ISDA published a paper that highlights the main areas of difference in the implementation of margin requirements for non-cleared derivatives across jurisdictions and makes recommendations on how to resolve these variations. The paper discusses differences in implementation in key areas such as eligible collateral requirements, initial margin model governance obligations, misalignments in initial margin product scope, settlement time frames, and treatment of inter-affiliate transactions.
Jurisdictions across the globe have implemented margin requirements for non-cleared derivatives, largely in line with the standards agreed by BCBS and IOSCO. Since implementation of the first phase of the requirements in 2016, the U.S., EU, Japan, and others have extended the requirements in line with the phase-in schedule agreed by BCBS and IOSCO. The consistency in requirements has enabled ISDA to develop and implement industry solutions to aid compliance, including standard initial margin and variation margin documentation, the ISDA Standard Initial Margin Model (ISDA SIMMTM), and ISDA Create—Initial Margin, an online tool for negotiating and executing initial margin documents. Nonetheless, differences in the implementation across jurisdictions still exist in certain key areas such as eligible collateral, settlement time frames, and treatment of inter-affiliate transactions. These inconsistencies create unnecessary complexity and costs for derivatives users and contribute to market fragmentation.
While initial margin and variation margin reduce counterparty credit risk and have the potential to mitigate systemic risk, divergence in the implementation of margin requirements across jurisdictions contributes to market fragmentation, increases the cost and complexity of cross-border trading, and decreases access to global liquidity pools. Aligning margin requirements in the mentioned key areas would significantly reduce these negative market effects without compromising overall policy objectives. By means of illustration, the paper outlines the requirements of the U.S., EU, UK, Japan, Singapore, Hong Kong, Australia, Switzerland, and Canada.
Keywords: International, Banking, Securities, Margin Requirements, Counterparty Credit Risk, OTC Derivatives, ISDA
Previous ArticleIMF Publishes Reports on 2019 Article IV Consultation with Ireland
MAS and Temasek jointly released a report to mark the successful conclusion of the fifth and final phase of Project Ubin, which focused on building a blockchain-based multi-currency payments network prototype.
PRA published a public working draft, or PWD, of version 1.2.0 of the BoE Insurance XBRL taxonomy, along with the related technical artefacts.
CPMI published a report that sets out nineteen building blocks for a global roadmap to improve cross-border payments.
EBA published phase 2 of the technical package on the reporting framework 2.10, providing the technical tools and specifications for implementation of EBA reporting requirements.
APRA updated the lists of the Direct to APRA (D2A) validation rules for authorized deposit-taking institutions, insurers, and superannuation entities.
PRA updated the statement that provides guidance to regulated firms on implementation of the EBA guidelines on reporting and disclosure of exposures subject to measures applied in response to the COVID-19 crisis.
EBA updated the 2019 list of closely correlated currencies that was originally published in December 2013.
ESMA published the final report on the guidelines on securitization repository data completeness and consistency thresholds.
FASB issued a proposed Accounting Standards Update that would grant insurance companies, adversely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, an additional year to implement the Accounting Standards Update No. 2018-12 on targeted improvements to accounting for long-duration insurance contracts, or LDTI (Topic 944).
APRA updated the regulatory approach for loans subject to repayment deferrals amid the COVID-19 crisis.