The MSRB has become aware of problems in transaction
reporting as a result of dealers “bunching” certain inter-dealer transactions
in the comparison system. Recently, some dealers have reported
the sum of two trades as one transaction in instances when two dealers effected
two trades with each other in the same issue and at the same price. When
two transactions are effected, two transactions should be reflected in each
dealer’s books and records and two transactions are required to be reported
to the MSRB. The time of trade for each transaction also must
accurately reflect the time at which a contractual commitment was formed
for each quantity of securities. For example, if Dealer A purchases
$50,000 of a municipal issue at a price of par from Dealer B at 11:00 am
and then purchases an additional $50,000 at par from Dealer B at 2:00 pm,
two transactions are required to be reflected on each dealers’ books and
records and two transactions are required to be reported to the MSRB.
Since the same inter-dealer trade record submitted for automated comparison
under Rule G-12(f) also is used to satisfy the requirements of Rule G-14,
on transaction reporting, each inter-dealer transaction should be submitted
for automated comparison separately in order to comply with Rule G-14’s requirement
to report all transactions. Failure to do so causes erroneous
information concerning transaction size and time of trade to appear in the
transparency reports published by the MSRB as well as in the audit trail
used by regulators and enforcement agencies. To the extent
that dealers use the records generated by the comparison system for purposes
of complying with MSRB Rule G-8, on recordkeeping, it may also create erroneous
information as to the size of transactions effected or time of trade execution.
Questions on this notice may be directed to Justin
R. Pica, Uniform Practice Specialist, or P. John Baughman, Senior Data Analyst,
at 703-797-6600.
November 24, 2003