About a-team Marketing Services
The knowledge platform for the financial technology industry
The knowledge platform for the financial technology industry

A-Team Insight Blogs

Why Further Brexit Delay Creates Greater Reporting Uncertainty for Fund Managers

Subscribe to our newsletter

By Quinn Perrott, co-CEO of TRAction.

There is a funny sense of déjà vu when it comes to the latest twist in the Brexit saga. The trouble is that whenever the can gets kicked down the road, market participants put Brexit to one side and allocate IT, process management and compliance resources elsewhere.

Then, as soon as the new deadline creeps up, firms need to dust off their plans, and work out how to modify their reporting, until the deadline gets extended again. This all amounts to a seemingly never-ending cycle of uncertainty when it comes to trade reporting. With the EU confirming a new deadline date of January 31st 2020, and Boris still trying to force through an early general election, there is more uncertainty now than ever.

This constant failure by politicians to reach an agreement adds a major administrative cost burden to investment firms, especially those offering delegated reporting to corporate clients, both in the UK and EU. Those funds managers subject to both EU MiFID II, and an FCA version of MiFID II, need clarity on whether or not they will need to split out transaction reporting duties. The trouble is, if an election is called and Boris loses, we could well enter second referendum territory, thus making all the reporting leg work done to date redundant.

Alternatively, if Boris manages to squeeze his deal through Parliament, then an EU investment firm executing its transactions via a UK branch or vice versa will have dual obligations. With so much reporting to deal with already, no investment firm wants the additional headache of reporting to two regulatory authorities. Fund managers domiciled in the EU will need to report to EU-based (as it will then be constituted) Trade Repositories (TRs) and Approved Reporting Mechanisms (ARMs). Investment Managers will need to continue to submit reports in the current format, but likely to UK-based TRs and ARMs, until such a time any changes are made by the FCA to MiFID to create a divergence from the current EU directives and regulations.

Thanks to this latest delay, it is still unclear what will be the specific impact will be on MiFID reporting. Yet fund managers can’t afford to sweep the Brexit issue under the carpet until the next deadline – whenever it will land. The only thing the buy-side can do, when it comes to reporting, is to try their best to prepare for all possible outcomes.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Related content

WEBINAR

Recorded Webinar: Best practice approaches to data management for regulatory reporting

Effective regulatory reporting requires firms to manage vast amounts of data across multiple systems, regions, and regulatory jurisdictions. With increasing scrutiny from regulators and the rising complexity of financial instruments, the need for a streamlined and strategic approach to data management has never been greater. Financial institutions must ensure accuracy, consistency, and timeliness in their...

BLOG

FINRA Requests Deadline Extension on SEC Approved 6500 Securities Lending Rules

In January, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) approved the FINRA rule 6500 series requiring securities lending reporting. SEC rule 10c-1a, which mandates greater transparency in the securities lending market was adopted in October 2023 and requires market participants to report securities lending transactions to FINRA, and for FINRA to establish a system to facilitate...

EVENT

RegTech Summit London

Now in its 9th year, the RegTech Summit in London will bring together the RegTech ecosystem to explore how the European capital markets financial industry can leverage technology to drive innovation, cut costs and support regulatory change.

GUIDE

What the Global Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) Will Mean for Your Firm

It’s hard to believe that as early as the 2009 Group of 20 summit in Pittsburgh the industry had recognised the need for greater transparency as part of a wider package of reforms aimed at mitigating the systemic risk posed by the OTC derivatives market. That realisation ultimately led to the Dodd Frank Act, and...