ISDA and FIA Respond to Six ESMA Consultations on CCP Resolution

As part of their level-2 rulemaking, the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) consulted on six topics around central counterparty (CCP) resolution. These consultations were:

  • Draft RTS on safeguards for clients and indirect clients;
  • Draft RTS on the valuation of CCPs assets and liabilities in resolution;
  • Draft RTS on resolution colleges;
  • Draft RTS on the content of CCP resolution plans;
  • Draft guidelines for the methodology to value each contract prior to termination; and
  • Draft guidelines on the application of the circumstances under which a CCP is deemed to be failing/likely to fail.

ISDA and the Futures Industry Association (FIA) are mostly supportive of the proposed rules, but make the following key comments:

  • We have concerns with the valuation for the No-Creditor-Worse-Off (NCWO) principle. Mostly driven by level 1 of the CCP Risk & Resolution Regulation, the counterfactual to resolution includes a lot of components, for instance replacement costs or margin funding for re-establishing positions at another CCP that are not present in the NCWO safeguard in other jurisdictions and that are extremely difficult to value.
  • We support the proposals how to distribute and pass on compensation for losses incurred in a fair, proportionate and transparent manner.
  • However, we believe that compensation should be distributed only to parties who participated in losses that led to actual and justifiable payment of compensation. Otherwise, a distribution would not be fair.
  • In order for the resolution objectives to be met, it is important that all stakeholders, including market participants have sufficient information about the goals and the tools utilized in the resolution plan to enable them to adapt their actions accordingly. If market participants do not have the required visibility, they may develop worst case scenarios and enact mitigation actions to cover all potential resolution actions, even if those were never part of the resolution plan. Some of these mitigation actions by clearing participants might run counter to resolution actions employed by the resolution authority.

Please find below the response to each of the consultations.

Joint Response to EBA Consultation

On August 12, ISDA and the Association for Financial Markets in Europe (AFME) responded to the European Banking Authority’s discussion paper on certain taxonomy key performance indicators (KPIs) and other aspects of the Disclosures Delegated Act  under Article 8 of...

Response to JSCC on Clearing Fund Consolidation

On August 12, ISDA responded to the Japan Securities Clearing Corporation’s (JSCC) consultation on its proposal to consolidate clearing fund consumption, calculation and deposit segmentation across six clearing qualifications under the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act. ISDA members broadly support...

Response on CSDD Guidelines

On August 6, ISDA responded to the European Commission’s (EC) consultation on due diligence guidelines under the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD). While ISDA acknowledges that model contractual clauses can be a helpful resource for in-scope companies, there are...