# SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

> Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more.

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/agency%3Asec%3A75f58f85cd0501be

## Record

- **Collection:** Agency decision
- **Document type:** Agency decision

## Text

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
17 CFR Parts 232, 239, 270 and 274
[Release Nos. 33-8823; IC-27884; File Number S7-05-07]
RIN 3235-AJ59
EXTENSION OF INTERACTIVE DATA VOLUNTARY REPORTING
PROGRAM ON THE EDGAR SYSTEM TO INCLUDE MUTUAL FUND
RISK/RETURN SUMMARY INFORMATION
AGENCY: Securities and Exchange Commission.
ACTION: Final rule.
SUMMARY: We are adopting rule amendments to extend the current interactive data
voluntary reporting program to enable mutual funds voluntarily to submit supplemental
tagged information contained in the risk/return summary section of their prospectuses. A
mutual fund choosing to tag its risk/return summary information also would continue to
file this information in HTML or ASCII format, as currently required. This extension of
the voluntary program is intended to help us evaluate the usefulness to investors, thirdparty analysts, registrants, the Commission, and the marketplace of data tagging and, in
particular, of tagging mutual fund information.
EFFECTIVE DATE: August 20, 2007.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alberto H. Zapata, Senior Counsel,
or Brent J. Fields, Assistant Director, Office of Disclosure Regulation, Division of
Investment Management, at (202) 551-6784, Securities and Exchange Commission, 100
F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549-5720. If you have questions about the EDGAR
system, contact Richard Heroux, EDGAR Program Manager, at (202) 551-8800, in the
Office of Information Technology.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Securities and Exchange Commission
(“Commission”) is adopting amendments to rules 401 1 and 402 2 of Regulation S-T 3 , rule
8b-33 4 under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“Investment Company Act”), and
Form N-1A 5 under the Investment Company Act and the Securities Act of 1933
(“Securities Act”). 6

1

17 CFR 232.401.

2

17 CFR 232.402.

3

17 CFR 232.10 et seq.

4

17 CFR 270.8b-33.

5

17 CFR 239.15A and 274.11A.

6

The Commission proposed these amendments in February 2007. Securities Act Release
No. 8781 (Feb. 6, 2007) [72 FR 6676 (Feb. 12, 2007)] (“Proposing Release”).

2

Table of Contents
I.

II.

BACKGROUND
A.

Interactive Data and XBRL

B.

The Voluntary Program and Tagging of Mutual Fund Information

DISCUSSION
A.

Expansion of Voluntary Program Content

B.

Required Disclosure

C.

Liability Issues

D.

The Risk/Return Summary Taxonomy and Software Tools

E.

Effective Date

III. PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT
IV. COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS
V.

PROMOTION OF EFFICIENCY, COMPETITION, AND CAPITAL
FORMATION

VI. FINAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS
VII. STATUTORY AUTHORITY
TEXT OF RULE AND FORM AMENDMENTS

3

I.

BACKGROUND
A.

Interactive Data and XBRL

For the past several years, the Commission has been evaluating the use of
interactive data tagging as a tool to improve the timeliness and accessibility of the
information contained in filings with the Commission under the federal securities laws. 7
Data tagging uses standard definitions (or data tags) to translate text-based information
into data that is interactive, that is, data that can be retrieved, searched, and analyzed
through automated means. 8
Interactive data has enormous potential to enable investors and other market
participants to analyze and compare data from different sources more efficiently and
effectively and to exchange information across various platforms automatically. Through
interactive data, static text-based information can be transformed into dynamic databases
that can readily be searched and analyzed, facilitating the comparison of information

7

See SEC to Rebuild Public Disclosure System to Make It ‘Interactive,’ Securities and
Exchange Commission Press Release, Sept. 25, 2006, available at:
http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2006/2006-158.htm (“September 25 Press Release”);
Commission Announces Roundtable Series Giving Investors and Analysts Better
Financial Data via Internet, Securities and Exchange Commission Press Release,
Mar. 9, 2006, available at: http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2006-34.htm; SEC Offers
Incentives for Companies to File Financial Reports with Interactive Data, Securities and
Exchange Commission Press Release, Jan. 11 2006, available at:
http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2006-7.htm (“January 11 Press Release”); SEC
Announces Initiative to Assess Benefits of Tagged Data in Commission Filings,
Securities and Exchange Commission Press Release, July 22, 2004, available at:
http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2004-97.htm.

8

The Commission’s Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval System
(“EDGAR”) has allowed certain tagged data since its inception, for example, by using
Standard Generalized Markup Language and Extensible Markup Language (“XML”) to
tag form-specific information (such as the form type, central index key, and file number)
that accompanies electronic documents submitted on EDGAR. More recently, EDGAR
has employed HyperText Markup Language (“HTML”) to format documents and made
limited use of XML related to financial and business information contained within certain
EDGAR submissions.

4

across companies, reporting periods, and industries. Interactive data also provides a
significant opportunity to automate information processing throughout the business and
reporting cycle, with the potential to increase accuracy and reduce costs. By ensuring
that information is classified properly at each step of the cycle, and minimizing the need
for human intervention and, therefore, human error, interactive data may improve the
quality of information at decreased cost.
Tags are defined in taxonomies, which are essentially data dictionaries that
describe individual items of information and mathematical and definitional relationships
among the items. As tagging has continued to gain prominence in recent years, there has
been substantial progress in developing data tagging taxonomies related to a language for
the electronic communication of business and financial data known as eXtensible
Business Reporting Language (“XBRL”). XBRL was developed as an open source
specification that describes a standard format for tagging financial and other information
to facilitate the preparation, publication, and analysis of that information by software
applications. 9 XBRL was developed and continues to be supported by XBRL
International, a collaborative consortium of approximately 450 organizations representing
many perspectives in the financial reporting community. 10 XBRL International and its
related entities have been developing standard taxonomies that are designed to classify
and define financial information in accordance with U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles (“GAAP”) and Commission regulations. The Commission has contracted with
9

“Open Source” means that the software can be used by anyone without charge and is
being developed in an open and collaborative setting. For a more detailed discussion
about XBRL, see “How XBRL Works” on the XBRL International Web site available at:
http://www.xbrl.org/HowXBRLWorks/.

10

See “About the Organisation” page and subpages on the XBRL International Web site,
available at: http://www.xbrl.org/AboutTheOrganisation/.

5

XBRL US, Inc., the U.S. based jurisdiction of XBRL International, to help complete the
writing of XBRL taxonomies that would enable companies in all industries to file
financial reports with the Commission using XBRL. 11
B.

The Voluntary Program and Tagging of Mutual Fund Information

As part of our evaluation of the potential of interactive data tagging technology,
the Commission adopted rules in 2005 instituting a program that permits filers, on a
voluntary basis, to submit financial information tagged in XBRL format as an exhibit to
certain filings on the Commission’s Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis and Retrieval
System (“EDGAR”). 12 The Commission adopted the voluntary program to help evaluate
the usefulness of data tagging and XBRL to registrants, investors, the Commission, and
the marketplace. 13 In 2006, the Commission initiated an interactive data test program, in
which companies, including investment companies, voluntarily agree to furnish financial
data in XBRL format for at least one year and provide feedback on their experiences,
including the costs and benefits. 14 The data currently permitted in XBRL exhibits is
limited to financial information.

11

September 25 Press Release, supra note 7.

12

See Securities Act Release No. 8529 (Feb. 3, 2005) [70 FR 6556 (Feb. 8, 2005)] (“XBRL
Adopting Release”); Securities Act Release No. 8496 (Sept. 27, 2004) [69 FR 59094
(Oct. 1, 2004)] (“XBRL Proposing Release”). See also Securities Act Release No. 8497
(Sept. 27, 2004) [69 FR 59111 (Oct. 1, 2004)] (concept release soliciting comment on
data tagging).

13

XBRL Adopting Release, supra note 12, 70 FR at 6556-57.

14

January 11 Press Release, supra note 7. For more information about the Commission’s
interactive data initiatives, see the Commission Web page “Spotlight On: Interactive Data
and XBRL Initiatives,” available at: http://www.sec.gov/spotlight/xbrl.htm.

6

The current voluntary program extends to financial information for investment
companies, including open-end management investment companies (“mutual funds”). 15
In February of this year, we proposed amendments to the voluntary program that would
permit mutual funds to tag the information in the risk/return summary section of their
prospectuses using a taxonomy developed by the Investment Company Institute
(“ICI”). 16
The risk/return summary section of the mutual fund prospectus contains important
information about investment objectives and strategies, risks, and costs, 17 and tagging
this information could provide powerful tools for investors. With almost half of all U.S.
households owning mutual funds, 18 typically to fund their education, retirement, and
other basic needs, improving the quality of mutual fund disclosure is important to
millions of Americans. Tagging of key mutual fund information could help to streamline

15

See SEC XBRL Voluntary Program Extends to Investment Companies, Securities and
Exchange Commission Press Release, Aug. 8, 2005, available at:
http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2005-112.htm.

16

The ICI is a national association of the American investment company industry. In
March 2006, the ICI announced an initiative to create a taxonomy to cover the risk/return
summary information. See Stevens Calls for Greater Use of Internet; Announces
Initiative to Develop XBRL Data Tagging Technology, ICI Press Release, Mar. 20, 2006,
available at: http://ici.org/statements/nr/2006/06_news_mfimc.html#TopOfPage; ICI
Unveils Draft XBRL Taxonomy For Public Review, ICI Press Release, Jan. 4, 2007,
available at: http://www.ici.org/statements/nr/07_news_xbrl_txnmy.html#TopOfPage.
In a letter to the Commission staff, dated May 18, 2007, the ICI advised that the
risk/return summary taxonomy is ready for use and described its response to comments
received regarding the taxonomy development. See Letter from Donald J. Boteler, Vice
President – Operations and Continuing Education, ICI, to Andrew J. Donohue, Director,
Division of Investment Management (May 18, 2007) (“Boteler Letter”), available at:
http://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-05-07/s70507-21.pdf. The ICI also indicated that the
schema files and reference materials for the taxonomy are available at: http://xbrl.ici.org.

17

Items 2 and 3 of Form N-1A [17 CFR 239.15A and 274.11A].

18

2007 Investment Company Fact Book, at 57-58, Investment Company Institute (2007),
available at: http://www.ici.org/home/2007_factbook.pdf.

7

the delivery of mutual fund information and provide investors, analysts, and others with
improved tools to compare funds based upon, among other things, costs, investment
objectives, strategies, and risks. In addition, the risk/return summary information is
largely narrative in format, and exploring the viability of tagging this information will
provide us with valuable insights as we assess the potential for tagging other primarily
narrative information.
The Commission received eight comment letters on the proposed rule
amendments, including comments from software vendors, an accounting firm, a trade
association, and several individuals. 19 These commenters generally supported the
proposed rules to extend the interactive data voluntary reporting program to the
risk/return summary section of mutual fund prospectuses. We are adopting the proposed
amendments, with minor modifications to address commenters’ recommendations. The
rule amendments are intended to help us evaluate the usefulness to investors, third-party
analysts, registrants, the Commission, and the marketplace of data tagging and, in
particular, of tagging mutual fund information.
II.

DISCUSSION
As part of our ongoing effort to evaluate the usefulness of data tagging, we are

adopting amendments to extend the voluntary program to enable mutual funds to submit
exhibits containing tagged risk/return summary information attached to EDGAR
19

See comment letters of Confluence (Mar. 14, 2007); Walter S. Hamscher (“Hamscher”)
(Mar. 2, 2007); Charles S. Hoffman (“Hoffman”) (Feb. 10, 2007); ICI (Mar. 14, 2007);
NewRiver, Inc. (“NewRiver”) (Mar. 14, 2007); PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PWC”)
(Mar. 14, 2007); Rivet Software, Inc. (“Rivet”) (Mar. 14, 2007); Ayal Rosenthal
(“Rosenthal”) (Mar. 6, 2007). The ICI contracted with PWC to design and construct the
risk/return taxonomy, and Hamscher was a subcontractor to PWC. The comment letters
are available on the Commission’s Web site at: http://www.sec.gov/comments/s7-0507/s70507.shtml.

8

filings. 20 Any mutual fund may participate, without pre-approval, merely by submitting
the risk/return summary information in the required manner. As we continue to gain
experience with interactive data, we will evaluate the benefits of data tagging to
investors, analysts, and others. If, in the future, we consider requiring filers to tag the
risk/return summary information, that would be the subject of a separate rulemaking
proposal.
A.

Expansion of Voluntary Program Content

Currently, the XBRL data furnished under the voluntary program must consist of
at least one item from a list of enumerated mandatory content (“Mandatory Content”),
including financial statements, earnings information, and, for registered management
investment companies, financial highlights or condensed financial information. 21 We are
adding the risk/return summary information set forth in Items 2 and 3 of Form N-1A as a
new item of Mandatory Content, with two modifications to our proposal that address
commenters’ recommendations.
Our proposal, like the current voluntary program, would have required that
Mandatory Content “consist of a complete set of information for all periods presented in
the corresponding official EDGAR filing.” 22 First, the adopted amendments clarify that,
in the case of a Form N-1A filing that includes more than one series, 23 a filer may tag a
20

The amendments do not alter the current voluntary program as it applies to the furnishing
of XBRL information by non-investment companies.

21

Rule 401(b)(1) of Regulation S-T [17 CFR 232.401(b)(1)].

22

Rule 401(b)(1)(i) of Regulation S-T [17 CFR 232.401(b)(1)(i)].

23

A mutual fund may issue multiple “series” of shares, each of which is preferred over all
other series in respect of assets specifically allocated to that series. Rule 18f-2 under the
Investment Company Act [17 CFR 270.18f-2]. Each series is, in effect, a separate
investment portfolio.

9

complete set of risk/return summary information for any one or more series. 24 For
example, if a filing contains information about four series, a filer could tag information
for one, two, three, or four series. Filers who choose to tag the information for a
particular series would be required to tag all the information for that series, including the
information for each class of the series. 25 Second, we have modified the proposed
amendments, which would have required the information for each class to be separately
identified, to clarify, as suggested by a commenter, 26 that this requirement applies only to
information that does not relate to all of the classes in a series. 27 Thus, class-specific
information, such as expenses and performance, would be required to be separately
identified by class. Information that is not class-specific, such as investment objectives,
would not be required to be separately identified by class.
Three commenters stated that if a mutual fund’s official filing contains
information for more than one series or class, the fund should be permitted to submit
tagged risk/return summary information for one or more, but fewer than all, series or
classes. 28 One of these commenters indicated that this approach would provide the
broadest possible participation in the voluntary program. 29 We agree with these
commenters that mutual funds volunteering to participate in the reporting program that
24

Rule 401(b)(1)(iv) of Regulation S-T [17 CFR 232.401(b)(1)(iv)].

25

A mutual fund may issue more than one class of shares that represent interests in the
same portfolio of securities with each class, among other things, having a different
arrangement for shareholder services or the distribution of securities, or both. Rule 18f-3
under the Investment Company Act [17 CFR 270.18f-3].

26

See letter from ICI, supra note 19.

27

Rule 8b-33 under the Investment Company Act [17 CFR 270.8b-33].

28

See letters from Hamscher, ICI, and PWC, supra note 19.

29

See letter from ICI, supra note 19.

10

include more than one series in an official filing should not be required to tag the
information for all series in the filing. A mutual fund’s series represent separate
portfolios of securities, each with its own discrete investment objectives and strategies.
Each series of a registered investment company is a distinct mutual fund though they are
organized as part of a single legal entity. As a result, we have concluded that tagging one
or more series should not require tagging all the series of a fund. Therefore, our rule
amendments permit mutual funds to submit tagged risk/return summary information for
one or more series in an official filing. 30 This flexibility should encourage participation
in the voluntary program. 31
We disagree, however, with commenters’ recommendations 32 that volunteers be
permitted to tag the risk/return summary information for less than all classes for any
mutual fund or series selected. Permitting tagged submissions for less than all the classes
of a fund or series would significantly impair the Commission’s and users’ ability to
evaluate the effectiveness of the ICI’s risk/return summary taxonomy in tagging classspecific information. In addition, it would limit the ability to assess the usefulness of the
taxonomy in facilitating the comparison of class-specific information, such as expenses
and performance, within a fund.

30

Rule 401(b)(1)(iv).

31

We have previously indicated that rule 8b-33 would require investment companies to
submit tagged XBRL documents separately for each series of an investment company
registrant. See XBRL Proposing Release, supra note 12, 69 FR at 59097 n. 49. Under
amended rule 8b-33, a mutual fund will not be required to submit tagged risk/return
summary information in separate documents for each series or class, provided that the
information is tagged in such a manner that the information may be separately identified
by series and class.

32

See letters from Hamscher, ICI, and PWC, supra note 19.

11

As with all tagged exhibits under the voluntary program, submissions of tagged
exhibits containing risk/return summary information will be supplemental and will not
replace the required HTML or ASCII version of the information called for in Form N-1A.
Volunteers will be required to file their complete official registration statements to ensure
that all investors have access to information upon which to base their investment
decisions. 33 While tagged exhibits will be required to reflect the same information
contained in the risk/return summary section of the related official Form N-1A filing, we
emphasize that investors and others should continue to rely on the official filing rather
than the tagged exhibit.
We are adopting, as proposed, the requirement that mutual funds submitting
tagged risk/return summary information must include this information as an exhibit to an
amendment to a previous filing on Form N-1A. 34 Form N-1A filings, which contain
mutual fund registration statements (or amendments thereto), are often subject to revision
prior to effectiveness. For this reason, the rules do not permit the submission of a tagged
33

Consistent with the current voluntary program, once received by the Commission, the
official filing and the tagged risk/return summary information submitted as exhibits to the
official filing will undergo technical validations. The official filing will continue to
follow the normal process for receipt and acceptance. That is, it will be suspended if it
fails its validation criteria. If the official filing meets its validation criteria, but any
tagged risk/return summary document submitted as an exhibit to the official filing fails its
own validation criteria, all tagged documents will be removed and the official filing will
be accepted and disseminated without the tagged documents. The volunteer will be
notified of the submission problem with the tagged documents. If the official filing fails
to meet the required receipt and acceptance process and is suspended for any reason, any
tagged risk/return summary information submitted with the official filing will also be
suspended.

34

See Rule 401(a) of Regulation S-T [17 CFR 232.401(a)]; rule 8b-33. A mutual fund
submitting tagged risk/return summary information as an exhibit to Form N-1A will be
required to name each document “EX-100” as specified in the EDGAR Filer Manual.
We also are adopting a technical amendment to General Instruction B.4.(b) of Form
N-1A to add rule 8b-33 to the list of general provisions that apply to the filing of
registration statements on Form N-1A.

12

exhibit that is related to a registration statement or an amendment that is not yet effective.
More specifically, the rules provide that a tagged exhibit to a Form N-1A filing, whether
the filing is an initial registration statement or an amendment thereto, may be submitted
only as an amendment to the filing to which the tagged exhibit relates and only after the
effective date of such filing. 35 An exhibit containing tagged risk/return summary
information may be submitted under rule 485(b) of the Securities Act, which provides for
immediate effectiveness of amendments that make non-material changes, and will only
need to contain the new exhibit, a facing page, a signature page, a cover letter explaining
the nature of the amendment, and a revised exhibit index.
The voluntary program requires all volunteers to use the appropriate version of a
standard taxonomy, supplemented with extension taxonomies as specified by the
EDGAR Filer Manual. Filers submitting tagged risk/return summary information should
not include the risk/return summary taxonomy in their submissions as this taxonomy will
be stored as a part of the EDGAR system. Section 5.2.4 of the EDGARLink Filer
Manual (Volume II): “EDGAR Filing” will provide instructions and guidance on the
preparation, submission, and validation of EDGAR-acceptable electronic filings with
attached tagged risk/return summary information. 36 The EDGAR system upgrade to
Release 9.7 is scheduled to become available on August 20, 2007, to, among other things,

35

Rule 401(a); rule 8b-33.

36

Rule 301 of Regulation S-T, the regulation that governs the preparation and transmission of
electronic filings on the Commission's EDGAR system, requires electronic filings to be
prepared in accordance with the provisions of the EDGAR Filer Manual. The Filer Manual
contains the technical formatting requirements for electronic submissions. Filers must
comply with those requirements to ensure the timely receipt and acceptance of documents
submitted to the Commission in an electronic format. The Commission’s EDGAR Filer
Manual is available at: http://www.sec.gov/info/edgar.shtml.

13

enable EDGAR to process tagged risk/return summary information when the expanded
voluntary program becomes effective.
Similar to the current voluntary program, volunteers will be free to submit tagged
risk/return summary information regularly or from time to time, and volunteers may stop
and start as they choose. Participating in the voluntary program will not create a
continuing obligation for a volunteer to submit tagged risk/return summary information
as an exhibit to a subsequent post-effective amendment. A volunteer will, however, be
required to amend any tagged risk/return summary exhibits that do not comply with the
content and format requirements of rule 401, e.g., because they do not reflect the same
information as the corresponding official filing. 37
One commenter, while agreeing that participation in the voluntary program
should not create a continuing obligation to submit tagged risk/return summary
information as an exhibit to a subsequent post-effective amendment, noted that rendering
tools may not be able to detect that tagged data is no longer current. 38 The commenter
encouraged the Commission to consider whether additional safeguards, such as the option
to withdraw tagged exhibits, should be made available to ensure that there is no liability
to funds or harm to investors if rendering tools utilize outdated information. As we noted
in response to similar comments when the voluntary program rules were initially adopted,
submissions to EDGAR cannot, as a practical matter, be withdrawn after public

37

See rule 401(c)(1) of Regulation S-T [17 CFR 232.401(c)(1)] (requires tagged exhibits to
reflect the same information as corresponding official filing); XBRL Adopting Release,
supra note 12, 70 FR at 6559 n. 48.

38

See letter from ICI, supra note 19.

14

dissemination. 39 In order to address questions of potential harm to investors and liability
to mutual funds, the rules provide for cautionary disclosures 40 and liability protections. 41
The amendments we are adopting will, as proposed, provide mutual funds with
the option to submit tagged financial highlights or condensed financial information as a
tagged exhibit to an amendment to the Form N-1A filing to which the information
relates. 42 Mutual funds also may continue to submit this information as an exhibit to
Form N-CSR, as currently permitted, whether or not they submit tagged risk/return
summary information. 43 A mutual fund submitting tagged risk/return summary
information may, but is not required to, submit tagged financial highlights or condensed
financial information. Similarly, a mutual fund that submits tagged financial highlights
or condensed financial information may, but is not required to, submit tagged risk/return
summary information.

39

XBRL Adopting Release, supra note 12, 70 FR at 6559.

40

See infra Section II.B.

41

See infra Section II.C.

42

Rule 8b-33 (permitting tagged exhibits under the voluntary program to be submitted on
Form N-1A); Item 8(a) of Form N-1A (requiring mutual funds to provide financial
highlights information); rule 401(a) and (b)(1)(iii) of Regulation S-T [17 CFR 232.401(a)
and (b)(1)(iii)] (permitting information set forth in Item 8(a) of Form N-1A as Mandatory
Content under the voluntary program).

43

Rule 401(a) and (b)(1)(iii) (permitting financial highlights or condensed financial
information set forth in Item 8(a) of Form N-1A to be submitted as Mandatory Content);
rule 8b-33. Mutual funds must include their financial highlights or condensed financial
information in every annual and semi-annual report transmitted to shareholders. Items
22(b)(2) and (c)(2) of Form N-1A (requiring annual or semi-annual reports to include the
information required by Item 8(a) of Form N-1A). Mutual funds must include a copy of
their annual or semi-annual report transmitted to shareholders with their Form N-CSR
filed with the Commission. Item 1 of Form N-CSR.

15

B.

Required Disclosure

The Commission is adopting, as proposed, a requirement that the exhibit index of
any Form N-1A filing that includes a tagged exhibit disclose that the purpose of
submitting the tagged exhibit is to test the related format and technology and, as a result,
investors should not rely on the exhibit in making investment decisions. 44 In addition, we
are requiring this disclosure to appear within a tagged exhibit, as recommended by some
commenters. 45
We believe that the inclusion of the cautionary disclosure within tagged
risk/return summary exhibits may help to alert investors and other users that the exhibits
should not be relied on in making investment decisions. We are modifying the proposed
rule to require that the disclosure be included within the exhibits as a tagged data
element. 46 The ICI indicated in its comment letter that an element could be added to the
risk/return summary taxonomy for the display of this disclosure and has now done so.
We encourage parties that are developing rendering tools for the risk/return summary
taxonomy to make use of this data tag in order to display the cautionary disclosure in
rendered versions of funds’ risk/return summary information.
The adopted rules, like the proposed rules and consistent with one commenter’s
recommendation, 47 do not require a Form N-1A filing that includes tagged exhibits
44

Rule 401(d)(1)(ii) and (d)(2)(i) of Regulation S-T [17 CFR 232.401(d)(1)(ii) and
(d)(2)(i)]. Rule 483(a) of Regulation C [17 CFR 230.483(a)] requires, among other
things, that a registration statement of a registered investment company “contain an
exhibit index, which should immediately precede the exhibits filed with such registration
statement.”

45

See letters from ICI and PWC, supra note 19.

46

Rule 401(d)(2)(i).

47

See letter from ICI, supra note 19.

16

containing only risk/return summary information to disclose that the information in the
exhibits is “unaudited” or “unreviewed.” This disclosure will be required in a Form
N-1A filing with which tagged financial highlights or condensed financial information is
submitted. 48
C.

Liability Issues

The two commenters who addressed liability issues supported the proposal to
extend to tagged risk/return summary information limited protection from liability that is
similar to the protection provided under the current voluntary program, 49 and we are
adopting the liability protection as proposed. We are providing this protection because
liability remains for the official filing, and because the program is experimental, it
contains certain safeguards, and the program should not unnecessarily deter volunteers
from participating.
Under the current voluntary program, tagged exhibits are not deemed filed for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”) 50 or
Section 34(b) of the Investment Company Act, 51 or otherwise subject to the liability of
these sections. 52 In addition, the current rules also provide more general relief from
liability under the securities laws, including the Securities Act, the Exchange Act, the

48

Rule 401(d)(1)(i) of Regulation S-T [17 CFR 232.401(d)(1)(i)].

49

See letters from ICI and PWC, supra note 19.

50

15 U.S.C. 78r.

51

15 U.S.C. 80a-33(b).

52

Rule 402(a)(1) under Regulation S-T [17 CFR 232.402(a)(1)]. Further, because the
tagged documents are not filed under the Exchange Act, they are not incorporated by
reference into registration statements filed under the Securities Act or prospectuses they
contain. These protections apply regardless of whether the documents are exhibits to a
document otherwise incorporated by reference into a filing.

17

Trust Indenture Act of 1939, and the Investment Company Act, for information in a
tagged exhibit that complies with the content and format requirements of the voluntary
program to the extent that the information in the corresponding portion of the official
EDGAR filing was not materially false or misleading. 53
The amendments we are adopting, as proposed, extend the liability protection
under the voluntary program to include Section 11 of the Securities Act. 54 Specifically,
we are amending rule 402(a) to provide that tagged exhibits are not deemed filed for
purposes of Section 11 or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section. In addition,
we are amending rule 402(a) to state explicitly that tagged exhibits are not part of any
registration statement to which they relate. 55 Finally, the provision in the current rules
that affords volunteers general relief from liability under the federal securities laws to the
extent that the information in the corresponding portion of the official EDGAR filing was
not materially false or misleading includes liability protections under the Securities Act,

53

Rule 402(b) of Regulation S-T [17 CFR 232.402(b)].

54

In addition, the current provisions of rule 402(a) will apply to tagged risk/return summary
information. In particular, a tagged exhibit on Form N-1A will not be deemed
incorporated by reference into another filing, regardless of whether the tagged exhibit is
an exhibit to a document otherwise incorporated by reference into another filing. Rule
402(a)(2) under Regulation S-T [17 CFR 232.402(a)(2)]. All other liability and antifraud
provisions of the Securities Act, Exchange Act, and Investment Company Act will apply.
Rule 402(a)(3) under Regulation S-T [17 CFR 232.402(a)(3)]. For example, material
misstatements or omissions in a tagged submission will continue to be subject to liability
under Section 10(b) [15 U.S.C. 78j(b)] and rule 10b-5 [17 CFR 240.10b-5] under the
Exchange Act.

55

Section 11 of the Securities Act applies to “any part of the registration statement, when
such part became effective.” The Commission takes a similar approach with unofficial
PDF copies contained in electronic submissions. See Rule 104(d) of Regulation S-T
[17 CFR 232.104(d)]. Similar to the other protections in the voluntary program, Section
11 liability relief will not extend to the information that the official filing contains.

18

and it will apply to tagged documents submitted as exhibits on Form N-1A. 56 We will
continue to caution users on the Commission’s Web site that documents submitted under
the voluntary program should not be relied upon for making investment decisions, and
users should continue to rely on the company’s official filing. 57
D.

The Risk/Return Summary Taxonomy and Software Tools

The taxonomy for tagging the risk/return summary information was developed by
the ICI. Mutual funds will be permitted to submit documents containing risk/return
summary information that is tagged using the ICI’s taxonomy commencing on the
effective date of the rules that we are adopting. In January 2007, the ICI released a draft
risk/return summary taxonomy for public review and comment. 58 The final taxonomy
was submitted for acknowledgement by the ICI to XBRL International on May 16,
2007, 59 in accordance with XBRL International procedures. 60 The taxonomy received
56

Rule 402(b). We are adopting technical amendments to rule 402(b) to replace each
reference to “Item 401” with “Rule 401.”

57

See “XBRL Data Submitted in the XBRL Voluntary Program on EDGAR” page on the
Commission Web site, available at: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/xbrl.html.

58

See ICI Unveils Draft XBRL Taxonomy For Public Review, Investment Company
Institute Press Release, Jan. 4, 2007, available at:
http://www.ici.org/statements/nr/07_news_xbrl_txnmy.html#TopOfPage. See also
Statements of SEC Chairman Christopher Cox and Division of Investment Management
Director Andrew Donohue Regarding the Investment Company Institute’s Mutual Fund
Interactive Data Taxonomy, Securities and Exchange Commission Press Release, Jan. 4,
2007, available at: http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2007/2007-2.htm.

59

See Boteler Letter, supra note 16.

60

XBRL US, Inc., represents the United States to XBRL International. XBRL US, Inc., is
responsible for organizing and sponsoring taxonomies from the United States, including
the main accounting standards for United States business reporting. There are two levels
of XBRL taxonomy recognition: (1) “acknowledgement” is formal recognition that a
taxonomy complies with XBRL specifications, including testing by a defined set of
validation tools; and (2) “approval” is a formal recognition requiring more detailed
quality assurance and testing, including compliance with official XBRL guidelines for the
type of taxonomy under review, creation of a number of instance documents, and an open
review period after acknowledgement. For more information regarding the XBRL

19

acknowledgement in June 2007. 61 The ICI also intends to seek approval of the taxonomy
in accordance with the procedures of XBRL International, but has indicated that requiring
the taxonomy to be approved prior to use in the voluntary program could introduce delay,
the length of which is unpredictable. 62
We have concluded that the ICI’s taxonomy is sufficiently developed to permit its
use in the voluntary program. Three commenters involved in the taxonomy development
process stated that the risk/return summary taxonomy is sufficiently developed for use in
the voluntary program, noting that the taxonomy was developed through the use of a
broad working group that was given the opportunity to review and comment on the
taxonomy as it was developed and that the taxonomy was subjected to a public review
and comment period. 63 While some commenters suggested changes to the taxonomy,
such as reducing the number of elements in the taxonomy 64 or avoiding the use of
complex structures, 65 these commenters did not suggest that the voluntary program
should be delayed unless the taxonomy is modified. The ICI has considered the
comments it received on the taxonomy, as well as the comments on the taxonomy
submitted to the Commission, and has submitted a letter to the Commission’s staff
summarizing its response to the commenters and the taxonomy changes that were
taxonomy recognition process, see “Taxonomy Recognition Process” on the XBRL
International Web site available at: http://www.xbrl.org/TaxonomyRecognition/.
61

The taxonomy is available on XBRL International’s Web site at:
http://www.xbrl.org/Taxonomy/ici/ici-rr-summarydocument-20070516acknowledged.htm.

62

See letter from ICI, supra note 19. See also letter from Hamscher, supra note 19.

63

See letters from Hamscher, ICI, and PWC, supra note 19.

64

See letter from NewRiver, supra note 19.

65

See letter from Rivet, supra note 19.

20

made. 66 In its letter, the ICI asserts that the taxonomy is ready for use with the
Commission’s interactive data voluntary reporting program. In light of the ICI’s
consideration of comments related to the taxonomy, and the comments that we received
favoring the expansion of the voluntary program to the risk/return summary, 67 we have
concluded that it is appropriate to permit use of the taxonomy in its present state of
development. Further, the purpose of the voluntary program is to test and evaluate
tagging technology, and, as a result, we agree with commenters’ recommendations that it
is not necessary for approval of the taxonomy to be obtained before permitting volunteers
to submit tagged documents.
As in the current voluntary program, filers will be permitted to use extensions to
the risk/return summary taxonomy, which are additional tags created by a particular user
that further refine the tags contained in a standard taxonomy. Some commenters
supported permitting the use of at least some extensions with the risk/return summary
taxonomy, 68 but one commenter opposed the use of extensions to the risk/return
summary taxonomy, stating that the extensions would introduce complexity. 69 While we
recognize that permitting the use of extensions to the risk/return summary taxonomy may
affect the ability to compare or render tagged submissions, we believe that it will be
helpful to permit extensions on an unrestricted basis at this time. Experimentation with
extensions will permit the Commission, filers, and users of tagged filings to better assess

66

See Boteler Letter, supra note 16.

67

See letters from Confluence, Hamscher, Hoffman, ICI, NewRiver, PWC, and Rosenthal,
supra note 19.

68

See letters from ICI, PWC, and Rivet, supra note 19.

69

See letter from Confluence, supra note 19.

21

the need for extensions to the risk/return summary taxonomy and the impact that
extensions may have on tagged documents.
One commenter recommended that the Commission impose validity testing on
tagged risk/return summary exhibits in addition to the tests currently performed under the
voluntary program, but we have determined not to impose additional testing at this
time. 70 The commenter stated that additional validity testing would improve the quality
of tagged exhibits submitted. Currently, under the voluntary program, validity testing of
tagged exhibits consists of testing for: (1) content validation (i.e., validating for invalid
ASCII characters); (2) document-type validation (e.g., ensuring that EX-100.INS
documents have .xml extensions and “”); and (3) XBRL validation (e.g.,
ensuring that exhibits follow appropriate XBRL standards and are structured according to
the taxonomy). We agree that increased validity testing of tagged submissions might
improve their quality. The purpose of the voluntary program, however, is to test the
technology and the taxonomy. We, therefore, believe that it is premature to impose
additional validity testing upon tagged risk/return summary documents.
The Commission’s Web site currently provides access to a prototype XBRL Web
application that converts tagged financial information submitted in the voluntary program
into a rendered, or human readable, format. 71 At present, our Web site does not provide
access to any rendering or analytical tools for use with tagged risk/return summary
information. Some commenters favored a tool on the Commission’s Web site that would

70

See comment letter from Hoffman, supra note 19.

71

See “Interactive Financial Report Viewer — Preview Release” Web page on the
Commission Web site, available at: http://www.sec.gov/spotlight/xbrl/xbrlwebapp.htm.

22

render tagged risk/return summary documents. 72 One commenter noted that such a tool
could help both investors and mutual funds to better understand and explore the benefits
of tagging and could stimulate the development of other, more sophisticated tools for
rendering tagged data. 73 We agree that the availability of rendering and analysis tools
will help investors and mutual funds, as well as third party users, to evaluate the benefits
of tagged risk/return summary data.
We will continue to analyze rendering and other capabilities specifically
developed for the risk/return summary taxonomy, and we may add these features to our
Web site in the future. The Commission also encourages funds and third parties to
develop these tools. Users of EDGAR data on the Commission’s Web site will be able to
download the tagged risk/return summary information to perform their own analysis if
they have appropriate software. Users will continue to be able to view the official filing
in ASCII or HTML format, as they can today.
E.

Effective Date

The effective date of these amendments is August 20, 2007, in order to provide
sufficient time to implement EDGAR system changes necessary to provide for risk/return
summary functionality.
III.

PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT
The rule and form amendments contain “collection of information” requirements

within the meaning of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (“PRA”). 74 Provision of
information under the amendments would be voluntary and would not be kept
72

See letters from Hamscher, ICI, and PWC, supra note 19.

73

See letter from ICI, supra note 19.

74

44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

23

confidential. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, an information collection unless it displays a currently valid Office of
Management and Budget (“OMB”) control number.
The title for the collection of information is “Voluntary XBRL-Related
Documents” (OMB Control No. 3235-0611). The rule and form amendments expand the
current interactive data voluntary reporting program to enable mutual funds voluntarily to
submit tagged information contained in the risk/return summary section of their
prospectuses on EDGAR as exhibits to Form N-1A filings. We published notice
soliciting comments on the collection of information requirements in the release
proposing the amendments and submitted the proposed collection of information to OMB
for review in accordance with 44 U.S.C. 3507(d) and 5 CFR 1320.11. 75 OMB preapproved these collection requirements. We received no comments on the collection of
information requirements.
The Voluntary Program
The amendments, which will expand the current interactive data voluntary
reporting program to enable mutual funds voluntarily to submit tagged information
contained in the risk/return summary section of their prospectuses on EDGAR as exhibits
to Form N-1A filings, will increase the burden associated with the existing collection of
information for Voluntary XBRL-Related Documents. The expansion of the voluntary
program will be open to any mutual fund choosing to participate. We estimate that 10%
of the approximately 545 fund complexes that have mutual funds, or 55 fund complexes,
will each submit documents containing tagged risk/return summary information for one

75

See Proposing Release, supra note 6, 72 FR at 6682-83.

24

mutual fund. 76 This estimate is higher than the number of mutual funds participating in
the current voluntary program. However, we believe that additional mutual funds will
participate in the expanded voluntary program. 77
Submission of tagged risk/return summary information will not directly affect the
burden of preparing the mutual funds’ registration statements or the registrants' official
EDGAR filings. In order to provide tagged risk/return summary information, a
participating mutual fund will have to tag the risk/return summary section of its
prospectus using the risk/return summary taxonomy and potentially develop taxonomy
extensions and will submit an exhibit to its filing. Based on our previous estimates and
our experience with registrants who have submitted tagged financial information in the
current voluntary program, we estimate that the initial creation of tagged documents
containing risk/return summary information will require, on average, approximately 110

76

In the case of a mutual fund with multiple series, our estimate treats each series as a
separate mutual fund.

77

The ICI is undertaking an educational effort to encourage mutual funds to use the
risk/return summary taxonomy to tag the information in their EDGAR filings. ICI
Details Project to Extend XBRL to Key Investor Information, Investment Company
Institute Press Release, June 12, 2006, available at:
http://www.ici.org/statements/nr/2006/06_news_xbrl.html#TopOfPage.
One commenter suggested that the Commission offer incentives to encourage volunteers
to participate in the expanded voluntary program. See letter from ICI, supra note 19.
Specifically, the commenter suggested that the Commission: (1) offer expedited review
of mutual fund exemptive applications; or (2) offer expedited review of an initial
registration statement on Form N-1A or an amendment to a registration statement to add
a new fund or series. Id. The Commission did not initially offer incentives for volunteers
to submit tagged information as part of the current voluntary program. The Commission
subsequently offered expedited review of registration statements and annual reports to
volunteers agreeing to participate in a test group. See January 11 Press Release, supra
note 7. Volunteers that participate in the test group agree to furnish financial data
contained in their periodic and investment company reports in XBRL format for at least
one year and provide feedback on their experiences. Id. At this time, we are not offering
specific incentives to encourage volunteers to participate in the expanded voluntary
program, however, we will continue to assess the need for incentives going forward.

25

burden hours per mutual fund, 78 and the creation of such tagged documents in subsequent
years will require an average 10 burden hours per mutual fund. 79 Because the PRA
estimates represent the average burden over a three-year period, we estimate the average
hour burden for the submission of tagged documents containing risk/return summary
information for one mutual fund to be approximately 43 hours.80
Based on the estimates of 55 participants submitting tagged documents containing
risk/return summary information for one mutual fund per year and incurring 43 hours per
submission, we estimate that, in the aggregate, the industry will incur an additional 2,365

78

In the current voluntary program, we estimated that an initial set of submissions would
require an average of 130 burden hours, 75% of which (or 97.5 hours) represents the
internal burden hour estimate. See XBRL Adopting Release, supra note 12, 70 FR at
6563; XBRL Proposing Release, supra note 12, 69 FR at 59101. Based upon our
experience with filers who have submitted tagged financial information in the current
voluntary program, we believe that this burden estimate for submitting an initial set of
submissions may have been too high. See, e.g., Indra K. Nooyi, Chief Executive Officer,
PepsiCo, Inc., Webcast Archive of October 3 Interactive Data Roundtable, Oct. 3, 2006,
available at: http://www.connectlive.com/events/secinteractivedata100306/ (initial
submission in voluntary program required approximately 60 to 80 total labor hours); John
Stantial, Director of Financial Reporting, United Technologies Corporation, Transcript of
June 12 Interactive Data Roundtable, June 12, 2006, available at:
http://www.sec.gov/spotlight/xbrl/xbrlofficialtranscript0606.pdf, at 160 (initial
submission in voluntary program required about 80 hours of effort). We, therefore,
estimate that the initial creation of tagged documents containing risk/return summary
information will require, on average, approximately 110 burden hours per mutual fund,
75% of which (or 82.5 hours) represents the internal burden hour estimate. These
estimates more closely approximate the experience of filers in the current voluntary
program.

79

In the current voluntary program, we estimated that each set of submissions, after the
initial set, would take 10 burden hours. See XBRL Adopting Release, supra note 12, 70
FR at 6563; XBRL Proposing Release, supra note 12, 69 FR at 59101. We continue to
believe that this estimate is appropriate.

80

(110 hours in the first year + 10 hours in the second year + 10 hours in the third year) ÷ 3
years = 43 hours. While the PRA requires an estimate based on a hypothetical three
years of participation, a registrant, as noted earlier, could participate in the expanded
voluntary program by submitting tagged risk/return summary information over a shorter
period or even just once as the registrant chooses.

26

burden hours associated with the amendments. 81 We further estimate that 75% of this
burden increase, or approximately 1,774 hours, will be borne internally by the mutual
fund complex. We estimate that this internal burden increase converted to dollars will
amount to approximately $393,828. 82
We also estimate that 25% of the burden, or approximately 591 hours, will be
outsourced to external professionals and consultants retained by the mutual fund complex
at an average cost of $256.00 per hour for a total annual increase of approximately
$151,296. 83 In addition, it is our understanding that many participants will also have
annual software licensing costs. We estimate that the cost of licensing software will be

81

55 documents per year x 43 hours per submission = 2,365 hours.

82

This cost increase is estimated by multiplying the increase in annual internal hour burden
(1,774) by the estimated hourly wage rate of $222.00. The estimated wage figure is
based on published rates for compliance attorneys and programmer analysts, modified to
account for an 1800-hour work-year and multiplied by 5.35 to account for bonuses, firm
size, employee benefits, and overhead, yielding effective hourly rates of $261 and $209,
respectively. See Securities Industry Association, Report on Management & Professional
Earnings in the Securities Industry 2006 (Sept. 2006) (“SIA Report”). The estimated
wage rate is further based on the estimate that compliance attorneys would account for
one quarter of the hours worked and programmer analysts would account for the
remaining three quarters, resulting in a weighted wage rate of $222.00 (($261 x .25) +
($209 x .75)). The wage rates used in the Proposing Release were based upon the
Securities Industry Association, Report on Management & Professional Earnings in the
Securities Industry 2005 (Sept. 2005), and the total internal and external burden increases
converted to dollars differs from the estimates in the Proposing Release due to changes in
wage rates in the 2006 SIA Report.

83

591 hours x $256.00 per hour = $151,296. The estimated wage figure is based on
published rates for attorneys and senior programmers, modified to account for an
1800-hour work-year and multiplied by 5.35 to account for bonuses, firm size, employee
benefits, and overhead, yielding effective hourly rates of $292 and $244, respectively.
See SIA Report, supra note 82. The estimated wage rate is further based on the estimate
that attorneys will account for one quarter of the hours worked and senior programmers
will account for the remaining three quarters, resulting in a weighted wage rate of
$256.00 (($292 x .25) + ($244 x .75)).

27

$333 per participant per year, for a total annual increase of $18,315. 84 Altogether, the
total annual increase in external costs related to the amendments will be $169,611. 85
Our cost estimates are intended to reflect both initial and ongoing costs over a
three-year period. In calculating these costs, we have tried to take into account, among
other things, the current state of reporting process automation, automation that likely will
be introduced in connection with the initial cost incurred, and the efficiencies that likely
will be realized over the course of three years.
Regulation S-T
Regulation S-T (OMB Control No. 3235-0424) specifies the requirements that
govern the electronic submission of documents. The amendments will revise rules under
Regulation S-T, but the associated increase in burden is reflected in the “Voluntary
XBRL-Related Documents” collection of information as described above.
IV.

COST/BENEFIT ANALYSIS
The Commission is sensitive to the costs and benefits imposed by its rules. The

goal of the voluntary program is to increase EDGAR's efficiency and utility and to
enhance the usefulness to investors of the information collected through EDGAR. In
84

$333 per participant x 55 participants = $18,315. The estimated annual cost of the
software comes from our previous PRA estimate for the current voluntary program. See
XBRL Adopting Release, supra note 12, 70 FR at 6563 and n. 113. That estimate was
based on our discussions with software providers and others familiar with XBRL. We
estimated that the cost of licensing software will range from $200 to $3,000 each year,
with the majority of companies licensing less complex software in the $200 to $500
range. We set our software cost estimate at $500, which is the highest cost for the
simpler XBRL software license, and we assumed that the first year license fee will be
waived (based upon our understanding that software providers indicated that they will
provide these products for free in the initial stages of the voluntary program). Because
the PRA estimates represent the average burden over a three-year period, we estimated
the average burden for software license costs to be $333 per year. Id.

85

This annual total consists of $151,296 in outside professional costs plus $18,315 in
software costs.

28

order to evaluate data tagging further, we are adopting amendments to extend the current
interactive data voluntary reporting program to enable mutual funds voluntarily to submit
tagged information contained in the risk/return summary section of their prospectuses on
EDGAR as exhibits to Form N-1A filings.
A.

Benefits

We believe that tagged information may allow more efficient and effective
retrieval, research, and analysis of company information through automated means. The
expansion of the voluntary program will assist us in assessing whether using interactive
data tags enhances users’ ability to analyze and compare mutual fund risk/return
summary information included in mutual funds’ filings with the Commission. The
expansion of the voluntary program to include narrative, non-financial information, such
as that contained in the risk/return summary, also will facilitate our ability to assess
further the technical requirements of processing tagged documents using EDGAR.
Currently, a number of companies use computers and data entry staff to mine
risk/return summary information provided by mutual funds on EDGAR in order to
populate databases that are used to package information for sale to analysts, funds,
investors, and others. Permitting funds to tag risk/return summary information in
Commission filings will aid this data-mining process in that it will identify points of data
at the source, which could reduce the cost to populate databases and improve the
accuracy of that data. Additionally, the expanded voluntary program may benefit funds
and the public by permitting experimentation with data tagged using the risk/return
summary taxonomy.

29

In the future, the availability of potentially more accurate tagged information
about mutual funds could also reduce the cost of research and analysis and create new
opportunities for companies that compile, provide, and analyze data to produce more
value added services. Enhanced access to tagged information also has the potential to
allow retail investors (or financial advisers assisting such investors) to perform more
personalized and sophisticated analyses and comparisons of mutual funds, which could
result in investors making better informed investment decisions, and therefore in a more
efficient distribution of assets by investors among different funds. This may, in turn, also
contribute to increased competition among mutual funds and result in a more efficient
allocation of resources among competing investment products. Although it is not
possible to quantify precisely the beneficial effects of more efficient allocation of
investors’ assets and increased competition, they may be significant, given the size of the
mutual fund industry.
In the Proposing Release, we sought comments on our cost-benefit analysis, 86 and
several commenters discussed the potential benefits resulting from the expansion of the
interactive data voluntary reporting program and from interactive data in general. Two
commenters stated that interactive data will increase the accuracy of information. 87 One
commenter also noted the potential for increased timeliness of critical data that investors
require to make informed investment decisions.88 Another commenter stated that a
prospectus tagged using the risk/return summary taxonomy will allow automated,

86

See Proposing Release, supra note 6, 72 FR at 6684.

87

See letters from Confluence and Hamscher, supra note 19.

88

See letter from PWC, supra note 19.

30

instantaneous extraction of every fact disclosed in the risk/return summary. 89 Further,
commenters stated that allowing funds to file tagged risk/return summary information
would serve the objective of providing investors with more user-friendly access to key
fund information. 90 Commenters also noted potential cost savings of interactive data
which would benefit investors. 91 Finally, one commenter noted that the investment
analysis process would become more efficient and effective through the increased use of
automation and reduced human intervention that would result from the use of interactive
data. 92
B.

Costs

The expansion of the voluntary program will lead to some additional costs for
funds choosing to submit tagged documents containing risk/return summary information
as exhibits to their Form N-1A filings. For purposes of the PRA, we estimated that the
increase in annual internal burden hours to the industry will be 1,774 hours, which will
amount to approximately $393,828 and that the increase in annual external costs will
amount to approximately $169,611 for a total estimated increase of $563,439 on an
annual basis. 93
We based these cost estimates upon, among other things, experience with filers
who have submitted tagged financial information in the current voluntary program. 94

89

See letter from Hamscher, supra note 19.

90

See letters from ICI and PWC, supra note 19.

91

See letters from Confluence and PWC, supra note 19.

92

See letter from PWC, supra note 19.

93

See supra Section III.

94

See supra note 78.

31

Due to the ongoing nature of the project to develop the risk/return summary taxonomy,
however, we have limited data to quantify the cost of implementing the use of interactive
data tags applied to risk/return summary information. In the Proposing Release, we
sought comments and supporting data on our cost estimates with regard to the proposed
amendments. 95 We did not receive any comments or supporting data specific to our cost
estimates. 96
In the future, there may be additional costs to current users of EDGAR data. For
example, companies that currently provide tagging and dissemination of EDGAR data
may experience decreased demand for their services. These entities have developed
certain products and services based on data in EDGAR; many entities disseminate,
repackage, analyze, and sell the information. Allowing mutual funds to submit tagged
risk/return summary information, even voluntarily, may have an impact on entities
providing EDGAR-based services and products. Because the Commission does not
regulate all these entities, it is currently not feasible to accurately estimate the number or
size of these potentially affected entities. The limited, voluntary nature of the program
will help the Commission assess the effect, if any, on these entities. In addition, the
availability of mutual fund tagged data on EDGAR may provide these companies with
alternative business opportunities.

95

See Proposing Release, supra note 6, 72 FR at 6684.

96

One commenter noted that it is difficult to estimate the likely cost of participation in the
voluntary program at this time but noted that it may wish to provide cost data to the
Commission in the future. See letter from ICI, supra note 19.

32

V.

PROMOTION OF EFFICIENCY, COMPETITION, AND CAPITAL
FORMATION
Section 2(c) of the Investment Company Act 97 and section 2(b) of the Securities

Act 98 require the Commission, when engaging in rulemaking that requires it to consider
or determine whether an action is necessary or appropriate in the public interest, to
consider, in addition to the protection of investors, whether the action will promote
efficiency, competition, and capital formation.
The amendments will extend the interactive data voluntary reporting program to
enable mutual funds voluntarily to submit tagged information contained in the risk/return
summary section of their prospectuses on EDGAR as exhibits to Form N-1A filings. The
expansion of the voluntary program is intended to help us evaluate the usefulness to
investors, third-party analysts, mutual funds, the Commission, and the marketplace of
data tagging and, in particular, of tagging mutual fund information. Because compliance
with the amendments will be voluntary, the Commission estimates that the impact of the
amendments will be limited. However, because the tagging of risk/return summary
information has the potential to facilitate analysis of that information, we believe that the
amendments could promote efficiency by allowing us and others to gain experience with
tagged mutual fund information in Commission filings.
Further, tagging of the risk/return summary information has the potential to help
streamline the delivery of mutual fund information, and provide investors and others with
improved tools to compare funds based upon, among other things, costs, investment
objectives, strategies, and risks. We believe that the potential to streamline the delivery
97

15 U.S.C. 80a-2(c).

98

15 U.S.C. 77b(b).

33

of mutual fund information and to provide investors and others with improved mutual
fund comparison tools could promote efficiency and competition through more efficient
allocation of investments by investors and more efficient allocation of assets among
competing funds. In the future, companies that currently provide tagging and
dissemination of EDGAR data may experience decreased demand for their services. The
availability of mutual fund tagged data on EDGAR, however, may provide these
companies with alternative business opportunities. We do not anticipate that the
amendments will have a significant impact on capital formation. Finally, because the
amendments are designed to permit mutual funds to provide information in a format that
we believe will be more useful to investors, we believe that the amendments are
appropriate in the public interest and for the protection of investors.
We requested comment on whether the proposed amendments would promote
efficiency, competition, and capital formation. We received no comment on this issue.
VI.

FINAL REGULATORY FLEXIBILITY ANALYSIS
This Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis was prepared in accordance with 5

U.S.C. 604 and relates to the amendments we are adopting that will expand the current
interactive data voluntary reporting program to enable mutual funds voluntarily to submit
tagged information contained in the risk/return summary section of their prospectuses on
EDGAR as exhibits to Form N-1A filings. An Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
(“IRFA”), which was prepared in accordance with the 5 U.S.C. 603, was published in the
release proposing the amendments.

34

A.

Need for the Amendments

The purpose of the amendments is to help us evaluate the usefulness to investors,
third-party analysts, mutual funds, the Commission, and the marketplace of data tagging
and, in particular, of tagging mutual fund information. We believe that the expanded
voluntary program will enable us to study further the extent to which interactive data tags
enhance the comparability of that data, the usefulness of data tags for dissemination, and
our staff's ability to review and assess the accuracy and adequacy of that data. The
expanded voluntary program will also help us assess the effect of interactive data tags on
the quality and transparency of risk/return summary information, as well as the
compatibility of data tagging with the Commission's disclosure requirements.
More specifically, we believe that the expanded voluntary program will better
enable us to study the extent to which interactive data enhances the:
•

search capability of the EDGAR database to allow more efficient and effective
extraction and analysis of specific data,

•

capability to perform comparisons among mutual funds, and

•

ability to perform analyses of mutual fund data and whether it would reduce the
resources needed for data analysis.

In addition, we believe that the expanded voluntary program will enhance our ability to
evaluate the:
•

impact on the staff's ability to review filings on a more timely and efficient basis,

•

use of tagged data for risk assessment and surveillance procedures, and

•

compatibility of interactive data with reporting quality, transparency, and other
Commission reporting requirements.

35

B.

Significant Issues Raised by Public Comment

In the IRFA for the proposed amendments, we requested comment on the number
of small entities that would be affected by the proposed amendments, the existence or
nature of the potential effect of the proposals on small entities, how to quantify the effect
of the proposals, how different procedures could be provided for small entities, and we
asked commenters to provide any empirical data supporting the extent of the impact. We
received no comment letters specifically addressing the IRFA in the Proposing Release;
however, one commenter suggested that the Commission could lower the barrier for
participation for small funds by providing a “literal” or structured form using some
commonly used software applications. 99
C.

Small Entities Subject to the Rules

The expansion of the voluntary program may have an effect on mutual fund
participants in the voluntary program. Under Rule 0-10 under the Investment Company
Act, an investment company is a small entity if it, together with other investment
companies in the same group of related investment companies, has net assets of $50
million or less as of the end of its most recent fiscal year. 100 We estimate that there are
approximately 131 mutual funds that meet this definition. A smaller subset of those
issuers may voluntarily submit tagged risk/return summary information under the
voluntary program, but, because submitting risk/return summary information will be
voluntary, we anticipate that only complexes with sufficient resources will elect to

99

See letter from Hamscher, supra note 19.

100

17 CFR 270.0-10.

36

participate. To date, no small entity mutual funds have elected to participate in the
current voluntary program.
D.

Projected Reporting, Recordkeeping, and Other Compliance
Requirements

The voluntary program is designed to assist us in assessing the feasibility of using
interactive data on a broader basis. Experience with the current voluntary program
indicates that the cost of participating in the expanded program, the associated burden on
the EDGAR system, and the possible effect of the expanded voluntary program on those
entities that use the EDGAR data will be minimal. Nevertheless, the impact of the
amendments remains somewhat speculative at this point.
No registrant will be required to submit tagged documents under the expansion of
the voluntary program. The submission of tagged risk/return summary information will
require a participating mutual fund to tag the risk/return summary section of its
prospectus using the risk/return summary taxonomy and potentially develop extensions
and to submit exhibits to its filing. Volunteers may also need to purchase software or
retain a consultant to assist in tagging data. For purposes of the PRA, we estimated that
each volunteer, including small entities, would incur approximately 43 burden hours and
$333 in software costs annually.
E.

Agency Action to Minimize Effect on Small Entities

The Regulatory Flexibility Act directs us to consider significant alternatives that
would accomplish the stated objective, while minimizing any significant adverse impact
on small entities. The purpose of the amendments is to help us evaluate the usefulness to
investors, third-party analysts, mutual funds, the Commission, and the marketplace of
data tagging and, in particular, of tagging mutual fund information. Submitting

37

documents containing tagged risk/return summary information is entirely voluntary. We
have considered different or simpler procedures for small entities, including:
•

The establishment of different compliance or reporting requirements or
timetables;

•

The clarification, consolidation, or simplification of the proposed requirements;

•

The use of performance rather than design standards; and

•

Exemption from coverage.

For tagged data to provide benefits such as ready comparability, however, the data
tagging system cannot have alternative procedures. Similarly, in order to achieve the
benefits of interactive data tagging, use of a single data tagging technology is necessary.
Additionally, providing structured input forms, as suggested by one commenter, 101 is not
appropriate at this time given the cost of deploying and maintaining such forms and the
difficulty of permitting extensions to be used with a structured input form. If we
determine to require data tagging in the future, we will look to the results of the voluntary
program, including those of the expansion of the program to risk/return summary
information, in considering alternatives to minimize any burden on small entities.
VII.

STATUTORY AUTHORITY
The Commission is adopting the rule amendments outlined above under Sections

5, 6, 7, 10, 19(a), and 28 of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. 77e, 77f, 77g, 77j, 77s(a), and
77z-3] and Sections 6(c), 8, 24(a), 30, and 38 of the Investment Company Act [15 U.S.C.
80a-6(c), 80a-8, 80a-24(a), 80a-29, and 80a-37].

101

See supra note 99.

38

List of Subjects in 17 CFR Parts 232 and 239
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities.
List of Subjects in 17 CFR Parts 270 and 274
Investment Companies, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Securities.
TEXT OF RULE AND FORM AMENDMENTS
For the reasons set forth above, the Commission amends title 17, Chapter II of the
Code of Federal Regulations as follows:
PART 232 – REGULATION S-T – GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS
FOR ELECTRONIC FILINGS
1.

The general authority citation for Part 232 is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, 77s(a), 77z-3, 77sss(a), 78c(b), 78l, 78m,
78n, 78o(d), 78w(a), 78ll, 80a-6(c), 80a-8, 80a-29, 80a-30, 80a-37, and 7201 et seq.; and
18 U.S.C. 1350.
*

*

*

*

*

2.

Amend § 232.401 by:

a.

Revising the first sentence of paragraph (a);

b.

Removing the word “or” at the end of paragraph (b)(1)(ii);

c.

Removing the phrase “(§ 239.15A and § 274.11A of this chapter)” in

paragraph (b)(1)(iii);
d.

Removing the period at the end of paragraph (b)(1)(iii) and adding in its

place “; or”;
e.

Adding new paragraph (b)(1)(iv); and

f.

Revising paragraphs (d)(1)(i) and (d)(2)(i).

The addition and revisions read as follows:

39

§ 232.401 XBRL-Related Document Submissions.
(a)

An electronic filer that participates in the voluntary XBRL (eXtensible

Business Reporting Language) program may submit XBRL-Related Documents
(§ 232.11) in electronic format as an exhibit to: the filing (other than a Form N-1A
(§ 239.15A and § 274.11A of this chapter) filing) to which the XBRL-Related
Documents relate; an amendment to such filing, but, in the case of a Form N-1A filing,
an amendment made only after the effective date of the Form N-1A filing to which the
XBRL-Related Documents relate; or if the electronic filer is eligible to file a Form 8-K
(§ 249.308 of this chapter) or a Form 6-K (§ 249.306 of this chapter), a Form 8-K or a
Form 6-K, as applicable, that references the filing to which the XBRL-Related
Documents relate if such Form 8-K or Form 6-K is submitted no earlier than the date of
that filing.

*

*

*

(b)

*

*

*

(1)

*

*

*

(iv)

The risk/return summary information set forth in Items 2 and 3 of Form

N-1A provided that, in the case of a Form N-1A filing that includes more than one series
(as that term is used in rule 18f-2(a) under the Investment Company Act (§ 270.18f-2(a)
of this chapter), a filer may include in mandatory content complete risk/return summary
information for any one or more of those series.
*

*

*

*

*

(d)

*

*

*

(1)

*

*

*

40

(i)

That the financial information contained in the XBRL-Related Documents

is “unaudited” or “unreviewed,” as applicable (but only if the mandatory content
contained in the XBRL-Related Documents contains information other than risk/return
summary information submitted under paragraph (b)(1)(iv) of this section);
*

*

*

*

*

(2)

*

*

*

(i)

The exhibit index of a Form 10-K (§ 249.310 of this chapter), 10-Q

(§ 249.308a of this chapter), 10 (§ 249.210 of this chapter), 10-SB (§ 249.210b of this
chapter), 10-KSB (§ 249.310b of this chapter), 10-QSB (§ 249.308b of this chapter), 20-F
or N-1A and, in the case of risk/return summary information submitted under paragraph
(b)(1)(iv) of this section, within the XBRL-Related Documents as a tagged data element;
*

*

*

*

*

3.

Revise § 232.402(a)(1) to read as set forth below and amend § 232.402(b)

by removing each reference to “Item 401” and adding in its place “Rule 401”.
§ 232.402 Liability for XBRL-Related Documents.
(a)

*

*

*

(1)

Are not deemed filed for purposes of section 11 of the Securities Act (15

U.S.C 77k), section 18 of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78r), or section 34(b) of the
Investment Company Act (15 U.S.C. 80a-33(b)), or otherwise subject to the liabilities of
these sections, and are not part of any registration statement to which they relate;
*

*

*

*

*

41

PART 239 – FORMS PRESCRIBED UNDER THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933
4.

The general authority citation for Part 239 is revised to read as follows:

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, 77s, 77z-2, 77z-3, 77sss, 78c, 78l, 78m,
78n, 78o(d), 78u-5, 78w(a), 78ll, 78mm, 80a-2(a), 80a-3, 80a-8, 80a-9, 80a-10, 80a-13,
80a-24, 80a-26, 80a-29, 80a-30, and 80a-37, unless otherwise noted.
*

*

*

*

*

PART 270 – GENERAL RULES AND REGULATIONS, INVESTMENT
COMPANY ACT OF 1940
5.

The authority citation for Part 270 continues to read in part as follows:

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et seq., 80a-34(d), 80a-37, and 80a-39, unless
otherwise noted.
*

*

*

*

*

6.

Revise § 270.8b-33 to read as follows:

§ 270.8b-33 XBRL-Related Documents.
A registrant that participates in the voluntary XBRL (eXtensible Business
Reporting Language) program may submit, in electronic format as an exhibit to a filing
on Form N-1A (§§ 239.15A and 274.11A of this chapter), Form N–CSR (§§ 249.331 and
274.128 of this chapter), or Form N–Q (§§ 249.332 and 274.130 of this chapter) to which
they relate, XBRL-Related Documents (§ 232.11 of this chapter). A registrant that
submits XBRL-Related Documents as an exhibit to a form must name each
XBRL-Related Document “EX 100” as specified in the EDGAR Filer Manual and submit
the XBRL-Related Documents in such a manner that will permit the information for each
series and, for any information that does not relate to all of the classes in a filing, each
class of an investment company registrant and each contract of an insurance company

42

separate account to be separately identified. A registrant may submit such exhibit with,
or in an amendment to, the Form N-CSR or Form N-Q filing to which it relates, or in an
amendment to the Form N-1A filing to which it relates, in accordance with rule 401 of
Regulation S-T (§ 232.401).
PART 274 – FORMS PRESCRIBED UNDER THE INVESTMENT COMPANY
ACT OF 1940
7.

The authority citation for Part 274 continues to read in part as follows:

Authority: 15 U.S.C. 77f, 77g, 77h, 77j, 77s, 78c(b), 78l, 78m, 78n, 78o(d),
80a-8, 80a-24, 80a-26, and 80a-29, unless otherwise noted.
*

*

*

*

*

8.

Amend General Instruction B.4.(b) of Form N-1A (referenced in

§§ 239.15A and 274.11A) by revising “8b-32 [17 CFR 270.8b-1 – 270.8b-32]” to read
“8b-33 [17 CFR 270.8b-1 – 270.8b-33]”.
Note: The text of Form N-1A will not appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.
By the Commission.

Florence E. Harmon
Deputy Secretary
July 11, 2007

43

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/agency%3Asec%3A75f58f85cd0501be. Public record. Not legal advice.
