
FSA releases policy statement dealing with best execution under Mifid
Daily news headlines
The UK Financial Services Authority (FSA) has published a policy statement (PS07/15) that attempts to answer all final questions from respondents to FSA papers DP06/3 (covered benchmarking and internal models) and CP06/19 (proposals for the intelligent copy out for Mifid into the FSA Handbook) that deals with best execution requirements under the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (Mifid).
The statement is divided into four sections: an overview, the CESR Q&A and feedback on issues it does not address, scope issues and specialist regimes. Even though the FSA agrees with all of CESR’s answers in its Q&A document, it attempts in this statement to answer any remaining issues.
The statement deals with questions concerning the requirements of the best execution policy, such as if it is necessary to obtain consent from clients for material changes to its policy, and if this can be done on the web. Other questions covered include whether firms can make contractual promises about execution quality to eligible counterparties (ECPs) without becoming subject to regulatory requirements for best execution, and related issues to ECPs among many others.
The FSA's policy statement also considers the scope of the best execution requirements in the context of quote-driven markets, retail clients and the spread-betting market. It also looks at the application of best execution requirements to specialist regimes.
The policy statement will be covered in full in the next issue of OpRisk & Compliance. To access the PS please visit the FSA website: http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/policy/ps07_15.pdf
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Printing this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Copying this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
SEC cyber rules risk creating web of confusion and costs
Proposals would require breach notifications, public disclosures and annual cyber assessments
Indonesia readies close-out netting after passing P2SK Law
Bankruptcy law changes remove close-out netting obstacles
Behnam comments fan JSCC hopes for US client clearing
Japan clearing exec welcomes CFTC chair’s pledge to keep discussing OTC clearing status for non-US houses
Top 10 operational risks: The umpire strikes back
Tougher regulatory enforcement, new consumer rules and rise of ESG are ringing alarm bells
SVB wouldn’t happen in Europe, says Deutsche CIB head
Campelli also thinks Credit Suisse’s bailed-in AT1 bonds acted as originally intended
How Finma milked Credit Suisse’s CoCos to close UBS deal
An unusual clause in Swiss AT1 bonds allowed them to be written off, but could others follow suit?
Fed’s climate stress test whips up storm for banks
Long-awaited US climate risk exercise puts tough pressure on banks’ data and models