17 CFR 270.3c-3 - Definition of certain terms used in section 3(c)(1) of the Act with respect to certain debt securities offered by small business investment companies.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Commission” or “SEC”) is proposing rule 18f-4, a new exemptive rule under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the “Investment Company Act” or “Act”) designed to address the investor protection purposes and concerns underlying section 18 of the Act and to provide an updated and more comprehensive approach to the regulation of funds' use of derivatives. The proposed rule would permit mutual funds, exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”), closed-end funds, and companies that have elected to be treated as business development companies (“BDCs”) under the Act (collectively, “funds”) to enter into derivatives transactions and financial commitment transactions (as those terms are defined in the proposed rule) notwithstanding the prohibitions and restrictions on the issuance of senior securities under section 18 of the Act, provided that the funds comply with the conditions of the proposed rule. A fund that relies on the proposed rule in order to enter into derivatives transactions would be required to: comply with one of two alternative portfolio limitations designed to impose a limit on the amount of leverage the fund may obtain through derivatives transactions and other senior securities transactions; manage the risks associated with the fund's derivatives transactions by maintaining an amount of certain assets, defined in the proposed rule as “qualifying coverage assets,” designed to enable the fund to meet its obligations under its derivatives transactions; and, depending on the extent of its derivatives usage, establish a formalized derivatives risk management program. A fund that relies on the proposed rule in order to enter into financial commitment transactions would be required to maintain qualifying coverage assets equal in value to the fund's full obligations under those transactions. The Commission also is proposing amendments to proposed Form N-PORT and proposed Form N-CEN that would require reporting and disclosure of certain information regarding a fund's derivatives usage.

The Securities and Exchange Commission is proposing a new rule and amendments to its rules and forms designed to promote effective liquidity risk management throughout the open-end fund industry, thereby reducing the risk that funds will be unable to meet redemption obligations and mitigating dilution of the interests of fund shareholders in accordance with section 22(e) and rule 22c-1 under the Investment Company Act. The proposed amendments also seek to enhance disclosure regarding fund liquidity and redemption practices. The Commission is proposing new rule 22e-4, which would require each registered open-end fund, including open-end exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”) but not including money market funds, to establish a liquidity risk management program. The Commission also is proposing amendments to rule 22c-1 to permit a fund, under certain circumstances, to use “swing pricing,” the process of adjusting the net asset value of a fund's shares to effectively pass on the costs stemming from shareholder purchase or redemption activity to the shareholders associated with that activity, and amendments to rule 31a-2 to require funds to preserve certain records related to swing pricing. With respect to reporting and disclosure, the Commission is proposing amendments to Form N-1A regarding the disclosure of fund policies concerning the redemption of fund shares, and the use of swing pricing. The Commission also is proposing amendments to proposed Form N-PORT and proposed Form N-CEN that would require disclosure of certain information regarding the liquidity of a fund's holdings and the fund's liquidity risk management practices. In connection with these proposed amendments, the Commission is re-opening the comment period for Investment Company Reporting Modernization, Investment Company Act Release No. 31610 (May 20, 2015).

The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) is adopting certain amendments, initially proposed in March 2011 and re-proposed in July 2014, related to the removal of credit rating references in rule 2a-7, the principal rule that governs money market funds, and Form N-MFP, the form that money market funds use to report information to the Commission each month about their portfolio holdings, under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company Act” or “Act”). The amendments will implement provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”). In addition, the Commission is adopting amendments to rule 2a-7's issuer diversification provisions to eliminate an exclusion from these provisions that is currently available for securities subject to a guarantee issued by a non-controlled person.

The Securities and Exchange Commission is proposing new rules and forms as well as amendments to its rules and forms to modernize the reporting and disclosure of information by registered investment companies. The Commission is proposing new Form N-PORT, which would require certain registered investment companies to report information about their monthly portfolio holdings to the Commission in a structured data format. In addition, the Commission is proposing amendments to Regulation S-X, which would require standardized, enhanced disclosure about derivatives in investment company financial statements, as well as other amendments. The Commission is also proposing new rule 30e-3, which would permit but not require registered investment companies to transmit periodic reports to their shareholders by making the reports accessible on a Web site and satisfying certain other conditions. The Commission is proposing new Form N-CEN, which would require registered investment companies, other than face amount certificate companies, to annually report certain census-type information to the Commission in a structured data format. Finally, the Commission is proposing to rescind current Forms N-Q and N-SAR and to amend certain other rules and forms. Collectively, these amendments would, among other things, improve the information that the Commission receives from investment companies and assist the Commission, in its role as primary regulator of investment companies, to better fulfill its mission of protecting investors, maintaining fair, orderly and efficient markets, and facilitating capital formation. Investors and other potential users could also utilize this information to help investors make more informed investment decisions.

On August 14, 2014, the Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) published a document in the Federal Register (79 FR 47986). The document contained an incorrect RIN. The Commission is publishing this document to correct that RIN.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) is reopening the period for public comment on rule amendments it proposed in 2010, Investment Company Advertising: Target Date Retirement Fund Names and Marketing, Securities Act Release No. 9126 (June 16, 2010). Among other things, the proposed amendments would, if adopted, require marketing materials for target date retirement funds (“target date funds”) to include a table, chart, or graph depicting the fund's asset allocation over time, i.e., an illustration of the fund's so-called “asset allocation glide path.” In 2013, the Commission's Investor Advisory Committee (“Committee”) recommended that the Commission develop a glide path illustration for target date funds that is based on a standardized measure of fund risk as a replacement for, or supplement to, the proposed asset allocation glide path illustration. The Commission is reopening the comment period to seek public comment on this recommendation.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) is adopting amendments to a rule and three forms under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company Act”) and the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) in order to implement a provision of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”). Specifically, rule 5b-3 under the Investment Company Act contains a reference to credit ratings in determining when an investment company (“fund”) may treat a repurchase agreement as an acquisition of securities collateralizing the repurchase agreement for certain purposes under the Investment Company Act. The amendments we are adopting today replace this reference to credit ratings with an alternative standard designed to retain a similar degree of credit quality to that in current rule 5b-3. The Commission is also adopting amendments to Forms N-1A, N-2, and N-3 under the Investment Company Act and Securities Act to eliminate the required use of NRSRO credit ratings when a fund chooses to depict its portfolio holdings by credit quality.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) is correcting outdated cross-references in rule 602 under the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”) and rule 12b-1 under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company Act”) and correcting an inadvertent error in rule 17d-1 under the Investment Company Act as published in the Federal Register on January 22, 2003.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission” or “SEC”) is proposing two alternatives for amending rules that govern money market mutual funds (or “money market funds”) under the Investment Company Act of 1940. The two alternatives are designed to address money market funds' susceptibility to heavy redemptions, improve their ability to manage and mitigate potential contagion from such redemptions, and increase the transparency of their risks, while preserving, as much as possible, the benefits of money market funds. The first alternative proposal would require money market funds to sell and redeem shares based on the current market-based value of the securities in their underlying portfolios, rounded to the fourth decimal place ( e.g., $1.0000), i.e., transact at a “floating” net asset value per share (“NAV”). The second alternative proposal would require money market funds to impose a liquidity fee (unless the fund's board determines that it is not in the best interest of the fund) if a fund's liquidity levels fell below a specified threshold and would permit the funds to suspend redemptions temporarily, i.e., to “gate” the fund under the same circumstances. Under this proposal, we could adopt either alternative by itself or a combination of the two alternatives. The SEC also is proposing additional amendments that are designed to make money market funds more resilient by increasing the diversification of their portfolios, enhancing their stress testing, and increasing transparency by requiring money market funds to provide additional information to the SEC and to investors. The proposal also includes amendments requiring investment advisers to certain unregistered liquidity funds, which can resemble money market funds, to provide additional information about those funds to the SEC.

The Securities and Exchange Commission (“Commission”) is adopting a new rule under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company Act”) to establish a standard of credit-worthiness in place of a statutory reference to credit ratings that the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”) removes. The rule will establish the standard of credit quality that must be met by certain debt securities purchased by entities relying on the Investment Company Act exemption for business and industrial development companies.