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 2026 proposal as an improvement relative to the 2023 proposal, noting in particular that the revised proposal would not include client-cleared derivatives under the agency model in the complexity and interconnectedness categories of the G-SIB surcharge, which would have increased capital requirements for G-SIBs providing clearing services and been at odds with longstanding public policy objectives to promote central clearing.
The associations recommend the following further improvements:
- Derivatives exposures should not be included in the cross-jurisdictional activity indicator, as they are already captured in other systemic indicators, including size, interconnectedness and complexity. To the extent derivatives are included, exposures should be calculated net of collateral and centrally cleared derivatives should be excluded.
- The notional amount of over-the-counter derivatives should be averaged using monthly values rather than daily values to better reflect typical portfolio compression and risk-mitigation practices and avoid overstating notional amounts due to transient build-ups between compression cycles.
- Cross-jurisdictional activity claims and liabilities should be reported as the average of quarter-end values rather than month-end values to avoid operational complexity and maintain alignment with existing quarterly reporting requirements.
- Further consideration is needed before recognizing cross-product netting in the size and interconnectedness indicators, given the interaction with the supplementary leverage ratio framework and the evolving implications of the US Treasury clearing mandate.
- The standardized approach for counterparty credit risk alpha factor should not be included in the interconnectedness indicator, as it is a measure of capital conservatism rather than a reflection of a firm’s actual interconnectedness with other financial institutions.
Click on the PDF to read the full response.
Documents (1) for ISDA, SIFMA, IIF Respond to 2026 US G-SIB Surcharge Proposal
Latest
ISDA-SIFMA letter to SEC on Swap Dealer Thresholds
ISDA and SIFMA have submitted a comment letter to the SEC in response to the staff report on the definitions of “security-based swap dealer” and “major security-based swap participant.” The associations recommend maintaining the current de minimis thresholds for both...
ISDA responds to RBI consultation on SA-CCR
On July 1, ISDA responded to the Reserve Bank of India's (RBI) consultation on draft amendment directions on the standardized approach for counterparty credit risk (SA-CCR). ISDA broadly welcomes the RBI's move to SA-CCR and updated capital treatment for exposures...
Data Subject Access Request Form
Pursuant to its mission to promote safe and efficient markets within the over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives industry, The International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. (ISDA) processes personal data of its employees, members and non-members (for example individuals attending ISDA conferences or...
ISDA and GDF publish tokenization report
ISDA and Global Digital Finance have published a report that examines the viability of using tokenized money market funds (MMFs) as collateral for derivatives within existing US legal, regulatory and operational frameworks. Based on feedback from over 120 firms, the report...
