Dit geldt ongeacht of dit contract op een beurs, MTF of over-the-counter verhandeld is en ongeacht of dit contract onder de centrale clearingverplichting of bilaterale afwikkeleisen valt.
To ensure the financial counterparty has the data it needs to fulfil its reporting obligation, the non-financial counterparty must provide the financial counterparty the details relating to the OTC derivative contracts concluded between them, which the financial counterparty cannot be reasonable expected to possess. Where firms choose the option to report themselves, they face, in turn, the dillema which trade repository to use. Hence, as from 1 November 2017, in the absence of a UPI taxonomy endorsed in Europe, firms will need for EMIR reporting to generate the new CFI classification using the trade attributes (approach common with the MiFID II reporting). So, when reporting the conclusion of a derivative contract in the trading venue the two trading scenarios should be distinguished: one in which the investment firm is itself a counterparty to the trade (in the sense meant by EMIR) and the other in which it is not, but just acted on the account of and on behalf of the client to execute the trade. Hence, the ETDs' reporting requirement for all counterparties other than CCPs is envisioned to be eliminated. Accordingly, where an existing contract is subsequently cleared by a CCP, it should be reported as terminated and the new contract resulting from clearing should be reported, Article 2 of the Commission Delegated Regulation No 148/2013 as amended by the Commission Delegated Regulation of 19.10.2016. With this system, there is no doubt that both counterparties to the trade need to report the transaction, and there is no excuse for not doing so. The values to be filled in with this field are: T = Trade and P = Position. The reporting obligation to trade repositories applies to counterparties established in the European Union. In this case, if the other counterparty also has the reporting obligation, and it was provided a wrong code, it should also cancel (using Action type “Error”) and re-report the derivatives with the correct LEI and the previously agreed UTI to ensure that both sides can be reconciled.
- modified TR Q&A 34 (p. 93) on contracts with no maturity date confirms that counterparties may report a derivative with Action Type “P” if the derivative is included in a position on the same day that it is reported. The collateral should be reported at the total market value that has been posted by the Counterparty responsible for the report. Thus a transaction that is reportable in one jurisdiction may not be reportable in another jurisdiction or may have to be reported in a different way, for example: − the definition of “OTC” varies between jurisdictions. Since the valuation is part of the Counterparty data, in the case of a derivative not cleared by a CCP, counterparties do not need to agree on the valuation reported. Among legislative modifications envisioned in the said document is the removal of backloading requirement, hence the reporting on historic transactions would no longer be required. - TR Q&A 51 regarding the notifications to be made by market participants to their competent authorities to apply an intragroup exemption from reporting. Where an AII code is used, the complete AII code shall be used. Contracts that are entered into during the frontloading period and will have, at the date of application of the clearing obligation for that contract, a remaining maturity higher than the minimum remaining maturity specified in accordance with Article 5(2)(c) of EMIR should be flagged with "Y" in the Clearing Obligation field. Moreover, since Regulation (EU) No 600/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council requires every ETD to be cleared by a CCP, CCPs already hold the vast majority of the details of those contracts. However, FIA Response of 18 July 2017 to the European Commission EMIR Review Proposal – Part 1 (REFIT Proposals) recommended the European Commission clarifies also the following issues: - whether the clearing member-to-client trade will still be reportable. - Excess collateral received (Table 1 Field 34). Position level report can be used only as a supplement to trade level reporting to report post-trade events and only if the individual trades in fungible products have been replaced by the position.". It was also explained how to populate the field "Notional" in position level reports with respect to options and futures. Therefore all collateral for a single portfolio collateral type should be reported in one single currency value for the corresponding collateral type. The identifier (LEI) to be used should be the one of the undertaking assuming the obliga-tions of a liquidated or insolvent undertaking. In practice, industry standards, such as: - the ISDA 2013 Portfolio Reconciliation, Dispute Resolution and Disclosure Protocol published by the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. (the "ISDA Protocol"), and.