On January 9, ISDA, the Alternative Investment Management Association and the European Banking Federation submitted a joint response to a European Commission (EC) consultation on the best way to identify over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives for the purpose of transparency requirements under the Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation (MIFIR).
In the response, the associations highlight their preference for unique product identifiers (UPIs) (ISO4914) in MIFIR regulatory technical standard (RTS) 2, augmented by several other fields to ensure optimal granularity. RTS 2 sets out the technical detail of transparency requirements in MIFIR. The associations further stated that the most efficient way for users of transparency and consolidated tape data to understand the tenor of instruments covered by these requirements would be for market participants to report the effective date (among the additional fields needed). Along with the time stamp of the trade, this would allow approved publication arrangements to calculate the tenor for these users. Furthermore, the associations suggest the EC conduct a cost/benefit analysis on the use of UPI as the basis for MIFIR transaction reporting requirements.
Currently, MIFIR requires ISINs as the basis for transparency and transaction reporting requirements, but this approach has been sub-optimal in some asset classes – notably, interest rate derivatives.
Documents (1) for Joint Trade Association Response on Unique Product Identifiers
Latest
ISDA Trading and Treasury Forum: CEO Remarks
ISDA Derivatives Trading and Treasury Forum London, September 16, 2025 Opening Remarks Scott O’Malia ISDA Chief Executive Officer Good morning, and welcome to the ISDA Derivatives Trading and Treasury Forum. Thank you to CME Group for partnering with us...
Recognition of Cross-product Netting is Critical
US regulators are in the process of making important changes to the regulatory capital framework by proposing modifications to the enhanced supplementary leverage ratio, which should help stop it from acting as a non-risk-sensitive constraint on bank capacity – a...
ISDA, GFXD Response to FCA on SI Regime
On September 10, ISDA and the Global Foreign Exchange Division (GFXD) of the Global Financial Markets Association responded to the Financial Conduct Authority's (FCA) consultation paper CP25/20 on the systematic internalizer (SI) regime for derivatives and bonds. ISDA and the...
ISDA, IIF Response to PRA on Market Risk Framework
On September 12, ISDA and the Institute of International Finance (IIF) submitted a joint response to the Prudential Regulation Authority’s (PRA) consultation on adjustments to the market risk capital framework (CP 17/25). ISDA and the IIF strongly believe the market...