loi Dodd Franck/CFTC/ limitations de positions

Oui Marie, reçu hier "Dim 16 janvier 2011, 15h 39min 56s".

Il a peut-être mis six mois pour arriver mais bon...et il fait référence à la "kiki table" du Métropole Café (intraduisible pour des raisons évidentes).

Comme on ne me demande pas de cliquer sur un lien et de communiquer mes coordonnées bancaire, ou qu'on ne me propose pas de partager 50.000.000$ sur un compte bancaire détenu à Londres par l'héritier improbable d'un ressortissant d'un pays plus ou moins exotique, je pense qu'il s'agit d'un authentique mail du Métropole, mais bon, de nos jours, il faut s'attendre à tout.

marie a écrit:

est tu certain qu'il s'agissait d'un mail du métropole?
j'ai rien reçu de tel, personnellement ..

je relis l'article .. et tout les commentaires st relatifs à ça ..
d'ailleurs, tu vois bien en lisant la file dédiée à Bart Chilton .. que les négociations / tractations sont toujours en cours depuis cette date ..

https://000999.forumactif.com/t11828-bart-chilton-s-enerve-plaintes-contre-jpm-et-hsbc-en-class-action

tu as raison,Pascal, toutes mes excuses ..
je viens d'aller sur Kiki table et je découvre dans cet article, la dernière déclaration de Bart Chilton .. datant du 13 janvier dernier, très alambiquée..où il déclare en final, que ni lui, ni les 8 sénateurs qui lui ont écrit.. ne vont renoncer à mettre en place ces limitations de position ... en dépit de l'obstruction visible de la commission ..

Statement of Commissioner Bart Chilton at the 9th CFTC Public Meeting on Rulemaking under the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act


January 13, 2011
As regulators, I think we have one key mission. It is embodied in the Commodity Exchange Act. We have a singularity of purpose to ensure efficient and effective markets and to prevent and deter fraud, abuse and manipulation. Quite frankly, I think we can do better. We can because the new Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act requires that we develop what many of us consider to be some fairly precious parameters.
Today, I am hopeful we will move forward to propose a position limits rule, a most precious parameter that we should have proposed much earlier in a way that would have implemented the provision as Congress intended. That's not happening.
Yesterday, eight U. S. Senators told us to move forward on limits. That follows two other senatorial letters from last month.
This is a Commission of five individuals, a group of people who make these decisions. That pretty much ensures no individual will get their way all the time. I'm certainly not getting my way on position limits, nor are the Senators who wrote to us.
I am thankful that we will have position points in place as a kind of glide path to position limits. As I've said repeatedly, points are not limits. However, they will help us learn more and do better as we go forward in further developing important—and precious— parameters.



Last Updated: January 13, 2011




http://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/SpeechesTestimony/chiltonstatement011311.html

c'est donc en effet un victoire.. provisoire pour JPM .. qu'il a immédiatement mis à profit avec le raid de ces derniers jours ..
ceci étant dit .. le marché l'aura quand même au tournant .. et il sera éventuellement pris au piège de ses soit disant hedge .. car il ne devrait pas pouvoir proposer en lieu et place de ses livraisons, un cash settlement ( cad payer en $ et au prix fort- majoré- son obligation contractuelle )..
ce qui montrerait à l'envie ( et à la CFTC) qu'il n'a aucune longue position en contrepartie de ses shorts

intégralité de l'article paru sur kikitable est en lecture libre chez zero hedge

http://www.zerohedge.com/article/guest-post-jp-morgan-wins-cftc-position-limits-do-not-apply-them

Harvey Organ, s'énerve et à juste titre à son tour.. contre les 4 régulateurs ( sur 5 , le 5eme étant Bart Chilton, seul contre les 4 autres.. dont le plus "gradé G.Gensler ex GS ) de la CFTC

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Gensler


From: harveyorgan@rogers.com
To: GGensler@cftc.gov, somalia@cftc.gov, MDunn@cftc.gov, JSommers@cftc.gov
Subject: Position limits and elimination of exemptions. Date: 1/20/2011 9:40:56 P.M.
I am rather disappointed that you have allowed the major banking short interests to continue with their fraudulent and manipulative practices in the precious metals. You have allowed another 60 days of massive shorting by the bankers to allow for yet another public input. The public for the past 2 1/2 years have bombarded you with millions of emails with the hope that you will see the light and put position limits on silver and eliminate the phony exemptions. Mr O'Malia was the lone dissenter on your latest vote voicing his concern that the swap books on JPMorgan once opened would be a shock and that the CFTC would not know how to handle the situation. It has been my contention all along that the major short, is in reality the Chinese government who lent their hoard of silver in support of the suppression of gold. It would be difficult to suppress gold while allowing silver to advance in price. The gold was supplied by central authorities. The USA ran out of silver in 2003 and in order to receive most favoured nation status, the Chinese have done a swap with the USA with a date certain to re-swap. It is quite conceivable that the Chinese have asked for their silver back but were refused as global supplies for silver are vanishing.
Yesterday, the USA Mint announced a record 4.6 million oz of silver eagles sold in the first 3 week period of January which is a record. The USA produces 40 million oz from their mines so for the first time, the USA must import silver from the rest of the world to satisfy the mint's requirements.
The comex is witnessing massive movements of silver into and out of registered vaults signifying turmoil as this silver is putting out fires in other jurisdictions. In gold we are witnessing the opposite. How on earth is gold being settled?
What is even more troubling to me is this:
How could you even discuss position limits and the elimination of exemptions without first telling us what happened in July 2008 which caused you to bring in the enforcement division of the CFTC? Mr Chilton has decided to act unilaterally in proclaiming one trader, JPMorgan, with fraud, and from his statement to the press, major class action law suits have been initiated and filed.
It is frustrating to many of us who witness time and time again massive un-backed paper driving the commodity price of silver and gold down like today. I guess the CFTC's motto that the futures market is a price discovery mechanism is out the window. Mr Dunn has stated that he needs more manpower to try and catch manipulation. Yet when a whistle blower is presented to you and this person describes in detail the accounting of how the crime has been committed in the past and how it will happen in the future and yet you refuse to listen to this gentleman.
Mr Sprott of Sprott Asset Management is having a tough time trying to find any physical silver for his silver fund and yet the bankers massive sell huge amounts of paper silver. The SLV also has liquidated massive amounts of "paper silver". The real stuff is difficult to find in quantity.
Sooner or later, this fraud will end and I guess there is going to be a lot of explaining to do.
I urge you to do the right thing and order JPMorgan and friends to stop this massive fraud and manipulation immediately.
Harvey Organ.

http://www.roadtoroota.com/public/504.cfm


CFTC Delays 60-Day Notification To Assist Manipulators


Bix Weir




OPEN LETTER TO THE CFTCJanuary 25, 2011Commodities Futures Trading Commission3 Lafayette Center1155 21st St. NW Washington, DC 50581Re: CFTC Delays 60-Day Notification To Assist ManipulatorsCommissioners:On
January 13, 2011 the CFTC held a hearing on the Implementation of
Position Limits for the Dodd-Frank Act that was mandated by the US
Congress to be implemented on January 17, 2011. This meeting was a
continuation of the same meeting held in December on the same topic. As
of today, January 25, 2011, Position Limits have NOT been implemented
and thus the CFTC is currently in violation of the laws of the United
States Congress. The reasoning behind the current delay? "There must be a
60 day notice period"...SO WHERE IS IT? WHERE IS THE 60 DAY
NOTIFICATION ANNOUNCEMENT? WHY WON'T YOU START THE CLOCK TICKING EVEN
THOUGH YOU ARE IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW?Are you stalling to
let the GIGANTIC silver short escape from their manipulative short
position because THAT'S WHAT THEY ARE DOING WITH EVERY SLAM! Just look
at your own Bank Participation Reports:Here's the US Bank Silver short contracts for the last 2 months:11/2/10 = 30,76012/7/10 = 26,3321/4/11 = 22,658Why
can't you see manipulation when it is directly in front of your face.
Do you plan to let them make up more false reasons for the public to run
away from silver so they can fully cover up their crime?Silver Investors: Pick Your Poisonhttp://www.roadtoroota.com/public/498.cfmTruthfully, Silver Investors have been dealing with this for so long we've grown numb to it all and that is very sad. The
January 13th meeting SHOULD have been the beginning of the 60 day
notification period that would have ENDED on March 14, 2011. Please
advise the public as to WHY this notification has not been posted and
WHY there is no comment section on your website even though rule
proposals held later ARE POSTED:http://comments.cftc.gov/PublicComments/ReleasesWithComments.aspxNow,
I'd like to address a very remarkable statement that was made at the
beginning of this meeting that was as SHOCKING as anything I have heard
from an official at the CFTC. The Statement was made by Commissioner
Mike Dunn and it was regarding what he deemed to be false accusations by
the press on what "the problem" is. Here is a link to the hearing and
his quote is at the very beginning after being presented with an plaque
for 25 years of service.http://www.capitolconnection.net/capcon/cftc/011311/wmarchive.htm"It
is too often in the press today that folks have said 'the Government is
the enemy or is the problem' it then is shifted not from the Government
but to the men and women who work day to day in Government as a
problem...AND THAT'S JUST SIMPLY NOT TRUE."Excuse me Mr.
Dunn but Silver Investors are not the kind of people to shift blame just
to find someone to fault for our misfortunes. If we "get it wrong" and
have made a poor investment choice because of faulty analysis or an
overzealous "bubble mentality" we are more than willing to take our
licks in the free market.BUT when YOU CIVIL SERVANTS sit on your
hands and stand by as the obvious manipulations take place THAT'S WHERE
WE DRAW THE LINE! Mr. Dunn we have something very important to say to
you and you'd better listen this time...YOU, AS AN EMPLOYEE OF THE CFTC WORKING DAY TO DAY, ARE THE PROBLEM!You
are EVERYTHING bad about our once great nation and WE will not rest
until justice is served. Both for the perpetrators who pull off the
market rigging on a day to day basis AS WELL AS the massively
incompetent or massively corrupt civil servants. For over 10
years silver investors have been yelling and screaming at the CFTC to do
their job and stop the obvious manipulation in the COMEX silver market.
We have supplied you with irrefutable evidence from your own data, the
names of the perpetrators, the timing of their manipulative actions and
EVEN A BONAFIDE WHISTLBLOWER THAT HELD YOUR HAND DURING ANOTHER
MANIPULATION but STILL you allow the daily manipulation of the COMEX
silver market!Mr. Dunn, one of your OWN JUDGES blew the whistle
on the corrupt CFTC in his resignation letter. This PROVES we have been
correct for the past 20 years that the COMEX has been RIGGED!

baroud d'honneur de Butler et Bix Weir pour imposer une limitation à 1500 contrats silver, sans compter l'exception injustifiée des bullions banks

modéle de courrier à envoyer à la CFTC

http://www.roadtoroota.com/public/532.cfm

marie a écrit:

baroud d'honneur de Butler et Bix Weir pour imposer une limitation à 1500 contrats silver, sans compter l'exception injustifiée des bullions banks

modéle de courrier à envoyer à la CFTC

[url=http://www.roadtoroota.com/public/532.cfm

http://www.roadtoroota.com/public/532.cfm[/quote[/url]]

C'est peut-être une erreur technique Marie, mais pour l'adresse à laquelle écrire moi j'avais

CFTC
c.o. Santa Claus
- 00000° C
North Pole

Bon, tout ça pour dire que les efforts consentis jusqu'à présent ont été remarquablement utiles et ont probablement débloqué la situation auprès de nombreux investisseurs qui ont pris conscience de l'ampleur des manipulations du marché. C'est ce qui les a conduits à modifier leur attitude et probablement a fait participer d'autres intervenants, d'où l'évolution du cours du silver notamment.

Mais sur un plan juridique et réglementaire, je ne suis pas certain que la CFTC elle-même accepte de changer quoi que ce soit comme elle a d'ailleurs encore récemment refusé de le faire (je suis même à peu près sûr qu'elle ne le fera pas, en tout cas pas sérieusement tant que les intérêts des commerciaux seront en jeu).

Certes, écrire ces lettres démontrera encore un peu plus l'asservissement volontaire de cette noble institution, mais à mon sens aujourd'hui la vitesse acquise est suffisante sur un plan économique pour que le véritable enjeu soit devenu : LMBA et plus COMEX, mouvement qui est apparemment en train de se produire à la fois sur le pétrole et sur les MPx comme remarqué sur une autre file.

La CFTC laissera ce marché mourir et, si elle le peut, JPM et ses sbires sortir au mieux et truander à l'envers le marché du cuivre comme elle a laissé shorter le gold et le silver pendant 30 ans plutôt que d'en faire un marché juridiquement transparent et valablement réglementé. Il n'y a plus guère de doute sur cette question. Et c'est probablement sur un autre plan, économique, accessoirement médiatique, et non juridique, que le combat a été engagé aujourd'hui et qu'il est d'ailleurs en train d'être gagné.

faut pas être aussi cynique, Pascal.. sur ce sujet en tout cas ..

on n'imagine pas à quel point les pétitions successives organisées par Ted Butler ont produit leur effet ..
sans elles, y'aurait tout simplement eu ni enquête officielle sur la manipulation du marché de l'argent, ni auditions cftc en mars dernier sur le dossier argent ... et personne n'aurait jamais entendu ce que Andrew Maguire avait à révéler..

ce genre de pétitions a au minimum un effet médiatique indiscutable..( donc une forme de pression extrémement importante )

marie a écrit:

faut pas être aussi cynique, Pascal.. sur ce sujet en tout cas ..

on n'imagine pas à quel point les pétitions successives organisées par Butler ont produit leur effet ..
sans elles, y'aurait tout simplement eu ni enquête officielle sur le silver, ni auditions cftc en mars dernier sur le dossier silver ... et personne n'aurait jamais entendu ce que Andrew Maguire avait à révéler..

ce genre de pétitions a au minimum un effet médiatique indiscutable..( donc une forme de pression extrémement importante )

Oui Marie,

C'est en effet bien ce que j'écrivais.

Mais maintenant, je ne suis pas certain qu'il soit encore très utile de se battre sur ce terrain là puisque tout a été dit, que le message est passé auprès des pros et que de toutes façons la CFTC ne bougera pas tant que JPM et Cie ne le lui ordonnera pas. Je pense que maintenant c'est vraiment ailleurs que ça se passe.

I may be wrong...

plus il y aura de tapage médiatique, mieux ce sera .. , Pascal

ça coute rien de mailer la cftc.. et ça peut pas faire de mal ..
donc je vais pas décourager nos lecteurs, de le faire

le papier de Ted Butler sur ce sujet .. avec là aussi , un modéle de courrier à mailer

http://news.silverseek.com/SilverSeek/1298557244.php

je modifierais comme suit sa dernière phrase .. puisque cette limitation de positions, doit bien évidemment s'appliquer à tout le monde .. et pas uniquement à ceux qui sont classés en specs ..
c'est évident, mais ça va mieux en le disant




Please institute a 1500 contract (7.5 million ounce) position limit for silver. for any single trader.. commercial or speculator

arf ... nos braves gens du world gold council s'opposent fermement à toutes limitation de positions sur les futures métaux précieux..
le boss du WGC s'est donc fendu d'une lettre à la cftc que vous trouverez ici

ttp://www.gata.org/files/WGCtoCFTC-03-28-2011.pdf

les arguments avancés sont typiquement ceux des bullions banks, positions hedgées en dérivés,
cad dire pérennité et protection d'une offre fictive et illimitée de papier or, argent ou autres métaux précieux.

http://www.gata.org/node/9754

World Gold Council to CFTC: Don't mess with paper gold


Submitted by cpowell on Tue, 2011-03-29 03:18. Section: Daily Dispatches
11:28p ET Monday, March 28, 2011
Dear Friend of GATA and Gold (and Silver):
Thanks to Zero Hedge's pseudonymous Tyler Durden tonight for unearthing the long statement submitted this month by World Gold Council CEO Aram Shishmanian to the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission in opposition to the commission's proposal to impose limits on traders' positions in the precious metals futures markets:
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/cftc-position-limit-response-period-ove...
The council's objection to position limits involves to a great extent their potential to interfere with the derivative instruments that have diverted monetary demand for gold away from real metal and into paper promises of metal that suppress gold's price but can't be fulfilled, and the potential for position limits to interfere with hedging by gold miners, another price-suppressive practice.
In essence, the council's statement is a defense of an unlimited supply of paper gold issued by the several big international banks that control the gold and silver markets, paper gold being the enemy of real metal priced in a free market as well as the enemy of accountability for government currencies.




Shishmanian tells the CFTC:
"The current proposed definition of 'deliverable supply' includes the quantity of the commodity meeting a contract's delivery specifications that a market participant could, with 'prudent planning,' procure during the relevant time period from available local supply, deliverable non-local supply, and comparable supply (based on factors such as product and location). The World Gold Council believes that the CFTC should update its definition of 'deliverable supply' to account for changes in the commodity markets over the last 20 years which have increased the complexities and products within the commodity markets.
"For example, 'exchanges for related positions' ('EFRPs') are transactions used by market participants in the futures exchanges to accommodate more flexible settlement options for physically settled commodity transactions. An EFRP consists of two discrete but related simultaneous transactions. One party to the EFRP must be the buyer of (or the holder of the long market exposure associated with) the related position and the seller of the corresponding exchange contract. The other party to the EFRP must be the seller of (or the holder of the short market exposure associated with) the related position and the buyer of the corresponding exchange contract. The related position (cash, OTC swap, OTC option, or other OTC derivative) must involve the commodity underlying the exchange contract, or must be a derivative, byproduct, or related product of such commodity that has a reasonable degree of price correlation to the commodity underlying the exchange contract.
"In the majority of circumstances, EFRPs (particularly exchange for physical transactions) make physical settlement of exchange-traded commodity futures and option contracts unnecessary, and therefore increasingly less common. Additionally, the exchange for physical transaction makes a commodity's futures contract substantially less vulnerable to a corner or squeeze because, in effect, the exchange for physical transaction has introduced flexibility to an otherwise limited physical settlement process.
"The World Gold Council encourages the CFTC to update the proposed definition of deliverable supply to reflect the more flexible settlement options for physically settled commodity transactions, and thereby expanding the definition of deliverable supply (and increase the applicable spot-month position limits). Furthermore, an updated definition of deliverable supply which accurately reflects the manner in which the current commodity markets function will reduce the threat of price volatility and manipulation, while promoting liquidity and encourage effective risk management.
"The CFTC's proposal to recalculate the position limits annually based on changes in open interest potentially may reduce the participation of market participants in the more deferred delivery months, particularly for long-term contracts that include positions in relatively illiquid deferred months.
"For example, a market participant may be wary of entering into a long-term transaction if the position limit that makes the trade permissible at one point in time may be reduced in the future. In order to secure financing for many mining projects, the World Gold Council’s members must be able to hedge price risk many years into the future. However, the uncertainty associated with floating position limits may inadvertently discourage market participants from providing the requisite long-term hedges which, in turn, would make it difficult for the World Gold Council's members to finance investments for crucial infrastructure projects. In general, the annual recalculation will make it difficult to hedge long-term transactions. This, in turn, likely will lead to more price volatility due to reduced liquidity."
The World Gold Council's letter to the CFTC has been posted at GATA's Internet site here --
http://www.gata.org/files/WGCtoCFTC-03-28-2011.pdf
-- but apparently not at the council's own Internet site. One has to wonder here whether the council is representing mining companies or their bankers instead.
CHRIS POWELL, Secretary/Treasurer
Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee Inc.

Le Worlg gold council, un ardent supporter de la manipulation des prix de l'or et de l'argent
comme vous l'avez vu plus haut, le WGC refuse toute limitations de positions sur les futures de l'or et de l'argent
Réaction et analyse de Bix Weir

ça n'est pas pour rien que G.Sandro avait baptisé cette organisme, censé représenter et défendre les intérêts des compagnies productrices d'or et d'argent métal : gros wagon des collabos

outre le fait qu'ils mettent toujours en avant la demande de bijouteris, qu'ils produisent des statisues bidonnées .. ils ont également comme principal partenaire, l'etf Or, GLD, un des principaux instruments de manipulation du marché de l'or. dont HSBC, l'un des plus gros shorteurs des futures or, est le gardien ...
sans compter l'etf argent SLV, dont JPM, suspecté d'être le plus gros shorteur sur les futures de l'argent métal, est le gardien

j'en profite pour saluer le travail du Gata à ce sujet ... qui dénonce WGC, depuis le début ..

http://www.roadtoroota.com/public/564.cfm

La WGC n'est qu'un "syndicat" et ne représente que lui même (ses bailleurs de fonds). L'entourloupe consiste à faire croire à la plèbe naïve et crédule qu'il aurait une quelconque représentativité globale objective.

Quand vous avez des gens corrompus au sein d'une organisation à vocation corporatiste , on ne peut pas s'attendre à avoir des avis-revendications honnêtes.

oui, Nofear .. en attendant les cies minières qui ne veulent pas se faire flouer devraient retirer leur adhésion .. et créer un autre syndicat ..

la CFTC repousse à nouveau la date du prochain meeting, qui était initialement prévue pour aujourd'hui 30 mars

CFTC cancels March 30 rule-making meeting
Mon Mar 28, 2011 5:26pm EDT
WASHINGTON, March 28 (Reuters) - The U.S. futuresregulator said on Monday it has canceled its latest rule-makingmeeting scheduled on March 30.
The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission did not givea reason for the cancellation. The agency had planned tointroduce at its 13th rule-making session a measure for datarecordkeeping and reporting requirements for swaps prior to implementation of the rule, as well as transition swaps.
The CFTC is writing dozens of regulations to implement the Dodd-Frank law, which was enacted last July and gives the agency oversight of the $600 trillion global swaps market.
The agency also has scheduled a meeting on April 7 to introduce another batch of proposals. Measures including capital and margin requirements for non-bank companies, and a definition for the types of swaps that will be required to clear and trade have yet to be introduced.

limitations de position CFTC Vote fixé au 18 octobre prochain .

cette fois ci sera t'elle la bonne ?

on sait que le calendrier a été maintes fois repoussé ... bref, voici communiqué de Reuters



**************



http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/10/11/us-financial-regulation-limits-cftc-idUSTRE79A6GV20111011



CFTC majority is said to favor position limits rule


Submitted by cpowell on Wed, 2011-10-12 13:15. Section: Daily Dispatches
By Christopher Doering
Reuters
Tuesday, October 11, 2011



CHICAGO -- The head of the U.S. futures regulator has the support he needs to pass a long-awaited rule that would curb excessive speculation in commodity markets, a source with knowledge of the agency's rule-making told Reuters on Tuesday.

The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission announced on Tuesday that it would vote on October 18 on a rule limiting the number of contracts any one speculative trader could hold in commodity markets.

The source said the agency was still making changes to the position limits rule and there was a chance changes could upset the balance of support among the five commissioners before next Tuesday.

"I think he does have the votes," the source who closely follows the rule-making process told Reuters.

The CFTC has postponed two scheduled meetings on the position limits plan, with the most recent canceled due to a lack of the three votes needed for its approval.

Curbing excessive speculation is part of the CFTC's efforts to enact sweeping reforms in the Dodd-Frank financial reform overhaul of 2010 that required the agency to regulate the $600 trillion over-the-counter derivatives market.

Gary Gensler, the chairman of the CFTC, told reporters on the sidelines of a Futures Industry Association conference in Chicago that position limits were next on the agency's to-do list, but he declined to say whether he had the support needed to pass it.

The CFTC has estimated it will cost the industry more than $100 million to comply with the position limits rule, Scott O'Malia, a Republican commissioner, told reporters after speaking on a panel in Chicago.

Most of the cost for the industry is expected to be soon after the rule goes into effect.

"You have to look beyond the implementation costs and look at the larger costs," Craig Donohue, chief executive of CME Group Inc, told Reuters Insider.

"If we create an environment where people fundamentally can't manage within the constraints of the new position limit requirements ... that will result in much more fundamental costs to the industry in terms of their commercial activities."

O'Malia expressed concern the cost to comply with the rule could be too expensive, especially for bona fide hedgers, or companies that use physical commodities themselves and seek to lower risk by entering into contracts in order to guard against price increases.

"That would be expensive for them and I'm a little bit concerned about the burden that we're placing on commercial hedgers to justify why they shouldn't have limits," said O'Malia. "They have to have the compliance and reporting mechanism to show why they're not," he said.

The commission has never presented a unified front on position limits, one of the most contentious pieces of the financial overhaul for big commodity traders.

In January, Republican Commissioner Jill Sommers opposed releasing the draft rule for public comment, while Democrat Michael Dunn and O'Malia expressed skepticism on how effective the rules would be. Gensler and Bart Chilton have been staunch supporters throughout.

Some CFTC commissioners also are skeptical that the limits would prevent a run-up in prices. The agency's economists have not been able to find a causal link between speculation and price volatility. One study concluded commodity index traders are not causing price volatility and may actually help reduce it.

The Dodd-Frank legislation gave the CFTC the power to set position limits to curb excessive speculation in 28 commodities, including energy, metals and agricultural markets, "as appropriate."

The law required the CFTC to have position limits in place by mid-January.

les positions limite viennent d'être approuvées par 3 voix contre 2 ... et ce calendrier n'est certainement pas sans rapport avec la spectaculaire volatilité de la séance d'aujourd'hui sur l'or et l'argent

un dernier raid pour couvrir d'avantage de shorts et être à peu pres dans les clous sur les limitations de positions?

pas impossible !

on devrait le savoir très vite ds les séances qui viennent





www.lemetropolecafe.com





JUST IN…

14:12 CFTC votes 3-2 in favor of approving commodity position limits, as expected
* Vote in favor of reform was expected to pass by a 3-2 margin, with the CFTC's three Democrats forming the majority
* Reform will place limits on the size of positions in the futures and swaps markets
* Limits will first apply to spot commodity markets 60 days after the CFTC passes a separate rule that legally defines swaps.





***************

UPDATE 1-US cracks down on commodity traders; will it stick?

Tue Oct 18, 2011 8:01am EDT

* CFTC set to approve limits for commodity speculators
* Rule nixes class limits, aggregation fought by Wall St
* After years of debate, topic still contentious
* Legal challenge looms as financial industry fights back

By Christopher Doering and Jonathan Leff

WASHINGTON, Oct 18 (Reuters) - The United States set out on Tuesday with its toughest measures yet to curtail speculation in commodity markets, likely shifting the focus of a fierce four-year debate from the regulators to the courts.

In a measure decried by Wall Street and trading companies as a misguided political attempt to cap soaring oil and grain prices, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission set out its rule on "position limits" that will cap the number of futures and swaps contracts that any single speculator can hold.

The final rule, due to be voted on after the commission meets from 9:30 a.m. EDT (1330 GMT), will be a relief to many in the industry as it relents on several key provisions that were heavily criticized, as Reuters reported last month.

That included tough measures on whether separately controlled accounts must be aggregated and whether swaps and futures positions can be offset, so-called "class limits", the CFTC said. It also partly yielded to CME Group (CME.O) calls for equal treatment of cash and physical contracts.

But giving ground on those details will do little to temper deep frustration over a contentious plan that could force banks such as Morgan Stanley (MS.N) and industry traders like grains giant Cargill to scale back business, stemming an influx of investor capital. The CFTC estimated the measure would cost the industry about $100 million in the first year.

"The Wild West of exempting traders from any concentration levels whatsoever ends now," Bart Chilton, a CFTC commissioner and a staunch supporter of the limits, told Reuters.

A lawsuit to stop the measure coming into force seems likely, say industry experts and lawyers, one more hurdle for CFTC Chairman Gary Gensler, who is struggling against emboldened Republicans and a hostile Wall Street to put in place the rules required by the Dodd-Frank financial reforms.

After an eight-month battle, the Securities and Exchange Commission in July had its first Dodd-Frank rule overturned when a federal appeals court found the SEC had conducted a flawed analysis to support a rule that would make it easier for shareholders to nominate directors to corporate boards.

The position-limits rule may be challenged on similar grounds -- that the costs outweigh the benefits of a plan that many industry officials say will make markets riskier by driving trade to less-regulated overseas venues.

"We need to be very careful, but I believe we're on very solid legal ground," Chilton told Reuters Insider on Tuesday.

The limits could temper investors who have poured over $300 billion into commodity markets, often via index swaps with banks. Under the new rules, banks will no longer be given an exemption for such speculative swaps, although they will be able to hedge on behalf of corporate customers.

Gensler has worked tirelessly to win support from the commissioners. He is certain to have the backing of Chilton, a long-time advocate of tougher regulations, and likely will face opposition from Republican Jill Sommers. Michael Dunn, who is retiring, will likely be the pivotal vote.

Republican Scott O'Malia came out against the rule, saying the agency "overreached in interpreting its statutory mandate".

He said the CFTC had failed to provide the "empirical evidence" to substantiate the rule -- an argument similar to that put forth by industry officials who say that there no proof of the link between speculators and commodity prices-END-

Were gold and silver sent to the cleaners to give some more cover to the major shorts who have been reducing positions already? That fits right in too. As to whether this position limit thing is worth a darn, it all comes down to whether JPM is forced to verify that their hedged positions are backed by physical metal. There is disagreement in our camp as to whether that will occur. I know Bart Chilton is very aware that this is the key to this entire exercise. Only time will tell whether he is able to back up what he says the CFTC intends to do.



************



je ne sais pas exactement quelles limitations précises ont été votées ... ainsi évidemment que de savoir si la CFTC surveillera les soit disantes contreparties des prétendues couvertures de JPM, c'est comme cela qu'il baptise ses monstrueuses positions de vente à découvert sur les argent.comex, de la couverture / hedging

en tout état de cause, cette dernière analyse indique que les limitations votées seraient inférieures de 2 à 3 fois celles proposées par Ted Butler

Citation :

All the signs point to the fact that the CFTC is in fact preparing to approve position limits in commodities. Our sources are indicating that the limits will likely be approximately 3,000-5,000 contracts (roughly 2-3x the levels called for by Ted Butler of 1,500 contracts).
Gary Gensler's Congressional hearing for Oct 6th was likely cancelled with the understanding that the CFTC would finally get off their arse and get something done on the 18th.

http://12160.info/group/gold_silver_precious_metals/forum/topics/implications-of-today-s-cftc-vote-on-position-limits-in

limitations de position ( à l'exception de gaz nat qui obéira à des régles différentes)

Citation :

The rule limits traders to 25 percent of deliverable supply in the month nearest to delivery. The spot-month limits apply separately to physically settled and cash-settled contracts. Deliverable supply will be determined by the CFTC in conjunction with the exchanges.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-10-18/cftc-votes-3-2-to-approve-new-limits-on-commodity-speculation.html



http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204346104576638973617953958.html



The Commodity Futures Trading Commission on Tuesday approved a much-debated, long-delayed rule designed to curb bets on oil, gold, sugar, and other commodities.

The 3-2 vote -- cast along party lines -- illustrates how divided regulators remain over the role of government in the markets. The debate leading up to the vote also shows how even some CFTC commissioners supporting the rule think it may not have the desired effect.

Opposed by Wall Street, the rule aims to cap the positions firms can take in certain commodity contracts in order to curb sharp price increases. The rule gained traction in Congress during an oil-price spike in 2008, which some attributed to excessive speculation by short-term traders. Along with a number of other rules, it was mandated by last year's Dodd-Frank financial-regulatory overhaul even though commodity trading had little to do with the financial crisis.

In a series of phone calls, emails and meetings at the CFTC headquarters in Washington, commissioners and lobbyists haggled through the weekend over details of the rule. There were even conversations during the hearing Tuesday as the agency hammered out last-minute revisions.

Both Republicans on the commission, Scott O'Malia and Jill Sommers, voted against the rule, saying it represented an overreach of government powers and went beyond the mandates of the Dodd-Frank law.

Mr. O'Malia said the final rule assumes that "the government knows best." He also said the rule failed to adequately quantify the costs it will impose on the financial industry. The CFTC estimates it will cost the industry around $100 million in the first year of implementation.

CFTC Commissioner Michael Dunn, a Democrat, called the limits a "sideshow" that distracts from the commission's work of preventing another financial crisis.

"No one has proven that the looming specter of excessive speculation in the futures markets we regulate even exists," Mr. Dunn said in comments before voting for the rule Tuesday. Mr. Dunn said the rule could lead to higher prices because it could limit traders' ability to hedge positions.

CFTC Chairman Gary Gensler, who also voted for the rule, said in his opening statement that position limits "protect the markets both in times of clear skies and when there is a storm on the horizon."

But Bart Chilton, a Democratic commissioner and longtime advocate of position limits, said he would have preferred stricter caps. He said the agency would periodically reassess the limits, and they could be recalibrated as necessary. Congress mandated that the CFTC study the impact of the rules on the market 12 months after the limits are put into effect.

The CFTC has long curbed the positions firms can take on certain agricultural commodities. The new rule extends position limits to 28 contracts covering commodities such as natural gas and silver.

Limits on contracts for near-term delivery, as opposed to longer-dated futures, will restrict a firm from owning more than 25% of a commodity's estimated deliverable supply. Traders will be able to hold a smaller percentage of longer-term contracts, based on a formula.

The new caps are likely to take effect in 2012 and possibly as late as 2013.

The proposed rule inspired about 15,000 letters from interests varying from private citizens to giant oil and grain companies to U.S. senators. Supporters say it will keep large firms such as hedge funds and banks from piling into commodities and driving up prices. Critics say the rule will hamper traders and cause large compliance costs.

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.) wrote in a letter to Mr. Gensler on Monday that the spot-month limits are too weak and "will do little or nothing" to limit speculative traders in commodity markets.

"At a time when the American people are experiencing extremely high oil and gas prices, this would be simply unacceptable," Mr. Sanders wrote.

Tuesday's vote offered another illustration of how divided regulators remain over how to implement Dodd-Frank. Last week bank regulators and the Securities and Exchange Commission approved a new proposal for the so-called Volcker rule, which will curb proprietary trading at banks. The proposal was met with disapproval from Wall Street as well as from Democrats who said it was watered down.

The position-limits rule met with similar complaints. Indeed, as they worked on this final version of the rule, commissioners struggled to come to consensus and canceled two recent votes on the issue.

Ms. Sommers said the vote was the most important one she has made since she started at the agency in 2009. She worried the commission would be blamed for future high commodity prices if the limits don't curb prices.

"This agency is setting itself up for an enormous failure," Ms. Sommers said.

The CFTC also voted Tuesday to approve a rule laying out specifications for how organizations that clear derivatives trades will operate under the Dodd-Frank law. It also voted to push off the date that several derivatives requirements would take effect until July 16, 2012.

plus d'infos ce soir



www.lemetropolecafe.com





Bart Chilton on BNN yesterday…

http://watch.bnn.ca/#clip551797

***

http://silverdoctors.com/


Tuesday, October 18, 2011


Its All in the Fine Print: CFTC Ruling Gives Exemptions for Prior Positions Established in Good Faith, Final Position Limits Won't Be Determined for 12 MONTHS!


Before everyone gets too excited over today's 3-2 CFTC vote in favor of position limits in commodities, we need to examine WHEN the shorts will be forced to comply with the new rules, the size of the new position limits implemented, as well as what loopholes might be available to the cartel in order to continue business as usual.
Those who have been skeptical of the CFTC should enjoy this as we examine the fine print of today's CFTC position limits regulations.

Exemptions to be given for prior positions without describing how or who qualifies for exemptions: Check.
No defined date for required compliance to short positions: Check. (60 days from the time the term "swap" is defined)
No defined position limits to allow easy identification of whether an entity is in excess of said limits: and Check
Non-spot month position limits will be implemented AFTER ONE YEAR OF OPEN INTEREST DATA!?! Nice work guys!

So what are your thoughts Blythe, sure not as bad as that could have gone, huh?


Establishment of speculative limits on Referenced Contracts will occur in two phases:
o Spot-month position limits. Spot-month limits will be effective sixty days after the term "swap" is further defined under the Dodd-Frank Act. The limits adopted at that time will be based on the spot-month position limit levels currently in place at DCMs. Thereafter, the spot-month limits will be adjusted biennially for agricultural contracts and annually for energy and metal contracts. These subsequent limits will be based on the Commission’s determination of deliverable supply (developed in consultation with DCMs).

o Non-spot-month position limits (i.e., limits applied to positions in all contract months combined or in a single contract month). For the nine "legacy" agricultural Referenced Contracts that currently are subject to Commission administered limits, the new non-spot-month limits will go into effect sixty days after the term "swap" is further defined under the Dodd-Frank Act. These limits will be set equal to the levels described in the final rulemaking. For all other Referenced Contracts (that currently are not subject to Commission administered limits), the limits will be made effective by Commission order after the Commission has received one year of open interest data on physical commodity cleared and uncleared swaps under the swaps large trader reporting rule. The non-spot-month limits will be adjusted biennially based on Referenced Contract open interest.

Spot-month position limit levels will be set generally at 25% of estimated deliverable supply. These spot-month limits will be applied separately for physical-delivery Referenced Contracts and cash-settled Referenced Contracts in the same commodity.

Non-spot-month position limits (i.e., limits applied to positions in all contract months combined or in a single contract month) will be set using the 10/2.5 percent formula: 10 percent of the contract’s first 25,000 of open interest and 2.5 percent thereafter. These limits will be reset biennially based on two years open interest data.

Open interest used in determining non-spot-month position limits will be the sum of futures open interest, cleared swaps open interest, and uncleared swaps open interest.

Exemptions for bona fide hedging transactions based on the Dodd-Frank Act’s new requirements for such transactions. These exemptions have been broadened to include certain anticipated merchandising transactions, royalties, and service contracts in the final rulemaking to reflect concerns by commercial firms.
Exemptions for positions that are established in good faith prior to the effective date of the initial limits established by the regulations.
Establishment of account aggregation standards consistent with the Commission’s current position limits aggregation policy, including the Commission’s long-standing independent account controller exemption.

A position visibility reporting regime to assist the Commission in its surveillance program.

Acceptable practices for DCMs and swap execution facilities for setting position limits for the 28 Referenced Contracts, as well as position limits or accountability rules in all other listed contracts, including excluded commodities.

Full CFTC Decision can be found here:

Now that we have examined the fine print a little more closely, we welcome our readers thoughts and comments on what if anything the CFTC has accomplished today.

Posted by The Doc at 5:26 P

commentaire de Dan de thegoldentruth sur le vote CFTC des limitations de positions :



il rejoint l'avis précédent : en dépit des difficultés pour faire voter le texte, rien de bien révolutionnaire

les limitations sont faibles , et le régime des exemptions est fort large .. .on sait déjà qui va en profiter ...



http://truthingold.blogspot.com/2011/10/new-cftc-position-limits.html

Citation :

es limitations sont faibles , et le régime des exemptions est fort large .. .on sait déjà qui va en profiter ...

donc le résultat c'est concrètement RIEN de changé hormis une armée de PARASITES qui ont "bossé" (journaleux, légalistes , politipisseux , segrétaires , imprimeurs de papier etc etc ) bref du pseudo-travail inutile avec un cout exorbitant pour le mougeon * de la gabegie d'énergie globale. Pas très écolo tout ça lol , pendant ce temps vous payez des impôts-taxe pour payer des kapos à fouiller vos poubelles afin de vous faire aligner pour mauvais tri sélectif.

Quand vous cesserez de croire au père noël des lois (étatiques) pour régler vos problèmes alors seulement vous serez libres car vous ne serez plus une larve paresseuse à se complaire dans sa déchéance orgiastique biologiquement suicidaire.

* mougeon = contraction de mouton + pigeon, terme emprunté au blog des enculuminés merci à eux...

les mougeons ... Excellent Nofear !





du très bon Bix Weir chez Midas



www.lemetropolecafe.com



Bix yesterday at The Silver Summit…

Is There Silver Price Manipulation?

*What should the silver market be like? In the broad scope of markets the silver market is tiny. In my opinion it should be a sleepy "quaint" little market. Supply is fairly stable varying about 5%. There are never any huge silver discovery announcements. Silver is mostly mined as a byproduct of mining for other metals. Hand full of dedicated silver mining companies. Industrial demand is fairly constant over the years. Investment demand is growing but official numbers aren’t that huge.

You’d think that in a market like this the miners and silver buyers could easily come together and transact business discovering the "Fair Market Value" of silver.

The Silver market should be a QUAINT LITTLE MARKET
But the reality is much different…

1) Massive Volatility – The silver market is characterized by larges upward moves over time with huge and sudden downward slams. There are massive volumes traded back and forth. Fortunes are made and lost. There’s blood in the streets after each market slam. In 2008 the price dropped from $21 to below $9 in a matter of months. On May 1st silver was violently slammed down from $50 to $35 in a matter days. It was called a "Drive By Shooting" by many. There is an insane amount of volatility. The Silver market is no place for you to invest if you have a weak stomach.

2) Off hours trading - Most of the downward volatility begins in the off hours of trading before or after the large markets are open. The May 1st "Drive-By-Shooting" started in the middle of the night on a Sunday and dropped 10% instantly…who trades like that? If you had a huge long position in silver that you wanted to unload would you do it in the afterhours market to maximize your price? There was no news to spook the market. This was a blatant manipulation and was obvious to all of us.

3) COMEX Short Concentration – Ted Butler has been exposing the Short concentration issue for 20 years and we all know of his work. The kicker for me was that in November 2009 (2) traders or less (likely 1) held 68% of the Commercial Net Short. 68% of the short was held by one trader! The CFTC has just passed the Position Limits rule and hopefully this will put an end to the excessive short concentration in the future but we’ll see.

4) Multiple Ownership Claims – Who owns the physical silver these days? With so many silver derivatives there are many options for bullion banks and others to work a Fractional Reserve metal storage system. Silver certificates, swaps, leases pooled accounts, options, ETF shorting and on and on. In 2007 Morgan Stanley was sued for charging storage fees on silver certificates although they didn’t hold the physical silver in inventory. It was settled out of court but their defense was that the practice of selling silver certificates and not holding the physical metal was "Industry Standard Practice". What about the silver iShares ETF? How many claims of ownership are on that silver? It’s unknown but we do know that there are 20M shares short at the moment. There are currently investors in SLV who bought 20M shares expecting the ETF to deposit 20M ounces in inventory but that metal was shorted instead of placed in inventory.

5) Exchange Margin Requirements – The latest silver slam was assisted by huge margin requirement increases by the CME to squeeze the weak handed shorts. This was a blatant manipulative move by the CME and it added significantly to the downward plunge in the price of silver…which is illegal by the way. Craig Donahue, the CEO of the CME, had to come on TV to try and justify their actions. He said "Margin requirements are really intended to make sure that we have the ability to PROTECT all participants in the clearing house because WE ARE THE GUARANTOR to every buyer and seller." So margins were increased to PROTECT market participants. At $50/oz who needed protection? Clearly the longs didn’t need protection. It was the shorts that were being protected from default because the sold silver derivatives on metal they didn’t have. Get out of the COMEX. If you play in their market you play by their rules!

6) 3rd CFTC Silver Investigation – First two silver investigations were a joke. They were announced and closed at the same time with no finding of manipulation. The CFTC’s main conclusions were that the price was going up so there can’t be downward manipulation and the London Bullion Market was a "physical market" and is in line with the COMEX. Give me a break. The LBM will settle 50B ounce of supposedly physical silver this year! There’s nothing physical about that market.

7) Whistle Blowers – Ok. We’ve finally arrived at that SILVER BULLET to put an end to the manipulation once and for all. We have a whistle blower. Andrew Maguire. I’ll say it again Andrew Maguire. It’s strange but I keep thinking of that movie Jerry Maguire when I hear his name? I think if comes from a drinking game in college where we had to drink every time we heard his name in the movie…which is a lot. Now every time I hear Jeffery Christian or Jon Nadler saying there’s no silver market manipulation I heard in my head…Andrew Maguire, Andrew Maguire. Yes, the Andrew Maguire revelations at the CFTC meeting in March of 2010 was the smoking gun to END the silver manipulation debate. He told the CFTC who was doing it, why they were doing it, how they were doing it, when they were going to do it next and it happened just like he said. Case closed. I’m sure Bill Murphy will elaborate on this tomorrow.

But there was another very important whistle blower inside of the CFTC itself. CFTC Enforcement Judge George Painter said in his retirement letter…"There are two administrative law judges at the CFTC, myself and the Honorable Judge Bruce Levine. On Judge Levine’s first week on the job, nearly twenty years ago, he came into my office and stated that he had promised Wendy Gramm, then Chairwoman of the Commission, that we would never rule in a complainant’s favor. A review of his rulings will confirm that he has fulfilled his vow."

8) YES there is Manipulation - As we all expected. The game is rigged. From the regulators to the bullion banks to the exchanges to our elected officials our "Quaint Little Silver Market" is 100% rigged.

****

Silver Derivatives

*Definition - A derivative instrument is a contract between two parties that specifies conditions under which payments, or payoffs, are to be made between the parties. It’s like a side bet. Futures, options, swaps, leases etc are all derivative contracts.

The concept behind derivatives is to allow a company to hedge their risk. For example to hedge a credit risk of a bank loan a lender can purchase a Credit Default Swap contract that will payout if the borrower defaults. Hedging risk is a good thing right? Not always. In reality the risk of default does not go away but rather is transferred to another party and a new risk is created in the form of a counter party risk of the CDS issuer defaulting. The issuer of that CDS can hedge their new risk by purchasing a CDS from another issuer and so on. Although the initial concept of a derivative is to hedge your risk, the more and more derivatives that are created off the first transaction greatly increase the total risk is to the overall market.

In the last 20 years derivative contracts have ballooned into the hundreds of trillions of dollars on a notional value basis. In 2008 the inherent danger in this growth in overall risk became painfully apparent with the global crash of the financial markets.

Warren Buffet was correct in identifying derivatives as "WEAPONS OF MASS FINANCIAL DESTRUCTION".

If there was any one person to blame for the 2008 financial crisis it was a woman named Blythe Masters out of the JP Morgan "Financial Products Division" in London. She was the creator and promoter of the Credit Default Swap market and built it up over 15 years into a monstrous 50 Trillion dollar market by 2008 when it all fell apart. The destruction this amount of "risk hedging" ended up costing the world was almost incalculable. Today, even after all the losses and bankruptcies, the Credit Default Swap market stands at over 30 trillion dollars.

So what ever happened to this woman who destroyed the world’s financial markets with derivatives…

1) Blythe went from running the gigantic CDS derivative market to running the gigantic commodity derivative market for JPM.

2) COMEX open interest means nothing. The price of silver is determined on a trade by trade basis. The amount of daily volume on the COMEX is staggering. Based on the COMEX daily silver volume averages over 120B ounces of silver derivatives will trade in 2011. 120B ounces! Stunning number considering there’s a total of just over 700M ounces mined every year. AND THIS IS JUST ONE EXCHANGE!

3) The LBM will settle over 50B ounces of (supposedly physical) silver this year. These are net ounces counted at the end of each day. During the day many multiples of this amount trade hands. I’m conservative and I’ll say 5x the amount.

4) Including all markets and unreported OTC derivatives I estimate that the total worldwide silver derivative contracts traded in 2011 will amount to 500B ounces. 500B ounces!

5) Let’s say that 500M oz of the 700M oz mined every year have silver derivatives attached to them for some reason. That equates to silver derivatives totaling 1,000x the underlying commodity. There is no legitimate market function of silver derivative trades for the 1,000x derivative leverage. In the March 2010 CFTC hearings commissioner Gensler asked Jeffery Christian a very important question at the very end of that hearing. That question was "What are the billion banks hedging on the other side?" His answer clearly didn’t satisfy Chairman Gensler. The answer was "a tremendous amount of things". He then went on to list "forward purchases from mining companies"(not many hedged silver mines these days but ok), "forward purchases from refineries"(ok, I’ll give you one there), "metal leased to electronics manufacturers, catalysts and jewelers"(not that I agree that leased metal should be consumed but I’ll give you that one too). So that’s 3 when put on the spot. That’s only 3! Can he name a thousand for each and every ounce of silver mined this year? Of course not because the vast majority of these 500B ounces of silver derivatives aren’t hedging anything!

6) The truth is that the price discovery mechanism for silver has been destroyed by a mountain of silver derivatives. Remember that "Quaint Little Physical Silver Market" we talked about earlier? It means absolutely NOTHING when it comes to discovering the true Fair Market Value of silver as long as the silver market riggers are allowed pile on 500 billion ounces of silver derivatives every year.

7) Just like the Credit Default Swap bubble that burst and almost destroyed the global financial system in 2008 the silver derivative bubble is an accident waiting to happen.

***

The latest from Bix today…

FIREPOWER COMES TO THE CFTC & CHRISTIAN DOES IT AGAIN!

The CFTC just announced that Mark Wetjen's nomination was confirmed and he has now taken Commissioner Dunn's spot.
Statement of Chairman Gary Gensler on Mark Wetjen's Confirmation as CFTC Commissioner

http://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/SpeechesTestimony/genslerstatement102111

The timing of this couldn't be more perfect. Dunn cast the deciding vote on Position Limits and now he is out! Dunn was a joke of a Commissioner but Wetjen is the REAL DEAL! Along with Gensler he wrote the commodity law portion of the Dodd-Frank Law.

Looks like everything is in place.

Buckle up!!!!

Bix Weir
www.RoadtoRoota.com

PS - Just listened to Jeffery Christian's presentation at the Silver Summit and came away with 2 DOOZIES. 1) He has upped is previous "faux pas" of admitting 100-1 gold trading leverage on the LBM to 400-1 but he says it doesn't matter! 2) Christian claimed that the "Drive By Shooting" in May was caused by a change of trading positions on the COMEX....WHICH IT WAS! Of course, under US Commodity Law it is ILLEGAL for prices to be SET on the COMEX! The futures and options contracts can only be a "price discovery mechanism" and not a "price setting mechanism"!

Thanks again for your valuable insight Jeffery!

le temps pour la CFTC de définir légalement ce que sont les swaps ...

ça laisserait 2 mois aux traders concernés pour cloturer leurs positions excédentaires swap silver, d'apres l'un des derniers communiqués de la CFTC





http://silverdoctors.blogspot.com/2011/11/cftc-defines-swaps-silver-shorts-have.html



pour mémo la catégorie des swaps dealers est la fraction minoritaire des commerciaux, mais la plus "agressive"

définitions des différentes catégories et notamment des swaps dealers

déja que c'était très timoré, on l'a vu plus haut... c'est encore trop pour nos habituels suspects, JPM et GS, qui, par l'intermédiaire de 2 de leur boites de lobbying ( habillées en association ""dérivés et swaps"), font pression sur un juge fédéral de Washington, pour repousser les délais d'application de la loi

ils ont carrément déposé 2 plaintes !

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-02-08/wall-street-groups-seek-to-delay-cftc-limits-on-speculation.html

leur avocat n'est autre qu'Eugéne Scalia, le fils du juge de la cour supéme, Anthonin... conflits d'intérêts, toujours et encore

A votre avis, qui va gagner?

à propos de conflits d'intérêts, voici un graph fort édifiant : statistiques des poursuites d'institutions financières, pour fraude, sous les différentes administrations US depuis 1991 ===> en chute libre sous l'administration Obama : encore moins de poursuites des fraudes financières que sous Reagan ou même Bush ... Merci aux généreux sponsors de la campagne présidentielle Obama

cliquez sur le graphe, pour l'agrandir







http://truthingold.blogspot.com/2012/02/wall-street-takes-nuclear-option-in.html

devant l'échec des "négociations cftc sur la loi Dodd franck et notamment les swaps, Bart Chilton propose de passer la main au conseil de stabilité financière

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-03-21/finance-council-should-speed-up-speculation-curbs-chilton-says.html

Judge throws out CFTC's position limits rule



WASHINGTON | Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:42pm EDT
(Reuters) - A U.S. judge handed an 11th-hour victory to Wall Street's biggest commodity traders on Friday,
knocking back tough new regulations that would have cracked down on speculation in energy, grain and metal markets.

Les Banksters décidément au dessus des lois...

Judge Robert Wilkins of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia threw out the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission's
new position limits rule, and sent the regulation back to the agency for further consideration.

Wilkins ruled that, by law, the CFTC was required to prove that the position limits in commodity markets are necessary to diminish
or prevent excessive speculation.

He also ruled that the amendments to the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial oversight law "do not constitute a clear and unambiguous
mandate to set position limits, as the Commission argues."

The ruling is a major victory to traders just two weeks before parts of the new position limits rule were scheduled to go into effect.

The Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association and the International Swaps and Derivatives Association brought the suit
against the CFTC, arguing that the regulations would force their members to drastically alter their businesses, cost them tens of
millions of dollars, and send customers fleeing.

Wall Street has also long argued that regulators have not proven that position limits would curb speculation in markets and prevent
disruptive price spikes.

The CFTC and industry groups that brought the suit did not immediately have comment.

The agency passed the position limit rule last year, in a bid to limit the number of contracts traders can hold in 28-commodities,
including oil, coffee and gold. (Reporting By Alexandra Alper and Karey Wutkowski; Editing by James Dalgleish)