82,891
edits
Template:Csa expenses: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Paragraph {{csaprov|8}} of the {{vmcsa}} is identical to the [[8 - CSA Provision|equivalent]] in the {{csa}}. Being a function of the [[common law]] of [[contract]], not to mention common sense — why would someone else be liable for your costs and expenses of performing a contract unless it specifically said they would be? — it falls into the goes without saying category. But {{icds}} said it anyway. | Paragraph {{csaprov|8}} of the {{vmcsa}} is identical to the [[8 - CSA Provision|equivalent]] in the {{csa}}. Being a function of the [[common law]] of [[contract]], not to mention common sense — why would someone else be liable for your costs and expenses of performing a contract unless it specifically said they would be? — it falls into the goes without saying category. But {{icds}} said it anyway. | ||
===NY law CSA=== | ===NY law CSA=== | ||
The {{nyvmcsa}} is largely the same — it carries on in 10(b) and 10(c) to rabbit on a bit about {{nyvmcsaprov|Posted Collateral}} — but, curiously, neglects to specifically call out [[stamp duty]]. Not ''that'' curiously: {{ | The {{nyvmcsa}} is largely the same — it carries on in 10(b) and 10(c) to rabbit on a bit about {{nyvmcsaprov|Posted Collateral}} — but, curiously, neglects to specifically call out [[stamp duty]]. Not ''that'' curiously: {{nyvmcsa}}s tend to be largely domestic affairs, and there aren’t specfic stamp duties payable on US equities (the relevant tax is under section [[871(m)]]). Since risk of foreign stamp duties isn’t such a big deal, and the language in {{vmcsa}} is only an [[incluso]], it doesn’t make any difference. <br> | ||