1 The Committee on Payment and Settlement Systems (CPSS) changed its name to the Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures (CPMI) on 1 September 2014.
4 CPMI and IOSCO, Consultative Report: Guidance on Cyber Resilience for Financial Market Infrastructures (November 2015), <http://www.bis.org/cpmi/publ/d138.htm> (accessed 26 March 2016).
9 FSB Key Attributes (2014), Appendix II-Annex 1, 57 et seq.
10 FSB Key Attributes (2014), Appendix II-Annex 1, 71–4.
11 FSB Key Attributes (2014), Appendix II-Annex 1, 58, s 1.1. Thus, entry into resolution should be possible, subject to determination by the relevant authorities, if the recovery plan and loss allocation procedures have failed to return the FMI to viability or have not been implemented in a timely manner, or if, even though the recovery plan may not yet have been fully implemented, recovery measures are not reasonably likely to return the FMI to viability or would otherwise be likely to compromise financial stability.
12 FSB Key Attributes (2014), Appendix II-Annex 3, 85 et seq.
14 FSB Key Attributes (2014), Appendix II-Annex 3, 85: ‘The Key Attributes state that the legal framework governing the segregation of client assets should be clear, transparent and enforceable during a crisis or resolution of firms and should not hamper the effective implementation of resolution measures (Key Attribute 4.1). Effective resolution regimes should allow for the rapid return of segregated client assets or the transfer to a performing third party or bridge institution of the client asset holdings.’
15 FSB Key Attributes (2014), Appendix II-Annex 3, 86: ‘Whatever national arrangements apply, client assets should be shielded—in a manner appropriate to those arrangements—from the failure of the firm and, to the extent possible, of any third-party custodian. The legal status of client assets and the clients' entitlement to them should not be affected by entry into resolution of the firm.’ [Footnotes omitted.]
16 FSB Key Attributes (2014), Appendix II-Annex 3, 89, s 5. The Annex does not take a position on the form such segregation should take (e.g. client omnibus accounts or individual client accounts).
17 FSB Key Attributes (2014), Appendix II-Annex 3, 92–3, s 10.
18 FSB Key Attributes (2014), Appendix II-Annex 3, 88–9, s 4.
19 FSB Key Attributes (2014),Appendix II-Annex 3, 90, s 6.'Those records should be sufficient to enable clients to unwind outstanding transactions to which they are principal or, in the event of resolution, to enable outstanding transactions to be transferred to a qualified transferee. Particular consideration should be given to ensuring that the firm holds adequate records of collateral allocation where securities collateral is held for multiple clients on a pooled basis and where cash collateral is reinvested on a pooled basis.’
20 ‘In particular, in order to facilitate resolution, it should be clear how the exercise of the right of use is recorded and what quantity of assets can be rehypothecated or used.’ [Footnote omitted.]
21 FSB Key Attributes (2014), Appendix II-Annex 3, 91–2, s 9.
25 Including e.g. the conditions for recognition, enforcement or support actions; the grounds for refusal of such actions, which should be limited; and the process for taking such actions.
26 FSB, Principles for Cross-border Effectiveness of Resolution Actions (November 2015), <http://www.fsb.org/wp-content/uploads/Principles-for-Cross-border-Effectiveness-of-Resolution-Actions.pdf>(accessed 26 March 2016), 13 et seq. In line with the Principles, ‘contractual cross-border recognition of temporary stays on early termination rights should be framed as a contractual agreement by the parties to a financial contract to be bound by temporary stays on early termination that are imposed under the resolution regime applicable to the counterparty, subject to safeguards that are consistent with the Key Attributes’. Further, ‘[c]apital or debt instruments that are governed by the laws of a jurisdiction other than that of the issuing entity should include legally enforceable provisions recognizing a write-down, cancellation or conversion of debt instruments in resolution ('bail-in') by the relevant resolution authority if the entity enters resolution.’
32 FSB, Standards and Processes for Global Securities Financing Data Collection and Aggregation (2015), 32–3.
35 The further recommendations include standards and processes for data collection and aggregation at the global level to enhance transparency of securities financing markets; minimum standards on cash collateral reinvestment; requirements on rehypothecation; and policy recommendations related to structural aspects of the securities financing markets (central clearing and possible changes in the insolvency law treatment of securities financing transactions).
38 BCBS, Consultative Document:Haircut Floors for Non-centrally Cleared Securities Financing Transactions (November 2015), <http://www.bis.org/bcbs/publ/d340.htm> (accessed 26 March 2016).