GLEIF and the U.S.-based Data Foundation published the report on envisioning comprehensive entity identification for the U.S. federal government. The report explores how Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) adoption by U.S. federal agencies could streamline entity identification and produce benefits in and beyond financial markets. The report presents findings based on the comprehensive research on the entity identification systems currently deployed across the U.S. government.
The joint GLEIF and Data Foundation research report explores the current landscape of U.S. federal agencies’ entity identification needs and describes the entity identification system that each uses. It the compares the Global LEI System to the other systems currently in use in the U.S and identifies how U.S. federal agencies would benefit from replacing proprietary or internal identifiers with the LEI. Finally, it proposes factors that describe the feasibility of a particular U.S. entity identification system to convert to a comprehensive entity identification system built on the LEI or, alternatively, the value of mapping existing identifiers against the LEI.
This research demonstrates that the U.S. federal government uses fifty distinct entity identification systems—all of which are separate and incompatible with one another. Entity identification, therefore, continues to represent a significant challenge for the missions of many federal agencies. Any agency tracking non-federal entities to perform a regulatory, statistical, procurement, or assistance function must either create its own entity identification system or adopt one originally created by another agency. Both approaches present difficulties in matching entities and properly assigning legal responsibility. The findings in this report may serve to inform regulators in any jurisdiction where public authorities continue to rely on a multitude of identification regimes.
Keywords: International, US, Banking, Insurance, Securities, LEI, GLEIS, Data Foundation, GLEIF
Previous ArticleIMF Publishes Report on 2018 Article IV Consultation with Austria
APRA has concluded its review of the comprehensive plans of authorized deposit-taking institutions for the assessment and management of loans with repayment deferrals.
ESAs (EBA, EIOPA, and ESMA) published the first joint report that assesses risks in the financial sector since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.
BoE and HM Treasury confirmed that the COVID Corporate Financing Facility (CCFF) will close for new purchases of commercial paper, with effect from March 23, 2021.
ECB published a decision allowing the euro area banks under its direct supervision to exclude certain central bank exposures from the leverage ratio.
ESAs launched a survey seeking feedback on the presentational aspects of product templates under the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR or Regulation 2019/2088).
ECB published input of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB) into the EBA feasibility report on reducing the reporting burden for banks in EU.
EC adopted a decision determining, for a limited period of time, that the regulatory framework applicable to central counterparties, or CCPs, in the UK and Northern Ireland is equivalent to the requirements laid down in the European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR or Regulation 648/2012).
EBA has decided to phase out the guidelines on legislative and non-legislative moratoria of loan repayments, in accordance with the earlier specified end of September deadline.
EBA published an Opinion addressed to EC to raise awareness about the opportunity to clarify certain issues related to the definition of credit institution in the upcoming review of the Capital Requirements Directive and Regulation (CRD and CRR).
ECB finalized the guide on assessment methodology for the internal model method for calculating exposure to counterparty credit risk (CCR) and the advanced method for own funds requirements for credit valuation adjustment (A-CVA) risk.