|
|
Enron Mail |
Latest and greatest as just discussed !
Regards Janine ---------------------- Forwarded by Janine Juggins/LON/ECT on 22/09/2000 14:23 --------------------------- Mahesh Lakhani 22/09/2000 11:22 To: Paul Simons/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Sheila Glover/HOU/ECT@ECT, John Greene/LON/ECT@ECT, Janine Juggins/LON/ECT@ECT, Gary Hickerson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Kinneman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Erica Gut/LON/ECT Subject: Re: Bond & Equity Trading Paul I am in the process of drafting the agency agreement between the US principal and the UK agent. As soon as I have completed this I will circulate it for review. With regard to your points on the choice of entities, I have the following comments: the principal booking entity - For equities : ECT Investments Inc and for Bonds it will be ENA (Based on Sheila's note below) the UK agent - as this should not be EEFT, we should set up a new entity for this as I think we should have a clean company. I have started the new company workflow process for the set up of this company. I have recommended that the entity is a sub of EnronCredit.com and be called Enron Investment Services Limited (unless if anyone has any other suggestions) I confirm that the same UK agent can be used for both businesses Regards Mahesh From: Sheila Glover 19/09/2000 18:43 To: Mahesh Lakhani/LON/ECT@ECT, Janine Juggins/LON/ECT@ECT, John Greene/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Gary Hickerson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Kinneman/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Equities Mahesh, This confirms our discussion that the the UK entity will have two separate service agreements. One with ENA for Prop Debt Trading and one with ECT Investments Inc for Equities Trading. In London, we can book directly into the underlying entity, e.g. Energy-London Book, At the end of the month, we will record income based upon activity to the Arranger, New UK entity, and record the offsetting expense to the Serviced book (Energy London). Many thanks. Sheila From: Mahesh Lakhani on 09/19/2000 To: John Greene/LON/ECT@ECT, Sheila Glover/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Equities I have a quick question - Would the principal for the bonds/Equities business done from London be ENA or ECT Investments Inc. I recall from our meeting that it was ECT due to the regulatory environment - can you please confirm Thanks Mahesh Paul Simons 14/09/2000 19:27 To: Sheila Glover/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: John Greene/LON/ECT@ECT, Janine Juggins/LON/ECT@ECT, Mahesh Lakhani/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Bond & Equity Trading The agent is needed for tax reasons. I think it means that the income is earned by a "dealer" (ie the agent) which means it is not sub-part F income for US tax purposes and hence not double taxable. The tax guys can correct me if I'm wrong! Paul From: Sheila Glover 14/09/2000 19:08 To: Paul Simons/LON/ECT@ECT, John Greene/LON/ECT@ECT, Janine Juggins/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Bond & Equity Trading Paul, John and Janine, If it is unregulated, do we still need to use an agent? If the answer is yes, I would like to understand why and what the operational requirements will be for the transactional flow. Thanks. Sheila Paul Simons 09/14/2000 04:36 AM To: John Greene/LON/ECT@ECT, Janine Juggins/LON/ECT@ECT, Mahesh Lakhani/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Erica Gut/LON/ECT@ECT, Gary Hickerson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Kinneman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sheila Glover/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Evans/Legal/LON/ECT@ECT, Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Laurel Adams/HOU/ECT@ECT, Alan Aronowitz/HOU/ECT@ECT, Lin Richardson/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Bond & Equity Trading Since we're clear on regulation, the choice of entities becomes a tax issue. We need to identify: which company (new or existing) will be the principal booking entity which company (new or existing) will be the agent (but we shouldn't use EEFT, our SFA entity) whether the same principal entity can be used for both the equity and bond businesses, and as you say, whether the same agent can be used for both businesses Could Janine/Mahesh please opine on these questions (we can meet if necessary to discuss) then we can set up the entity or entities as required. Thanks Paul John Greene 14/09/2000 10:03 To: Paul Simons/LON/ECT@ECT, Janine Juggins/LON/ECT@ECT, Mahesh Lakhani/LON/ECT@ECT, Erica Gut/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Gary Hickerson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Kinneman/HOU/ECT@ECT, Sheila Glover/HOU/ECT@ECT, Mark Evans/Legal/LON/ECT@ECT, Sara Shackleton/HOU/ECT@ECT, Laurel Adams/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Bond & Equity Trading Now that we have the "green light", can we please start the process of setting up the UK entity that will act as agent for this activity. According to Jeff, the bond trading activity will not start right away and, in any case, the volume for this activity will be fairly light. Therefore, I think it would be best if we just set up one agent now and decide on the need for another separate entity at a later date. Thanks and regards, John Paul Simons 13/09/2000 15:16 To: Gary Hickerson/HOU/ECT@ECT, Jeff Kinneman/HOU/ECT@ECT, John Greene/LON/ECT@ECT, Sheila Glover/HOU/ECT@ECT, Janine Juggins/LON/ECT@ECT, Mahesh Lakhani/LON/ECT@ECT, Mark Evans/Legal/LON/ECT@ECT, Andrew Cornfield/LON/ECT@ECT cc: John Sherriff/LON/ECT@ECT, Michael R Brown/LON/ECT@ECT Subject: Bond & Equity Trading I have just received the letter SFA promised us. SFA have accepted our argument that our proprietary bond and equity trading can be carried on in London through an unregulated UK entity. The letter also states that SFA will not be applying their consolidated capital supervision rules to the unregulated entity, which they have the discretion to do. From a regulatory perspective this means we can move ahead at full speed to set up an appropriate Chinese Wall and then begin trading. Best regards Pau
|