Taking the Pulse of Reporting and Capital Adequacy Compliance
Commonalities in European rulemaking still need to be translated into industry systems
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/27a6f/27a6fc5345e3eb79806a755b31a1ce11a4ca011a" alt="michael-shashoua-waters michael-shashoua-waters"
Financial services industry market participants are trying to find enough overlap between major new regulations such as MiFID II/MiFIR, BCBS 239 and Solvency II to be able to achieve more with a single data management effort.
This dilemma has emerged during discussions at our European Regulatory Roadshow series, which started recently with Paris and Copenhagen events. The series, hosted by Waters, Inside Market Data and Inside Reference Data, will continue with events in Frankfurt on October 14, Zurich on October 27 and Amsterdam on November 26.
Interactive Data regulatory product executive Hubert Deroubaix told Copenhagen attendees that the lack of overlap is making data management for regulatory compliance a complex and costly proposition.
Although MiFID (Markets in Financial Instruments Directive) II and its associated MiFIR regulation, BCBS 239, Solvency II and the US Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, which also can figure into the European regulatory mix, all have their distinct provisions and idiosyncrasies, in the end, all of these sets of rules center on two things: reporting and capital adequacy.
BCBS 239 mandates risk data aggregation principles and sets out annual risk data stress tests beginning next year. Similarly, Solvency II, the European Union directive that takes effect on January 1, sets reporting requirements to demonstrate capital adequacy in the insurance segment of the financial services industry. MiFID II/MiFIR are concerned just with reporting overall, without delving into capital adequacy, tax withholding compliance or anything specific about the content of what is being reported and how that may meet desired standards for the financial industry.
It may have been understandable in 2013 or 2014 that data aggregation, governance and processing plans and systems were not in place or up to the demands to come from BCBS 239, as shown in survey results released earlier this year.
But months have passed since those results, and now there are just a few short months before BCBS 239 and Solvency II provisions are going to be the law. It will be interesting to see in the upcoming European Regulatory Roadshow events happening through the end of 2015, whether the industry's pulse—in terms of the functioning of data aggregation governance, architecture and processes for compliance with reporting and capital adequacy rules—has quickened.
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
How to navigate regional nuances that complicate T+1 in Europe
European and UK firms face unique challenges in moving to T+1 settlement, writes Broadridge’s Carl Bennett, and they will need to follow a series of steps to ensure successful adoption by 2027.
Nasdaq leads push to reform options regulatory fee
A proposed rule change would pare costs for traders, raise them for banks, and defund smaller venues.
The CAT declawed as Citadel’s case reaches end game
The SEC reduced the CAT’s capacity to collect information on investors, in a move that will have knock-on effects for its ongoing funding model case with Citadel.
Waters Wavelength Ep. 305: Cato Institute's Jennifer Schulp
Jennifer joins to discuss what regulatory priorities might look under Paul Atkin's SEC.
Examining Cboe’s lawsuit appealing SEC’s OEMS rule rejection
The Chicago-based exchange has sued the regulator in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals after the agency blocked a proposed rule that would change how Silexx is classified.
European exchange data prices surge, new study shows
The report analyzed market data prices and fee structures from 2017 to 2024 and found that fee schedules have increased exponentially. Several exchanges say the findings are misleading.
Regis-TR and the Emir Refit blame game
The reporting overhaul was been marred by problems at repositories, prompting calls to stagger future go-live dates.
FCA: Consolidated tape for UK equities won’t happen until 2028
At an event last week, the FCA proposed a new timeline for the CT, which received pushback from participants, according to sources.