July 10, 2015
Lynnette Kelly, Executive Director
Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board
1900 Duke Street, Suite 600
Alexandria, VA 22314
Re: Implementation of MSRB Rule G-45
Dear Ms. Kelly:
On behalf of the undersigned,1 we would like to thank you and your colleagues at the Municipal
Securities Rulemaking Board (MSRB) for delaying the compliance date for the first Form G-45 filings
required under MSRB Rule G-45. We believe this delay will provide the staff of the MSRB and
underwriters additional time to better understand and implement these new filing requirements.
Collectively, we continue to support the MSRB’s interest in obtaining industry data and we are
committed to the success of Rule G-45. Consistent with this, we hope that the MSRB will use this
additional time to work with us and our respective members to address the variety of issues that may
frustrate and impede consistent compliance with the new filing requirements. We strongly encourage
the staff to publish comprehensive filing instructions that resolve filers’ current uncertainty with Form
G-45 and the MSRB’s filing requirement. We believe it is important for the MSRB to take these steps
now, before filings officially commence, in order to be sure that any data the MSRB obtains through
Form G-45 is reported consistently among filers, thereby increasing its reliability and usefulness for
regulatory purposes. We also encourage the MSRB, as it continues to make changes to the G-45
Manual, to alert the market and interested parties to such changes. Each of these issues is discussed in
detail below.
1 See the Appendix for more information about the signatories to this letter.
Lynnette Kelly, Executive Director
July 10, 2015
Page 2
BACKGROUND
In February 2014, three years after it was originally proposed, Rule G-45’s adoption was
approved by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).2 As adopted, Rule G-45 requires
underwriters of 529 plan securities to submit data to the MSRB on Form G-45 consistent with the
instructions in the Form G-45 Manual. We were pleased when the MSRB assured filers that the new
rule would be implemented with a one-year compliance period. Unfortunately, however, filers were
never truly provided one year to implement these new requirements. This is because the Form G-45
Manual, which was necessary for filers to build systems to support the new filings and understand their
filing requirements, was not published until February 2015.
Our concerns with the insufficient amount of time the MSRB was providing to filers to
implement this new filing requirement culminated in the undersigned sending a letter in January 2015
to you and MSRB Chair Kym S. Arnone respectfully requesting the MSRB postpone the compliance
date in order to provide filers ample time to implement the new filing requirements and avoid violating
the new rule.3 Following our letter, we met with you and your staff to discuss our concerns with the
speed with which these new filing requirements were being implemented and the lack of time being
provided to underwriters to comply with them. After this meeting, which is was held on February 19th,
the MSRB published its first G-45 Manual (Version 1.0).
During the meeting, we discussed our concerns that the speed with which G-45 is being
implemented is adversely affecting the compliance efforts of filers. We noted that we are not aware of a
need compelling the MSRB to obtain 529 plan data as soon as possible; nor do we understand the
urgency with which the MSRB is seeking to implement this rule. In the absence of such a pressing
need, we strongly encouraged you and your staff to focus on the quality of the new filing system and not
the speed with which it could be operational. At the meeting, we were informed that the system was
ready for beta testing in anticipation of it going live on July 1st (less than five months after our meeting
and publications of the first G-45 Manual). To demonstrate our commitment to the new filing process
and to provide your staff meaningful input on the system, we agreed to encourage our members that are
subject to Rule G-45 to beta test the system for a 60-day period beginning as soon as practicable. We
agreed to provide the staff the results from this testing.
Inasmuch as ICI and SIFMA represent the interests of the majority of underwriters subject to
the new filing requirements, they agreed to take the lead on this testing initiative and to communicate
2 SEC Release No. 71598 (Feb. 21, 2014).
3 See Letter from the undersigned dated January 9, 2015.
Lynnette Kelly, Executive Director
July 10, 2015
Page 3
the results to the MSRB’s staff. Members of ICI and SIFMA began their 60-day test period
approximately a week after our February 19th meeting with the staff. Following the test period, ICI and
SIFMA compiled the results of their members’ testing efforts and provided them in a detailed narrative
form to the MSRB staff. The concerns raised by persons testing the system were primarily substantive
(i.e., the type of information that was to be reported on Form G-45 and how it was to be provided –
which was not clear from merely reading Rule G-45 or Form G-45) but also included concerns relating
to technical filing issues.4
Subsequent to providing the MSRB staff the results of the beta testing, in May, ICI and SIFMA
requested a call or meeting with the staff to discuss the results. In response, ICI and SIFMA received
the following email from the staff on June 8th:
We are still considering the lists of items you sent. So far, however, it is looking like many
of them raise questions that the MSRB has previously answered in documents that made
up the rulemaking initiative or in other public communications about the new rule. To
make our call potentially more efficient and productive, I wanted to confirm which items
you consider needing to be answered. Feel free to send an email or to send the file with
some kind of marking or highlighting in it. Thanks.
That same day, ICI and SIFMA responded to the staff’s email as follows:
Since obviously our members are unaware of the issues on the list that the MSRB has
already resolved, can you let [ICI and SIFMA] know which issues those are so we can
pull the necessary documents and discern the answers for our members? Thanks!
A call between ICI, SIFMA, and the MSRB staff was arranged for June 12th. The call
consisted of the staff going through the list of issues provided by ICI and SIFMA seriatim and
4 Most members had to manually input data during the beta testing as the February publication of the G-45 Manual had
not provided them sufficient time to build business-to-business systems to make the filings electronically. Their first filings
are also expected to be manual filings due to the lack of lead time their IT Departments have been provided to build filing
systems.
Lynnette Kelly, Executive Director
July 10, 2015
Page 4
informing ICI and SIFMA that the answers to the substantive issues5 raised by the beta testing
process could be found by consulting one or more of the following documents:6
• Looking at the PowerPoint screenshots from “MSRB Webinar: 529 Plan Data
Collection” (March 12, 2015);
• MSRB Notice 2014-03 (Feb. 24, 2014) announcing the SEC’s approval of Rule
G-45;
• The current Form G-45 Manual;
• The revised Form G-45 Manual, which had not yet been published but which the
staff expected to publish in June;
• Amendment I that the MSRB had filed with the SEC on proposed Rule G-45;
and
• The letter that Larry Sandor of the MSRB filed with the SEC as part of the
rulemaking process.
The MSRB’s response is of great concern to us. In our view, persons subject to a
regulatory requirement should be able to ascertain the entirety of what is expected of them by
reading the applicable rule (Rule G-45), the required filing form (Form G-45), or the
instructions to the form (the Form G-45 Manual). Instead, however, in order to understand
the filing requirements imposed by Rule G-45, the MSRB seems to expect filers to consult a
variety of documents – including an MSRB PowerPoint presentation and a letter filed by the
staff with the SEC staff during the rulemaking process. We are aware of no other regulatory
requirement that requires consulting a variety of extraneous information – including letters
written during the pendency of a rulemaking – in order to understand fully a regulatory
requirement. We are at a loss to understand why all information that is necessary to understand
the new filing requirements cannot be found in one document that is readily accessible by filers.
While the information provided by the MSRB to the ICI and SIFMA was, in turn, provided by
them to their members, we are not aware of the MSRB publishing it for all Form G-45 filers.
Along these same lines, as noted above, during the conversation ICI and SIFMA had
with the MSRB staff in June, the staff mentioned that they were working on a revised version of
the Form G-45 Manual. At some point in June, this revised manual was posted to the MSRB’s
5 With respect to the technical filing issues that were raised with the staff, the staff was amenable to addressing
some of those. For others, ICI and SIFMA were told that the staff viewed the issue either as a recommendation
the staff would take under consideration or they were issues that were the responsibility of the filer.
6 Though expressly asked during the call, the staff did not provide the answer to each issue raised during the beta testing
process. Instead, ICI and SIFMA were only directed to documents where they could discern the answers for their members.
Lynnette Kelly, Executive Director
July 10, 2015
Page 5
website. This is the version currently available to filers. To our knowledge, however, the
MSRB published no notice or press release notifying underwriters that a revised version of the
Manual had been published. Indeed, only those filers that downloaded the G-45 Manual after
the revised version was added to the MSRB’s website would even be aware that it had been
revised – and only then if they noticed it was Version 1.1 dated June 2015.
While the signatories to this letter very much appreciate the 60-day delay in the
compliance period, we strongly encourage the MSRB to use this time to work constructively
with the underwriters subject to this new rule in order to ensure that it is implemented as
consistently, effectively, and efficiently as possible. At a minimum, this work should include
consolidating all the information necessary for underwriters to understand their filing
obligations into one easily accessible and easy-to-understand format and notifying filers where
such information may be found. Also, as the staff makes revisions to the Form G-45 Manual, it
should alert underwriters that the Manual has been revised to avoid them becoming aware of
such revisions only by periodically visiting the MSRB’s website and observing the version of the
Manual posted there.
The undersigned are committed to making sure that the implementation of Rule G-45
will result in the MSRB obtaining meaningful data from underwriters within its jurisdiction.
We strongly recommend that the MSRB not lose sight of the importance of creating sound
filing protocols that will result in the MSRB collecting reliable data. We are concerned that, if
the MSRB fails to do so, and filers are left to their own devices to resolve their current
uncertainties, the integrity and reliability of the data the MSRB obtains through Form G-45
will be questionable and subject to challenge.7 This would be an unfortunate result that is
wholly preventable.
7 As previously discussed in comment letters on proposed Rule G-45 filed by signatories to this letter, the data the MSRB
obtains via Form G-45 will never be reflective of the entirety of the 529 plan market inasmuch as the MSRB’s jurisdiction
over this market is limited to requiring data only of those persons that are required by law to be registered with the MSRB,
which does not include all persons offering 529 plans to investors. It would be unfortunate if the limited data the MSRB is
able to obtain through Rule G-45 is unreliable due to defects in the filing process.
Lynnette Kelly, Executive Director
July 10, 2015
Page 6
Accordingly, we continue to encourage the MSRB to work with industry participants to
address filers’ concerns. We believe such work will inure to the benefit of both the MSRB and persons
subject to Rule G-45. We welcome another opportunity to meet with the staff to discuss our
continuing concerns in order to expedite resolution of these issues. To arrange such a meeting, please
do not hesitate to contact Andrea Feirstein, of AKF Consulting Group. You can reach Ms. Feirstein by
phone (646-218-9864) or email (andrea@akfconsulting.com).
Regards,
College Savings Foundation
College Savings Plan Network
Investment Company Institute
Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association
Strategic Insight
Cc: Robert Fippinger, General Counsel, MSRB
Jessica Kane, Director, SEC Office of Municipal Securities
APPENDIX
Below, in alphabetical order, is a description of the signatories to this letter:
College Savings Foundation (CSF)
CSF is a not-for-profit organization with the mission of helping American families achieve their
education savings goals by working with public policy makers, media representatives, and financial
services industry executives in support of 529 college savings plans. CSF serves as a central repository of
information about college savings programs and trends and an expert resource for its members as well as
representatives of state and federal government, institutions of higher education and other related
organizations and associations. CSF’s members include state 529 Plans, investment managers, broker-
dealers, other governmental organizations, law firms, accounting and consulting firms, and non-profit
agencies that participate in the sponsorship or administration of 529 Plans.
College Savings Plans Network (CSPN)
Established to make higher education more financially attainable, CSPN is a national non-profit
association and the leading objective source of information about 529 Plans. An affiliate of the
National Association of State Treasurers, CSPN works with its members to enhance 529 Plans and
assist American families in planning and saving for higher education. CSPN members include state
officials and state-sponsored 529 Plans, as well as program managers, investment managers, and many
organizations providing services to 529 Plans, including legal, accounting, and general consulting
services.
Investment Company Institute (ICI)
ICI is the world’s leading association of regulated funds, including mutual funds, exchange-traded funds
(ETFs), closed-end funds, and unit investment trusts (UITs) in the United States, and similar funds
offered to investors in jurisdictions worldwide. ICI seeks to encourage adherence to high ethical
standards, promote public understanding, and otherwise advance the interests of funds, their
shareholders, directors, and advisers. ICI’s U.S. fund members manage total assets of $17.7 trillion and
serve more than 90 million U.S. shareholders.
Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA)
SIFMA brings together the shared interests of hundreds of securities firms, banks, and asset
managers. SIFMA's mission is to support a strong financial industry, investor opportunity, capital
formation, job creation, and economic growth, while building trust and confidence in the financial
markets. SIFMA, with offices in New York and Washington, D.C., is the U.S. regional member of the
Global Financial Markets Association (GFMA). For more information, visit http://www.sifma.org.
Strategic Insights
For more than 25 years, Strategic Insight has been at the forefront of thorough, unbiased mutual fund
industry research and business intelligence. It believes in the mutual fund industry. Its core mission has
always been to strengthen the industry and help its clients succeed in the global marketplace by
providing them with the research, data, and analytical support they need to identify product and
distribution opportunities and make smart business decisions. As sincere industry advocates, Strategic
Insights provides products and services to a wide range of clients, including executives from more than
200 investment management and insurance companies, distributors, investment banks, hedge funds,
consultants, and law firms. Strategic Insight sets the standard for trusted business intelligence and
mutual fund analysis. It offers the most comprehensive, accurate mutual fund information available to
help its clients direct their efforts wisely and grow their businesses. Strategic Insight’s parent company,
Asset International, delivers critical, cutting-edge data, research, and marketing programs to mutual
fund companies, banks, asset managers, and insurance companies worldwide.
Latest Comment Letters:
TEST - ICI Comment Letter Opposing Sales Tax on Additional Services in Maryland
ICI Comment Letter Opposing Sales Tax on Additional Services in Maryland
ICI Response to the European Commission on the Savings and Investments Union