According to the original timetable, the first implementation date in various G20 countries for uncleared over-the-counter ("OTC") derivative variation margin requirements was 1 September 2016 for the largest market participants and the second implementation date was scheduled to be 1 March 2017 for all other market participants. However, as 1 March 2017 approached, there was a recognition by regulators that some market participants would not likely be in a position to fully comply with the variation margin requirements by 1 March 2017. Among other things, market participants indicated that they were facing difficulty in completing the necessary credit support documentation and operational processes to settle variation margin in accordance with the applicable requirements, notwithstanding their efforts to do so.
In light of this, regulators in the US, the European Union, Japan, Hong Kong, Singapore and Australia, among others, have granted relief to market participants to provide them some flexibility in complying with the 1 March 2017 variation margin requirements with respect to certain counterparties. This relief is intended to prevent disruption to the uncleared OTC derivatives market, the occurrence of which would likely undermine the regulatory purpose of the variation margin requirements.
Jurisdiction |
Regulator |
Relief |
Links |
United States
|
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System Department of the Treasury (the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency) |
Each Swap Dealer that was required to comply with the variation margin requirements on 1 March 2017 with respect to its counterparties is expected to comply with such requirements:
The regulators, in exercising their supervisory discretion, will prioritise compliance efforts by Swap Dealers subject to their jurisdiction based on the size and risk inherent in the credit and market exposure presented by each counterparty. |
|
Farm Credit Administration Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Federal Housing Finance Agency |
Not applicable, as there are no Swap Dealers regulated by such entities that would be affected. |
||
Commodity Futures Trading Commission |
Each Swap Dealer that was required to comply with the variation margin requirements on 1 March 2017 with respect to its counterparties must comply prior to 1 September 2017, subject to the following requirements:
Swap Dealers are expected to make continual, consistent, and quantifiable progress toward compliance with the variation margin requirements with all counterparties on a rolling basis during this period. |
||
European Union |
European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) |
The ESAs issued a statement noting that the implementation of variation margin requirements by 1 March 2017 "mainly [posed] a challenge for smaller counterparties" (i.e. smaller FCs on the buy-side of the market and NFC+s). Taking this into account, it noted that, although the ESAs still expect Competent Authorities (being the relevant regulator in each EU Member State) to generally apply their risk-based supervisory powers to enforce applicable legislation, in this context they may take into account:
In short, the relief is limited in scope and the ESAs expect Competent Authorities to continue to apply their supervisory powers. |
|
Japan |
Japan Financial Services Agency |
Variation margin requirements commenced on 1 March 2017. However, the Japan Financial Services Agency has stated that, if the counterparty is located outside Japan where variation margin requirements have not been effective and a Japanese financial institution has difficulty in entering into the necessary documentation required for the margin regulations, the Japan Financial Services Agency will consider, for the time being, that the appropriate management system required by the margin regulations has been established so long as the relevant Japanese financial institution has established appropriate measures to reduce the counterparty risks in line with the margin regulations and continuously strives to comply with the regulations, including without limitation, addressing of the remaining risks and managing the exposure. |
|
Hong Kong |
Hong Kong Monetary Authority |
Authorised Institutions incorporated in Hong Kong and overseas are required to comply with margin requirements when they enter into in-scope uncleared OTC derivatives with a covered entity. Variation margin requirements apply to new transactions entered into on or after 1 March 2017. Initial margin requirements, on the other hand, apply in accordance with a phase-in schedule. Both requirements are now subject to an initial 6-month transition period (1 March 2017 to 31 August 2017). |
|
Singapore |
Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) |
MAS Covered Entities entering into in-scope uncleared OTC derivatives booked in Singapore are required to comply with the margin requirements. Variation margin requirements apply to new transactions entered into on or after 1 March 2017. Initial margin requirements, on the other hand, apply in accordance with a phase-in schedule. Both requirements are now subject to an initial 6-month transition period (1 March 2017 to 31 August 2017). |
MAS – Singapore Margin Guidelines MAS Response – Policy Consultation on Margin Requirements (December 2016) |
Australia |
Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) |
If an APRA covered entity enters into a new uncleared OTC derivative transaction, with the exception of a physically settled FX forward or swap, with a covered counterparty during the margining period 1 March 2017 to 31 August 2017, the APRA covered entity will be taken to comply with the variation margining requirements in CPS 226 if it uses its best endeavours to exchange variation margin with the covered counterparty during that period. If the transaction remains open on 1 September 2017, the APRA covered entity must exchange variation margin for the transaction from 1 September 2017. |
CPS 226
|
THE DELTA REPORT
Derivatives Newsletter
May 2017
Read other articles in this issue
Search for more Derivatives Insights
This publication is provided for your convenience and does not constitute legal advice. This publication is protected by copyright.
© 2017 White & Case LLP