83,371
edits
Template:Hypothetical broker-dealer capsule: Difference between revisions
Template:Hypothetical broker-dealer capsule (view source)
Revision as of 11:05, 20 July 2022
, 20 July 2022no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
One of the key indicators, they intuit, is the degree to which the contract permits a swap counterparty influence or control its [[prime broker]]’s hedge. A swap counterparty should care not one whit about its broker’s hedge — other than its [[cost]]. If it does takes an unhealthy interest, the swap position may be — dramatic look gopher — [[recharacterised]] as a ''disguised [[custody]] arrangement'' of shares the swap counterparty has in reality bought, and on which it should pay tax, [[stamp duty]] and so on. Depending on which tax specialist you ask, an “unhealthy interest” might extend even to the execution price the[[broker-dealer]] achieves on its hedge. (This seems potty to us, by the way, but such is the interior world of the US tax attorney). [[US tax attorney]]s are greatly calmed by the suggestion that a hedge execution price is imaginary, and not real, even though it happens to be identical to the real one. Thus, you will see much chatter about prices a “[[hypothetical broker-dealer]]” might achieve selling [[fungible]] securities, and [[volume-weighted average price]]s and so on. | One of the key indicators, they intuit, is the degree to which the contract permits a swap counterparty influence or control its [[prime broker]]’s hedge. A swap counterparty should care not one whit about its broker’s hedge — other than its [[cost]]. If it does takes an unhealthy interest, the swap position may be — dramatic look gopher — [[recharacterised]] as a ''disguised [[custody]] arrangement'' of shares the swap counterparty has in reality bought, and on which it should pay tax, [[stamp duty]] and so on. Depending on which tax specialist you ask, an “unhealthy interest” might extend even to the execution price the[[broker-dealer]] achieves on its hedge. (This seems potty to us, by the way, but such is the interior world of the US tax attorney). [[US tax attorney]]s are greatly calmed by the suggestion that a hedge execution price is imaginary, and not real, even though it happens to be identical to the real one. Thus, you will see much chatter about prices a “[[hypothetical broker-dealer]]” might achieve selling [[fungible]] securities, and [[volume-weighted average price]]s and so on. | ||
So who, why, which or what is this “[[hypothetical broker-dealer]]”? | ===What is a hypothetical broker-dealer anyway?=== | ||
So who, why, which or what is this much-talked-about, seldom-seen “[[hypothetical broker-dealer]]”? | |||
Well, it’s | Well, it’s an investment banker’s imaginary friend. A fellow just like the ''actual'' [[broker-dealer]] — in the same jurisdiction, having the same taxation status, earning the same income, executing the same hedge transactions, eating at the same restaurants, having the same GSOH and watching the same stuff on Netflix — but ''not'' the actual [[broker-dealer]]. He’s like actual [[broker-dealer]]’s “sober me”, only ''he gets drunk too''. Now this might strike you, as it strikes the [[JC]], as just too cute – too much of a playground argument to hold water. (“I didn’t break the window, sir, honest, sir, it was a boy who looked exactly like me who arrived from out of nowhere and is gone now”). But [[US tax attorney]]s seem to be taken in by it, even if they won’t buy arguments on actual economic substance. | ||
===But ''do'' synthetic equity swaps resemble disguised custody arrangements?=== | ===But ''do'' synthetic equity swaps resemble disguised custody arrangements?=== | ||