Track the Health Care Reform Law with Knowledge Mosaic
As the Supreme Court hears arguments as to the constitutionality of the new Affordable Care Act — a decision is expected in June — federal agencies continue to churn out rulemaking to implement the law. Tomorrow, Friday April 27, Knowledge Mosaic Inc. will unveil a new tool to help you keep on top of this far-reaching rulemaking process. It’s included as part of a standard Knowledge Mosaic license, so current subscribers will have full access.
The Knowledge Mosaic ACA Rulemaking Tracker identifies relevant releases from over two dozen federal rulemaking bodies, on topics including the individual mandate, Medicare, prescription drugs, tax & revenue provisions, and much more. Advanced features offer you the ability to:
- Gain control of your calendar. Search for items by date / time frame for compliance date, effective date, release date, and public comment date.
Photo source: www.shutterstock.com
- Find the needle in the 961-page haystack. Link directly to the Title (and section, if applicable) of the Affordable Care Act that correlates to a particular agency release.
- Connect to the crowd. Link directly to public comments associated with a given rulemaking item.
- Keep both eyes on what you care about. Set up an email alert by agency or by topic.
For more information, take a look at our features document on the Tracker. If you don’t currently have a license with Knowledge Mosaic, we encourage you to sign up for a free trial. In any case, please feel free to contact us at 866-650-3600 or info@knowledgemosaic.com.
Transnational Securities Fraud
Photo by Cha222. Some rights reserved.
On April 11th, the SEC published a study, required by the Dodd-Frank Act, regarding the application of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act to private actions alleging transnational securities frauds.
Background
In 2010, the Supreme Court held that Section 10(b) only applies to transactions in securities listed on domestic exchanges or “domestic” transactions in other securities. Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd., 130 S. Ct. 2869 (2010). Concerned that the decision would limit the ability of the SEC and Justice Department to pursue transnational securities frauds, Congress included in the Dodd-Frank Act a provision explicitly stating that Section 10(b) is intended to apply extraterritorially in enforcement matters in which the fraudulent conduct occurred in the U.S. or the fraud had a substantial and foreseeable effect in the U.S. Congress did not, however, extend this “conduct and effects” test to private actions for transnational securities fraud. Instead, it required the SEC to study the matter.
Follow Knowledge Mosaic on Twitter
Knowledge Mosaic is now on Twitter!
Some sample subjects covered just today: Walmart and potential FCPA violations, Executive Compensation, a major patent agreement between Microsoft and Facebook, and a major settlement payment by Metlife. Visit us at http://twitter.com/#!/knowledgemosaic, or better yet, become a follower.
Closing a Loophole: The Federal Reserve’s Proposal on when a Company is “Predominantly Engaged in Financial Activities”
On April 2nd, the Federal Reserve Board requested comment on a proposed amendment to its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking
(“NPR”) issued February 11, 2011 that would establish requirements for determining whether a company is “predominantly engaged in financial activities,” and can therefore be subject to additional supervision and prudential standards.
Under Title 1 of the Dodd-Frank Act, a company generally can be designated for Board supervision by the Financial Stability Oversight Council only if 85 percent or more of the company’s revenues or assets are related to activities that are financial in nature under the Bank Holding Company Act (“BHCA”). Some commenters to the February 2011 NPR asked whether BHCA conditions on how financial activities are conducted (as opposed to the financial activity itself), should be considered in defining financial activities for purposes of Title I. Read more…
On Tuesday, the Financial Stability Oversight Council (“FSOC” or “Council”) adopted a new final rule implementing Section 113 of the Dodd-Frank Act, which authorizes the Council to require a nonbank financial company to be supervised by the Federal Reserve Board and be subject to prudential standards if the Council determines that: (1) material financial distress at the nonbank financial company could pose a threat to the financial stability of the United States, or (2) the nature, scope, size, scale, concentration, interconnectedness, or mix of the activities of the nonbank financial company could pose a threat to the financial stability of the United States.
Together with appended interpretive guidance, the new rule describes the manner in which the Council intends to apply the statutory standards and considerations, and the processes and procedures that the Council will consider in making determinations under Section 113 of the Dodd-Frank Act.
The Statute. The Dodd-Frank Act defines a “nonbank financial company” as a domestic or foreign company that is “predominantly engaged in financial activities,” other than bank holding companies and certain other types of firms. The Dodd-Frank Act provides that a company is “predominantly engaged” in financial activities if either (1) the annual gross revenues derived by the company from financial activities, as well as from the ownership or control of insured depository institutions, represent 85 percent or more of the consolidated annual gross revenues of the company; or (2) the consolidated assets of the company related to financial activities, as well as related to the ownership or control of insured depository institutions, represent 85 percent or more of the consolidated assets of the company. The Dodd-Frank Act requires the Board of Governors to establish the requirements for determining whether a company is “predominantly engaged in financial activities” for this purpose. Read more…
Don’t Bet on It
Photo by red betty black; some rights reserved.
In January, we wrote about a new import the North American Derivatives Exchange (“NADEX”), an on-line futures exchange wholly owned by U.K.-based IG Group Holdings plc, wanted to bring to the U.S.: “Political Election Event Derivatives.”
Yesterday, the CFTC officially said “no.”
NADEX described the contracts as a way of hedging against five possible 2012 election outcomes: (1) a Democratic majority in the U.S. House of Representatives; (2) a Republican majority in the U.S. House of Representatives; (3) a Democratic majority in the U.S. Senate; (4) a Republican majority in the U.S. Senate; and (5) the U.S. Presidency.
But the CFTC found that NADEX’s proposal was analogous to betting on elections, which many states prohibit. It further found that “the unpredictability of the specific economic consequences of an election means that the Political Event Contracts cannot reasonably be expected to be used for hedging purposes” and “there is no situation in which the Political Event Contracts’ prices could form the basis for the pricing of a commercial transaction involving a physical commodity, financial asset or service, which demonstrates that the Political Event Contracts have no price basing utility.”
Of course, it’s not within the CFTC’s purview to consider the entertainment value of election-betting. But maybe that’s why what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas.
View NADEX’s notice of proposal here.
View the CFTC’s order prohibiting the proposal here.
As of our recent Knowledge Mosaic upgrade, our SEC Watchlist offers precision alerting not previously possible on our platform. For example, you can now set up alerts on specific 8-K items. That’s a big deal, because it opens the door to alerting on a variety of major public company announcements – bankruptcies, delistings and trading suspensions, changes in directors and officers, major financial news, and so on.
It also includes the “Entry into a Material Definitive Agreement” item, in which companies formally disclose the completion of a major deal such as a merger. So you can now set up a Watchlist to be notified when such deals happen. Here is a basic template for this kind of alert:
Search parameters: Scope: 8-K Items (Basic) Entity: All Filers Text: merger near/3 agreement Items: 1.01 Form Type: 8-K
Depending on your purposes, there are a number of adjustments you might consider making to this template query.
To narrow it (i.e., to make it more precise and to reduce the number of results), you can:
1) Use this more specific text string:
(entered into or pursuant to the terms of) pre/4 (merger near/3 agreement)
2) Include other search filters, such as filer attributes: industry, location, exchange, etc.
To cast a wider net (i.e., to increase the number of results but possibly to introduce irrelevant ones), you can:
1) Use this broader text string:
merg*
which catches any mention of “merger” or variants like merging, merged, etc. (the asterisk is a wildcard operator).
2) Include Item 2.01 (Completion of Acquisition) alongside Item 1.01.
If you’d like assistance on setting up alerts through Knowledge Mosaic, please contact us.
