On January 16, ISDA and the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA) submitted a joint response on the US Basel III ‘endgame’ notice of proposed rulemaking (NPR). The response focuses on the Fundamental Review of the Trading Book (FRTB), the revised credit valuation adjustment (CVA) framework, the securities financing transactions requirements and elements of the standardized approach to counterparty credit risk rules.
Based on an industry quantitative impact study with input from eight US global systemically important banks, the proposed FRTB and CVA framework would result in a 129% increase in market risk and CVA risk-weighted assets under the new expanded risk-based approach versus the current US standardized approach.
In the response, the associations propose a number of calibration changes to ensure the rules are appropriate and risk sensitive and avoid adverse consequences to US capital markets.
Documents (1) for ISDA and SIFMA Response to US Basel III NPR
Latest
Response to ESMA Guarantees
On April 30, ISDA responded to the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) consultation paper on guarantees as central counterparty (CCP) collateral and certain aspects of CCP investment policy. ISDA broadly supports ESMA’s proposed draft regulatory technical standards (RTS) to...
ISDA AGM Studio: Jenny Cosco and Jason Granet
Jenny Cosco, global head of government relations and regulatory strategy at LSEG, and Jason Granet, chief investment officer at BNY, speak with Tara Kruse, ISDA’s global head of derivative products and infrastructure, about how firms can manage liquidity pressures during...
Updated OTC Derivatives Compliance Calendar
ISDA has updated its global calendar of compliance deadlines and regulatory dates for the over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives space.
Capital Models Benchmarking: A Framework for Counterparty Credit Risk Internal Models
When firms implement capital models in line with supervisory standards, a range of interpretative and implementation choices inevitably arise. These choices reflect differences in modeling approaches, data availability, system architecture and risk management practices, and can lead to variation in...