European Market Infrastructures regulation (EMIR)
In 2012, following the 2008 financial crisis, the EU adopted the European Market Infrastructures regulation (EMIR) with the laudable objectives of increasing transparency in the OTC derivatives markets, to reduce the counterparty risk of derivatives contracts and to reduce operational risks associated with derivatives trading.
EFAMA welcomes the improvements recently brought by the EMIR Refit: It redefines the obligations imposed on derivatives users, recognising and solving some issues previously existing in EMIR, such as the disproportionate regulatory burden imposed on the least risky counterparties. We also advocate for a better alignment between EMIR and MiFIR, especially with regards to the clearing and trading obligations.
Industry Association Letter on Impact of COVID-19 on Initial Margin Phase-In
EFAMA Reply: ESMA CP on review report MiFIR transparency regime for equity, ETFs & other related instruments
EFAMA's reply to ESMA's CP on Draft technical advice on commercial terms for providing clearing services under EMIR (FRANDT)
Trade associations call for deletion of active account proposal in EMIR 3.0
EFAMA, BFPI Ireland, EACB, FIA EPTA, Federation of the Dutch Pension Funds, Finance Denmark, Nordic Securities Association, AIMA, ICI Global, FIA and ISDA, which collectively represent major European end users of derivatives along with providers of clearing services, have published a joint statement on the European Commission’s proposed active account requirement under the European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR 3.0).
Active Accounts - Joint Trade Association Statement
EFAMA, BFPI Ireland, EACB, FIA EPTA, Federation of the Dutch Pension Funds,
Finance Denmark, Nordic Securities Association, AIMA, ICI Global, FIA and ISDA support positive
incentives to further enhance the attractiveness of EU clearing and EU Capital Markets, including
many of the measures proposed in EMIR 3.0. (read more)
EMIR 3.0: Detailed views on active accounts
EFAMA offers a detailed view on the active accounts proposal in this paper. Costs to the end investor are broken down into two main buckets i) operational build-out and ii) in nominal terms the much larger impact of loss of netting efficiencies. Potential impacts on financial stability are also examined, with a focus on the widening basis which will result from large volumes of one-directional flows onto an EU-CCP. The impact on margins and procyclicality are also studied. The analysis points to increased liquidity risk for