Common use of Regulatory Flexibility Act Clause in Contracts

Regulatory Flexibility Act. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) requires that agencies consider whether the rules they propose will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.28 The Commission previously has established certain definitions of ‘‘small entities’’ to be used in evaluating the impact of its regulations on small entities in accordance with the RFA.29 The proposed rules would affect swap dealers and major swap participants. Swap dealers and major swap participants are new categories of registrants. Accordingly, the Commission has not previously persons are, in fact, small entities for purposes of the RFA. The Commission previously has determined, however, that futures commission merchants should not be considered to be small entities for purposes of the RFA.30 The Commission’s determination was based, in part, upon the obligation of futures commission merchants to meet the minimum financial requirements established by the Commission to enhance the protection of customers’ segregated funds and protect the financial condition of futures commission merchants generally.31 Like futures commission merchants, swap dealers will be subject to minimum capital and margin requirements and are expected to comprise the largest global financial firms. The Commission is required to exempt from swap dealer designation any entities that engage in a de minimis level of swaps dealing in connection with transactions with or on behalf of customers. The Commission anticipates that this exemption would tend to exclude small entities from registration. Accordingly, for purposes of the RFA for this rulemaking, the Commission is hereby proposing that swap dealers not be considered ‘‘small entities’’ for essentially the same reasons that futures commission merchants have previously been determined not to be small entities and in light of the exemption from the definition of swap dealer for those engaging in a de minimis level of swap dealing. The Commission also has previously determined that large traders are not ‘‘small entities’’ for RFA purposes.32 In that determination, the Commission considered that a large trading position was indicative of the size of the business. Major swap participants, by statutory definition, maintain substantial positions in swaps or maintain outstanding swap positions that create substantial counterparty exposure that could have serious adverse effects on the financial stability of the United States banking system or financial markets. Accordingly, for purposes of the RFA for this rulemaking, the Commission is hereby proposing that major swap participants not be considered ‘‘small entities’’ for essentially the same reasons that large traders have previously been determined not to be small entities. Moreover, the Commission is carrying out Congressional mandates by proposing this regulation. Specifically, the Commission is proposing these regulations to comply with the ▇▇▇▇- The Commission requests comment addressed the question of whether such on all aspects of proposed 28 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. 30 Id. at 18619. 31 Id. 27 Section 202(f) of the ▇▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇▇ Act.

Regulatory Flexibility Act. The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) requires that agencies consider whether the rules they propose will have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.28 The Commission previously has established certain definitions of ‘‘small entities’’ to be used in evaluating the impact of its regulations on small entities in accordance with the RFA.29 The proposed rules would affect swap dealers and major swap participants. Swap dealers and major swap participants are new categories of registrants. Accordingly, the Commission has not previously persons are, in fact, small entities for purposes of the RFA. The Commission previously has determined, however, that futures commission merchants should not be considered to be small entities for purposes of the RFA.30 The Commission’s determination was based, in part, upon the obligation of futures commission merchants to meet the minimum financial requirements established by the Commission to enhance the protection of customers’ segregated funds and protect the financial condition of futures commission merchants generally.31 Like futures commission merchants, swap dealers will be subject to minimum capital and margin requirements and are expected to comprise the largest global financial firms. The Commission is required to exempt from swap dealer designation any entities that engage in a de minimis level of swaps dealing in connection with transactions with or on behalf of customers. The Commission anticipates that this exemption would tend to exclude small entities from registration. Accordingly, for purposes of the RFA for this rulemaking, the Commission is hereby proposing that swap dealers not be considered ‘‘small entities’’ for essentially the same reasons that futures commission merchants have previously been determined not to be small entities and in light of the exemption from the definition of swap dealer for those engaging in a de minimis level of swap dealing. The Commission also has previously determined that large traders are not ‘‘small entities’’ for RFA purposes.32 In that determination, the Commission considered that a large trading position was indicative of the size of the business. Major swap participants, by statutory definition, maintain substantial positions in swaps or maintain outstanding swap positions that create substantial counterparty exposure that could have serious adverse effects on the financial stability of the United States banking system or financial markets. Accordingly, for purposes of the RFA for this rulemaking, the Commission is hereby proposing that major swap participants not be considered ‘‘small entities’’ for essentially the same reasons that large traders have previously been determined not to be small entities. Moreover, the Commission is carrying out Congressional mandates by proposing this regulation. Specifically, the Commission is proposing these regulations to comply with the ▇▇▇▇- Dodd- The Commission requests comment addressed the question of whether such on all aspects of proposed 28 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq. 30 Id. at 18619. 31 Id. 27 Section 202(f) of the ▇▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇▇ Act.