United States: The Sun Never Sets On Dodd-Frank

Last Updated: April 25 2012
Article by Steven D. Lofchie

I. Is Dodd-Frank Light From a City on a Hill?

When Dodd-Frank (more formally, the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act) was adopted, the legislation was advertised as a legal blueprint that, although proudly stamped "Made in America," would serve as a light of financial safety as to derivatives, bank activities, and like matters for the entire world. The global commercial and financial community was assured that a cooperative, consistent, and rational scheme of regulation would be adopted in financial capitals across the world, from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe, all based closely (maybe even word-for-word!) on translations of Dodd-Frank.

This has not happened. It is not going to happen. It was never going to happen. In fact, the initial proposed version of the regulations implementing the "Volcker Rule" created a wave of public protests—not just from private institutions—but from financial regulators outside the United States.

There are a number of reasons that Dodd-Frank is not a model of international financial regulation:

  • First, the haste with which Dodd-Frank was adopted meant that very little consideration could be given even as to its domestic effects, much less as to how it might affect either (i) international (cross-border) commerce and finance or (ii) wholly non-U.S. commerce and finance.1
  • Second, as much as Dodd-Frank makes life difficult for commercial and banking enterprises in the United States, its impact on non-U.S. enterprises is worse. (While there may be a case for our domestic laws favoring our domestic businesses, at some point we cross a line in our treatment of non-U.S. enterprises that offends notions of fairness and hinders a global economy.)
  • Third, it seems to ignore the legitimate governmental authority of non-U.S. financial regulators to establish rules for their domestic institutions.

II. Some Examples of Cross-Border Issues

Below are a number of aspects of Dodd-Frank that are problematic as a matter of cross-border regulation. (Many are also problematic as a matter of domestic regulation.)

A. Lincoln Amendment. Section 716 of Dodd-Frank generally prohibits banking institutions in the United States from registering as swap dealers. A carve-out is provided that allows U.S. banks to act as swap dealers in interest rates and currencies. No similar carve-out is provided for non-U.S. banks. In the aftermath following the adoption of Dodd-Frank, (now former) Senator Lincoln engaged in a "colloquy" with (now former) Senator Dodd that was roughly to the following effect: "Whoops." In short, everyone agreed that the failure of the Lincoln Amendment to allow domestic branches of offshore banks to deal in interest rates and currencies was a significant mistake, including the author of the amendment. This mistake has not been corrected.

B. Dealer Definition. The definition of "swap dealer" in Dodd-Frank excludes a U.S. bank that enters into interest rate swaps in connection with its grant of a loan, but does not provide the same exemption to non-U.S. banks.

C. Cross-Border Trades. It is generally assumed that for international financial trade to function smoothly, regulated entities in each jurisdiction must be able to trade with regulated entities in other jurisdictions without each being required to register, and be regulated, in the other's jurisdiction. By way of example, Rule 15a-6 under the Securities Exchange Act permits a U.S. SEC-registered broker-dealer to trade with a U.K. FSA-registered broker-dealer without the U.S. broker-dealer registering with the FSA or the U.K. broker-dealer registering with the SEC. Dodd-Frank does not provide any similar exemption for non-U.S. swap dealers. Accordingly, a European or Asian swap dealer that enters into swaps with registered and fully regulated U.S. swap dealers would itself be at risk of having to be registered in the United States. This clearly will negatively impact international trade and is not a precedent that the United States would like to see followed by other governments. That is, it would not be in the interests of the United States if a U.S. swap dealer were required to register, and be regulated by, European authorities simply because the U.S. swap dealer had traded with a European swap dealer.

D. Dealing in non-U.S. Sovereigns By Non-U.S. Banks. The Volcker Rule permits a U.S. bank, operating outside the United States, to be a dealer in U.S. government securities, but does not permit a non-U.S. bank operating in the United States to be a dealer in the securities of its home jurisdiction.

E. Regulation of Non-U.S. Entities that Are Not Banks. Title II of Dodd-Frank presumes to give the United States the power to regulate nonbank financial companies if the U.S. government judges that "financial distress" of such firms could cause a "threat to the financial stability of the United States." One would assume that this power would never be used; if the U.S. economy were in such weak shape that the failure of a foreign company could threaten its financial stability then our problem would be large indeed. Nonetheless, even the assertion of such a power sets a bad precedent – this is not a power that the United States would want other countries to assert against U.S. corporations. In this regard, it should be noted that it is far more likely that the failure of a U.S. corporation could be asserted to injure another country than the opposite.

F. Scope of U.S. Jurisdiction. Under Section 722 of Dodd-Frank, the U.S. government purports to have the authority to regulate non-U.S. activities that have a "direct and significant connection with activities in" or "effect on commerce of" the United States. The exercise of the power is not dependent upon there being any misconduct; e.g., the assertion of authority is not dependent upon there being, for example, fraudulent conduct or price conspiracies. It simply depends upon the non-U.S. activity having an effect on the United States. Unlike the power to regulate non-U.S. nonbanks, it is not so clear that this power would not be used. For example, in the various hearings on the international reach of Dodd-Frank, the CFTC seemed to hold open the possibility that it could regulate two non-U.S. entities trading (in a non-criminal manner) in a "commodity" (such as a physical asset, like oil) that is important to the United States. Again, this is an assertion of authority that we in the United States would resent it if another country were to assert as to economic activity in the United States, and our assertion of such an authority is not be a precedent that we would want followed.

G. Holding Collateral. Any collateral held in connection with a swap must be held by a "futures commission merchant" registered with the U.S. CFTC: for example, an entity such as MF Global, the recently failed FCM as to which over a billion dollars are still unaccounted for. In the hearings as to the failure of MF Global, representatives of the CFTC testified that the CFTC does not have any examiners inspecting the custody arrangements of registered FCMs. Therefore, as a non-U.S. entity (or non-U.S. regulator), one wonders: is it better to have my collateral held at a major European or Asian bank or is it better to have my collateral held at a U.S. FCM whose custody arrangements are not inspected by the U.S. regulators? Many non-U.S. entities would prefer that their collateral be held by a regulated bank. Unfortunately, this is not permitted under the U.S. rules.

H. Buy U.S. Bonds. Cash collateral held at CFTC-registered FCMs may be invested in bonds issued by the U.S. government and states, cities and towns and other governmental entities located in the United States, but not in obligations of governmental entities outside the United States. This seems neither fair, if we expect U.S. regulation to establish a model for non-U.S. entities, nor does it seem prudent. The New York Times, for example, has reported that many local governmental entities in the United States are in serious financial trouble; and yet the obligations of these entities are permissible investments for FCMs, while national sovereign debt of other countries, including G-8 countries, is not.

I. Capital Regulation. The capital of swap dealers in the United States will be regulated by the CFTC, despite the fact that the CFTC has acknowledged that it does not have the financial expertise to oversee the use of financial models. To deal with this lack of expertise, the CFTC has said that it will permit the use of financial models by entities whose capital requirements are overseen by the U.S. banking regulators (which does have the relevant expertise). However, all subsidiaries and affiliates of non-U.S. banks must comply with the capital requirements of the CFTC (without models), which will likely subject them to a significant competitive disadvantage as against the non-bank subsidiaries of U.S. bank holding companies.

J. Organizational Structure. Dodd-Frank requires that the compliance officer of a swap dealer with responsibility for compliance with the rules under the U.S. Commodity Exchange Act report directly either to the governing board of the swap dealer or to its chief executive officer. Most of the non- U.S. entities that will be required to register as swap dealers under Dodd-Frank will be major non- U.S. banks. These banks generally will be of a type that do business in many different countries and are subject to many laws in each country. The Board and CEO of these banks bear some responsibility for these many laws (which include some important ones, like banking regulation, financial reporting, AML, paying taxes), not to mention responsibility for business issues, such as raising capital and other strategic issues. Is it good policy to require that the individual responsible for compliance with a single U.S. law must have a direct reporting line to the Board/CEO? Is that a sensible measure of the significance of this law?

K. Register Now, Tell You the Regulations Later. The CFTC seems to be inclined to require non- U.S. banks to register with the CFTC before the CFTC decides whether, or to what extent, trades of the non-U.S. banks with non-U.S. persons will be regulated by the CFTC. This manner of conducting regulation seems wrong, as a matter of basic equity. (The SEC does not appear to intend to proceed in this manner.)

III. Conclusion

The purpose of this memorandum is to describe a few, certainly not all, of the provisions of Dodd- Frank that are inequitable in their treatment of non-U.S. institutions doing business in the United States, and that the United States ought not to wish to establish as precedent for global financial regulation. Further, many of the provisions described in this memorandum are significantly flawed, even as applied to U.S. financial institutions.

Nonetheless, there are steps that non-U.S. institutions, and non-U.S. regulators, should take as various provisions of Dodd-Frank come near effect. First, there is benefit in commenting to the various U.S. regulators on the rules. Clearly, the comments of non-U.S. regulators and institutions on the Volcker Rules caused a rethinking of the proposed implementing regulations. While many problems of Dodd-Frank require corrective legislation, there is also much that the regulators can do. For example, the decision of the SEC to delay the implementation of its swap dealer registration requirements until there has been a determination of the extra-territorial application of the rules seems the right decision; and one that the CFTC could follow.

Beyond that, non-U.S. institutions must consider their obligations to comply with these provisions of Dodd-Frank that will directly affect them, regardless of whether those provisions appear appropriate. The most significant provisions in this regard are the Volcker Rule (limiting proprietary trading by banks, as well as relationships between banks and private funds); swaps regulation; and the regulation of advisers that manage funds or individuals trading in securities, futures, or swaps.


1 Various news stories have reported that the legislation, as to which there was virtually no prior study, was ultimately adopted in an all-night drafting session, with enormous changes made at the last minute. See, e.g., http://www.cnbc.com/id/37919120 . As I have previously observed, Dodd-Frank is replete with (what I believe to be) errors of various kinds, both conceptual and drafting errors, including quite serious ones. See, e.g., "What is a Swap?" ( http://www.cadwalader.com/assets/client_friend/041212WhatIsASwap.pdf ) (pointing out that the most significant definition in all of Dodd-Frank is impossibly and mistakenly overbroad, and that there appears no way to fix the problem absent corrective legislation).


The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions