EMIR - European Securities Agencies Issue Statement on EMIR Variation Margin Rules, More Entities Exempt from EMIR and ESMA Re-Affirms Commitment to Co-Operate with Non-EU Regulators on CCPs

On 23 February, the European Securities Agencies (ESMA, EIOPA and the EBA) issued a statement on variation margin exchange under EMIR. The statement confirmed that each expects EMIR’s requirements on exchanging variation margin to have been met by 1 March and also on an ongoing basis, though recognises that local regulators should generally apply their risk-based supervisory powers in their day-to-day enforcement of applicable legislation.

The joint statement is available

The statement for each securities agency is available below:




On 2 March, the European Commission issued a new delegated regulation exempting the central banks of Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, Mexico, Singapore and Switzerland from EMIR.

The delegated regulation is available

On 20 March, ESMA re-affirmed its commitment to recognising “third country” CCPs for EMIR purposes has signed various MoUs with non-EU regulators whose legal and supervisory framework for CCPs have been deemed equivalent to EMIR.

The associated press release is available


MiFID II - Initial Concerns Regarding Systematic Internalisers (SIs) Operating Broker Crossing Networks Noted by European Commission

On 23 March, the European Parliament published correspondence between it and the European Commission raising concerns around SI’s collecting client orders and then routing them through high-frequency traders, and so arguably creating a network operating as an unauthorised multi-lateral trading facility.

The European Commission intends to follow up on this concern on a jurisdiction by jurisdiction basis.

The correspondence is available below

ECON letter to the European Commission

Response from the European Commission


Other Regulatory Developments - How Regulatory Equivalence "Works"

Given the events of 23 June last year, the European Commission has published its working document of how it assesses regulatory “equivalence” between the EU and non-EU regimes.

The European Commission continues to endorse the equivalence process, though emphasises that any decision taken will be based on a principle of proportionality and from following a risk-based approach, and is always at the discretion of the European Commission.

Further, any equivalence declaration will always be tailored to the needs of the underlying legislation – a non-EU state should not expect a single declaration that its legislation is “equivalent” across all EU legislation.

The working document is available