[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 56 (Thursday, March 23, 1995)] [Notices] [Pages 15318-15320] From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] [FR Doc No: 95-7137] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION [Release No. 34-35503; File No. SR-Phlx-94-55] Self-Regulatory Organizations; the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc., Order Approving Proposed Rule Change Relating to Implementation of a Three-Day Settlement Standard March 16, 1995. On November 14, 1994, the Philadelphia Stock Exchange, Inc., (``Phlx'') filed a proposed rule change (File No. SR-Phlx-94-55) with the Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') pursuant to Section 19(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'').\1\ Notice of the proposal was published in the Federal Register on January 9, 1995 to solicit comments from interested persons.\2\ The Commission received one comment letter.\3\ As discussed below, this order approves the proposed rule change. \1\15 U.S.C. 78s(b) (1988). \2\Securities Exchange Act Release No. 35176 (December 29, 1994), 60 FR 2417. \3\Letter from Dr. Keith B. Jarrett, President, Thomson Trading Services, Inc., to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Commission (January 30, 1995). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I. Description In October 1993, the Commission adopted Rule 15c6-1 under the Act\4\ which establishes three business days after the trade date (``T+3''), instead of five business days (``T+5''), as the standard settlement cycle for most securities transactions. The rule will become effective June 7, 1995.\5\ Several of the Phlx's rules are interrelated with the T+5 settlement time frame. The [[Page 15319]] purpose of the proposed rule change is to amend Phlx's rules to be consistent with a T+3 settlement standard for securities transactions. \4\17 CFR 240.15c6-1 (1994). \5\Securities Exchange Act Release Nos. 33023 (October 6, 1993), 58 FR 52891 (order adopting Rule 15c6-1) and 34952 (November 9, 1994), 59 FR 59137 (changing effective date from June 1, 1995, to June 7, 1995). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rule 113(b), 114(b), and 115(b) specify the delivery date for regular way transactions in stocks, bonds, and convertible bonds, respectively. The time frames contained in each rule is being shortened to reflect a T+3 settlement environment. Similarly, Rules 113(c), 114(c), and 115(b) are being amended to provide that a seller's option cannot require delivery in less than four days. Rule 114(b) also is being amended to provide that bonds sold for delayed delivery must be delivered on T+5. Under the amendments to rule 117 (a) and (b), a seller's notice of next day delivery of securities sold pursuant to a seller's option or regular way delayed delivery may not be given until the third day following the date of the contract. As amended, Rule 291 requires, unless otherwise agreed, securities loaned to be delivered on the third business day following the day of the loan, As amended, Rule 294 requires the return of securities loaned on the third full business day following the date the notice for the return is given. Under Rule 362, the contract price of bonds dealt in ``and interest'' and made regular way delayed delivery will include interest computed on up to but not including T+3. As amended, Rule 371 (a) and (b) provides that there will be a cash adjustment for coupons paid during the pendency of delayed delivery contracts and seller's option contracts in bonds dealt in ``and interest'' made prior to the third business day preceding the interest payment date and delivered on or after the interest payment date. Rule 431 is being amended to require transactions in stock to be ex-dividend or ex-rights on the second business day preceding the record date. With regard to a record date on other than a business day, the transaction will be ex-dividend or ex-right on the third preceding business day. Under Rule 432, the ex-warrant period will begin on the second business day preceding the date of expiration of warrants. When warrant expiration occurs on a day other than a business day, the ex- warrant period will begin on the third business day preceding expiration date. Rule 823 is being amended to require all transactions effected on Phlx to be settled pursuant to the three day delivery plan which will require regular way transactions to settle on the third business day after the transaction. Rule 825(b) is being amended to state that the ex-dividend period for transactions in stock for which there exists a transfer facility in Philadelphia begins on the second business day preceding the record date. In the event the record date is not a business day, the ex-dividend date will be the third preceding business day. Under Rule 825(c), regular way transactions for stocks with transfer facilities only outside Philadelphia will be ex-dividend on the second business day preceding the equivalent Philadelphia record date. The Phlx has requested that the proposed rule change become effective on the same date as Rule 15c6-1. Rule 15c6-1 will become effective on June 7, 1995.\6\ \6\The transition from five day settlement to three day settlement will occur over a four day period. Friday, June 2, will be the last trading day with five business day settlement. Monday, June 5, and Tuesday, June 6, will be trading days with four business day settlement. Wednesday, June 7, will be the first trading day with three business day settlement. As a result, trades from June 2 and June 5 will settle on Friday, June 9. Trades from June 6 and June 7 will settle on Monday, June 12. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- II. Written Comment The Commission received one comment letter from Thomson Trading Services, Inc. (``Thomson'') suggesting that additional rule changes may be necessary to implement T+3 settlement.\7\ Thomson believes that the Phlx should amend Rule 274(b) which requires the use of the facilities of a registered securities depository for confirmation and acknowledgement of all payment on delivery transactions in depository- eligible securities when the member organization, its agent, the customer, and its agent are participants in a securities depository. \7\Supra note 3. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- III. Discussion The Commission believes the proposal is consistent with the requirements of Section 6 of the Act.\8\ Specifically, Section 6(b)(5) states that the rules of the exchange must be designed to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating, clearing, settling, and processing information. The Phlx rules and other self-regulatory organizations' rules provide a standard time frame for settlement of securities transactions. On June 7, 1995, the new settlement cycle of T+3 will be established as mandated by the Commission's Rule 15c6-1. As a result, the Phlx's current rules providing for a T+5 settlement cycle will be inconsistent with the Commission's rule. This proposal will amend the Phlx's rules to harmonize them with the Commission's Rule 15c6-1 and a T+3 settlement cycle. \8\15 U.S.C. 78f (1988). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In addition, the Commission believes that the proposed rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act in that it protects investors and the public interest by reducing risks to clearing corporations, their members, and public investors which are inherent in settling securities transactions. The reduction of the time period for settlement of most securities transactions will correspondingly decrease the number of unsettled trades in the clearance and settlement system at any given time. Thus fewer unsettled trades will be subject to credit and market risk, and there will be less time between trade execution and settlement for the value of those trades to deteriorate.\9\ \9\The Commission release adopting Rule 15c6-1 stated that ``the value of securities positions can change suddenly causing a market participant to default on unsettled positions. Because the markets are interwoven through common members, default at one clearing corporation or by a major market participant or end-user could trigger additional failures resulting in risk to the national clearance and settlement system.'' Securities Exchange Act Release No. 33023 (October 6, 1993), 58 FR 52891. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- While the Thomson letter supports the Phlx's efforts to shorten the settlement cycle for securities transactions, Thomson believes that the Phlx should amend Rule 274(b), which requires the use of the facilities of a registered securities depository for the confirmation and acknowledgement of all payment on delivery transactions in depository- eligible securities when the member organization, its agent, the customer, and its agent are participants in a securities depository. The Commission believes that the issue raised by the Thomson letter need not be resolved prior to the approval of the proposed rule change. Discussions regarding Thomson's concerns are underway among the Commission, Thomson, and DTC. DTC has submitted a rule filing that will establish a linkage between DTC and vendors such as Thomson.\10\ The Commission intends to consider whether a self-regulatory organization rule should continue to preclude use of private vendor systems for confirmation/affirmation services in DVP/RVP trades. However, if the Phlx's proposed rule change being approved by this order is not approved prior to the June 7, 1995, effective date of Rule 15c6-1, the Phlx rules will conflict with Commission Rule 15c6-1. \10\Securities Exchange Act Release No. 35332 (February 3, 1995), 60 FR 8102 (notice of filing of proposed rule change) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Thomson letter suggests that approval of the proposed rule change without amendments to Rule 274(b) raises competitive concerns. Under the Act, the Commission's responsibility is [[Page 15320]] to balance the perceived anticompetitive effects of a regulatory policy or decision against the purpose of the Act that would be advanced by the policy or decisions and the costs associated therewith. The Commission notes that any anticompetitive effects pointed to by Thomson are not caused by the proposed rule change being approved by this order but rather by an existing Phlx rule. The Commission is reviewing Thomson's claim but does not believe that approval of this proposal will itself create any burdens on competition. Moreover, as discussed above, the rule advances fundamental purposes under the Act, namely the efficient clearance and settlement of securities. IV. Conclusion For the reasons stated above, the Commission finds that Phlx's proposal is consistent with Section 6 of the Act.\11\ \11\15 U.S.C. 78f (1988). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- It Is Therefore Ordered, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\12\ that the proposed rule change (File No. SR-Phlx-94-55) be and hereby is approved and will become effective June 7, 1995. \12\15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2) (1988). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- For the Commission by the Division of Market Regulation, pursuant to delegated authority.\13\ \13\17 CFR 200.30(a)(12) (1994). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Margaret H. McFarland, Deputy Secretary. [FR Doc. 95-7137 Filed 3-22-95; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 8010-01-M