{
  "id": "R44231",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "R44231",
  "active": true,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 587590,
      "date": "2016-08-03",
      "retrieved": "2020-01-02T15:32:28.048232",
      "title": "Commodity Futures Trading Commission: Proposed Reauthorization in the 114th Congress",
      "summary": "The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), created in 1974, regulates futures, most options, and swaps markets. The CFTC administers the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA; P.L. 74-765, 7 U.S.C. \u00a71 et seq) enacted in 1936 to monitor trading in certain derivatives markets. The CEA contains a sunset provision, meaning Congress periodically reauthorizes appropriations to carry out the CEA. If an explicit authorization of appropriations for a program or activity is present\u2014as in the CEA\u2014and it expires, the underlying authority in the statute to administer such a program does not, however. Thus, the CFTC continues functioning and administering the CEA even if its authorization has expired\u2014which has been the case since the last CFTC reauthorization expired on September 30, 2013. It has not been uncommon for Congress to pass CFTC reauthorization bills several years after the prior authorization had expired.\nThe current CFTC reauthorization process is the first since the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (Dodd-Frank; P.L. 111-203) brought the roughly $400 trillion U.S. swaps market under regulatory oversight. Historically, the reauthorization process has often been one of the principal vehicles for modifying the CFTC\u2019s regulatory authority and evaluating the efficacy of its regulatory programs. The House passed a CFTC reauthorization bill, H.R. 2289, the Commodity End-User Relief Act, on June 9, 2015, by a 246 to 171 vote. The Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry marked up and ordered to be reported an identically titled bill, S. 2917, which would also reauthorize such appropriations, as well as making other changes to the CEA. The Obama Administration threatened to veto H.R. 2289, stating that the bill \u201c ... undermines the efficient functioning of the CFTC by imposing a number of organizational and procedural changes and would undercut efforts taken by the CFTC over the last year to address end-user concerns.\u201d A number of the provisions in H.R. 2289 discussed in this report do not appear in S. 2917. This report examines the following selected major provisions of H.R. 2289, and S. 2917, which have generally garnered the most attention:\nH.R. 2289 expands the current 5 cost-benefit analysis provisions in the CEA to 12. It adds a requirement that the CFTC conduct quantitative as well as qualitative assessments, which appears to mark a change from previous practice. \nH.R. 2289 includes a provision that would extend an exemption from certain Dodd-Frank swaps trading and clearing requirements granted to nonfinancial companies so as to also include certain of their affiliates. \nH.R. 2289 would modify the definition of a \u201cfinancial entity,\u201d potentially enabling a wider range of companies to claim certain exemptions from the Dodd-Frank derivatives requirements. S. 2917 takes a different approach to modifying this definition. It directs the CFTC to issue a new rule defining the term predominantly engaged in financial activities to exclude hedging transactions.\nH.R. 2289 and S. 2917 would potentially broaden the bona fide hedging definition to allow anticipated, as well as current, risks to be hedged, which might increase the number of swaps that qualify as hedges. Bona fide hedging is often used to determine which swaps count toward registration requirements, position limits, large trader reporting, and other regulatory requirements. Language in the two bills on this topic is substantially the same.\nH.R. 2289 mandates that, starting 18 months from enactment, the swaps regulatory requirements of the eight largest foreign swaps markets must be considered comparable to those of the United States\u2014unless the CFTC issued a rule finding that any of those foreign jurisdictions\u2019 requirements were not comparable to U.S. requirements. \nS. 2917 and H.R. 2289 would essentially codify the deadline for a futures commission merchant (FCM) to deposit any capital to cover residual interest as no earlier than 6:00 p.m. on the following business day.\nH.R. 2289 would remove a requirement in Dodd-Frank that foreign regulators indemnify a U.S.-based swap data repository for any expenses arising from litigation related to a request for market data. Indemnification generally refers to compensating someone for harm or loss.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": true,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44231",
          "sha1": "815b4be4f638a1544112c17c8a24adaa5656e104",
          "filename": "files/20160803_R44231_815b4be4f638a1544112c17c8a24adaa5656e104.html",
          "images": {
            "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R44231_files&id=/0.png": "files/20160803_R44231_images_7a34cde9e22bd64379b4f80750c6a3066b5ca367.png"
          }
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44231",
          "sha1": "b3b7300c7a2e72439bc8e6cc6f6d0653c1493aa0",
          "filename": "files/20160803_R44231_b3b7300c7a2e72439bc8e6cc6f6d0653c1493aa0.pdf",
          "images": {}
        }
      ],
      "topics": [
        {
          "source": "IBCList",
          "id": 4831,
          "name": "Derivatives"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 447774,
      "date": "2015-12-02",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-06T17:49:42.722103",
      "title": "Commodity Futures Trading Commission: Proposed Reauthorization in the 114th Congress",
      "summary": "The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), created in 1974, regulates futures, most options, and swaps markets. The CFTC administers the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA), enacted in 1936 to monitor trading in certain derivatives markets. The CEA contains a sunset provision, meaning Congress periodically reauthorizes appropriations to carry out the CEA. If an explicit authorization of appropriations for a program or activity is present\u2014as in the CEA\u2014and it expires, the underlying authority in the statute to administer such a program does not, however. Thus, the CFTC continues functioning and administering the CEA even if its authorization has expired\u2014which has been the case since the last CFTC reauthorization expired on September 30, 2013. It has not been uncommon for Congress to pass CFTC reauthorization bills several years after the prior authorization had expired.\nThe current CFTC reauthorization process is the first since the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010\u2019s (P.L. 111-203) passage brought the roughly $400 trillion U.S. swaps market under regulatory oversight. Historically, the reauthorization process has often been one of the principal vehicles for modifying the CFTC\u2019s regulatory authority and evaluating the efficacy of its regulatory programs. The most recent CFTC reauthorization bill, H.R. 2289, the Commodity End-User Relief Act, passed the House on June 9, 2015, by a 246 to 171 vote. It was referred to the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry on June 10, 2015. The Obama Administration threatened to veto H.R. 2289, stating that the bill \u201c ... undermines the efficient functioning of the CFTC by imposing a number of organizational and procedural changes and would undercut efforts taken by the CFTC over the last year to address end-user concerns.\u201d This report examines the following selected major provisions of H.R. 2289, which have generally garnered the most attention:\nSection 202 expands the current 5 cost-benefit analysis provisions in the CEA to 12. It adds a requirement that the CFTC conduct quantitative as well as qualitative assessments, which appears to mark a change from previous practice. \nSection 301 includes a provision that would extend an exemption from certain Dodd-Frank swaps trading and clearing requirements granted to nonfinancial companies so as to also include certain of their affiliates. \nSection 306 would modify the definition of a \u201cfinancial entity,\u201d potentially enabling a wider range of companies to claim certain exemptions from the Dodd-Frank derivatives requirements.\nSection 313 would potentially broaden the bona fide hedging definition to allow anticipated, as well as current, risks to be hedged, which might increase the number of swaps that qualify as hedges. Bona fide hedging is often used to determine which swaps count toward registration requirements, position limits, large trader reporting, and other regulatory requirements.\nSection 314 mandates that, starting 18 months from enactment, the swaps regulatory requirements of the eight largest foreign swaps markets must be considered comparable to those of the United States\u2014unless the CFTC issued a rule finding that any of those foreign jurisdictions\u2019 requirements were not comparable to U.S. requirements. \nSection 302 of H.R. 2289 would remove a requirement in Dodd-Frank that foreign regulators indemnify a U.S.-based swap data repository for any expenses arising from litigation related to a request for market data. Indemnification generally refers to compensating someone for harm or loss.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": true,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44231",
          "sha1": "8971a9cc599ca83d2b6411d2b43540b5b06cd68d",
          "filename": "files/20151202_R44231_8971a9cc599ca83d2b6411d2b43540b5b06cd68d.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44231",
          "sha1": "01a12d34386373a5b6602fef4ba3db9646e1c2d1",
          "filename": "files/20151202_R44231_01a12d34386373a5b6602fef4ba3db9646e1c2d1.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": [
        {
          "source": "IBCList",
          "id": 4575,
          "name": "Derivatives Regulation"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
      "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc808750/",
      "id": "R44231_2015Oct19",
      "date": "2015-10-19",
      "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26",
      "title": "Commodity Futures Trading Commission: Proposed Reauthorization in the 114th Congress",
      "summary": null,
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORT",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "filename": "files/20151019_R44231_4d6f71ca8a47ff91628e316e7d3e9ef6d5741f8f.pdf"
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20151019_R44231_4d6f71ca8a47ff91628e316e7d3e9ef6d5741f8f.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Appropriations",
    "Economic Policy",
    "Foreign Affairs"
  ]
}