PFMI implementation database
This is an online data repository of jurisdictions' implementation measures for the Principles for financial market infrastructures and associated CPMI and IOSCO assessment principle ratings. It complements the Level 2 assessment programme on the extent to which jurisdictions' implementation measures are complete and consistent with the international standards for payment systems, central securities depositories, securities settlement systems, central counterparties and trade repositories.
Note that authorities may have updated their rules, regulations and policies since the assessment. For current implementation measures, please contact the relevant authority.
EU-ESMA
- Principle ID 19.4
- Rating Broadly consistent
Implementation measure cut-off date: 25-Feb-2015
Assessment rating date: 17-Apr-2014
Principle
An FMI should identify, monitor, and manage the material risks to the FMI arising from tiered participation arrangements.
Implementation measures
EMIR Art 9(1), 9(4), 78 and 79 RTS 148/2013 Art 1(5) RTS 150/2013 Art 7, 19 (a), (b), (d) and 21 Table 1 to the annexes to the RTS and ITS on Reporting.
EU-ESMA
- Principle ID 2.0
- Rating Broadly consistent
Implementation measure cut-off date: 25-Feb-2015
Assessment rating date: 17-Apr-2014
Principle
An FMI should have governance arrangements that are clear and transparent, promote the safety and efficiency of the FMI, and support the stability of the broader financial system, other relevant public interest considerations, and the objectives of relevant stakeholders.
Assessment comments (key conclusions and recommendations)
Recommendation: The EU is recommended to implement measures that address the gaps or inconsistencies identified, particularly those related to KC1. Key consideration: There are minor gaps noted in the context of KC1, KC2, KC3, KC4, KC6 and KC7 which are the basis for the rating.
EU-ESMA
- Principle ID 2.1
- Rating Broadly consistent
Implementation measure cut-off date: 25-Feb-2015
Assessment rating date: 17-Apr-2014
Principle
An FMI should have governance arrangements that are clear and transparent, promote the safety and efficiency of the FMI, and support the stability of the broader financial system, other relevant public interest considerations, and the objectives of relevant stakeholders.
Implementation measures
EMIR Art 78(4), 79 to 81 RTS on Access to Data Art 2(9)
Assessment comments (key conclusions and recommendations)
A minor gap is created by the lack of clear requirements in the referenced legislations on obligation for the TR to have internal objectives that support financial stability and other relevant public interest considerations.
EU-ESMA
- Principle ID 2.2
- Rating Broadly consistent
Implementation measure cut-off date: 25-Feb-2015
Assessment rating date: 17-Apr-2014
Principle
An FMI should have governance arrangements that are clear and transparent, promote the safety and efficiency of the FMI, and support the stability of the broader financial system, other relevant public interest considerations, and the objectives of relevant stakeholders.
Implementation measures
EMIR Art 78(1) RTS on TR Registration Art 5
Assessment comments (key conclusions and recommendations)
A minor gap is created by the lack of requirements in the referenced legislations for the TR to disclose governance arrangements to relevant parties.
EU-ESMA
- Principle ID 2.3
- Rating Broadly consistent
Implementation measure cut-off date: 25-Feb-2015
Assessment rating date: 17-Apr-2014
Principle
An FMI should have governance arrangements that are clear and transparent, promote the safety and efficiency of the FMI, and support the stability of the broader financial system, other relevant public interest considerations, and the objectives of relevant stakeholders.
Implementation measures
EMIR Art 78(1) RTS Art 5, 8(b) RTS on TR Registration Art 6, 10, 13 and 15
Assessment comments (key conclusions and recommendations)
A minor gap is created by the lack of explicit requirements in the referenced legislations that the performance of the TR board should be reviewed “regularly”.
EU-ESMA
- Principle ID 2.4
- Rating Broadly consistent
Implementation measure cut-off date: 25-Feb-2015
Assessment rating date: 17-Apr-2014
Principle
An FMI should have governance arrangements that are clear and transparent, promote the safety and efficiency of the FMI, and support the stability of the broader financial system, other relevant public interest considerations, and the objectives of relevant stakeholders.
Implementation measures
EMIR Art 78(6) RTS Art 6(1) RTS on TR Registration Art 9
Assessment comments (key conclusions and recommendations)
A gap is created by the lack of requirements in the referenced legislation for the inclusion of non-executive members on the TR board and for the board to have incentives to fulfil its role. At the same time, the wording in the KC is somewhat more generic (by the use of “typically” as opposed to “should”). Weighing the various factors together, the gap noted above is considered to be minor.
EU-ESMA
- Principle ID 2.5
- Rating Broadly consistent
Implementation measure cut-off date: 25-Feb-2015
Assessment rating date: 17-Apr-2014
Principle
An FMI should have governance arrangements that are clear and transparent, promote the safety and efficiency of the FMI, and support the stability of the broader financial system, other relevant public interest considerations, and the objectives of relevant stakeholders.
Implementation measures
EMIR Art 9, 78(1) and 78(6) RTS on TR Registration Art 5 and 8(b)
EU-ESMA
- Principle ID 2.6
- Rating Broadly consistent
Implementation measure cut-off date: 25-Feb-2015
Assessment rating date: 17-Apr-2014
Principle
An FMI should have governance arrangements that are clear and transparent, promote the safety and efficiency of the FMI, and support the stability of the broader financial system, other relevant public interest considerations, and the objectives of relevant stakeholders.
Implementation measures
EMIR Art 78(1), 78(4), 79(1), 79(2) RTS on TR Registration Art 7, 8 and 21(a), (c), (d)
Assessment comments (key conclusions and recommendations)
A minor gap is created by the absence of clear requirements in the referenced legislations on the need for the TR board to put in place a risk-management framework that requires “decision making in crises and emergencies.”
EU-ESMA
- Principle ID 2.7
- Rating Broadly consistent
Implementation measure cut-off date: 25-Feb-2015
Assessment rating date: 17-Apr-2014
Principle
An FMI should have governance arrangements that are clear and transparent, promote the safety and efficiency of the FMI, and support the stability of the broader financial system, other relevant public interest considerations, and the objectives of relevant stakeholders.
Implementation measures
EMIR Art 78(1), 78(7) and 78(8)
Assessment comments (key conclusions and recommendations)
A significant gap is created by the lack of requirements in the referenced legislations that would compel the TR board to ensure the TR design, rules, overall strategy, and major decisions reflect appropriately the interest of the various stakeholders. Similarly, there is no explicit requirement that major decisions are required to be disclosed to relevant stakeholders.
EU-ESMA
- Principle ID 20.0
- Rating Broadly consistent
Implementation measure cut-off date: 25-Feb-2015
Assessment rating date: 17-Apr-2014
Principle
An FMI that establishes a link with one or more FMIs should identify, monitor, and manage link-related risks.
Implementation measures
EMIR Art 78 and 79 RTS 150/2013 Art 7, 19 and 21
Assessment comments (key conclusions and recommendations)
Recommendation: The EU is recommended to implement measures that address the gaps or inconsistencies identified. Key conclusion: The assessment team considers that the exchange of files between TRs can be viewed as a link given the failure of the link could affect the major feature of a TR (e.g. availability of timely completed and accurate data of reporting entities). The gaps identified for KC2 (absence of requirement to have a well-founded legal basis) is considered, in the context of the Principle as a whole, to pose a minor impact on consistency with respect to this principle.
Description of filters
Jurisdiction
This filter limits the search results to selected jurisdictions. The available jurisdictions represent assessments that have been completed to date. The table below provides also a pdf of key conclusions and recommendations for all Principles of a given jurisdiction.
| Jurisdiction and relevant authorities | Assessments and comments |
|---|---|
Australia RBA: Reserve Bank of Australia | |
Brazil BCB: Central Bank of Brazil | |
Canada | |
European Union ESMA: European Securities and Markets Authority | |
Hong Kong SAR HKMA: Hong Kong Monetary Authority | |
Japan | |
Singapore | |
Switzerland FINMA: Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority | |
Turkey CMB: Capital Markets Board of Türkiye | |
United Kingdom | |
United States CFTC: Commodity Futures Trading Commission |
FMI type
This filter limits the search results to the selected FMI types. FMIs may be subject to different regulatory, supervisory and oversight regimes depending on their organisation, function and design.
PS: Payment system
A set of instruments, procedures and rules for the transfer of funds between or among participants; the system includes the participants and the entity operating the arrangement.
CSD/SSS: Central securities depository / Securities settlement system
CSDs are entities that provide securities accounts, central safekeeping services and asset services, which may include the administration of corporate actions and redemptions, and play an important role in helping to ensure the integrity of securities issues (that securities are not accidentally or fraudulently created or destroyed or their details changed). The precise activities of a CSD vary based on jurisdiction and market practices.
SSS are entities that enable securities to be transferred and settled by book entry according to a set of predetermined multilateral rules. Such systems allow transfers of securities either free of payment or against payment. Typically, a CSD also operates an SSS.
CCP: Central counterparty
An entity that interposes itself between counterparties to contracts traded in one or more financial markets, becoming the buyer to every seller and the seller to every buyer and thereby ensuring the performance of open contracts.
TR: Trade repository
An entity that maintains a centralised electronic record (database) of transaction data.
Principle or key consideration ID
This filter limits the search results to selected principles and key considerations. Each principle includes a headline standard and a list of key considerations that further explain the headline standard. The principles are listed below. A detailed list of key considerations is available in the CPMI-IOSCO Principles for financial market infrastructures.
Principle rating
This filter limits the search results to selected principle rating(s) used in the L2 assessments. The ratings reflect conditions at the time of the assessment, and are built on key conclusions that reflect CPMI and IOSCO's collective expert judgment regarding the impact of identified gaps and/or shortcomings. Ratings are determined for each principle after the jurisdiction's legislative and regulatory framework, including policy statements, as relevant, was compared against the corresponding content of the PFMI.
The jurisdiction’s regulatory framework is consistent with the Principle. The assessment has identified no gaps or shortcomings, or only a few gaps and/or shortcomings that have no material impact on completeness and/or consistency.
The jurisdiction’s regulatory framework is broadly consistent with the Principle. The assessment has identified gaps and/or shortcomings that have a minor impact on completeness and/or consistency.
The jurisdiction’s regulatory framework is partly consistent with the Principle. The assessment has identified gaps and/or shortcomings that have a significant impact on completeness and/or consistency.
The jurisdiction’s regulatory framework is not consistent with the Principle. The assessment has identified gaps and/or shortcomings that have a major impact on completeness and/or consistency.
This status corresponds to the case where no relevant FMI exists that is within the scope of the Principles. A rating of “NA” will be indicated only if no relevant regulatory measures are being taken and no such FMI is expected to develop within the jurisdiction.