News: ESMA now proposes postponement of ETD reporting until January 201508 August 2013 | Tom Riesack
Today, ESMA sent a final report to the European Commission
"proposing an amendment to Article 5 of the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No.1247/2012 (ITS on reporting) on the format and frequency of reporting to trade repositories under EMIR.
The amendment relates specifically to the reporting of exchange traded derivatives (ETDs) and proposes postponing the reporting start date by one year. "
The following few snippets of choice from the final report make it clear that a lot of ambiguity remains around the reporting of ETDs under EMIR. ESMA therefore should be applauded for their wise choice to postpone reporting after concrete guidelines and recommendations have been developed.
"The current dates do not include a specification of ETDs. This specification would be useful as there is a risk currently that reporting of ETDs is not harmonised unless further regulatory guidance is issued. Without regulatory guidance, reporting would not be consistent and not able to be efficiently used."
"When finalising its draft ITS, ESMA did not consider differences between trading methods, notably derivatives traded in venues (ETDs) vis-à-vis OTC derivatives. This was also due to the absence of evidence for a need of different treatment at the time of consultation on the draft ITS."
"In absence of a clear guidance on the identification of the counterparties of an ETD transaction under different transaction scenarios, reporting under EMIR cannot take place in a consistent manner within the EU."
"In absence of a clear identification of the counterparties of ETD transactions under EMIR, financial and non-financial counterparties would be exposed to uncertainty on their obligations and to legal risk."
"Therefore, ESMA considers it essential to develop Guidelines and Recommendations under Article 16 of ESMA Regulation to ensure common, uniform and consistent application of Article 9 of EMIR and in particular of the following aspects:
a. A clear identification of the counterparties of ETDs;
b. A consistent application of reporting requirements under EMIR and MiFID, to the extent possible;
c. The compatibility of the models, logic and formats used to identify all the details to be reported under the two regimes."