View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

R-721
BOARD OF GOVERNORS

"or THE

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
STATEMENT FOR THE PRESS
For release in morning papers,
Tuesday, October 29, 1940.
The following ruling will appear in the Federal Reserve
Bulletins
"Gash on Delivery" Transactions Under Regulation T
The Board has recently considered certain questions involving the special cash account under section 4(c) of Regulation T, and
especially the provisions of section 4(c)(5) relating to so-called
"cash on delivery" or "C.O.D." transactions. For convenient reference,
the relevant portions of section 4(c), particularly of 4(c)(5) are set
out below:
"(c) Special cash account. - (1) In a special cash account, a creditor may effect for or with any customer bona
fide cash transactions in securities in which the creditor
may—
"(A) purchase any security for> or sell any
security to, any customer, provided funds sufficient for the purpose are already held in the account or the purchase or sale is in reliance upon
an agreement accepted by the creditor in good
faith that the customer will promptly make full
cash payment for the security and that the customer does not contemplate soiling the security
prior to making such payment;
"(2) In case a customer purchases a security (other than
an exempted security) in the special cash account and does not
make full cash payment for the security within 7 days after
the date on which the security is so purchased, the creditor
shall, except as provided in the succeeding subdivisions of
this section 4(c), promptly cancel or otherwise liquidate the
transaction or the unsettled portion thereof
"(5) If the creditor, acting in good faith in accordance
with subdivision (1) of this section 4(c), purchases a security




1 7 8

- 2 -

Ii-721

for a customer, or sells a security to a customer, with the
understanding that he is to deliver the security promptly to
the customer, and the full cash payment to be made promptly
by the customer is to be made against such delivery, the
creditor may at his option treat the transaction as one to
which the period applicable under subdivision (2) of this
section 4(c) is not, the 7 days therein specified but 35 days
after the date of such purchase or sale: Provided, however,
That the creditor shall not so treat any purchase by a given
customer if any security has been purchased ty such customer
at any time during the preceding 90 days in a special cash
account with the creditor, and then, for any reason whatever,
without having been previously paid for in full by the customer , the security has been sold in the account or delivered
out to any broker or dealer: Provided, That an appropriate
committee of a national securities exchange, on application
of the creditor, may authorize the creditor to disregard for
the purposes of the preceding proviso any given instance of
the type therein described if the committee is satisfied that
both creditor and customer are acting in good faith ana that
circumstances warrant such authorization.
" (6) If e.n appropriate committee of a national securities exchange is satisfied that the creditor is acting in
good faith in making the application, that the application
relates to a bona fide cash transaction, and that exceptional circumstances warrant such action, such committee, on application of the creditor, may (A) extend any period specified
in subdivision (2), (3), (4) or (5) of this section 4(c) for
one or more limited periods commensurate with the circumstances,
"
In general. The problems were ones relating, under section
4(c)(5), to the time of delivering a security to a customer and obtain
ing cash payment against the delivery. The rulings on the particular
cases may be understood more readily in the light of certain general
principles which apply to section 4(c) and particularly to the 0.0.D.
transactions under section 4(c)(5).
It should be noted at the outset that it is not the purpose
of section 4(c)(5) to allow additional time to customers for making
payment. The "prompt delivery" described in section 4(c)(5) is delivery which is to be made as soon as the broker or dealer can reasonably
make it in view of the mechanics of the securities business and the
bona fide usages of the trade. The provision merely recognizes the
fact tnat in certain circumstances it is an established bona fide
practice in the trade to obtain payment against delivery of the




K-721
security to the customer, and the further fact that the mechanics of
the trade, unrelated to the customer's readiness to pay, may sometimes
delay such delivery to the customer.
The customer should have the necessary means of payment readily available when he purchases a security in the special cash account.
He should expect to pay for it immediately or in any event within the
period (of not more than a very few days) that is as long as is usually
required to carry through the ordinary securities transaction.
Such an undertaking is a necessary part of the customer's
agreement, under section 4(c)(1)(A), that he "will promptly make full
cash payment". Furthermore, any delay by the customer may cast doubt
on the original status of the transaction and should be explainable by
exceptional circumstances that justify the delay. Repetition of delays
by the customer would be especially hard to justify. Such repetition
would almost conclusively label his transactions as unable to qualify
as bona fide cash transactions and would almost conclusively disqualify
them for inclusion in the special cash account.
These general principles are illustrated ty the specific
cases to which the Board has given consideration.
Broker "failed to receive" security. A typical example of
a case in which the delivery to the customer is delayed because of conditions in the trade is one in which tne broker has "failed to receive"
the security which the customer has purchased. Assuming that no evasion of the regulation is involved and that the failure to receive the
security is an ordinary incident to the usual operation of the securities business, section 4(c)(5) would cover the time, not exceeding the
35-day maximum specified in the provision, reasonably required for the
broker to obtain the security and deliver it to the customer.
Purchasing for delivery security already sold to customer.
It sometimes happens that a dealer will sell a security to a customer
although the dealer does not have the security on hand for delivery and
expects to purchase it in the market in order to make delivery to the
customer. A special case of this type is one in which an institutional
investor such as an insurance company, trust fund, or the like, will
purchase a block of a particular issue of securities—usually bonds—
as a unit, and will request that the entire block of securities be delivered at one time in order to avoid unreasonable duplication of
clerical or administrative operations.
Questions as to the time allowed the dealer to acquire the
securities in the market for delivery to the customer under section
4(c)(5) are essentially questions of reasonableness, and must




175

~4~

8-721

176

necessarily depend on the circumstances of the particular case.
„

*

•

,

As indicated above, the dealer could not delay acquiring the
securities he did not have on hand if such delay was for the purpose
of giving additional time to the customer. Assuming, however, that no
such evasion is involved and that there is complete good faith, the
dealer would have a reasonable time for acquiring the securities and
could take into account the general state of the market, the effect of
forcing a sudden purchase of the securities, and similar factors. He
would not have to force through a sizeable purchase in a market that
is temporarily thin or disorganized. But on the other hand he should
proceed to acquire and deliver the securities with all reasonable dispatch.
Unissued securities. The question was raised whether section
4(c)(5) applies to securities which at the time of the transaction are
unissued. The answer is that it does, but that, as in other cases, the
broker should deliver the security and complete the transaction as soon
as he can in view of the mechanics of the trade. This being the case,
it seems that there would be very few instances in which section 4(c)(5)
would, in practice, authorize any more time for delivering such a security and obtaining payment therefor than would section 4(c)(3) which,
in the following terms, specifically provides for most situations involving unissued securities:
"(3) If the security when so purchased is an unissued
security, the period applicable to the transaction under subdivision (2) of this section 4(c) shall be 7 days after the
date on which the security is made available by the issuer
for delivery to purchasers."
Securities purchased with proceeds of securities called for
redemption. Sometimes a customer wishes to purchase a security and to
pay for it with the proceeds of another security which the customer
holds and which the issuer has called for redemption. Occasionally the
proceeds of trie called security will not be available for some time,
perhaps 30 days, and the customer would like to delay payment for that
time.
Such a circumstance would not justify delay in obtaining payment under section 4(c)(5), since the delay would not arise from the
mechanics of the trade as they affect the broker or dealer, but merely
from the customer's desire for delay in making payment.

.«

In the particular case presented to the Board, however, the
customer deposited the called security with the dealer with definite
instructions to deliver it for redemption and apply the proceeds to
payment for the purchased security. This made the situation similar




to that considered in the ruling at page 1043 of the December 1938 Federal Reserve Bulletin, which was to the effect that in certain circumstances the sale of a security held in the special cash account may
serve as payment for a security which has been purchased in the account
even though the proceeds of sale have not yet been collected.
Although the security had not actually been sold in the present case, the Board expressed the view that, if the necessary requirements of good faith were met and there was every reasonable probability
that the called security actually would be paid according to the call
for redemption, the same principle would apply. In such circumstances,
therefore, payment for the purchased security may be considered to have
been made for the purposes of section 4(c) at the time when the called
security is deposited with the dealer for the indicated purpose.