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.
US-SEC
- Principle ID 20.9
- Rating Not 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
SEC Proposed Rule 13n-6 Proposed Form SDR Exhibits, SEC SDR Proposing Release
Assessment comments (key conclusions and recommendations)
It is proposed that a TR establish automated systems for monitoring, screening and analyzing data reported to it and that TRs establish, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to ensure that its systems provide adequate levels of capacity, resiliency, and security. However, it is not proposed that a TR be required to carefully assess the additional operational risks related to its links to ensure the scalability and reliability of IT and related resources.
US-SEC
- Principle ID 21.0
- Rating Partly consistent
Implementation measure cut-off date: 25-Feb-2015
Assessment rating date: 17-Apr-2014
Principle
An FMI should be efficient and effective in meeting the requirements of its participants and the markets it serves.
Implementation measures
The Securities Exchange Act available at this link: http://www.sec.gov/about/laws/sea34.pdf SEC SDR Proposing Release available at this link: http://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2010/34-63347.pdf SEC Re-Proposed Reg SBSR available at this link: http://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2013/34-69490.pdf
Assessment comments (key conclusions and recommendations)
Recommendation: The SEC is recommended to implement measures which address the gaps or inconsistencies identified for all relevant key considerations. Key conclusion:The proposed implementation measures of the SEC are partly consistent with Principle 21. The overall rating has been influenced by gaps or shortcomings in the proposed implementation measures for key considerations 1, 2 and 3.
US-SEC
- Principle ID 21.1
- Rating Partly consistent
Implementation measure cut-off date: 25-Feb-2015
Assessment rating date: 17-Apr-2014
Principle
An FMI should be efficient and effective in meeting the requirements of its participants and the markets it serves.
Implementation measures
Securities Exchange Act Sections 13(m)(1)(E); 13(n)(7)(A)-(B); 13n-1(c)(3); 13n-4(c) SEC Re-Proposed Reg SBSR, Rules 903; 904; 905(b); 907 SEC Proposed Rules 13n-4(b); 13n-5; 13n-6
Assessment comments (key conclusions and recommendations)
It is proposed that a TR be required to support the objectives of participants, which could be interpreted to mean the markets that it serves. However, a TR is not specifically required to have regard to offering a choice with regard to its operating structure, scope of products recorded, and use of technology and procedures
US-SEC
- Principle ID 21.2
- Rating Partly consistent
Implementation measure cut-off date: 25-Feb-2015
Assessment rating date: 17-Apr-2014
Principle
An FMI should be efficient and effective in meeting the requirements of its participants and the markets it serves.
Implementation measures
SEC Proposed Rules 13n-4(c)(1); 13n-4(c)(3); 13n-5(b)(6); 13n-6(b); 13n-9(b) SEC Re-Proposed Reg SBSR, Rules 902; 904; 905; 907 Preamble to SEC SDR Proposing Release
Assessment comments (key conclusions and recommendations)
A TR is required to establish, maintain, and enforce written policies and procedures reasonably designed to ensure that its systems provide adequate levels of capacity, resiliency, and security. However, it is not proposed that a TR be required to have clearly defined goals and objectives that are measurable and achievable, such as in the areas of minimum service levels, risk-management expectations, and business priorities.
US-SEC
- Principle ID 21.3
- Rating Partly consistent
Implementation measure cut-off date: 25-Feb-2015
Assessment rating date: 17-Apr-2014
Principle
An FMI should be efficient and effective in meeting the requirements of its participants and the markets it serves.
Implementation measures
Securities Exchange Act Section 13(n)(6) SEC Proposed Rules 13n-5(b)(1)(iii)-(iv); 13n-5(b)(3); 13n-6(b)(1); 13n-11 SEC Re-Proposed Reg SBSR, Rules 906; 907(d)
Assessment comments (key conclusions and recommendations)
The SEC has not implemented, or proposed to implement, measures which explicitly require that a TR regularly review its efficiency and effectiveness.
US-SEC
- Principle ID 22.0
- Rating Not consistent
Implementation measure cut-off date: 25-Feb-2015
Assessment rating date: 17-Apr-2014
Principle
An FMI should use, or at a minimum accommodate, relevant internationally accepted communication procedures and standards in order to facilitate efficient payment, clearing, settlement, and recording.
Implementation measures
SEC SDR Proposing Release available at this link: http://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2010/34-63347.pdf Re-Proposed Reg SBSR available at this link: http://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2013/34-69490.pdf
Assessment comments (key conclusions and recommendations)
Recommendation: The SEC is recommended to implement measures which address the gaps or inconsistencies identified, specifically those related to key consideration 1. Key conclusion: The proposed implementation measures of the SEC are Not consistent with Principle 22. The overall rating has been influenced by the absence of measures or proposed measures implementing key consideration 1.
US-SEC
- Principle ID 22.1
- Rating Not consistent
Implementation measure cut-off date: 25-Feb-2015
Assessment rating date: 17-Apr-2014
Principle
An FMI should use, or at a minimum accommodate, relevant internationally accepted communication procedures and standards in order to facilitate efficient payment, clearing, settlement, and recording.
Implementation measures
SEC Re-Proposed Reg SBSR, Rules 900(nn); 903; 907(a) Preamble to SEC SDR Proposing Release
Assessment comments (key conclusions and recommendations)
It is not proposed that a TR be required to use, or at a minimum accommodate, internationally accepted communication procedures and standards.
US-SEC
- Principle ID 23.0
- Rating Broadly consistent
Implementation measure cut-off date: 25-Feb-2015
Assessment rating date: 17-Apr-2014
Principle
An FMI should have clear and comprehensive rules and procedures and should provide sufficient information to enable participants to have an accurate understanding of the risks, fees, and other material costs they incur by participating in the FMI. All relevant rules and key procedures should be publicly disclosed.
Implementation measures
SEC SDR Proposing Release available at this link: http://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2010/34-63347.pdf SEC Cross-Border Proposing Release available at this link: http://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2013/34-69490.pdf SEC Re-Proposed Reg SBSR available at this link: http://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2013/34-69490.pdf
Assessment comments (key conclusions and recommendations)
Recommendation: The SEC is recommended to implement measures which address the gaps or inconsistencies identified, specifically those related to key consideration 5. Key conclusion: The proposed implementation measures of the SEC are broadly consistent with Principle 23. The overall rating has been influenced by gaps or shortcomings in the proposed implementation measures for key consideration 5.
US-SEC
- Principle ID 23.1
- Rating Broadly consistent
Implementation measure cut-off date: 25-Feb-2015
Assessment rating date: 17-Apr-2014
Principle
An FMI should have clear and comprehensive rules and procedures and should provide sufficient information to enable participants to have an accurate understanding of the risks, fees, and other material costs they incur by participating in the FMI. All relevant rules and key procedures should be publicly disclosed.
Implementation measures
SEC Proposed Rule 13n-10(b) SEC Re-Proposed Reg SBSR, Rule 907
US-SEC
- Principle ID 23.2
- Rating Broadly consistent
Implementation measure cut-off date: 25-Feb-2015
Assessment rating date: 17-Apr-2014
Principle
An FMI should have clear and comprehensive rules and procedures and should provide sufficient information to enable participants to have an accurate understanding of the risks, fees, and other material costs they incur by participating in the FMI. All relevant rules and key procedures should be publicly disclosed.
Implementation measures
SEC Proposed Rule 13n-10(b)
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.