts with the Federal Reserve, the FDIC, and other financial regulators to address the many challenges we face.
Let me summarize our actions thus far and provide some additional details.
Implementation

Treasury has moved quickly since the enactment of the EESA to implement programs that will provide stability to the markets and help enable our financial institutions to support consumers and businesses across the country. We are focused on applying the authorities Congress provided in ways that are highly effective and protect the taxpayer to the maximum extent possible. As Interim Assistant Secretary for Financial Stability Neel Kashkari recently testified before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs, we have accomplished a great deal in a short time. A program this large and complex would normally take months or years to establish. We don’t have months or years and so we are moving quickly, and methodically, to facilitate the necessary results. We are also moving with great transparency, communicating with Congress and the oversight authorities at every step.

Capital Purchase Program

Earlier this month we announced a capital purchase program under which Treasury will purchase up to $250 billion of senior preferred shares from qualifying U.S. controlled banks and financial institutions. Last week Treasury and financial regulators outlined a streamlined, systematic process for all banks wishing to voluntarily participate in the capital purchase program. Since that time, we have seen a broad range of interest. We signed final agreements with the initial nine major financial institutions that hold 50 percent of all U.S. deposits over this past weekend, and directed our custodian to deliver the capital to these institutions starting today.  We also granted preliminary approval to several more regional banks over the weekend.  There will be a rolling process for selecting financial institutions for capital injections as we go forward.

This program is aimed at healthy banks, and provides attractive terms to encourage lending. The minimum subscription amount available to a participating institution is one percent of risk-weighted assets. The maximum subscription amount is the lesser of $25 billion or three percent of risk-weighted assets. Treasury intends to fund the senior preferred shares purchased under the program by the end of this year. We worked with the four banking regulatory agencies to finalize the application process. Qualified and interested publicly-held financial institutions will use a single application form to submit to their primary regulator – the Federal Reserve, the FDIC, the OCC, or the OTS. These regulators have posted this common application form on their websites.

As Secretary Paulson said last week, this capital purchase program is an investment, not expenditure. This is an investment in Americans, in our community banks, credit unions, and main street banks.

As these banks and institutions are reinforced and supported with taxpayer funds, they must meet their responsibility to lend, and support the American people and the U.S. economy. It is in a strengthened institution’s best financial interest to increase lending once it has received government funding.

Capital Purchase Program Disclosure

Treasury is committed to transparency and disclosure as we implement this program. Once a financial institution is granted preliminary approval, Treasury and the institution will work to complete the final agreement and final authorization of payments. Once the payment is authorized, within two business days Treasury will publicly disclose the name and capital purchase amount for the financial institution. We will disclose the names of financial institutions at the same time every day with postings on our EESA website.

Financing the Financial Rescue Package

Let me now focus on another topic that is just as important – the financing of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) as well as the various initiatives implemented this past year.

As you know, we make announcements regarding debt management policy at our Quarterly Refunding after consulting with our Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee as well as after significant internal consultation. This year’s financing needs will be unprecedented. We firmly believe that investors value greatly and pay a premium for Treasury’s predictable actions, the certainty of supply, and the liquidity in the market. To the very best of our ability, we intend to stay the course.

However, specific policy actions or market conditions have recently caused us to take new actions.
For example, two weeks ago I stated that Treasury will continue to increase auction sizes of our bills and coupon securities and continue to issue cash management bills. As has been the case over the past year, some of these cash management bills may be longer-dated. Treasury is also considering its options regarding the frequency and issuance of additional nominal coupons, including a possible reintroduction of the three-year note, beginning in November 2008.

I noted at the time that the announcement was being made, outside the customary Quarterly Refunding announcements, to allow Treasury to adequately respond to the near-term increase in borrowing requirements and to give market participants notice of the potential changes.

Specifically, Treasury may need to address many different policy objectives, including TARP related programs and purchases, FDIC bank resolution measures, liquidity initiatives conducted by the Federal Reserve including the Supplementary Financing Program, the Agency MBS program, student loan program, and the GSE Senior Preferred Stock Agreement. All of these initiatives are not factored into the $482 billion FY 2009 deficit projected by the Office of Management and Budget in July’s Mid-Session review. The potential for deterioration in economic conditions given the contraction in credit may also affect budget conditions this year.

In addition, Acting Assistant Secretary for Financial Markets Karthik Ramanathan recently issued a statement regarding dislocations in the Treasury market. Specifically, Treasury closely monitors conditions in the Treasury securities market as well as financing markets, and realizes that the depth and liquidity of the Treasury market benefits investors both domestically and globally. To address its borrowing needs and further enhance liquidity in the Treasury market, Treasury reopened multiple securities which relieved severe dislocations in the market causing acute, protracted shortages. In addition, Treasury stated that regulators will be monitoring situations in which aged settlement fails are not cleared and will encourage actions by market participants, including the use of netting and bilateral processes, cash settlement, negative rate repo trading, margining of aged settlement fails, and identifying pair-offs.

Once again, we are strongly urging the private sector to lead this effort. We all benefit from a deep, liquid Treasury market, and SIFMA and the Treasury Markets Practices Group have the opportunity to take a leadership role in devising and implementing private sector solutions to current challenges.
Efforts by the private sector to address challenges in the marketplace will go a long way to strengthen market discipline, improve market liquidity and enhance market confidence. It will also help build credibility with market regulators.

Addressing the Challenges and Disequilibrium in the Markets

Our financial market system rests on a balanced tension between private-sector market discipline and public-sector regulatory oversight. However, that balance has been weakened by deficiencies on both sides; market discipline failed and regulatory efforts were compromised. Rules, guidance, and oversight did not mitigate the failures of market discipline. From a public policy perspective, we must restore equilibrium to financial markets, which in this context means market stability. We must strike the optimal balance between market discipline and supervision. Aligning the interests of the private sector and the public sector is critical to the long term success of our economy. When discipline and oversight are balanced, market participants better manage risks, financial institutions operate in a safer and sounder manner, and our economy is served by more competitive, innovative, and efficient capital markets. In March, Treasury released its Blueprint for a Modernized Financial Regulatory Structure. This report outlines a series of steps to improve the U.S.’s antiquated regulatory system. Both market practices and regulatory practices must be reviewed with a critical eye towards improvement and material strengthening. We need to focus on moving forward, with all parties contributing to the collective effort.

President’s Working Group on Financial Markets

In order to address the unprecedented and extraordinary disequilibrium and challenges that our financial markets have experienced, the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets, or “PWG” as it is known, has been taking proactive steps to mitigate systemic risk, restore investor confidence, and facilitate stable economic growth. The PWG issued a policy statement on the financial market turmoil last March, which contained an analysis of underlying factors that contributed to the market turmoil.

The PWG identified weaknesses in global markets, financial institutions, and regulatory policies, and made a set of comprehensive recommendations to address those weaknesses. The analysis focused on six areas: mortgage origination, improving investors’ contributions to market discipline, reforming the ratings process and practices regarding structured credit products, strengthening risk management practices, enhancing prudential regulatory policies, and enhancing the infrastructure for the OTC derivatives market. The PWG’s recommendations cover the practices of a broad array of market participants, as well as supervisors, addressing all links in the securitization chain: mortgage brokers, mortgage originators, mortgage underwriters, securitizers, issuers, credit rating agencies, investors, and regulators.

Since March, the PWG has worked to ensure implementation of its recommendations, and issued an update just over two weeks ago on progress to date. We noted that, while no single measure can be expected to place financial markets on a sound footing, implementation of the recommendations is an important step in addressing weaknesses. Substantial progress has occurred, and more progress has been made in some areas than in others as efforts have been prioritized to address the most immediate problems. The pace of implementation must be balanced with a need to avoid exacerbating strains on markets and institutions. Still, further effort is warranted, and the PWG is continuing to carefully monitor markets and implementation and will not hesitate to make recommendations if necessary.

Another PWG effort, which pre-dates the current turmoil, concerns private pools of capital, including hedge funds. Recognizing that private pools of capital bring significant benefits to the financial markets, but also can present challenges for market participants and policymakers, the PWG in February 2007 issued a set of principles and guidelines to address public policy issues associated with the rapid growth of private pools of capital and to serve as a framework for evaluating market developments, including investor protection and systemic risk issues. These principles contained guidelines for all links in the pooled investment chain: pool managers, creditors, counterparties, investors, and supervisors. In September 2007, the PWG facilitated the formation of two private-sector groups to develop voluntary industry best practices: the Asset Managers’ Committee and the Investors’ Committee. In April of this year, the two groups issued draft best practices for hedge fund managers and for investors in pools, and they expect to issue finalized practices very soon.

Conclusion

We remain vigilant as Americans face strong headwinds in this challenging financial environment. We will focus on addressing or mitigating immediate problems while being mindful that longer term regulatory reform is critical to our continued status as the world’s preeminent capital market. Our Blueprint and the PWG’s reports clearly outlined some of the changes that need to be addressed. Maintaining the balance between regulatory measures and market discipline is critical to highly efficient markets. Most importantly, such a balance fosters market confidence. There is important work for all of us and I appreciate your efforts and dedication. Thank you.

Offshore Hedge Fund Law Firms

Generally speaking, offshore hedge funds utilize both domestic and offshore law firms when launching the hedge fund.  In a recent survey, offshore hedge fund law firms were ranked; please see press release below.

Walkers named Top Offshore Law Firm in 2008 Alpha Awards
28-Oct-2008

Underlining its reputation as the offshore law firm of choice in the hedge fund industry, Walkers is pleased to announce that it has been named as ‘Top Offshore Law Firm’ in the 2008 Alpha Awards for hedge fund service providers, with particular praise in the areas of hedge fund expertise and in the regulatory and compliance field.

Based on the votes of more than 1,000 hedge fund firms which manage more than US$1.5 trillion, Alpha Magazine compiled its rankings based on the quality of service the firms received for the 12 months to March 31 2008. Views on service quality were broken down into a number of broad attributes and respondents were also asked to rate the importance of each attribute, which was used to help calculate the overall winner.

“Receiving any award is always welcome but it is particularly gratifying when the results are based upon the views of our clients in the investment management community,” said Jonathan Tonge, managing partner of Walkers’ hedge fund practice, who is based in the Cayman Islands. “Our success can be attributed to the expertise and hard work of all the members of our hedge funds group and clients can be sure of our continued devoted attention and responsiveness at what is such a crucial time for the industry.”

In addition to offshore law, the Alpha Magazine awards also recognised excellence in service to hedge funds among accountants, fund administrators, prime brokers and onshore law firms.  Other winners included Morgan Stanley, Shartsis Friese, Rothstein Kass & Co., and Goldman, Sachs & Co.

The rankings for the 2008 Alpha awards for hedge fund service providers can be viewed at – http://www.iimagazine.com/Rankings/RankingsHeFuTSPRGlobal08.aspx?src=http://www.iimagazinerankings.com/rankingsHeFuTSPRGlobal08/analysts1.asp~no–no__catid–4

The recent establishment by Walkers of a specialist Distressed Funds Group was also noted by Alpha Magazine. Formed earlier this year to assist hedge funds affected by the credit crisis and market downturn, the Distressed Funds Group draws on expertise from Walkers corporate, insolvency and litigation departments in its Cayman, British Virgin Islands and Jersey offices. Amid current market uncertainty, clients have welcomed additional specialist services targeted towards a specific market need.

In its overview of this year’s Alpha Awards, the publication noted the brisk growth that the hedge fund industry has experienced in the Cayman Islands, where the number of hedge funds registered with the Cayman Islands Monetary Authority reached 10,291 as of September 30.  Demonstrating resilience in the face of the global financial crisis, there were a net 254 new hedge funds registered in the Cayman Islands in the third quarter of 2008, taking cancellations into account.

“As has been demonstrated by the recent moves to Cayman by offshore law firms from elsewhere in the region, the Cayman Islands remain the clear jurisdiction of choice for offshore hedge funds. If you want to work in the hedge fund space then you need to be here,” said Mark Lewis, senior investment funds partner at Walkers.

Walkers will host a seminar in New York on November 6 specifically designed to examine issues relating to distressed hedge funds. ‘Fighting the Tape’ will be a unique discussion on protecting and growing a hedge fund business in volatile markets.  Speakers at the event include a number of Walkers hedge fund partners and invited guests, particularly renowned hedge fund manager George Hall, the Founder and President of the Clinton Group Inc.; Yolanda McCoy, Head of the Investments and Securities Division of the Cayman Islands Monetary Authority (CIMA); and Jeffrey Rosensweig, Associate Professor of Finance at Emory University.

A limited number of spaces remain and for more information about the event or to reserve a seat, please contact Walkers’ Marketing Team at [email protected]. The ‘Walkers Fundamentals’ series of ‘Thought Leadership’ events will be developed further over the coming months.

Prime Brokerage Survey Results

The following is a press release regarding the results from a prime brokerage survey.

Alpha Magazine Survey Ranks Merlin Securities as the #1 Prime Broker for Small Hedge Funds in 2008
Merlin Securities Receives Top Honors for Second Year Running

SAN FRANCISCO, Oct 28, 2008 — Merlin Securities, a leading prime brokerage services and technology provider for hedge funds, funds of funds and long-only managers, today announced that Alpha magazine has named it #1 prime broker for hedge funds with less than $1 billion in assets under management. This is the second year that Merlin Securities has received top honors as the “Small Firms’ Favorite” in Alpha’s survey of more than 1,000 hedge fund firms.

“We feel very privileged to be voted by so many funds as the top prime broker for the second year running,” said Aaron Vermut, senior partner and chief operating officer of Merlin Securities. “This award recognizes the hard work of our entire team and our continuing commitment to providing quality customer service and leading-edge technology.”

About Merlin Securities

Merlin Securities is a leading prime brokerage services and technology provider for hedge funds, funds of funds and long-only managers. The firm provides single- and multi-primed hedge fund managers with dynamic performance attribution portfolio analytics and reporting. In January 2008, Sequoia Capital, a leading venture capital firm, invested $20 million in Merlin Securities. The firm has offices in New York and San Francisco and is a member of NASD and SIPC.

In 2007, Global Custodian named Merlin Securities the #1 prime broker in North America, the #1 prime broker for single-strategy funds and the #1 prime broker for funds under $100 million. Merlin was also named the #1 prime broker for funds less than $1 billion by Alpha magazine in their 2007 Hedge Fund Service Provider Survey. In the 2008 Global Custodian survey, Merlin achieved the highest overall scores in the single- and multi-primed brokerage categories.

For more information, please visit www.merlinsecurities.com.