On October 4, ISDA and FIA submitted a joint response to two Bank of England (BoE) consultations on central counterparty (CCP) recovery and resolution (R&R):
- the BoE’s power to direct a CCP to address impediments to resolvability (available here); and
- the BoE’s approach to determining commercially reasonable payments for contracts subject to a statutory tear up in CCP resolution (available here).
In response to the BoE’s consultation on its power to direct a CCP to address impediments to resolvability, ISDA and FIA welcome the clarity provided by the BoE on the timescales it would follow when using its power to address impediments to resolvability. However, the response also notes that the BoE should more explicitly set out whether and how it would consider informing clearing members ahead of using this power. The associations would welcome some form of publication of the BoE’s resolvability assessments of UK CCPs, similar to what the BoE currently does with resolvability assessments of UK banks.
In response to the BoE’s consultation on its approach to determining commercially reasonable payments for contracts subject to statutory tear-up in CCP resolution, the associations expressed caution on the proposed approach, which could result in placing too much reliance on the CCP’s own rules and arrangements to generate commercially reasonable prices for contracts subject to tear up. The response highlights that in a situation where the BoE would have to use its power to tear up contracts – ie, after a failed auction – there might not be a clear price for those contracts. The associations suggest that the BoE should consider the circumstances that led the auction to fail, as these factors could significantly influence whether the prices generated by the CCP are appropriate. The associations also stressed that when assessing whether prices are commercially reasonable, the BoE should ensure the proposed prices do not result in the allocation of losses to some market participants.
Documents (2) for ISDA, FIA Response to BoE Consultation on CCP R&R
Latest
Joint Response to 2026 US G-SIB Surcharge Proposal
On June 18, ISDA, the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association and the Institute of International Finance submitted a joint response to US agencies on proposed changes to the surcharge for global systemically important banks (G-SIBs). The associations welcome the...
Eyeing the Basel III Finish Line
An effective regulatory capital framework relies on multiple ingredients, from appropriate drafting to rigorous testing and consultation. Even minor calibration distortions can inflate capital requirements, which could negatively affect the capacity of banks to support deep and liquid markets, with...
Joint Comment Letter on Basel III Endgame Proposal
The Institute of International Finance (IIF), the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. (ISDA) and the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA) today submitted a joint comment letter to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the...
Joint Response to 2026 US Basel III Proposal
On June 18, ISDA, the Institute of International Finance and the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association submitted a joint response to the 2026 US Basel III notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR). The response focuses on the Fundamental Review of...
