A Simple Framework for Determining Whether Dodd-Frank Applies to Your Energy Trade

Jan 2, 2014

Reading Time : 4 min

The CFTC’s definition of “swap” generally includes financial derivatives such as contracts-for-differences that are settled against a price index or a futures contract.2 Forward contracts that are intended to be physically settled, contracts for full requirements or full output that are intended to be physically settled, and leases and lease-like arrangements such as tolling agreements generally are not regulated as swaps.3

There are important exceptions for “end users,” bona fide hedging, and trades in organized electric markets; however, even if an exception applies, the contract still may be subject to Dodd-Frank’s data collection and reporting requirements if it meets the definition of “swap.

2. Is the company an Eligible Contract Participant?

If the contract is a swap and no exception applies, then it needs to be executed on an organized exchange or else each party needs to qualify as an Eligible Contract Participant (“ECP”).  Only ECPs may enter into bilateral, over-the-counter swaps.  ECPs include entities that have, or have a guarantor that has, $10 million in assets.4 Entities with a net worth of only $1 million may be considered ECPs, but only with respect to swaps that are entered into for the purpose of hedging risk.5 

3. Is the company a “Swap Dealer” or “Major Swap Participant”?

Swap Dealers and Major Swap Participants are subject to extensive regulation under Dodd-Frank so market participants will want to avoid these designations.  It is unlikely that any single transaction will result in a company falling into either of these categories, although any company that engages in a large volume of swaps needs to be aware of how these categories are defined and what exemptions could apply. 

Again, the CFTC’s rules are complex.  The final rule defining the terms “swap dealer” and “major swap participant” runs 169 Federal Register pages.6 

In general, a swap dealer is a person who:  (a) holds themself out as a dealer in swaps; (b) makes a market in swaps; (c) regularly enters into swaps in the ordinary course of business; or (d) engages in any activity causing them to be known as a swap dealer.7  If a company engages in activities that could cause it to be classified as a swap dealer, it may fall under the “de minimis exception” which excludes a company from the “swap dealer” category if, over the immediately preceding 12-month period, its aggregate swap dealing activities do not exceed the gross “notional amount” of $3 billion ($8 billion during the initial phase-in period),8 excluding hedges.9  Entities under common control are considered one company for the purposes of this calculation.10

In general, a “major swap participant” is a person other than a swap dealer that (a) maintains a substantial position in swaps for any of the major swap categories, excluding positions for hedging or mitigating commercial risk, (b) has outstanding swaps that create substantial counterparty exposure that could have “serious adverse effects” on the financial stability of the U.S. banking system or financial system, or (c) is a highly leveraged financial entity that maintains a substantial position in any major swap category.11  The intent is to identify those entities whose exposure to swaps poses market risks that, in the view of the CFTC, warrant enhanced regulatory oversight and control.

4. Is the contract subject to mandatory clearing requirements?

As of December 2013, only interest rate swaps and credit default swaps are subject to mandatory clearing,12 but the CFTC has stated that other classes of swaps may become subject to mandatory clearing in the future. 

5. Is the contract subject to position limits? 

The CFTC has issued proposed rules regarding speculative position limits for certain products, but there are currently no position limit rules in effect.13 The proposed speculative position limits would apply to financial derivatives that settle against four core energy commodity futures contracts and economically equivalent products.  The core energy commodity futures contracts are (1) New York Mercantile Exchange Light Sweet Crude Oil, (2) New York Mercantile Exchange New York Harbor ULSO, (3) New York Mercantile Exchange RBOB Gasoline Blendstock, and (4) New York Mercantile Exchange Henry Hub Natural Gas.  For more information on speculative position limits, see our December 23, 2013 blog, “CFTC Re-Proposes Position Limits for Certain Commodity Futures Contracts and Economically Equivalent Swaps.”

6. Is the contract subject to mandatory reporting and recordkeeping requirements?

Companies are required to keep full, complete and systematic records of all swaps to which they are counterparties.  Information on a swap must be retained for at least five years following termination of the swap.  These records must be readily retrievable throughout the life of the swap and for two years thereafter, but can then be archived.14   

All swaps must be reported to a swap data repository.  If the swap was not cleared on an exchange, then one of the parties must do the reporting.  If one party is a Swap Dealer, Major Swap Participant, or a financial entity, that entity will be responsible for reporting the swap.  If neither party falls into those categories, the parties must determine between themselves which entity will be responsible for reporting.15


1 Further Definition of “Swap,” “Security-Based Swap” and “Security-Based Swap Agreement,” 77 Fed. Reg. 48208 (Aug. 13, 2012).

2 See 7 U.S.C. § 1a(47)(A) (2012).

3 See id. § 1a(47)(B); Further Definition of “Swap,” “Security-Based Swap” and “Security-Based Swap Agreement,” 77 Fed. Reg. 48,208, 48,227-43 (Aug. 13, 2012).

4 7 U.S.C. § 1a(18).

5 Id.

6 Further Definition of “Swap Dealer,” “Security-Based Swap Dealer,” “Major Swap Participant,” “Major Security-Based Swap Participant” and “Eligible Contract Participant,” 77 Fed. Reg. 30596 (May 23, 2012).

7 7 U.S.C. § 1a(49); 17 C.F.R. § 1.3(ggg).

8 In May 2015, the CFTC staff will prepare a study of the derivative markets.  Nine months after this study, the CFTC may end the phase-in period or propose new de minimis rules.  Otherwise, the five-year phase-in period will automatically terminate in October 2017.  17 C.F.R. § 1.3(ggg)(4)(ii).

9 7 U.S.C. § 1a(49)(D); 17 C.F.R. § 1.3(ggg)(4).

10 Further Definition of “Swap Dealer,” “Security-Based Swap Dealer,” “Major Swap Participant,” “Major Security-Based Swap Participant” and “Eligible Contract Participant,” 77 Fed. Reg. 30,596, 30,631 (May 23, 2012) (“Further Definition”).

11 7 U.S.C. § 1a(33); 17 C.F.R. § 1.3(hhh)(1)(ii)(C).

12 Clearing Requirement Determination Under § 2(h) of the CEA, 77 Fed. Reg. 74,284 (Dec. 13, 2012).

13 Position Limits for Derivatives, 78 Fed. Reg. 75680 (December 12, 2013).

14 Swap Data Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements, 77 Fed. Reg. 2136, 2141-42 (Jan. 13, 2012).

15 Id. at 2137, 2153.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Speaking Energy

April 15, 2025

On April 9, 2025, President Trump issued an executive order (EO)1 directing several federal agencies and subagencies that regulate energy, environmental, and conservation matters,2 including the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the Department of Energy (DOE), to establish conditional sunset dates for “regulations governing energy production.” The stated objective of the EO is to require agencies to periodically reexamine their regulations to ensure that they continue to serve the public good. For FERC, the order covers regulations promulgated under the Federal Power Act (FPA), the Natural Gas Act (NGA) and the Powerplant and Industrial Fuel Use Act (FUA)3, as amended, while DOE must consider regulations promulgated under the Atomic Energy Act (AEA), the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act, the Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPAct 1992), the Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct 2005) and the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA), as amended (collectively the Covered Regulations).4 To the extent the DOE has been directed to promulgate regulations under various sections of the NGA, FPA and FUA, and FERC has been directed to promulgate regulations specific to the statutes attributed to the DOE in the EO, the EO is silent. The EO expressly does not apply to those “regulatory permitting regimes authorized by statute.”5

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

April 10, 2025

On April 8, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive Order (EO) directing the Department of Energy (DOE) to take steps to expand the use of its emergency authority under Federal Power Act (FPA) Section 202(c) to require the retention of generation resources deemed necessary to maintain resource adequacy within at risk-regions of the bulk power system regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC).1 The EO appears to envision a more active role for DOE in overseeing and supporting the resource adequacy of the grid that deviates from the historic use of Section 202(c) and touches on issues at the intersection of state and federal authority over resource planning.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

March 10, 2025

On March 5, 2025, the United States Department of Energy (DOE) approved Golden Pass LNG Terminal LLC’s (GPLNG) request to extend a deadline to begin exporting liquefied natural gas (LNG) from its terminal facility currently under construction in Sabine Pass, Texas for 18 months, from September 30, 2025, to March 31, 2027 (the Order). The Order amends GPLNG’s two existing long-term orders authorizing the export of domestically produced LNG to countries with which the United States does and does not have free trade agreements (FTA).1  The Order does not amend the authorizations’ end date, which remains December 31, 2050. Under section 3 of the Natural Gas Act (NGA), the DOE may authorize exports to non-FTA countries following completion of a “public interest” review, whereas exports to FTA countries are deemed to be in the public interest and the DOE is directed to issue authorizations without modification or delay.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

March 4, 2025

Join projects & energy transition partner Shariff Barakat at Infocast’s Solar & Wind, where he will moderate the “Tax Equity Market Dynamics” panel.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

February 13, 2025

Oil & gas companies continue to identify and capitalize on opportunities related to the deployment of new energy technologies, with their approaches broadly maturing and coalescing around maximizing synergies, leveraging available subsidies and responding to regulatory drivers.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

February 11, 2025

On January 30, 2025, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC or the Commission) approved a Stipulation and Consent Agreement (Agreement) between the Office of Enforcement (OE) and Stronghold Digital Mining Inc. (Stronghold) resolving an investigation into whether Stronghold had violated the PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (PJM) tariff and Commission regulations by limiting the quantity of energy made available to the market to serve a co-located Bitcoin mining operation.1 This order appears to be the first instance of a public enforcement action involving co-located load and generation and comes at a time when both FERC and market operators2 are scrutinizing the treatment of co-located load due to the rapid increase in demand associated with data center development.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

February 5, 2025

2024 was about post-consolidation deal flow and a steady uptick in activity across the oil & gas market. This year, mergers & acquisitions (M&A) activity looks set to take on a different tone as major consolidation plays bed down.

...

Read More

Speaking Energy

January 30, 2025

The oil & gas industry is experiencing a capital resurgence, driven by stabilizing interest rates and renewed attention from institutional investors. Private equity is leading the charge with private credit filling the void in traditional energy finance and hybrid capital instruments gaining in popularity. Family offices are also playing a crucial role, providing long-term, flexible investments.

...

Read More

© 2025 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.