Sibos: A Good Place To Check ISO 20022 Progress
Another Sibos in the Americas region is upon us, this time in Boston, seven years after it was last held there.
This mammoth securities and payments transaction operations conference, typically held in the largest convention center in its host city, with several streams of panel discussions and an exhibition hall three or four times as large as the Sifma Tech Expo in its best years, is a good place to take the pulse of progress—or lack thereof—on standards relevant to reference data, such as the legal entity identifier and ISO 20022.
Since the last Sibos in the Americas, in Toronto in 2011, there have been significant developments with those standards. At that time, the industry and its regulators were just beginning to define, understand and act upon upgrading ISO 15022 to ISO 20022, to figure out how business identifier codes and trader identifications relate to the LEI, and to contend with risk management rules such as European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR).
It's a little disingenuous to say ISO 20022 only became an issue in 2011, actually. An interesting session planned for this Sibos is one on its first day, slated to cover "10 Years of ISO 20022." Although the ISO 20022 messaging standard, which is being applied to corporate actions operations in the reference data space, was starting to gain greater attention and support in 2011—as evidenced at that year's Sibos, as recently as 2013—there were doubts about its acceptance.
Two years after the Toronto Sibos, many users were still retaining ISO 15022, keeping the transition at a standstill or limiting its progress to the pace of slowly poured molasses.
Representatives of Swift (the messaging standards industry cooperative that organizes Sibos), Citi, Bank of America Merrill Lynch and other industry organizations and interested parties who are scheduled to discuss the decade-long history of ISO 20022, may or may not agree on whether ISO 20022 has produced better results as far as making processing corporate actions more efficient.
As a rule, with regulation and standards that Inside Reference Data covers, none of them are ever complete within a year, and more often than not, are multi-year efforts, first to complete their provisions with universal agreement from regulators and the industry, and then to implement compliance methods and systems. The only certainty for ISO 20022 is that now is a good time, with its ups and downs over the past few years, to make an assessment on its acceptance and effectiveness.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@waterstechnology.com or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.waterstechnology.com/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.com to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.com to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@waterstechnology.com
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@waterstechnology.com
More on Regulation
American Bankers Assoc. asks SEC: Do you know what you’re doing?
The industry group disagrees severely with regulators’ interpretation of the Financial Data Transparency Act, hinting at possible legal action in a recently published comment letter.
DORA will change the buy vs. build debate… maybe
Waters Wrap: With DORA’s deadline looming, trading firms are having to reassess their long-term tech strategies. Anthony wonders if that means more building and less buying.
The SEC needs a hand with artificial intelligence
The SEC wants to take a tough stance on AI, but it has a talent problem… or a marketing problem. Or both…
Off-channel messaging (and regulators) still a massive headache for banks
Waters Wrap: Anthony wonders why US regulators are waging a war using fines, while European regulators have chosen a less draconian path.
Banks fret over vendor contracts as Dora deadline looms
Thousands of vendor contracts will need repapering to comply with EU’s new digital resilience rules
Chevron’s absence leaves questions for elusive AI regulation in US
The US Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the Chevron deference presents unique considerations for potential AI rules.
Aussie asset managers struggle to meet ‘bank-like’ collateral, margin obligations
New margin and collateral requirements imposed by UMR and its regulator, Apra, are forcing buy-side firms to find tools to help.
The costly sanctions risks hiding in your supply chain
In an age of geopolitical instability and rising fines, financial firms need to dig deep into the securities they invest in and the issuing company’s network of suppliers and associates.