In response to the global financial crisis of 2008-2009, the Group of 20 nations agreed to a financial regulatory reform agenda covering the over-the-counter derivatives markets and market participants, among them recommendations for the implementation of margin requirements for non-centrally cleared derivatives. The Basel Committee on Bank Supervision and International Organization of Securities Commissions subsequently developed and finalized their Final Framework on Margin Requirements for Non-Centrally Cleared Derivatives, which sought to establish international standards for such requirements, to be phased in over time.
As agreed in the revised implementation timeline to the final framework, the uncleared margin rules (UMR) began to be phased-in on September 1, 2016 for the largest market participants. Broader implementation of variation margin (VM) requirements occurred in March 2017, while initial margin (IM) requirements continue to phase-in annually through 2020.
The final phases of the UMR will occur on September 1 of 2019 and 2020, when a large number of additional counterparties will be brought into scope for IM requirements. The fundamental challenges for market participants during the final phases of IM implementation are distinct from and more intense than those experienced in previous phases, and therefore likely to result in broader systemic impact.
In this paper, ISDA and the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA) seek to highlight the significant challenges market participants will encounter during the final phases of IM implementation and identify the key tasks and resulting hurdles that must be overcome to ensure an orderly implementation that avoids disruption to the functioning of the derivatives market.
Documents (1) for Initial Margin for Non-Centrally Cleared Derivatives: Issues for 2019 and 2020
Latest
Recognition of Cross-product Netting is Critical
US regulators are in the process of making important changes to the regulatory capital framework by proposing modifications to the enhanced supplementary leverage ratio, which should help stop it from acting as a non-risk-sensitive constraint on bank capacity – a...
ISDA, GFXD Response to FCA on SI Regime
On September 10, ISDA and the Global Foreign Exchange Division (GFXD) of the Global Financial Markets Association responded to the Financial Conduct Authority's (FCA) consultation paper CP25/20 on the systematic internalizer (SI) regime for derivatives and bonds. ISDA and the...
ISDA, IIF Response to PRA on Market Risk Framework
On September 12, ISDA and the Institute of International Finance (IIF) submitted a joint response to the Prudential Regulation Authority’s (PRA) consultation on adjustments to the market risk capital framework (CP 17/25). ISDA and the IIF strongly believe the market...
ISDA Response on Clearing Costs
On September 8, ISDA responded to consultation by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) on a draft regulatory technical standard on clearing fees and associated costs (article 7c(4) of the European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR)). In the response, ISDA...