Subject: SR-OCC-2024-001 34-99393
From: Doug Gibbons
Affiliation:

Feb. 7, 2024

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on SR-OCC-2024-001 34-99393
entitled “Proposed Rule Change by The Options Clearing Corporation
Concerning Its Process for Adjusting Certain Parameters in Its
Proprietary System for Calculating Margin Requirements During Periods
When the Products It Clears and the Markets It Serves Experience High
Volatility”.

I have several concerns about the OCC rule proposal, HIGHLY OPPOSE
THIS PROPOSAL, AND DO NOT SUPPORT IT'S APPROVAL!.

I’m concerned about the lack of transparency in our financial system
as evidenced by this rule proposal, amongst others. The details of
this proposal along with supporting information are significantly
redacted which prevents public review making it impossible for the
public to meaningfully review and comment on this proposal, and this
proposal should be rejected on that basis alone.

These rules create an unfair marketplace for market participants,
especially retail investors, who are forced to face the consequences
of long-tail risks while the OCC repeatedly waives margin calls for
Clearing Members by repeatedly reducing their margin requirements. For
this reason, this rule proposal should be rejected and Clearing
Members should be subject to strictly defined margin requirements as
other investors are.

Per the OCC, this rule proposal and these special margin reduction
procedures exist because a single Clearing Member defaulting could
result in a cascade of Clearing Member defaults potentially exposing
the OCC to financial risk. Thus, Clearing Members who fail to properly
manage their portfolio risk against long tail events become de facto
Too Big To Fail.

For this reason, this rule proposal should be rejected and Clearing
Members should face the consequences of failing to properly manage
their portfolio risk, including against long tail events. Clearing
Member failure is a natural disincentive against excessive leverage
and insufficient capitalization as others in the market will not cover
their loss.

This rule proposal codifies an inherent conflict of interest for the
Financial Risk Management (FRM) Officer. While the FRM Officer’s
position is allegedly to protect OCC’s interests, the situation
outlined by the OCC proposal where a Clearing Member failure exposes
the OCC to financial risk necessarily requires the FRM Officer to
protect the Clearing Member from failure to protect the OCC.

Unfortunately, rubber stamping margin requirement reductions for
Clearing Members at risk of failure vitiates the protection from
market risks associated with Clearing Member’s positions provided by
the margin collateral that would have been collected by the OCC. For
this reason, this rule proposal should be rejected and the OCC should
enforce sufficient margin requirements to protect the OCC and minimize
the size of any bailouts that may already be required. As the OCC’s
Clearing Member Default Rules and Procedures Loss Allocation waterfall
allocates losses to “3. OCC’s own pre-funded financial resources” (OCC
‘s “skin-in-the-game” per SR-OCC-2021-801 34-91491 [10]) before “4.
Clearing fund deposits of non-defaulting firms”, any sufficiently
large Clearing Member default which exhausts both “1. The margin
deposits of the suspended firm” and “2. Clearing fund deposits of the
suspended firm” automatically poses a financial risk to the OCC.

As this rule proposal is concerned with potential liquidity issues for
non-defaulting Clearing Members as a result of charges to the Clearing
Fund, it is clear that the OCC is concerned about risk which exhausts
OCC’s own pre-funded financial resources. With the first and foremost
line of protection for the OCC being “1. The margin deposits of the
suspended firm”, this rule proposal is blatantly illogical and
nonsensical.

If this rule proposal is approved, mitigating the procyclical margin
requirements directly reduces the first line of protection for the
OCC, margin collateral from at risk Clearing Member(s), so this rule
proposal should be rejected, made fully available for public review,
and approved only with significant amendments to address the issues
raised herein.

In light of the issues outlined above, please consider the following
modifications:

Increase and enforce margin requirements commensurate with risks
associated with Clearing Member positions instead of reducing margin
requirements. Clearing Members should be encouraged to position their
portfolios to account for stressed market conditions and long-tail
risks. This rule proposal currently encourages Clearing Members to
become Too Big To Fail in order to pressure the OCC with excessive
risk and leverage into implementing idiosyncratic controls more often
to privatize profits and socialize losses.

Thank you



---------------------------------------------------------
Doug Gibbons, Broker Associate
RE/MAX OF PRINCETON
343 Nassau St
Princeton, NJ 08540
(609) 439-6571 Cell (preferred)
(609) 921-9202 Office
Doug@DougGibbons.com  (preferred email)
https://protect2.fireeye.com/v1/url?k=31323334-50bba2bf-3132d782-4544474f5631-f0d65f53026cfb2d&q=1&e=52025b1f-3b72-4033-8f16-7e7cf30011b2&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.searchprinceton.com%2F

The highest compliment I can receive is the referral of a friend or relative!
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any accompanying documents
contain  confidential information belonging to the sender which is
legally privileged. The information is intended only for the use of
the individual(s) or entity(ies) named above. If you are not the
intended  recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the
contents of  this information is strictly prohibited. If you have
received this e-mail in error, please reply as such and delete the
e-mail.
WIRE FRAUD ALERT: Never wire transfer money based on an email request
from me or my office without calling me or my office and speaking with
someone personally to confirm wire information.  When calling, do not
use the phone number from the e-mail signature line.  Even if an email
looks like it has come from me or my office, or someone involved in
your transaction, do not accept emailed wire instructions from anyone
without voice verification.  You will never be instructed to wire
money related to a closing without verbal confirmation.