1 See Memorandum to Accounting/Treasurers Committee No. 29-95, Money Market Funds Ad Hoc Committee No. 9-95 and SEC Rules Committee No. 84-95, dated July 25, 1995.
September 28, 1995
TO: ACCOUNTING/TREASURERS COMMITTEE No. 38-95
MONEY MARKET FUNDS AD HOC COMMITTEE No. 13-95
SEC RULES COMMITTEE No. 105-95
RE: INSTITUTE COMMENT LETTERS ON SEC’S SIMPLIFIED MONEY MARKET
FUND PROSPECTUS AND QUARTERLY REPORTING PROPOSALS
______________________________________________________________________________
As we previously informed you, the Securities and Exchange Commission has issued for
public comment (1) proposed amendments to the disclosure requirements for money market
funds to permit such funds to issue simplified prospectuses, as well as several other proposed
changes to Form N-1A that would apply to all funds, and (2) proposed new Rule 30b3-1 under
the Investment Company Act of 1940 to require money funds to file with the SEC quarterly
reports regarding their portfolio holdings.1 Copies of the Institutes comment letters on these
proposals, which are briefly summarized below, are attached.
Money Fund Prospectus Simplification
The Institutes letter generally expresses support for the proposed amendments to Form
N-1A to permit a simplified money fund prospectus and recommends that the amendments be
extended to all mutual funds. The most significant changes proposed include replacing the
financial highlights table with a bar graph showing the funds total returns over a 10-year
period and permitting funds to describe themselves in their prospectuses with general
statements about their investment objectives and portfolio composition, rather than a detailed
discussion of the particular securities in which they may invest. The letter recommends some
specific modifications to the proposals, particularly the total return bar graph, which include (1)
deleting the requirement that the bar graph reflect capital gains distributions by shading or
other distinctive marking, (2) accompanying the bar graph with the funds 1, 5 and 10-year
average annual returns and (3) basing the bar graph on a calendar year rather than on a funds
fiscal year. Finally, the letter expresses general support for most of the other proposed
amendments to Form N-1A, but suggests slight revisions to several of them.
Money Fund Quarterly Reporting Requirement
The Institutes letter expresses strong opposition to the Commissions proposal to
require money funds to report detailed information regarding their portfolio securities on a
quarterly basis. The letter asserts that the proposal is neither a necessary nor appropriate
means for achieving the Commissions stated goals -- to enhance its ability to monitor money
fund compliance with Rule 2a-7, to improve the efficiency of its money fund inspection
program and to enable it to respond to significant market events affecting money funds and
their shareholders.
In lieu of the proposed quarterly reporting requirement, the Institute recommends that
money funds be required to report certain "fund-level" information (such as gross yield, total
assets, dollar-weighted average maturity, percentages of net assets invested in specific
categories of securities, percentage of net assets invested in Second Tier Securities, and certain
affiliated transactions) on a monthly basis. We also recommend that the Commission adopt a
standard format for money funds subject to an inspection to report information about their
portfolio holdings. Finally, the letter recommends that the Commission establish a
communications system to obtain information about particular securities that may be affected
by significant market events or about which the Commission has some concerns regarding their
appropriateness for money funds. These recommendations would allow the Commission to
achieve its stated goals, without imposing the unnecessary costs and burdens on funds that
would be associated with having to file excessive information on a quarterly basis.
Amy B.R. Lancellotta
Associate Counsel
Attachments
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