Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub
[ocr errors]

Page 1321 1354 1382 1732 1328 1369 1669 1739 1555 1346 1364 1317 1549

1561 1377

[ocr errors]

1696 1713 1539 1542

1496

1494

1509

Prepared statement submitted by

Bevis, Herman W.--
Delahunty, Christopher J.
Du Pont, Henry W., with exhibits and charts
Haack, Robert W.
Howland, Richard B., with exhibits.
Kaestner, Frank W.
Loeffler, Robert M.
Macklin, Gordon S.
Maller, Robert R.
Montross, Phillips M.
Morgan, David H.
Needham, James J.
Noyes, Clifford H.
O'Connor, Bernard, to include an article; illustrations; a speech by

Fred R. Esty, Chairman of the Board, United States Banknote

Corporation; and releases.-
Peake, Junius W.
Reinisch, Hans Randolph, to include article and attachments with

illustrations...
Securities and Exchange Commission, with extracts.
Sporkin, Stanley -

Weinberg, Eli.
Additional material submitted for the record by-
American Stock Exchange:

List of all members and top staff, including their places of residence

and business addresses Banking and Securities Industry Committee (BASIC):

List of all members and top staff, including their places of residence

and business addresses. -
Notes submitted by Herman W. Bevis on his study of the German,

French, and of Morgan Guaranty's Euro-Clear depository ---
Calvert, Gordon L., Investment Bankers Association of America:

Letter dated October 6, 1971, urging prompt enactment of legis

lation abolishing stock certificate for use in interstate commerce. Celler, Hon! Emanuel: Letter dated November 12, 1971, to Richard

W. McLaren, re concern of antitrust implications of the New York

Stock Exchange
Ernst, Martin L., Vice President, Arthur D. Little, Inc.: Letter dated

October 15, 1971, elaborating on industry's automation problems..
Federal Bar Journal: Article entitled “The Status of Regulatory

Independence," by A. Everette MacIntyre...
McLaren, Richard W.: Letter dated November 19, 1971, in reply

to letter of November 12, 1971, from Hon. Emanuel Celler.. McNeill, Charles R.: Letter dated November 16, 1971, clarifying

misunderstanding of testimony of October 18, 19, and 20.National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (NASD):

Letter dated July 22, 1971, from Gordon S. Macklin, in reply

to the NYSE letter of July 8, 1971..
List of all members and top staff including their places of residence

and business addresses
Letter dated November 18, 1971, submitting views in planning a

clearing facility in New York
National Clearing Corporation: List of all members and top staff,

including their places of residence and business addresses--New York Stock Exchange:

Letter dated July 8, 1971, setting forth NYSE thoughts on the

forthcoming introduction of a continuous net settlement system

in New York..
Letter dated October 22, 1971, setting forth a listing of the names,

business addresses, home addresses of the governors, president,

etc. of the exchange..
Material relating to the incorporation of the New York Stock

Exchange

1580

1646

1577

1811

1650

1524

1426

1498

1531

1499

1424

1494

1753 V

Page 1534 1632

1440

1534

1415

1757

1800

1395 1709

1458 1450

Additional material submitted for the record by-Continued

Nicholson, Clayton M., Vice President of the Stock Transfer Associa

tion, Inc.: Letter dated November 19, 1971, explaining action taken by his organization in the problems of the securities industryO'Connor, Bernard, article entitled “Optical Speed Reading' Peat, Marwick, Mitchell & Co.: Letter dated June 21, 1971, re material

submitted pertaining to various proposals for dealing with security

certificate.
Perkins, John H., Chairman of the National Coordinating Group for

Comprehensive Depositories: Letter dated December 23, 1971, to
Chairman Moss advising him of their interest in the subject of

immobilizing certificate in depositories --Securities and Exchange Commission:

Letter dated December 15, 1971, setting forth SEC opinion re

garding statutory authority of SEC to compel NASD to adopt
uniform rules for clearance and settlement procedures by all
NASD members for both O-T-C and listed stocks, with

attachment-
Material relating to the incorporation of the New York Stock

Exchange ---
Reply to letter of October 4, 1971, to Hon. John E. Moss, with

attachments.
Report of the SEC regarding comments on pending legislation,

submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for clearance.
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Release No. 9426.-
SEC data showing number of firms which went out of business

from late 1968 to 1970, where data processing was a significant

factor in failure, with attachments..

Securities Exchange Act release 8543 and other sundry releases.. Steadman, John M., The Law School, University of Pennsylvania:

Letter dated April 5, 1971, to Commissioner Smith, SEC, regarding

views to eliminate all stock certificates..
Subcommittee on Commerce and Finance:
Article entitled "Securities Struggle-Battle for Influence Over

Stock Trading Looms on Wall Street”..
Correspondence between staff of Subcommittee on Commerce and

Finance and the SEC, re policy of placing rule 17a-8 proposals

in a public file...
Letter dated October 4, 1971, from Hon. John E. Moss to Hon.

William J. Casey, to inform him as to the statutory basis for
clearing its budgetary requests with the Office of Management

and Budget...
Letter dated October 20, 1971, from Hon. John E. Moss, to George

P. Shultz, Director, Office of Management and Budget, re-
questing to be informed why SEC has to submit to the OMB
proposed legislation, legislative comments, etc., prior to or

simultaneously with submitting such material to Congress-
Letter dated October 20, 1971, from Hon. John E. Moss to the

Chief Justice of the United States, asking his views re what
effect there would be if SEC were empowered to conduct its
Supreme Court litigation independently of the Solicitor Gen-

eral's Office...
Shultz, George P.: Letter dated November 10, 1971, in reply to

letter from Hon. John E. Moss, dated October 20, 1971...
Supreme Court of the United States: Letter dated November 9,

1971, replying to letter of October 20, 1971, from Hon. John E.

Moss.
Van Dam, Henry, Corporate Transfer Agents Association: Letter

dated October 19, 1971, submitting position papers to Subcommittee
on Commerce and Finance.
Weinberg, Eli, article from Bank Administration, May 1971, en-

titled "A System of Certificateless Stock Transfers”

1585

[ocr errors]

1419

1666

1800

1808

1809

1808

1809

1533

1581 PARTS 4 AND 5

APPENDIXES
M. Answers to Questions, by Herman W. Bevis, Executor Director,

Page
BASIC...

1833 N. Comprehensive Securities Depository System-Study of Canceled

Stock Certificates, with statistical tables, exhibits, and charts------ 1838 0. Making the Certificate Machine-Readable (Discussion Paper, September 9, 1970)-

1869 P. Research Report on Making the Certificate Machine-Readable.

1888 Q. The Machine-Readable Certificate Project--

1893 Ř. Four Proposed Uniform Forms—Transfer Instruction Delivery Ticket Comparison Reclamation Form.

1895 S. The Billion-Share Automated Securities Depository (Central Certificate Service).-

1908 T. Memorandum of Understanding on a Comprehensive Securities De pository System

1922 U. Chronology of the New York Stock Exchange, Stock Clearing Corpo ration.

1929 V. Operating Rules of the National Clearing Corporation...

1935 W. Report and Recommendations of the Security Imprinting and Process

ing Task Force of the Committee on Uniform Security Identifica-
tion Procedures..

1960 X. OCR Equipment for Reading Stock Certificates (Report to BASIC July 1970), with charts, tables, and exhibits.

1971 Y. Letter from Chairman Casey of SEC to Mr. Moss regarding fails, with charts, tables, and exhibits..

2012 Z. Suggest approach to the National Clearing Problem, with charts and exhibits..

2039 AA. Securities Industry Overview Study

2055 BB. Paper Crisis in the Securities Industry: Causes and Cures.

2159 CC. The Role of Banking in Elimination of the Stock Certificate.

2306 DD. Seminar-Is the Stock Certificate Necessary?-

2367 EE. The Multiple Causes of Fails in Stock Clearing in the United States (Volumes I and II)--

2413 FF. A Securities Handling System for the 1975 Era-Report to New York Stock Exchange

2560 GG. Reducing Costs of Stock Transactions: A Study of Alternative Trade Completion Systems-Vol. I: Summary of Results.

2596 HH. Reducing Costs of Stock Transactions: A Study of Alternative Trade

Completion Systems—Vol. II: Evaluation of Selected Alternatives 2016 II. Reducing Costs of Stock Transactions: A Study of Alternative Trade

Completion Systems—Vol. III: The Trade Completion Simulation
Model.

2676 JJ. Reducing Costs of Stock Transactions: A Study Alternative Trade

Completion Systems-Supplement to Vol. III: The Computer
Program.

2768 KK. A Presentation for the Elimination of the Stock Certificate, by Compute-O-Gram Systems, Inc.

2850

STUDY OF THE SECURITIES INDUSTRY

APPENDIXES

APPENDIX M

EXHIBIT A

AXSWERS TO QUESTIONS BY HERMAN W. BEVIS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, BASIC

I, DEVELOPMENT OF DEPOSITORIES

(a) To what extent have such depositories been developed, and what measure of success has been achieved in these respects!

CCS is an outstanding example of a large and successful depository. Very comprehensive depositories have been operating country-wide in Germany since 1937 and France since 1941. More recent depositories founded in Continental Europe and crossing national lines are: CEDEL, based in Luxembourg; C.I.K., based in Brussels; and Morgan Guaranty's Euro-clear, for eurodollar securities, also based in Brussels.

Canada is working on a nationwide depository targeted to commence operations in about a year. We have heard of depositories being started up in Switzerland, South Africa, and Japan, but have no details about them.

(b) What developments are expected to be achieved in the near future in this respect, and what are the plans for the longer term?

This question has been answered—as to a Comprehensive Securities Depository System (CSDS) in the United States—in my Statement.

(c) What have been the significant problems involveil in developing deposi. tories, and how have these problems been overcome! What, if any, problems remain to be solved, and what steps are being taken to solve them?

As to past problems overcome by CCS, Mr. Howland, who is also scheduled to testify, is in the best position to comment.

As to establishing a CSDS, on which BASIC is working, the problems foreseen, and the attack on them, are as follows:

1. Changes in state laws, discussed below.

2 The transition of CCS from a division of Stock Clearing Corporation, a subsidiary of the New York Stock Exchange, to an independent corporation owned and managed by its participants. An implementing group of some 10 people has been formed from employees of projected participants, working full-time. The first “work plan" for this group, legal counsel, and others listed more than 70 steps that have to be taken.

3. The interrelationship between a NYCSDS and a national CSDS, discused in my Statement.

4. The problem of a CSDS taking in deposits of huge quantities of certificates from banks and other institutions will be a one-time operational problem. This problem can be solved by careful coordination and planning between CSDS and the depositors.

5. Banks--and any other potential depositors that presently file securities by customer or trust account-will have an internal problem of considerable magnitude in consolidating all these physical holdings by issue. They are already alert to this matter.

A communication plan will have to be developed to connect depositories with one another, and each with its depositors in the same and other cities. The BASIC Task Force has done some spade work in this area, and will bring in communications experts to go into the subject in further depth.

(d) What, if any, changes in state laws have been necessary to permit the full development and use of depositories? What, if any, state law changes hare yet to be made?

Mr. Howland will no doubt speak to the question of past state law changes to enable CCS to operate.

Further state law changes to enable a national CSDS to operate with maximum effectiveness include:

1. Amendment of Section 8 of the Uniform Commercial Code to provide that a "clearing corporation” (equivalent to our CSDS) may be owned by other than a registered securities exchange.

2. Amendment of Estates, Powers, and Trusts laws to permit banks to deposit fiduciary securities in a CSDS.

3. Amendment of the New York Transfer Tax law to make clear that transactions between out-of-state parties, with the sales outside the state, would not be subject to the transfer tax solely because the book-entry effecting delivery was made on CSDS records maintained in New York.

4. Probably, amendment of the state Business Corporation Act to provide that shares deposited in a CSDS may be voted directly by a depositor, after appropriate certification by CSDS to a corporation of the names and holdings of its depositors as of the record date. (This would eliminate CSDS as an obstacle in the communication chain from corporation to beneficial owner, a matter as to which corporate secretaries have expressed concern.) (e) What, if any, other regulatory problems (i.e., problems of state or Federal regulatory authorities, such as the Comptroller of the Currency, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Federal Reserve Board, or self-regulatory bodies such as the New York Stock Exchange or National Association of Securities Dealers) are likely to be involved in the development of depositories?

It is the intention that depositories in a CSDS be confined to financial organizations subject to the regulation or supervision of a federal or state authority. This would include broker-dealers, banks, mutual funds, insurance companies. and national securities exchanges and associations. Their regulators or supervisors would include: SEC, FRB, the Comptroller of the Currency, FDIC, state banking departments, state insurance departments, exchanges, and NASD,

All of these authorities would of course be interested in the conditions under which those under their jurisdiction deposited securities they hold in a CSDS. We have not heard from any of these quarters of a reservation about immobilizing certificates held by the financial community in a CSDS. The FRB's book-entry system for government bonds, notes, and bills already serves as a centralized depository precedent for many of these authorities.

It is hoped that the NYCSDS can be incorporated as a trust company under New York banking law. Preliminary discussions with the New York State Superintendent of Banks have to date uncovered no reason why this is not feasible.

(f) Would a Federal law which would preempt the field of regulation of depositories and other aspects of dealing with stock certificates, such as clear. ance, settlement and transfer, be desirable? If so, what general form should a law take?

We do not believe that a federal law regulating depositories is necessary.

If the Congress chose to preempt state law in the areas cited above in answer. ing question (d), that might be accomplished more quickly than amending the laws in the states—perhaps more quickly even than amending laws in the six to ten states that account for the vast majority of securities handlings.

However, if such federal law were accompanied by a prescribed national securities depository corporation, it is believed that it would take much longer for such a corporation to immobilize securities effectively than under the course BASIC is pursuing. A point which would have to be considered in connection with a prescribed national depository is whether the depositing in it of securities held by financial institutions would be compulsory or voluntary. If the latter. the federal corporation would have to win the complete confidence of broker dealers, banks, mutual funds, insurance companies and the customers of the first two in addition that the corporation could protect the securities as well. and account for them as accurately, as under the present system. BASIC and its Task Force have found that this is not easy,

Regardless of the form that a national CSDS takes, the Congress will naturally wish to consider whether the discharge of its responsibility requires the desig. nation of some single national regulatory authority. One reason for this could

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »