The MFWire
Manage Email Alerts | Sponsorships | About MFWire | Who We Are

Subscribe to MFWire.com's News Alerts [click]

Rating:SEC's Money Fund Proposals Make a Splash Not Rated 0.0 Email Routing List Email & Route  Print Print
Thursday, June 06, 2013

SEC's Money Fund Proposals Make a Splash

News summary by MFWire's editors


Mary Jo White
Securities and Exchange Commission
The newly passed SEC proposals for reforming money market funds has everybody with something to say about money fund reform rushing to their soapboxes: industry leaders, activists and journalists alike.

For example, Daily Finance considers the possibility that these resolutions may raise industry fees.

Meanwhile, Bloomberg reports that the proposal has united activists who want stricter regulation of the sector.

Investment News notes that the regulations are offered in a combo package.

ETF Trends says the proposal puts short-duration ETFs in the spotlight.

American Banker (which writes for money funds' natural competitors, banks) also looked at the criticisms leveled against the proposals.

Moreover, The New York Times' DealBook Blog says that the floating NAV proposal would apply to only 35 percent of all money market funds, and not to those available to ordinary investors.

Deal Book also quotes White's predecessor, Mary Schapiro, as saying "that the agency should be commended for putting a proposal out but needed to go further in overhauling the whole industry."

I hope the commission will remain open to meaningful reform of the entire sector and not just institutional prime funds, Deal Book quotes Schapiro as saying.

Wall Street Journal ran an opinion piece in support of the reforms.

The WSJ declared:

Even better would be a requirement for floating asset values across the whole industry. It's true that funds holding government debt, as opposed to corporate debt, often perform better in times of market turbulence, but government debts can also cause such turbulence (see Europe). And there is the regulatory challenge of ensuring that institutions cannot simply split up their money-fund investments into various accounts if the retail end of the market still promises fixed asset values. But it's encouraging that at long last the SEC is moving toward clarifying that money funds are investments that can lose value, and not deposits backed by taxpayers.


Edited by: Tommy Fernandez

Stay ahead of the news ... Sign up for our email alerts now

 Do You Recommend This Story?

Return to Top
 News Archives
2020: Q2Q1
2019: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2018: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2017: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2016: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2015: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2014: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2013: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2012: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2011: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2010: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2009: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2008: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2007: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2006: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2005: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2004: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2003: Q4Q3Q2Q1
2002: Q4Q3Q2Q1
 Subscribe via RSS:
Add to My Yahoo!
follow us in feedly

©All rights reserved to InvestmentWires, Inc. 1997-2020
14 Wall Street | 20th Floor | New York, NY 10005 | P: 212-331-8968 | F: 212-331-8998
Privacy Policy :: Terms of Use