A comprehensive and consistent regulatory framework for the US derivatives market is an important objective from public policy, risk mitigation and market liquidity perspectives. However, due to differences in the timing and substance of the rules implemented and/or proposed by the two primary US markets regulators – the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) – this objective is not being achieved.
Policy-makers and market participants have been discussing potential solutions for years, but haven’t settled on a fix that would reduce regulatory and compliance burdens while preserving the authority of the respective agencies. For example, some have suggested that the CFTC and SEC undertake a rule-by-rule gap analysis and harmonization effort. However, such an effort would be costly and likely take years to complete. Others have proposed shifting statutory authority from one agency to the other, but this solution ignores the historic oversight and unique role of each agency (and their Congressional authorizing committees).
This paper suggests a potential solution: a regulatory safe harbor mechanism that would allow firms to rely on their compliance with one commission’s rules to satisfy comparable requirements set by the other commission. This would ensure regulatory oversight over the entire market, while also enabling market participants to reduce the complexity and cost of complying with two similar but not identical regulatory regimes. The commissions could implement such a solution by adopting exemptive orders in line with their respective statutory authorities. This safe harbor mechanism could complement current efforts to achieve harmonization between the commissions’ rule sets and should provide immediate relief to market participants, increasing the number of liquidity providers and, potentially, improving overall market liquidity.
Click on the attached PDF to read a full version of this paper.
Documents (1) for A Regulatory Safe Harbor for Derivatives
Latest
ISDA Omnibus Canadian Representation Letter
On September 2, ISDA published the Omnibus Canadian Representation Letter, which combines previously published representation letters drafted to assist firms in compliance with Canadian trade reporting, business conduct, regulatory margin and clearing classification rules. The Omnibus Canadian Letter is designed...
Joint Response on Cross-margining
On August 31, ISDA and FIA submitted a letter to the US Commodity Futures and Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on the agencies’ joint request for comment on the implementation of portfolio margining and cross-margining...
Accounting for Carbon Credits: Latest Developments
This paper updates and extends the analysis set out in ISDA’s October 2023 paper on accounting for carbon credits. While preserving the original focus on the accounting treatment of voluntary carbon credits (VCCs) and compliance carbon credits (CCCs), it expands...
Response to SEC on FICC Guaranty Fund
On September 1, ISDA and FIA submitted a joint response to the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), supporting the Fixed Income Clearing Corporation’s (FICC) proposal to establish a dedicated guaranty fund at its government securities division (GSD). FICC had...
