|
Rev. Rul. 94-63, 1994-2 C.B. 188
Section 1256 contracts marked to market; nonequity options; warrants.
Cash-settled options
that are based on a stock index and traded on (or subject to the rules
of) a qualified board or exchange are nonequity options for purposes of
section 1256 of the Code if the Securities and Exchange Commission
determines that the stock index is "broad-based." For purposes of
section 1256, warrants that are based on a stock index and that are,
economically, substantially identical in all material respects to
options based on a stock index are treated as options based on a stock
index.
Rev. Rul. 94-63
ISSUES
(1) If the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) permits options
based on a stock index to be traded on a national securities exchange
but the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has not designated a
contract market for a futures contract based on the stock index, then
under what circumstances are the options treated as "section 1256
contracts" within the meaning of Section 1256(b) of the Internal Revenue
Code?
(2) For purposes of Section 1256, are warrants based on a stock index
treated as options based on a stock index?
FACTS
Situation 1.
Exchange X is a national securities exchange registered with the SEC.
Among the financial products listed on exchange X are options based on
the ABC index, a stock index that represents companies from a diverse
range of industry groups. Z corporation functions as a clearing agency
for transactions on exchange X in ABC-index options.
The ABC-index options are structured as either "call" options or "put"
options and have terms ranging from three weeks to five years. They can
be exercised only on expiration (that is, they are European-style
options), and they can be settled only in cash. The holder of a call
option has a right to receive cash based on the extent to which the ABC
index on the exercise date is above a pre-stated value. The writer of a
call option has an obligation to pay cash determined in the same way. A
put option resembles a call option except that a holder's right to
receive cash and a writer's obligation to pay cash are based on the
extent to which the ABC index on the exercise date is below a pre-stated
value.
Both a holder and a writer are needed to create an ABC-index option on
exchange X, but once Z corporation accepts their transaction, the
relationship between the holder and the writer terminates. Thereafter,
under Z corporation's rules, the rights of the holder and the
obligations of the writer run solely to Z corporation. In effect, Z
corporation becomes the writer to every holder and the holder to every
writer. The number of ABC-index options outstanding fluctuates, and the
total that can be created is limited only by the number registered by Z
corporation with the SEC.
Listing the ABC-index options required changing the rules of exchange X,
and the proposed changes were filed with the SEC. An SEC order approving
the changes, published in the Federal Register, expressly stated that
the ABC index was "broad-based." Following publication, the ABC-index
options began trading. At that time, the CFTC had not designated a
market for a futures contract based on the ABC index.
Situation 2.
Exchange Y is a national securities exchange registered with the SEC.
Among the financial products listed on exchange Y are warrants based on
the ABC index.
The ABC-index warrants resemble the ABC-index options described in
Situation 1 in that the warrants are based on the ABC index, are
European-style, are structured as "calls" or "puts," and are settled
only in cash. The holder of a call warrant has a right to receive cash
based on the extent to which the ABC index on the exercise date is above
a pre-stated value. The writer of a call warrant has an obligation to
pay cash determined in the same way. A put warrant resembles a call
warrant except that a holder's right to receive cash and a writer's
obligation to pay cash are based on the extent to which the ABC index on
the exercise date is below a pre-stated value.
The ABC-index warrants differ from the ABC-index options in that all of
the warrants have five-year terms and there are a fixed number of
warrants outstanding. Moreover, all of the warrants were written by W
corporation, which sold them in a manner that resembled an initial
public offering. As the writer of the ABC-index warrants, W corporation
is required by market rules to have substantial assets and earnings.
Unlike the holder of an ABC-index option, the holder of an ABC-index
warrant has a continuing relationship with the writer. Thus, upon
exercising a warrant, the holder looks directly to W corporation for
payment.
LAW AND ANALYSIS
Situation 1.
Section 1256 prescribes special rules for reporting gains and losses
from "section 1256 contracts."
The financial products that qualify as "section 1256 contracts" are
specified in Section 1256(b). Among these are nonequity options. Section
1256(g)(3) defines a "nonequity option" as any listed option that is not
an equity option.
Under Section 1256(g)(5), a "listed option" is any option (other than a
right to acquire stock from the issuer) that is traded on (or subject to
the rules of) a qualified board or exchange. Under Section 1256(g)(7),
the term "qualified board or exchange" includes a national securities
exchange registered with the SEC.
An "equity option" is defined in Section 1256(g)(6)(A) as (i) any option
to buy or sell stock, or (ii) any option the value of which is
determined directly or indirectly by reference to any stock (or group of
stocks) or stock index. This definition, however, is subject to two
exceptions. Under Section 1256(g)(6)(B) , an option with respect to a
group of stocks or a stock index is not an "equity option" if (i) there
is in effect a designation by the CFTC of a contract market for a
futures contract based on that group of stocks or stock index, or (ii)
the Commissioner determines that the option meets the requirements of
law for contract market designation.
The statutory definition of the term "equity option" is meant to exclude
options on "broad-based" stock indices (such as the Standard & Poor's
500 index). Instead, these options are meant to qualify as "nonequity
options." H.R. Conf. Rep. No. 861, 98th Cong., 2d Sess. 902 (1984),
1984-3 (Vol. 2) C.B. 156.
National securities exchanges are "self-regulatory organizations" as
defined in Section 3(a)(26) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
Exchange Act), 15 U.S.C. Section 78c(a)(26) (1988). Under Section 19(b)
of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C. Section 78s(b) (1988), self-regulatory
organizations must have SEC approval before adding, changing, or
deleting any of their rules.
Listing a new stock index product on a national securities exchange
requires changing the rules of the exchange. The proposed rule changes,
therefore, must be filed with the SEC. The SEC reviews the proposed rule
changes to determine whether they are consistent with the Exchange Act
and, in particular, with Section 6(b)(5) of the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C.
Section 78f(b)(5) (1988). That section requires an exchange, among other
things, to design its rules in a manner that prevents fraudulent and
manipulative acts and practices. Under its general authority to approve
the proposed rule changes, the SEC determines whether the underlying
stock index is "broad-based." This determination is necessary because
the regulatory treatment of products based on a "broad-based" index is
different from that of products based on a "narrow-based" index.
Specifically, if the SEC classifies an index as "broad-based," then an
exchange that lists a derivative product based on the index is permitted
to apply more favorable exchange rules regarding margin requirements and
position and exercise limits.
Under Section 2(a)(1)(B)(ii) of the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA), 7
U.S.C. Section 2a(ii) (1988), the CFTC can designate a market for a
futures contract based on a stock index if, among other regulatory
conditions, the futures contract meets the following minimum
requirements: para indent=2>(1) The contract must provide for cash
settlement; para indent=2>(2) The contract must not be readily
susceptible to manipulation or to being used to manipulate any
underlying security; and para indent=2>(3) The index must be
predominantly composed of the securities of unaffiliated issuers and
must reflect the market for all publicly traded securities or a
substantial segment of the market.
These three requirements are meant to narrow the authority of the CFTC
to designate a market for a futures contract based on a stock index. In
particular, the CFTC is not to approve trading in this type of futures
contract unless the underlying stock index is "broad-based." See H.R.
Rep. No. 565, Part I, 97th. Cong., 2d Sess. 38 (1980).
Whenever a commodity exchange seeks to become a market for a futures
contract based on a stock index, the CFTC must forward to the SEC a copy
of the exchange's application. Section 2(a)(1)(B)(iv)(II) of the CEA, 7
U.S.C.A. Section 2a(iv)(II) (West Supp. 1994). If the SEC determines
that the contract fails to satisfy the three requirements of Section
2(a)(1)(B)(ii), 7 U.S.C. Section 2a(ii) (1988), then the CFTC cannot
designate the commodity exchange as a market for the contract.
Consequently, the SEC examines stock indices not only for the purpose of
approving options and warrants on those indices but also for the purpose
of determining whether futures contracts on those indices satisfy the
three requirements of Section 2(a)(1)(B)(ii), 7 U.S.C. Section 2a(ii)
(1988).
The SEC uses the same analysis in determining both (1) whether a stock
index underlying an option or warrant is "broad-based," and (2) whether
a stock index underlying a futures contract is predominantly composed of
the securities of unaffiliated issuers and reflects the market for all
publicly traded securities or a substantial segment thereof. Thus, an
SEC determination that a stock index is "broad-based" is equivalent to a
determination that the index meets the third requirement of Section
2(a)(1)(B)(ii) of the CEA, 7 U.S.C. Section 2a(ii) (1988).
The ABC-index options are "listed options" under Section 1256(g)(5)
because the ABC-index options are traded on exchange X, a "qualified
board or exchange" under Section 1256(g)(7). Exchange X is a "qualified
board or exchange" because exchange X is a national securities exchange
registered with the SEC.
The value of the ABC-index options is determined by reference to a stock
index. The ABC-
index options are, therefore, "equity options" under Section
1256(g)(6)(A) unless (1) the CFTC has designated a contract market for a
futures contract based on the ABC index, or (2) the Commissioner
determines that the ABC-index options meet the requirements of law for
contract market designation. Section 1256(g)(6)(B).
The CFTC has not designated a contract market for a futures contract
based on the ABC index. Nevertheless, the Commissioner has an adequate
basis to determine that the ABC-index options meet the three minimum
requirements of Section 2(a)(1)(B)(ii) of the CEA, 7 U.S.C. Section
2a(ii) (1988). First, the ABC-index options provide for cash settlement.
Second, the SEC has approved the rule changes needed to list the
ABC-index options on exchange X, a national securities exchange. Under
the Exchange Act, 15 U.S.C.A. Sections 78a-78ll (West 1981 & Supp.
1994), a national securities exchange must design its rules in a manner
that prevents fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices. The SEC
approval of the rule changes, therefore, is evidence that the ABC-index
options are not readily susceptible to manipulation or to being used to
manipulate any underlying security. Third, the SEC has determined that
the ABC index is "broad-based." For reasons previously stated, this
determination by the SEC is equivalent to a determination that the ABC
index is predominantly composed of the securities of unaffiliated
issuers and that the ABC index reflects the market for all publicly
traded securities or a substantial segment thereof.
Under these circumstances, the Commissioner has sufficient grounds to
determine that the ABC-index options meet the requirements of law for
contract market designation under Section 1256(g)(6)(B). If the
Commissioner makes a determination, then the ABC-index options are not
"equity options" under Section 1256(g)(6)(A). Instead, they are "nonequity
options" and, therefore, "section 1256 contracts." Moreover, the
Commissioner would have sufficient grounds to make a determination even
if the ABC-index options were American-style options (that is, if the
options could be exercised at any time before expiration). Nothing in
Section 1256 requires a stock-index contract to be exercisable on a
particular date.
Situation 2.
For purposes of Section 1256, whether stock-index warrants are
treated as stock-index options depends on the warrants' economic
features. See Rev. Rul. 88-31 , 1988-1 C.B. 302. The warrants based on
the ABC index that are traded on exchange Y are structured as "calls"
and "puts." The holder of a call warrant has a right to receive cash
based on the extent to which the ABC index on the exercise date is above
a pre-stated value. The holder of a put warrant has a right to receive
cash based on the extent to which the ABC index on the exercise date is
below a pre-stated value. The writer of the warrants, W corporation, is
obligated to make these cash payments. Because, economically, the
warrants are substantially identical in all material respects to options
based on a stock index, the warrants are treated as options based on a
stock index for purposes of Section 1256. Moreover, this conclusion
would be the same even if the warrants were American-style warrants.
HOLDINGS
(1) For purposes of Section 1256, the Commissioner hereby determines
that:
Options that are based on a stock index and that are traded on (or
subject to the rules of) a qualified board or exchange meet the
requirements of law for contract market designation if (a) the options
provide for cash-settlement, and (b) the SEC has determined that the
stock index is a "broad-based" index. Therefore, these options are
"section 1256 contracts."
(2) For purposes of Section 1256, warrants that are based on a stock
index and that are, economically, substantially identical in all
material respects to options based on a stock index are treated as
options based on a stock index.
PROSPECTIVE APPLICATION
Under Section 7805(b), Holding (1) will not be applied to positions
in warrants or options established on or before November 10, 1994, or
before the SEC determines that the underlying index is "broad-based."
DRAFTING INFORMATION
The principal author of this revenue Ruling is Marshall D. Feiring
of the Office of Assistant Chief Counsel (Financial Institutions &
Products). For further information regarding this revenue Ruling,
contact Mr. Feiring at (202) 622-3960 (not a toll-free call).
Rev. Rul. 86-8,
1986-1 C.B. 295
ISSUE
Whether an option on the High Technology Index of the Pacific Stock
Exchange is a nonequity option within the meaning of section1256(g)(3)
of the Internal Revenue Code.
LAW
Section 1256 of the Code prescribes special rules for reporting
gains and losses from "section 1256 contracts."
Section 1256(b) defines the term "section 1256 contract" as any
regulated futures contract, any foreign currency contract, any nonequity
option, and any dealer equity contract.
Section 1256(g)(3) of the Code provides that the term "nonequity option"
means any listed option which is not an equity option.
Section 1256(g)(6)(B) of the Code provides that the term "equity option"
does not include any option with respect to any group of stocks or stock
index if--
(i) there is in effect a designation by the Commodities Futures Trading
Commission of a contract market for a contract based on such group of
stocks or index, or
(ii) the Secretary determines that such option meets the requirements of
law for such a designation.
HOLDING
The Internal Revenue Service has determined that an option on the
High Technology Index of the Pacific Stock Exchange is a nonequity
option within the meaning of section 1256(g)(3) of the Code.
Colin M. Cody, CPA, CMA
TraderStatus.com LLC
6004 Main Street
Trumbull, Connecticut 06611-2400
(203) 268-7000
MEMBERSHIPS
Member
PCPS
The
AICPA Alliance for CPA Firms
Private Companies Practice Section
American Institute of CPAs
Connecticut Society of CPAs
California Board of Accountancy
Institute of Management Accountants
online verifications:
http://peerreview.aicpaservices.org/firmfile/default.asp
http://www.ct.gov/sboa/site/default.asp
http://www.sots.state.ct.us/SBOA/DownloadData.html
https://www.cba.ca.gov/ppns_search
|