There has been increasing concern that the UK may withdraw from the EU without concluding a withdrawal agreement under Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union and without any transition (or implementation) period to allow market participants time to adjust.
There has been considerable discussion of the impact of this ‘no deal’ scenario on the ability of UK firms to rely on their single market passports, both to conduct new over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives business and to service legacy contracts with EU 27 clients and counterparties without authorization in the EU 27 (as well as on the obstacles to UK firms transferring legacy contracts to EU 27 affiliates). Similarly, there has been discussion of the corresponding impact of the loss of the passport on EU 27 firms conducting OTC derivatives business with UK clients and counterparties. This paper does not discuss those issues.
Instead, this paper sets out other reasons why a ‘no deal’ scenario has the potential to create a disruptive cliff-edge change in the EU regulatory requirements that apply to OTC derivatives business in a way that may adversely affect EU 27 or UK firms and their EU 27 and UK clients and counterparties.
This paper focuses on the treatment of OTC derivatives business under existing EU law. It does not consider the impact of any current legislative proposals to amend that law or whether any such amendments are likely to take effect in advance of Brexit. This paper does not address any issues arising under data protection legislation or consumer law.
The paper was developed by the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, the Association of German Banks (Bundesverband deutscher Banken), the Italian Financial Markets Intermediaries Association (Associazione Intermediari Mercati Finanziari, or ASSOSIM), the Banking and Payments Federation Ireland, the Danish Securities Dealers Association (Børsmæglerforening Danmark), the Dutch Banking Association (Nederlandse Vereniging van Banken) and the Swedish Securities Dealers Association (Svenska Fondhandlareföreningen).
Click on the attached PDF to read the full paper.
Documents (1) for Cliff Edge Effects under EU Law in a No Deal Brexit Scenario
Latest
Response to FCA on CFI Codes for Transparency
On March 19, ISDA responded to Chapter 3 of the UK Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) Quarterly Consultation CP26/8 on transparency requirements for financial instruments under Market Conduct Sourcebook (MAR) 11. Sections 3.11-3.13 of the consultation paper explain a discrepancy between...
Why We Need Safe and Efficient SFT Markets
Securities financing transactions (SFTs) play a vital role in fostering liquidity, mobilizing collateral and supporting the smooth functioning of derivatives markets. But during periods of stress, secured funding markets often come under pressure just when they’re needed most, with reduced...
Response to BoE on Clearing Exemption for PTRR
On March 11, ISDA submitted a response to the Bank of England’s consultation on a proposed approach to exempting post-trade risk reduction (PTRR) transactions from the derivatives clearing obligation under Article 4 of the European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR). ISDA...
IQ Interview with David Bailey
The Bank of England’s Prudential Regulation Authority recently finalized its Basel 3.1 framework for implementation at the start of 2027. David Bailey, executive director for prudential policy, talks to IQ about the importance of global consistency and the need to...