NOUVELLES REGLEMENTATIONS : _x000b_ENJEUX ET Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post- March et de l'ASSET SERVICING

NOUVELLES REGLEMENTATIONS : Enjeux et perspectives pour les mtiers du Post- March et de lasset servicingwww.pwc.comJanvier 2015 IUP Banque-FinanceUniversit de CaenMaster 2 Gestion dactifs et contrle des risques Patrice Berg-Vincent,associ Asset Management RegulatoryFront cover slide with activated logo1Sommaire SectionTitreLletrochoc de la crise et ses consquences sur le plan de la rgulation bancaire et financire impactant les acteurs du post-marchPassage en revue des principaux textes europens et internationaux intressant les acteurs et les activits du post-marchTextes europensLa rgulation AIFM et le nouveau rgime encadrant le dpositaire de fonds alternatifs (FIA).Le projet de rglement sur les Dpositaires Centraux de Titres (CSDs).Etat des lieux de la mise en uvre du projet Target 2 Securities.La directive OPCVM V alignant le rgime dpositaire pour les OPCVM avec la directive AIFM.Les rglementations MiFID II & MiFIR.Le projet de rglement sur le reporting et la transparence des oprations de financement sur titres (SFTs)Initiatives internationalesLes initiatives rglementaires menes par le FSB (Shadow banking & SIFIs)Conclusion : rgulation et perception des acteurs/intrt et atouts du modle franais dans lenvironnement post-criseNB : Slides prsents en anglais ou en franais selon la technicit du sujet et/ou les sources2janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC2I. Llectrochoc de la crise et ses consquences sur le plan de la rgulation bancaire et financire impactant les acteurs du post-march3janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC3

Electrochoc de la crise et rgulation : une prise de conscience collective et concerteG20 : () never again such a financial crisis !

Une nouvelle politique en matire de rgulation interventionniste et assume :

Base sur la coopration internationale et la mise en place dorganes supranationaux dots de vritables pouvoirsAu niveau mondial : cration du FSB et renforcement du rle de BCBS, IOSCO, IAIS Au niveau europen : EBA, ESMA, EIOPA

Des objectifs clairement affichs :

Surveillance des risques et durcissement des exigences prudentielles

Renforcement de la transparence des marchs

Harmonisation et convergence des cadres dans lesquels voluent les diffrents acteurs du secteur bancaire et financier (FMIs, shadow banking entities,)

Protection des dposants et des investisseurs

4janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwCUne dclinaison des objectifs qui commence produire ses effets :

Mesures adoptes Mesures prsentes et en cours dadoption Mesures pour la mise en place du nouveau cadre mondial de rgulation financire (reco. G 20)Une feuille de route ambitieusepour la prcdente Commission

5janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC5Rglement-livraisonNgociationCompensationConservationPlateformes de ngociationDpositaires centrauxGestion dactifsChambres de compensationCSDRSLL / SLDAIFMDMIF 2/MIFIREMIRUCITS VPrincipaux projets en coursEmetteursBanque CentraleTriparty collateral managementLEITitrisation crances privesOST / VOTACCESSIntermdiairesInvestisseursOSTT2ST+2UCITS VIFONDS MONETAIRESVOTACCESS.touchant tous les secteursSLL / SLDAIFMDUCITS VUCITS VIFONDS MONETAIRES6janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwCMaispriorits de la nouvelle Commission europenneFrom November 1st, 2014 - Jonathan Hill, new EU Commissioner for Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets UnionJonathan Hill's mission letter:continuing to put in place a regulatory framework to ensure financial stabilitypreserving the benefits of financial services, including the provision of financing to the real EU economypackage to be presented by 3 months: measures to improve the long-term financing of the economy (e.g. reviving securitization)proposing necessary measures to make financial services work better for citizens

7janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwCensuring timely and effective implementation of the financial services regulatory reform agenda, including the delegated/implementing actsreviewing functioning and operation of European Systemic Risk Board and three Supervisory Agencies and finding a way to eliminate EU and national budgetary contributions to ESAs which should be wholly financed by sectors they superviseBringing about a well-regulated and integrated Capital Markets Union by 2019

Maispriorits de la nouvelle Commission europenne8janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwCLes objectifs des mesures impactant le secteur du post-marchPost-trade processing for OTC derivatives transactionsPrudential capital requirements and supervision to monitor banks Framework in which systemically important securities infrastructures are subject to recovery and resolution mechanisms at EU levelDevelopment of a Pan-European securities settlement platformProviding a range of functions and duties for depositaries and introducing an onerous liability regimeAligning on AIFM Directive regarding delegation, liability, safekeeping duties, etc.Framework for harmonizing CSD core functions and regulation on a European level and prepare to T2S entry into forceModernizing market structures, increasing market transparency andenhancing investor protection9janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC9Ce cadre lgislatif et rglementaire va avoir un impact sur le capital et la liquiditCSD-R (2014)Increased technology investments in trading and reporting infrastructureMiFID II(2014)Increased liabilitiesfor retail assets under depositaryBasel IIIEMIR(2012)AIFMD(2013)Rglementations clsIncreased capital requirementsIncreased liquidity & collateralrequirements for OTC derivativesIncreased liabilitiesfor mainly institutional assets under depositaryUCITS V(2014)Capital, Liquidity, Collateral neededSeparation of settlement processing from securities financing activities, shorter settlement period (T+2)10janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC10II. Passage en revue des principaux textes europens et internationaux intressant les acteurs et les activits du post-march11janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC11Textes europens12janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC12La rgulation AIFM encadrant le rgime dpositaire pour les fonds alternatifs (FIA ou AIF) 13janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC13 Calendrier de mise en uvre

Une priode de deux ans pour tablir les projets dactes dlgus et prparer la transposition de la Directive en droit national Ces travaux se font en lien fort avecLESMA qui travaille dj sur des mesures de niveau 3 20122013201121 juillet 2011Publication au JOUE de la Directive 2011/61/CE 22 juillet 2013Date butoir pour la transposition de la Directive et des actes dlgus20142015 Mise en place dupasseport intra-europen pour les gestionnaires europens de FIA europens au plus tt aprs avis positif de lESMA adoption dun acte dlgu qui tendrait le passeport auxgestionnaires non europens et/ou la commercialisationde FIA non europens2018aprs avis positif de lESMA adoption dun acte dlgu qui supprimerait les rgimes nationaux de placement privNov.2011 Cration du Comit de Place AIFM 2017Revue du champ dapplication de la directive AIFM14janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwCObjectif : encadrer et harmoniser les conditions dexercice de lactivit de gestionnaires dAIF

Commercialisation

Passeport europen pour les gestionnaires europens de FIAs europens Au plus tt en 2015, passeport europen pour les gestionnaires non EU et/ou les FIAs non EU Au plus tt en 2018, suppression des rgimes nationaux de placement priv

Supervision

Agrment et supervision continue de la part des autorits comptentes et Reporting rgulier

Obligations gnrales et rgles oprationnelles

Exigences en matire de fonds propres Rgles organisationnelles en matire de gestion de la liquidit, des risques et des conflits dintrts Principe dvaluation juste et indpendante, par lAIFM ou par un valuateur externe Encadrement de la dlgation, la responsabilit du dlgant nest pas affecte

Dsignation dun dpositaire unique : dtail des fonctions et du rgime de responsabilit

Transparence et effet de levier

Dispositions spcifiques en matire de capital- investissementLes principales dispositions de la directive et du rglement dlgu 15janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwCLes principaux apports du texte par rapport la Directive OPCVM IV La directive AIFM complte lenvironnement rglementaire mis en place avec les directives OPCVM en introduisant de nouveaux benchmarks pour lexercice de la fonction dpositaire et le rgime de responsabilit

Elle introduit les caractristiques suivantes :

Critres dligibilit clarifis : EC ou EI ou EC dun pays tiers ou professions rglements pour les fonds de PE et les fonds immobiliers

Dfinition dtaille de la fonction de safekeeping en fonction de la nature des actifs appartenant lAIF et qui correspond dans la pratique franaise la tenue de compte conservation et la tenue de position

Exigences renforces en matire de sgrgation

Introduction dune obligation de surveillance des flux de liquidits (incluant les mouvements espces en provenance ou vers des contreparties de lAIF tel que les prime brokers )

Rgime de responsabilit clarifi limitant les conditions de transfert de responsabilit et encadrant les cas de dlgation de la fonction de safekeeping des sous-conservateurs

Etablissement dun contrat crit organisant la relation gestionnaire/dpositaire avec la liste des actifs couverts, lexistence dune dlgation de sous-conservation et ses raisons objectives ainsi quune description dtaille des flux dinformations changs entre le gestionnaire et le dpositaire et ncessaires lexercice de ses missions16janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwCLes 3 fonctions du dpositaire de FIA 1. Garde (Safekeeping) des actifs appartenant lAIF

Conservation des instruments financiers faisant lobjet dune obligation de restitution. En cas de perte dinstruments financiers, le dpositaire nest pas responsable sil apporte la preuve que la perte est lie un vnement extrieur au contrle raisonnable du dpositaire

Tenue de position et vrification de la proprit pour les actifs autres que les instruments financiers

2. Surveillance (Monitoring) des mouvements espces sur les comptes de lAIF ouverts en dehors des livres du dpositaire

Le dpositaire centralise lensemble des informations sur lensemble des flux espces pour dtecter les mouvements qui seraient incohrents avec les oprations effectues pour le compte de lAIF (fraudes, erreurs)

Pour cela, il procde rgulirement des rconciliations (au moins une fois par an) et informe sans dlai le gestionnaire des anomalies dtectes

3. Contrle de la rgularit des dcisions de lAIFM en conformit avec les rgles de lAIF et les lois nationales applicables

5 points de contrle identiques ceux prvus par la directive OPCVM IV

Contrle ex-post de 2nd et 3me niveaux des process et procdures mises en place sous la responsabilit de lAIFM avec visite sur place , remonte des anomalies et vrification que les procdures et process ont bien t mis en place par lAIFM 17janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwCLe rgime de responsabilit du dpositaire de FIA 1. La responsabilit est engage si :

Erreur ou ngligence professionnelle

Perte dinstruments financiers conserv par le dpositaire ou lun de ses sous-conservateurs

En cas de perte, le dpositaire doit restituer des instruments financiers de mme type ou leur montant correspondant sans dlai

2. Renversement de la charge de la preuve sur le dpositaire

3. Conditions dexonration de la responsabilit

Sil apporte la preuve que la perte rsulte dun vnement externe au del de son contrle raisonnable et quil naurait pu viter malgr touts ses efforts raisonnables, ou

Sil existe une raison objective dcrite dans un contrat permettant au dpositaire de transfrer sa responsabilit ex ante un tiers sous conservateur 18janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwCLe rglement sur les dpositaires centraux de Titres (CSDs) dit CSD-R19janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC19European Parliament adopted the report on the proposed Regulation (15 April 2014)EC published proposal for a Regulation on CSDs (7 March 2012)EP published a Report on the proposed Regulation (13 February 2013)Council confirms agreement with European Parliament(26 February 2014)Council published a progress Report on the proposed Regulation(21 June 2013)Council published a position on the proposed Regulation on CSDs(23 September 2013)CSDR Entry into force for transactions in transferable securities executed on trading venues (1 January 2015)Council and Parliament reached preliminary political agreement on CSDR (compromise text)(18 December 2013)Rglement CSDCalendrier lgislatif20janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwCUne harmonisation des pratiques europennesLharmonisation du cadre rglementaire des CSD T2S et au-del (1/2)La rglementation CSD, adopte en 2014, apporte la contribution ncessaire pour la mise en uvre de Target 2 Securities

En harmonisant les rgles applicables et en donnant une dfinition de ce quest un CSD et des activits quil pratique, la Commission Europenne va nanmoins plus loin : elle ouvre le jeu, pse sur le portefeuille dactivits des CSD et cr de nouvelles opportunits

Notamment, elle permet de nouveaux acteurs dobtenir le statut de CSD et de bnficier dun passeport au sein de lUnion Europenne, mettre en regard de la mise en uvre de T2SDfinition et encadrement des activits des CSDHarmonisationDfinition des activits qui peuvent tre gres par des CSDsAttnuation des risques encourus dans le cadre des activits de R/L, notamment par la sparation des activits de type bancaire (lies par exemple aux prts-emprunts)Harmonisation des rgles de traitement des activits de R/L (dont cycle de R/L)Harmonisation des rgles de traitement de la tenue de compte centralise et des services notariauxUniformisation des modalits dagrment et des rgles prudentiellesRglementationCSD21janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwCUne harmonisation des pratiques europennesLharmonisation du cadre rglementaire des CSD T2S et au-del (2/2)Services de Rglement-Livraison+ConservationCentral maintenance service ou top-tier custody)Services de Rglement-Livraison+NotarialEnregistrement initial des titresServices de Rglement-Livraison+ConservationCentral maintenance service ou top-tier custody)+NotarialEnregistrement initial des titresServices additionnels non bancairesLis au rglement-livraisonAgent pour les prts-emprunts (pas en tant que prteur)Services de gestion du collatral en tant quagent (pas en tant que prteur)Matching, routage des ordres, confirmations, vrificationsLis aux fonctions notariales et de conservationServices lis aux registres dactionnairesInitiation des processus de traitement des OST, incluant les traitements fiscaux, assembles gnrales et services dinformation associsTraitement des nouvelles missions, incluant la codificationRoutage des ordres et processing, collecte des fraisGestion des comptes lis au service de rglement-livraison, la gestion du collatral et autres services associsServices bancaires associs fournir par dautres entits (banque centrale, banque commerciale Groupe ou externe, ou sur demande de lautorit de rgulation locale)Li au rglement-livraison: comptes espces, rception de dpts, crdit, prt de titresLi aux autres services principaux (core)Ouverture de comptes espces pour le rglement-livraison et rception de dpts pour le compte du dtenteur des titresPrt de titres au dtenteur des titresServices de type bancaire pour faciliter le traitement des OST, tels que le pr-financement des coupons et des soultes ou le pr-financement des rcuprations fiscalesPrincipaux services (core services)+-Autres servicesABC22janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwCRglement CSDRaisons dune initiativeRisk and uncertainties regarding the post-trade infrastructureRising legal and development costs to implement the new environment, including the cost of complying with banking regulations (Basel III)In the short term there is a risk of greater fragmentation and higher cost for market participants, a scenario clearly identified by the ECDiscrepancies among national regulations and reluctance to adopt new standards 23janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC23Rglement CSDRaisons dune initiativeCreating a level playing field for European CSDs to facilitate T2S entry into force

CSDR main objectivesEU-wide regulatory and prudential regime for CSDsHarmonizing member states national securities settlement rules to support and encourage cross border securities settlement disciplineEstablishing access arrangements between CSDs and between CSDs and other financial market infrastructure so that they can obtain access to each others servicesHarmonizing the core functions performed by central securities depositories (CSDs)24janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC24Rglement CSDLes changementsTransparencyHarmonisationSafetyFreedom of choiceArt. 5 (2): Harmonization provisions regarding the single settlement period (T+2)Introducing a single settlement discipline regime ( EU CSD license)Liability: CSDs remain responsible even though they outsource settlement services to third parties (Art. 28)Implementation of common practices in case participants fail to deliver their securities on the agreed settlement dateArt 32: harmonization of communication standards in order to facilitate efficient recording, payment and settlementArt. 3a (proposed by EP): CSD liability regime to losses suffered by members/participants?

25janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC25Rglement CSDLes changementsTransparencyHarmonisationSafetyFreedom of choiceArt. 21: Freedom to provide services in another Member State Art. 23: Implementing third country provisions to allow competition with non-EU CSDs Art. 47: Removal of barriers of access between issuers and CSDs, allowing issuers to issue securities to any other CSD represented in book-entry formArt. 52: Interoperability and access to other market infrastructures, allowing CSDs to access to any other CSD, trading venue and CCP

26janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC26Rglement CSDLes changementsTransparencyHarmonisationSafetyFreedom of choiceArt. 8a: Reporting obligation for settlement internalisers (if EP text is adopted)Art. 19: Establishing and publishing a CSD register by ESMA, specifying amongst other things the services and classes of FIsArt 25 & 26: Establishing a user committee advising the board of the CSD on key arrangements and implementing provisions on the composition of the board members (2 independent directors) Art 31: Obligation to publish prices and fees related to the services provided by the CSDs, strengthening a transparent pricing system Art. 69: Reporting on settlement fails aggregated at EU level 27janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC27Rglement CSDLes changementsTransparencyHarmonisationSafetyFreedom of choiceAdoption of internationally agreed CPSS-IOSCO standards regarding a sound and prudential risk management Art. 7: Establishing measures to address settlement fails (e.g. buy-ins, penalty mechanisms for settlement fails)Art. 42: Implementing adequate business continuity policy as well as a recovery plan to ensure preservation of CSD services Art. 44: Requirement of higher levels of capitals for CSDs engaged in bankingArt. 52: CSDs will have to conduct their banking and securities activities in separate legal entities unless European Commission grants an exception (unclear process)Art. 55: Withdrawal of authorization in case of non-compliance28janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC28Etat des lieux du projet Target 2 Securities29janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC29TARGET2-Securities Calendrier et tapesPreparationSpecification & DevelopmentTest & Migration200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172006July 2006: Concept launch by ECBJuly 2008: ECB launches T2SFebruary 2010: Development startNovember 2011:GC approves T2S Framework agreementDec-Jun 2012:CSDs sign T2S-Framework agreementJanuary 2014:ES acceptance testing start

October 2014:User testing startJune 2015:1st migration waveJuly 2016:2nd migration wave

November 2016:3rd migration wave2017:T2S established30janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC30TARGET2-SecuritiesObjectife.g. coupon payments, redemptions, stock splitse.g. lending and borrowing only in some (I)CSDsChange of ownership among investorsRegistration of issuer indebtness and investor holdingsSource: www.ecb.europa.eu A service offered to CSDs for Settlement only31janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC31TARGET2-SecuritiesObjectifSource: www.ecb.europa.eu A single pool of securitiesTo enhance competition in settlement servicesTo harmonise fragmented and inefficient financial marketsMaking Europe a better place to trade and invest (in line with the Lisbon Agenda)32janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC32TARGET2-SecuritiesHarmonisation au niveau europenManifold impacts of T2S Transfer of settlement function to a common technical platformDevelopment of a pan-European securities settlement platformT2S platform will be available for all Central Securities Depositories (CSDs) that sign the T2S Framework Agreement

Decreasing settlement costs by bringing down cross-border settlement feesFostering competition, specifically sub-custodians on an asset servicing levelFostering harmonization of market practices to remove market barriers and inefficiencies

33janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC33TARGET2-SecuritiesRaisons de linitiativeCurrent European post-trade environment Clearing and settlement infrastructure has not been integrated across national EU boundaries (highly fragmented and expensive)Comparatively: U.S. has a centralized clearing and settlement infrastructureFocus on local securities businessLandscape is typified by a lack of global standards, different settlement cycles, barriers to enter the market as well as charges levied by different countriesComplex settlement procedures34janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC34TARGET2-SecuritiesRaisons de linitiativeRemoving the following Giovannini barriers:National differences in information technology and interfacesNational clearing and settlement restrictions that require the use of multiple systemsDifferences in national rules relating to corporate actions, beneficial ownership and custodyAbsence of intra-day settlement finalityPractical impediments to remote access to national clearing and settlement systemsNational differences in operating hours/settlement deadlines

Source: Giovannini Barriers to reduced by T2S, European Central Bank 35janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC35La directive OPCVM V36janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC36OPCVM VCalendrier lgislatifPublication of the proposal for a Directive amending Directive 2009/65/CE (July 3, 2012)Submission of the Committees report(April 29, 2013)Publication of the third Presidency Compromise (December 2, 2013)Agreement reached with the European Parliament and Council on a proposal to amend EU rules oninvestment funds(March 19, 2014)Commissions vote on the proposal of the Directive(March 21, 2013)Agreement reached by European Parliament and Council(February 25, 2014)European Council adopts final text of UCITS V(July 23, 2014)Publication in the Official Journal(August 28, 2014)Final vote on UCITS V rules of the EU Parliament and Council (April 15, 2014)37janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC37OPCVM VLes diffrentes tapes2014201520162017Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4Q1Q2Q3Q4H1H22018H1H2National transposition of the Directive: EIF +18 months

(March 18, 2016)Endorsement / Review (6 months)

(March 18, 2016)ESMA technical advice on the delegated acts, (level 2 measures), ITS/RTS and guidelinesEIF +12 monthsSeptember 18, 2014: Date entry into force (EIF)Deadline for appointing depositaries which are UCITS V compliant

EIF + 42 months (estimated January 2018)38janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC38OPCVM VDispositions clsNew rules relating to depositaries liability, eligibility of entities acting as depositaries as well as delegation of safekeeping functionsStrengthening the existing regime to ensure effective and harmonized administrative sanctionsEstablishing remuneration policies that are consistent with a sound and effective risk management The Madoff affair revealed many differences in Europe concerning depositaries, in particular the selection and the supervision of the sub-custodians. Result: inequality and legal uncertainty for investors.UCITS V aims at improving the protection afforded to UCITS investorsUCITS framework is brought into alignment with the AIFM DirectiveMichael Barnier (former Commissioner Internal Market and Services European Commission) has emphasized the need to maintain the UCITS framework as a gold standard for fund regulation globally23139janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC39OPCVM VDispositions clsDepositary functionSanctions regime Remuneration of UCITS managersRecognize impact of remuneration schemes to the financial crisisRemuneration should be more clearly aligned to investors interests and supported by robust policies and proceduresNo 100% cap on fund manager bonuses and performance fees still allowedIdentified staff to which the remuneration policy applies to aligned with AIFMDDisclosure of remuneration practices in the annual report and not in the KIIDAt least 40% of the variable remuneration is to be deferredIncrease of investigative powers and administrative sanctions of competent authorities Pecuniary sanctions can be up to at least twice the amount of the benefit deriving from the breachOr for legal persons up to at least EUR 5,000,000 or where so provided under applicable law up to 10% of its total annual turnoverFor natural persons up to at least EUR 1,000,000ESMA to publish an annual report on all sanctions imposed (history of 5 years)Clarify who is eligible to act as single depositaryClarify the UCITS depositary safekeeping functionClarify the depositarys oversight dutyIntroduce delegation rules Reinforce liability regime

40janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC40OPCVM VAvis technique de lESMA la Commission europenneTwo subject matters emphasized by EC:

Independence of UCITS depositaries and the management/investment company

Insolvency protection of UCITS assets in case of third party delegation (take all necessary steps to ensure that in the event of insolvency of the third party, assets of the UCITS held by the third party in custody are unavailable for distribution among realization for the benefit of creditors of the third party)41janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC41MiFID II & MiFIR42janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC42MiFID II & MiFIRCalendrier lgislatifPublication of the proposal (recast) by the European Commission(October 20, 2011)Final vote of MiFID II rules of the EU Parliament and Council (April 15, 2014)Vote in ECON Committee (European Parliament)(September 26, 2012)

Publication of the compromise agreed between the EU Parliament and Council(February 17, 2014)Publishing of the proposal by the European Council(June 18, 2013)EU Parliament and Council reached agreement over revised MiFID rules (January 14, 2014)Council adopted new rules on MiFID II(May 13, 2014)43janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC43MiFID II & MiFIRLes diffrentes tapesESMA Final ITS (18 months)

(December 2015)ESMA Final RTS +12 months

(June 2015)

2014201520162017MarJulOctDecMarJulOctDecMarJulOctDecJanJulDec 2014 ESMA opinion, on EC delegated actsNational transposition of the Directive: EIF +24 months

(July 2016)Application of MiFID II and MiFIR EIF +30 months

( January 2017)Consultation papers by ESMA

(May to August 2014)

July 2, 2014: Entry into force44janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC44MiFID II & MiFIRComparaison entre le rglement et la directiveAuthorization and operating conditions for investment firmsDisclosure of trade data to the publicTransaction reporting to supervisorsDerivative trading on organized venuesNon-discriminatory access to clearing and non-discriminatory access to trading in benchmarksProduct intervention powers of national supervisors, ESMA and the EBAPowers of ESMA on position management/ position limits Provision of investment services or activities by 3rd country firms following equivalence decision (with or without a branch).

Everything else

Michel Barnier : The new legislation constitutes about half of the Dodd-Frank Act (28 Jan 2014)

Regulation (MiFIR)(Automatically binding)Directive (MiFID II)(Maximum harmonization) 45janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC45May 22, 2014: Consultation by ESMAConsultation paper: advice on implementing measures Closing date: August 1, 2014Discussion paper: RTS and ITSJune 12, 2014: Publication in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU)July 3, 2014: Entry into force at EU levelDecember 19, 2014: publication of the technical adviceJuly 3, 2016: Transposition into national law with six months transitionJanuary 3, 2017: Application of new rules for firms in scopeMiFID II/MiFIRProcessus 46janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwCRequirement to establish a selection process to assess and compare a sufficient (ESMA does not suggest any number) range of financial instruments available on the market: Selection by type, issuer , or product provider Number and variety of financial instruments should be proportionate to the scope of advice services offeredConsideration of a variety of financial instruments available on the marketNumber of financial instruments issued by the investment firm (including entities with close links) is proportionate to the total amount of instruments consideredTaking into account a number of other relevant aspects such as: risks, costs, complexityInvestment firms focusing on certain investment classes have to comply with additional requirements set out by ESMAESMA sets out additional requirements when providing independent and non-independent adviceMiFID II / MiFIRESMA Avis techniqueIndependent investment adviceA number of criteria to fulfill, but no detailed rule available:creating leeway for regulators to interpret rules at national level47janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC47Proportion of the total number of financial instruments considered and issued by the investment firm itself (including close links)Description of the types of financial instruments Information about the principles of the selection process used by the investment firm

Indication whether and why investment advice could qualify as independent or notType and nature of the restrictions that apply for both advices

Frequency, extent and trigger for suitability assessment Re-assessment of information and how updated recommendation will be communicated Review of recommendations at least annually Possible increase of frequency of assessment is based on a proportionality principle

MiFID II / MiFIRESMA Avis techniqueInformation to client about adviceBroad/restricted analysis of FIsPeriodic assessmentIndependent investment advice48janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC48Cost and charges should be disclosed in an aggregated form (expressed in one single figure) and in a good time before the provision (no explicit definition given by ESMA)ESMA suggests to European Commission consider possibility to impose disclosure of cost and charges which are not included in the UCITS KIID

When the investment firms recommends or markets financial instruments to clientsWhen the investment firm is required to disclose a KID/KIID to its clientInformation on cost and charges has to be disclosed as well in the absence of the above mentioned Third party payments should be considered as part of the cost of the services provided to the clientInvestment firm has to illustrate the cumulative effect of costs on return (ensuring high-level requirements criteria)

MiFID II / MiFIRESMA Avis techniqueInformation about costs and chargesFull point of sale disclosure (ex-ante) in an aggregated formDisclosure of costs and charges 49janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC49Obligation to return any third party payments received in relation to the services provided Investment firms are required to set-up a policy to ensure that third party payments are allocated and transferred (organizational requirement under Article 16 MiFID II)Clients should be informed about the total amount received/passed on to the client

Prohibition to accept any non-monetary benefit that do not qualify as minor when providing independent investment advice /portfolio managementProposed definition: ReasonableProportionateUnlikely to influence the recipients behavior in a way that is detrimental to the interest of the relevant client

MiFID II / MiFIRESMA Avis techniqueVery limited list of minor non monetary inducements when independent adviceMinor non-monetary benefits (1/2)Third party payments 50janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC50Minor non-monetary benefits have to be clearly disclosed before providing investment or ancillary services to clients Additionally, ESMA lays down a set of disclosure requirements regarding monetary payments and non-monetary-benefitsESMA advises the Commission to introduce an exhaustive list of minor non-monetary benefits:Information or documentation relating to a financial instrument (including financial research but that it is accessible by a large number of persons, or for the public) or an investment service. This information could be generic in nature or personalized to reflect the circumstances of an individual client;Participation in conferences, seminars and other training events on the benefits and features of a specific financial instrument or an investment service; andHospitality of a reasonable de minimis value, this could for example include food and drink during a business meeting or a conference, seminar or other training events mentioned under ii.MiFID II / MiFIRESMA Avis techniqueVery limited list of minor non monetary inducements when independent adviceReporting requirementsMinor non-monetary benefits (2/2)51janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC51Fee, commission or non-monetary benefit could be considered as not acceptable if:It is used to pay or provide goods or services that are essential for the recipient firm in its ordinary course of business;It does not provide for an additional or higher quality service above the regulatory requirements provided to the end user client;It directly benefits the recipient firm, its shareholders or employees without tangible benefit or value to its end user client; orIn relation to an on-going inducement, it is not related to the provision of an on-going service to an end user clientFee, commission or non-monetary benefit could be considered as acceptable if:Enables clients to receive access to a wider range of suitable financial instrumentsEnables clients to receive access provision of non-independent advice on an ongoing basisRecordkeeping of an internal list of all benefits received as well the intends to use the commissions and fees to enhance the quality of the services provided to clientsMiFID II / MiFIRESMA Avis techniqueEven when non independent advice inducements could be limitedQuality enhancement52janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC52MiFID II at level 1 as adopted by co-legislators rather hi-level with regard to client assets protection:Safekeeping is maintained as an ancillary investment serviceFull prohibition of title transfer collateral arrangements (TTCA) with retail clientsMember States have the faculty to adopt unilateral measures in exceptional circumstances (notification to European Commission)

The EC request for technical advice (April 2014) takes after all topics related to client assets protection that were in the 2008 EC consultationPolitical push to ensure consistency with IOSCO recommendations on client assets protection (January 2014) and FSB draft report (Resolution Regimes to Non-Bank Financial Institutions, August 2013)UK FCA pressure as it has just review its national regime for client assets protection (CASS rules)MiFID II / MiFIRESMA Avis techniqueSafeguarding of client assets - rationaleHowever, EC and ESMA still pushing to introduce more stringent frameworkWhat does MiFID II bring as new measures?53janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC53ESMA suggests obligation to appoint a single (compliance) officer in addition to the compliance officer imposed by MiFID I with specific responsibilities for operational oversight over safeguarding of client assets Proportionality principle for small entities: the two functions could be combined in oneL1: Prohibition of TTCA (title transfer collateral arrangements ) for retail clients ESMA suggests: appropriateness of TTCA with non-retail clients should be demonstrated MiFID II / MiFIRESMA Avis techniqueSafeguarding of client assetsIndiscriminate use of TTCAsTwo concerns: i) classification of clients as non-retail (corporate, SMEs, small public entities) ; ii) appropriateness tests as a way to implicitly prohibit TTCA with non-retail clientsGovernance arrangementsWhat added-value regarding the quality of ownership rights?54janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC54ESMA concern: transactions permitted for retail client under MiFID I Implementing Directive and that require the transfer of title should not be used to circumvent prohibition of TTCAs.

ESMA suggests: Adoption of specific arrangements for retail and non-retail clients:Borrower ensures to provide the appropriate collateralInvestment firm continues to monitor the appropriateness of such collateralProof of prior consent from retail and non-retail clients is necessary (e.g. signature, records)

MiFID II / MiFIRESMA Avis techniqueSafeguarding of client assetsSFTs and collateralizationSecurities financing transaction (SFT) & TTCAArticulation between TTCAs under MiFID II and SFTs under draft RegulationSFTs are to be covered by a separate (proposal for) European regulation = risk of overlapping and/or regulatory loopholes55janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC55ESMA suggests: An intra-group deposit limit of 20% should be imposed Exception to comply with this limit under proportionality aspects (including small balance of clients funds the investment firm holds)Still strong pressure from UK and Ireland which would like European harmonization from their national regimes

MiFID II / MiFIRESMA Avis techniqueSafeguarding of client assetsIntra-group deposits of client funds for (non-bank) investment firms Requirement to consider diversification (among several banks) of the funds deposited at a third party by an investment firm is requiredThe above mentioned is required during the selection, appointment and periodic review of the third party

Diversification of (non-bank) investment firms holding of client fundsArising safety concerns and operational issues?Implicitly increases due diligence duties56janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC56Prohibition: liens that enables a third party to dispose of clients assets in order to recover debtException: Only where national law / jurisdiction enables third parties What would encompass "national law" (e.g. market rules)? Disclosure requirements to inform clients about such types of liens hard to implementRecordkeeping of granted liens, security interests or other encumbrances is required to ensure ownership status of client assets

MiFID II / MiFIRESMA Avis techniqueSafeguarding of client assetsInappropriate custody liensChallenge as securities law aspects addressed in MiFID II implementing measures ESMA intends specifying other equivalent measures when unable to comply with the segregation requirements in third country jurisdictions + specific disclosure to clients would be required when relying on other equivalent measures Each MS would specify what should be understood as other equivalent measures

Segregation of client financial instruments in third country jurisdictionsEC and ESMA could not define other equivalent measures in AIFMD L257janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC57ESMA suggest appropriate measures to prevent unintended use (non-exhaustive):Conclusion of agreements with clients on measures to be taken by the investment firm in case the client does not have the provision on its account on the settlement date Close monitoring by the investment firms projected ability to deliver on the settlement date and the putting in place remedial measures if this cannot be done Close monitoring and prompt requesting of undelivered securities outstanding on the settlement date (T+2) and beyond

MiFID II / MiFIRESMA Avis techniqueSafeguarding of client assetsPreventing unintended use of client FIsIssues to be coped with in CSD-R discussion paper (implementing measures)?ESMA suggests investment firms should establish and maintain accurate and up-to-date records of client assetsRecords should be maintained so that they may be used as an audit trialAccess to information and record-keepingNeed for consistency with international standards developed by IOSCO58janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC58Le projet de Rglement sur le reporting et la transparence des oprations de financement sur titres (SFTs)59janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC59Reporting et transparence des SFTsCalendrier lgislatifEuropean Commission published draft proposal for a regulation on SFTs(January 29, 2014)ECB has published an opinion in response to requests from the European Parliament and Council(June 24, 2014)European Council published Presidency Compromise Proposal on reporting and transparency of SFTs (October 24, 2014)60janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC60Reporting et transparence des SFTsObjectifsFocus of the Regulation:Activities and entities that are considered as posing a high level of systemic risk to the economic and financial sector

Goal of the RegulationReducing risks associated with SFTsIncreasing transparency61janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwCReporting et transparence des SFTsProjet de rapport de la Commission europenneConsistency with the FSB Recommendations (Report 29 August 2013)The proposed Regulation is consistent with the work of the FSB, in particular:It would provide for highly granular and frequent reporting of securities financing transactions to trade repositories. (Recommendations 1 and 2)It would provide for enhanced disclosure of the use of securities financing transaction to fund investors (Recommendations 5)It would provide for rules on re-hypothecation improving the disclosure to clients and counterparties (Recommendation 7)

62janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwCReporting et transparence des SFTsProjet de rapport de la Commission europenneA three-pronged approachImprove transparency towards fund investors regarding SFTs and other equivalent financing structuresImprove transparency with regard to re-hypothecationRequirement that all transactions (SFTs) are reported to a central databaseLead to better-informed investment decisions by investorsEnable regulators to access valuable informationFocus on UCITS and AIFs as defined in respective directives Setting minimum conditions to be met by the parties involvedLimit potential financial stability risksAllow supervisors to better identify the links between banks and shadow banking entities

Would shed more light on some of their funding operations

Supervisors would be able to monitor the exposures to and risks associated with SFTs and, if necessary, take better-targeted and timelier actions63janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwCReporting et transparence des SFTsOpinion de la BCEKey pointsECB has published on June 24, 2014 an opinion in response to requests from the European Parliament and Council, respectivelyECB is largely supportive of the points contained within the opinion and comments on the following four areas:Exemption for central bank transactions from transparency and reporting obligationsClarification of the Commissions power to amend the list of exemptionsRe-hypothecationModalities for the reporting of data on SFTs64janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC64Initiatives internationales65janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC65Les initiatives rglementaires menes par le FSB66janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC66Shadow Banking67janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC67Shadow Banking

Benefits and risks of shadow banking Create systemic risk through maturity/liquidity transformation and leverageRisk of regulatory arbitrageleverage built up can amplify procyclialityShortterm deposit-like funding can create vulnerability to bank runsInterconnectedness with the regular banking system can raise systemic concernsLower cost for intermediation and extensionQuick decision making abilityBroadening access to financial services and liquidityEnhance resilience of the financial system to economic shocksProvide alternatives to bank deposits RisksBenefits68janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC68

Shadow Banking Les 5 chantiers1)4)2)5)3)69janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC69Shadow Banking Les diffrentes recommandations du FSBThe Financial Stability Board (FSB) has published in August 29, 2013 an initial integrated set of policy recommendations. The consultative documents provide:An overview of the status of the five work streams:

WS1: Mitigating risks and banks interactions with shadow banking.WS2: Reducing the susceptibility of money market funds to runs.WS3: Improving transparency and aligning incentives in securitization.WS4: Dampen pro cyclical and other financial stability risks in securities financing transactions such as repos and securities lending.WS5: Assessing and mitigating financial stability risks posed by other shadow banking entities and activities.

A high-level policy framework to assess and mitigate bank-like systemic risks posed by shadow banking entities other than MMFs (other shadow banking entities).

Recommendations to enhance transparency, strengthen regulation of securities financing transactions, and improve market structure.

Five work streams focused on alleviating potential systemic risk from shadow banking 70janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC70Shadow Banking Feuille de route du G20 (1/3)Date 2014 Q4 2015 Q1 FSB to refine the information-sharing process within its policy framework for other shadow banking entities so as to start the comprehensive information sharing exercise with all FSB members in 2015. 2015 Q2 FSB to finalize its work on the application of numerical haircut floors for non-centrally cleared securities financing transactions (SFTs) to non-bank-to-non-bank transactions and set out details of monitoring implementation of the regulatory framework for haircuts on SFTs. 2015 Q2 IOSCO to publish the final results of its level one peer review (i.e. review on timeliness of adoption) on the progress of national/regional regulatory reforms for MMFs in the areas covered by the October 2012 IOSCO recommendations, and to consider developing a plan for regular monitoring and reporting on the timeliness, consistency and effects of these reforms. 2015 Q2 IOSCO to publish the final results of its level one peer review on the national/regional approaches to implement the November 2012 IOSCO recommendations to align incentives associated with securitization, including risk retention requirements, and to consider developing a plan for regular monitoring and reporting on the timeliness, consistency and effects of these reforms.71janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC71Shadow Banking Feuille de route du G20 (2/3)Date 2015 FSB to launch a peer review regarding member jurisdictions implementation of its policy framework for other shadow banking entities. Based on the findings, the FSB should evaluate the case for developing further policy recommendations for relevant shadow banking entities and report the results to G20 FM and CBG in 2015. 2015 Q4FSB to report to the G20 on the overview progress of shadow banking reforms, drawing on monitoring and peer reviews by the FSB and standard-setting bodies. 2015 Q4FSB to publish results of its fifth shadow banking monitoring exercise. IOSCO to contribute its analysis of the global hedge fund sector to the FSB within the scope of the FSBs regular shadow banking monitoring. End of 2015 FSB to complete its work on the standards and processes for the global securities financing data collection and aggregation. Thereafter, the required operational arrangements will be considered. It will also define by the end of 2015 a proposal with a timeline for the implementation of the data collection. 72janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC72Shadow Banking Feuille de route du G20 (3/3)Date End of 2015 FSB to prepare its final findings on the possible harmonization of regulatory approaches to re-hypothecation of client assets and review of possible financial stability issues related to collateral re-use. End of 2015 Standard setting bodies to review existing regulatory requirements in line with the FSB regulatory framework for haircuts on non-centrally cleared SFTs. BCBS to incorporate the numerical haircut floors into the Basel III framework. End of 2015 BCBS to develop guidance for public consultation on the scope of consolidation of prudential regulatory purposes to ensure all banks activities are appropriately captured in prudential regimes. 73janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC73SIFIs74janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC74NBNI-SIFIs derrire lacronyme, un dbat! CalendrierSeoul Summit 2010:G20 Leaders endorsed a framework for G-SIB and G-SIISeptember 2013:OFR published a report on Asset Management and Financial StabilityJanuary 2014:FSB and IOSCO published assessment methodologies for NBNI-SIFIsNovember 2011:FSB developed policy measures for SIFIsSeptember 2013:FSB published report to G20 explaining that policy measures on NBNI-SIFIs will be developed Early 2015:FSB and IOSCO may publish a second consultation paper on NBNI-SIFs?2010201120122013201475janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC75Identification des NBNI SIFIsContext: FSB work stream on NBNI-SIFIs FSB and IOSCO working on a draft methodology to identify non-bank non-insurer systematically important financial institutions (NBNI-SIFIs) i.e., SIFIs within asset management.

76janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwCNBNI-SIFIs derrire lacronyme, un dbat!Mthodologie didentification des NBNI SIFIsFinance companiesBroker / DealersAsset ManagersFinancial entitiesExposures / Counterparty channelAsset liquidation / Market channelCritical function or service / SubstitutabilityTransmission mechanismImpact FactorsInterconnec-tednessSubstitutabilityComplexityGlobal activitiesMaterialitythresholdsMethodology should be applied to funds above the thresholdSize is to be used as a filtering factorSIZEConsistent with the G-SIB and G-SII methodologies77janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwCNBNI-SIFIs derrire lacronyme, un dbat!FSB : une deuxime consultation venirA second consultation expected to be released by the end of the year, with hopefully a move to: At least, a combination of size and leverage approachMost ambitiously, an activity-based approach FSB not heading to a drastic reorientation but an occasion of conveying messages and making more commentsIt would be unlikely that the final methodology is being adopted before the end of 2015Process could be even more protracted78janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwCFSB and IOSCOMthodologie didentification des NBNI SIFIsSummary of the Assessment ReportThe Assessment Report looks at the systemic risks that may be posed by:Finance companies;Broker/dealers; and Asset managers.Three channels for financial distress of an NBNI SIFI most likely to be transmitted:Exposures of creditors, counterparties, investors, and other market participants to the NBNI;Liquidation of assets by the NBNI financial entity, which could trigger a decrease in asset prices, significantly disrupt trading or funding in key financial markets, or cause significant losses or funding problems for other firms; andNon substitutability: the inability or unwillingness of the NBNI financial entity to provide a critical function or service relied upon by market participants or clients (e.g., borrowers), for which there are no ready substitutes.

79janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwCFSB and IOSCOMthodologie didentification des NBNI SIFIs Quantitative information: to measure systemic stability threats, 5 sets of indicators:Size the importance of a single entity for the stability of the financial system is assumed to increase with the scale of financial activity that the entity undertakes.Interconnectedness systemic risk can arise through direct and indirect inter-linkages between entities within the financial system so that individual failure or distress can have repercussions throughout the financial system.Substitutability the systemic importance of a single financial entity is assumed to increase in cases where it is difficult for other entities in the system to provide the same or similar services in a particular business line or segment of the global market in the event of a failure.Complexity the systemic impact of a financial entitys distress or failure is expected to be positively related to its overall complexity (i.e., its business, structural and operational complexity). The more complex a financial entity, the more difficult, costly and time-consuming it will be assumed that companys resolution will be.Global activities (cross-jurisdictional activities) the global impact from a financial entitys distress or failure will be presumed to vary in line with its share of cross-border assets and liabilities. The greater the global reach of a financial entity, the more widespread the spill-over effects from its failure.80janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwCConclusion :Rgulation et perception des acteurs/ intrt et atouts du modle franais dans lenvironnement post-crise

81janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC81Nouvelles rgulations post-crise : les perceptions des acteurs du marchPositives :Clarification et reconnaissance du rle central jou par certains acteurs (infrastructures de march, dpositaires, experts en valuation des actifs,)Harmonisation et convergence avec un level playing field vers le hautCration de nouvelles opportunits Volont de remise des marchs au service du financement de lconomie relle

Ngatives :Rythme trop soutenu et mthode dvaluation des effets des initiatives prendre ou adoptes perfectibleAdquation entre rle et responsabilit parfois mal calibreCohrence des lgislations discuteArbitrages rglementaires favorisant certaines zones gographiquesSurcots pnalisant les performances des investissements ainsi que la relance de la croissance et la cration d'emplois Ncessit dun partenariat renforc entre asset managers, les corporates et les asset servicers82janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset ServicingPwC82

Any question?

83janvier 2015Enjeux et Perspectives pour les mtiers du Post-March et de l'Asset Servicing

PwC83