Operational Resilience / Outsourcing in United States
Operational Resilience / Outsourcing regulatory updates from United States.
We track 37 Operational Resilience / Outsourcing updates from United States regulators, published by CFTC, SEC and OCC. The archive covers 19 news items, 7 consultations and 5 enforcement actions. Most recent update: September 2026. Coverage runs from 2025 to 2026.
The Securities and Exchange Commission today censured New York-based broker dealer OTC Link LLC and ordered it to pay a $575,000 civil penalty for longstanding violations of Regulation Systems Compliance and Integrity (SCI).According to the SEC’s settled…
Why this matters
This is a settled enforcement action by the SEC against OTC Link LLC, a specific broker dealer, for longstanding violations of Regulation SCI (Systems Compliance and Integrity). The action includes a material civil penalty ($575,000) and censure.
Speech At the 2026 U.S. Treasury Market Conference, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, New York, New York
Why this matters
This is an informational speech by Vice Chair Jefferson detailing ongoing Federal Reserve discount window modernization efforts. The content describes three dimensions of modernization: business process improvements (standardized collateral frameworks, simplified forms), automation enhancements (DWD portal launched in...
PRESS RELEASE | SEPTEMBER 11, 2026 Joint Readout of Principals’ Meeting of UK and U.S. Authorities Regarding Central Counterparty Resolution WASHINGTON—Senior officials from the Bank of England, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Securities and Exchange Commission, and Federal…
Why this matters
The press release documents a regular senior-level meeting between UK and US authorities to discuss central counterparty (CCP) resolution frameworks through a tabletop exercise.
Senior officials from the Securities and Exchange Commission, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Federal Reserve Board, and Bank of England convened for a tabletop exercise on Sept. 3, 2026, to discuss certain…
Why this matters
The content describes a joint U.S.-UK regulatory tabletop exercise on central counterparty (CCP) resolution conducted by senior officials from five financial regulators.
The content describes a joint UK-US regulatory tabletop exercise on central counterparty resolution conducted on September 3, 2026. It is a news release documenting senior-level coordination and information-sharing arrangements among CFTC, SEC, FDIC, Federal Reserve, and Bank of England.
PRESS RELEASE | SEPTEMBER 11, 2026 Agencies Seek Comment on Proposed Third-Party Risk Management Guidance and Issue Statement on Community Bank Engagement with Core Service Providers WASHINGTON— Today the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Reserve Board, the National Credit Union Administration, and…
Why this matters
This is a joint proposal from four federal banking regulators (FDIC, Federal Reserve, NCUA, OCC) seeking public comment on comprehensive third-party risk management guidance. The guidance is principles-based and non-binding but signals supervisory priorities and will eventually replace existing guidance.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the Board) and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the FDIC, and collectively, the agencies) are issuing a statement to provide clarity on their risk-based supervision of certain services provided by core…
Why this matters
This is a joint statement from OCC, Federal Reserve, and FDIC providing clarity on supervisory approach to third-party core service providers used by community banking organizations.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency today continued to empower community banks and reduce their burden with a proposal to tailor third-party risk management to actual risk, and by providing greater clarity regarding supervision and enforcement of core service providers.
Why this matters
This is a policy proposal from the OCC (U.S. banking regulator) that introduces tailored third-party risk management guidance and clarifies supervision of core service providers for community banks.
Agencies Seek Comment on Proposed Third-Party Risk Management Guidance and Issue Statement on Community Bank Engagement with Core Service Providers Today the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Reserve Board, the National Credit Union Administration, and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency…
Why this matters
This is a formal consultation (OCC Bulletin) issued jointly by four federal banking agencies (OCC, Federal Reserve, FDIC, NCUA) proposing revised guidance on third-party risk management. The guidance applies broadly to national banks, federal savings associations, federal branches/agencies, and community banks.
Agencies seek comment on proposed third-party risk management guidance and issue statement on community bank engagement with core service providers
Why this matters
This is a joint consultation by four federal banking regulators (Federal Reserve, FDIC, OCC, NCUA) on proposed third-party risk management guidance. The update signals a material shift in supervisory approach—moving to principles-based guidance and rescinding prior guidance.
Today the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Reserve Board, the National Credit Union Administration, and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (collectively, the agencies) requested comment on proposed guidance to assist financial institutions with managing risks associated with third-party…
Why this matters
This is a multi-agency (FDIC, Federal Reserve, NCUA, OCC) consultation requesting comment on proposed guidance to replace existing third-party risk management rules. The update directly addresses supervisory expectations for managing third-party relationships and core service provider engagement.
Proposed rule. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC" or "Commission") is proposing to adopt new rules, amend existing rules, amend the existing form for registration with the Commission as a transfer agent (Form TA-1) and the existing form for reporting activities of transfer agents (Form TA-2), and…
Why this matters
This is a SEC proposed rule (not final) that amends multiple transfer agent rules (17ac2-1, 17ac2-2, 17ad-1 through 17ad-17) and introduces two new rules (17ad-30 on compliance, 17ad-31 on restrictive legends).
This is a policy speech by CFTC's Director of International Affairs outlining the agency's vision for regulating next-generation derivatives markets characterized by programmable assets, continuous settlement, and autonomous trading.
The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced the agenda and panelists for its Sept. 17, 2026, roundtable on preparations for 24-hour trading.The roundtable will be held at the SEC’s headquarters at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington, D.C., from 10…
Why this matters
The SEC is convening a structured roundtable with senior panelists from exchanges, brokers, asset managers, and infrastructure providers to examine preparations for 24-hour trading.
The Securities and Exchange Commission today proposed to update the rules and forms that apply to registered transfer agents.Transfer agents are a key component of the national clearance and settlement system. Transfer agents now perform a more diverse…
Why this matters
This is a formal SEC rule proposal (consultation) that modernizes legacy regulations governing registered transfer agents, a critical component of the U.S. securities clearance and settlement system.
Final rule. The NCUA Board (Board) is issuing a final rule removing NCUA's unnecessarily prescriptive regulation regarding third-party servicing of indirect vehicle loans. This action will reduce regulatory burden and provide federally insured credit unions (FICUs) with greater operational flexibility, consistent with…
AI Analysis
The NCUA issued a final rule removing the prescriptive limits in 12 CFR 701.21(h) that had capped purchases of indirect vehicle loans serviced by a third party at 50% of net worth, rising to 100% after 30 months with the same servicer. The agency says the change reduces regulatory burden and gives credit union boards greater flexibility, while leaving prudential oversight to board policies and the examination process.
Key dates
2026-03-25
NCUA issued the proposed rule to remove the prescriptive requirements
2026-05-26 Deadline
Public comment period closed
2026-08-06
Final rule was published in the Federal Register at 91 FR 50677
2026-09-08 Deadline
Final rule becomes effective
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to review current indirect vehicle lending policies to confirm they no longer reference the removed 50% and 100% net-worth limits.
Boards may wish to document a board-approved risk appetite and concentration framework for third-party serviced indirect vehicle loans.
Credit unions may wish to align vendor oversight, due diligence, and servicing controls with their internal policies since the prior waiver pathway is no longer the operative framework.
State-chartered federally insured credit unions may wish to verify any conforming updates needed to insurance-related procedures and governance materials.
Compliance functions may wish to update training, policy manuals, and examination binders to reflect that supervision will now focus on principles-based oversight rather than the deleted rule text.
What changed
The final rule removes 12 CFR 701.21(h) in full, eliminating the existing concentration limits, the 30-month step-up to a higher limit, the waiver process to a Regional Director, the related response timeline, and the embedded definition framework tied to that paragraph. NCUA also states that it removed the parallel requirement in 12 CFR 741.203(c) and the related citation in 12 CFR 746.201(c), as part of the same deregulatory package.
Compliance impact
This is a meaningful deregulatory change for credit unions that purchase indirect vehicle loans serviced by third parties because it removes a binding concentration cap and waiver process. The regulator describes the prior framework as unduly burdensome and says ongoing compliance consequences will now flow mainly through board governance, internal controls, and examination findings if safety-and-soundness expectations are not met.
Final rule. The NCUA Board (Board) is revising its regulations governing the organization and operation of federal credit unions (FCUs) by eliminating a provision related to credit union service contracts. The Board intends to reduce administrative costs and compliance complexity with this revision, enabling FCUs to…
AI Analysis
The NCUA finalized a deregulatory rule that removes 12 CFR 701.26, the section governing FCU credit union service contracts, and aligns part 721 to clarify FCU authority in shared operational arrangements. The rule is intended to reduce administrative burden and compliance complexity while the agency says existing expectations for written contracts, vendor oversight, and safe-and-sound third-party risk management remain unchanged.
Key dates
2026-02-25
NCUA issued the proposed rule removing 12 CFR 701.26; public comments were invited through April 27, 2026
2026-04-27 Deadline
Public comment deadline on the proposal
2026-08-06
Final rule published in the Federal Register at 91 FR 50674
2026-09-08 Deadline
Final rule becomes effective
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to remove references to 12 CFR 701.26 from policies, procedures, and training materials once the rule is effective.
Firms should consider confirming that contract templates still include written terms addressing audit rights, information security, business continuity, indemnification, performance metrics, data ownership and return, termination, and dispute resolution.
Credit unions involved in shared operational arrangements may wish to review whether documentation now reflects the updated clarification in 12 CFR 721.3.
Firms may wish to confirm that third-party risk management, vendor oversight, and due diligence controls remain aligned with existing supervisory expectations despite the regulatory deletion.
What changed
The final rule rescinds 12 CFR 701.26, which had addressed FCU authority to enter written contracts for assets or services relating to daily operations and required those agreements to be in writing. NCUA states that the contractual authority already exists under the FCU Act and incidental powers authority, so the regulation was redundant.
The Board also amended 12 CFR 721.3 to formally clarify that credit unions may act as representatives in shared operational arrangements with other credit unions or organizations, and that fixed assets may be shared.
Compliance impact
The practical impact is moderate: the rule removes a prescriptive regulatory citation but does not eliminate the underlying authority or supervisory expectations around written contracts and vendor oversight. NCUA says the change should lower administrative costs and complexity, while poor third-party risk management could still draw supervisory concern under existing safety-and-soundness expectations.
CFTC enforcement action against UBS Financial Services for AML transaction monitoring failures in FX wire transfers. Informational news announcement of settled charges involving supervision deficiencies and system configuration issues. Relevant to banking/trading sectors and AML compliance operations.
Request for comment; extension of comment period. On June 25, 2026, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission ("Commission" or "CFTC") published in the Federal Register a request for comment ("RFC") titled "Request for Comment on the Extension of Standard Futures Contracts to 24/7 Trading and on Perpetual Contracts…
AI Analysis
The CFTC has extended the public comment period for its June 25, 2026 request for comment on 24/7 trading of standard futures contracts and on perpetual contracts referencing physically delivered or storable energy commodities. The new deadline is August 26, 2026, and the Commission also added a specific request for comment on CME NYMEX’s self-certified 24/7 crude oil contract that the CFTC stayed on July 9, 2026.
Key dates
2026-06-25
CFTC published the original request for comment in the Federal Register at 91 FR 38334
2026-07-08
CME NYMEX self-certified a 24/7 oil contract
2026-07-09
CFTC stayed the self-certified 24/7 oil contract
2026-07-28
CFTC published the extension of the comment period at 91 FR 47158
2026-08-26 Deadline
Extended comment deadline for the request for comment
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to assess whether existing trading, clearing, settlement, surveillance, and customer-protection controls would function on a 24/7 basis.
Firms may wish to review the CFTC’s additional questions on the stayed CME NYMEX crude oil contract and consider whether their comments should address execution, settlement, market integrity, and operational resilience issues.
Market participants may wish to prepare data-driven comments, because the CFTC’s consultation is focused on factual and empirical input rather than conclusory policy statements.
Firms considering perpetual or around-the-clock products may wish to map any dependencies on payment systems, margin processes, and holiday/weekend operational support before submitting comments.
What changed
This publication does not impose a new binding rule; it extends the comment deadline for an existing request for comment by 30 days. The underlying consultation covers two issues: whether standard futures contracts, including energy futures, can trade on a 24/7 basis without changing expiration, delivery, or settlement terms, and whether perpetual contracts referencing physically delivered or storable energy commodities should be permitted.
Compliance impact
The practical impact is moderate but broad for energy derivatives and exchange-traded products: the CFTC is signaling active scrutiny of 24/7 trading models and perpetual contracts, especially where physical delivery or storability of the underlying commodity is relevant. The extension gives firms more time to submit comments, but the consultation itself indicates the Commission is evaluating possible risks around liquidity, price formation, surveillance, clearing, settlement, and customer protection.
CFTC no-action letter to Kraken Derivatives Exchange regarding designated contract market procedures and dormancy rules. This is informational guidance on regulatory relief for a specific crypto exchange operator. No immediate compliance deadline or critical risk indicated.
The CFTC has extended by 30 days the public comment period on its targeted Request for Comment (RFC) covering (i) extension of **standard futures contracts (including energy futures) to 24/7 trading** and (ii) **perpetual contracts referencing physically delivered or storable energy commodities**. This extension signals that the Commission intends to build a more complete record on market structure, risk management, and investor protection before setting a regulatory framework, and compliance teams in energy and derivatives markets now have additional time to shape that framework and align their controls with emerging expectations.
Key dates
22 June 2026
- CFTC issues the targeted request for comment on extending standard energy futures to 24/7 trading and on the listing of perpetual contracts referencing physically delivered or storable energy commodities
26 July 2026 Deadline
- Original 30‑day comment deadline for the RFC on 24/7 trading and energy perpetual contracts (now superseded by the extension)
26 August 2026 Deadline
- Extended deadline for submission of public comments on the RFC regarding 24/7 trading of standard energy futures and perpetual contracts referencing physically delivered or storable energy commodities
Suggested considerations
Identify and convene an internal cross‑functional working group (trading, risk, operations, compliance, legal, and IT) to assess potential impacts of 24/7 trading and energy perpetual contracts on your firm’s business model and control environment.
Perform a gap analysis of current trading, clearing, surveillance, margin, and risk management frameworks against the operational and risk expectations articulated in recent CFTC staff advisories and policy statements on 24/7 markets and perpetual contracts.
Draft and submit a data‑driven comment to the CFTC by 26 August 2026 addressing the RFC questions most relevant to your activities, including empirical analysis of liquidity, price formation, manipulation risk, funding rate behavior, and customer protection in energy derivatives.
Review and update internal policies and procedures for trade surveillance, market abuse monitoring, and manipulation detection to address continuous 24/7 trading windows and any contemplated use of energy perpetual contracts.
Assess whether current staffing models, systems support, and incident‑response processes can support 24/7 trading or clearing operations, and document enhancements or mitigations that would be needed to maintain operational resilience.
What changed
- The CFTC has extended the comment deadline on the RFC regarding 24/7 trading of standard futures contracts and perpetual contracts in energy markets by 30 days, moving the due date to 26 August...
The RFC focuses on the extension of standard futures contracts, including energy futures, to a 24/7 trading schedule while keeping fixed expirations but allowing potentially material economic changes...
The RFC separately focuses on the listing and regulation of perpetual contracts that reference physically delivered or storable energy commodities, such as crude oil, and that have no fixed...
The Commission has added additional questions to the original RFC to probe market integrity, price formation, operational resilience, customer protections, and risk management implications of 24/7...
The RFC builds on and is informed by the CFTC’s May 29, 2026 coordinated actions on perpetual contracts and 24/7 trading in digital commodities, including the Policy Statement on perpetual contracts,...
Compliance impact
Non‑compliance with eventual CFTC expectations and rules around 24/7 trading and perpetual energy contracts could result in denial of product listings, enforcement action for inadequate risk controls or misleading disclosures, and heightened supervisory scrutiny. Early alignment with the RFC themes and proactive engagement with the CFTC will reduce regulatory risk and position firms favorably as the framework solidifies.
The Securities and Exchange Commission announced today that it will host a roundtable on Sept. 17, 2026, to discuss moving towards 24-hour trading in the U.S. equity markets, including preparations to support overnight trading, operations and resiliency…
Why this matters
SEC roundtable announcement regarding future 24-hour trading framework. Informational content about market structure preparations affecting operational resilience and trading surveillance capabilities. Relevant to all market participants but particularly broker-dealers managing overnight operations.
PRESS RELEASE | JULY 16, 2026 Agencies Issue Joint Statement on Handling of Highly Sensitive Information During Bank Examinations WASHINGTON — The federal bank regulatory agencies today issued a joint statement describing enhanced security procedures for review of highly sensitive information in connection with…
AI Analysis
On 2026-07-16, the FDIC, Federal Reserve Board, and OCC issued a joint statement on how exam teams should handle highly sensitive information during bank examinations. The key compliance issue is not a new substantive prudential rule, but a procedural shift toward tighter controls, including on-site review and other methods intended to reduce cybersecurity and confidentiality risk.
Key dates
2026-07-16
FDIC, Federal Reserve Board, and OCC issued the joint statement on handling highly sensitive information during examinations
2026-07-16 Deadline
Affected banks must be notified of any potential or confirmed material data breach involving confidential supervisory information no later than 72 hours after discovery, unless legal restrictions apply
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to review examination response procedures for materials that could be treated as highly sensitive, including technology diagrams, penetration test results, detailed control-weakness reports, and similar data.
Banks may wish to establish an internal process for flagging sensitive examination materials to examiners and documenting the basis for the sensitivity designation.
Firms may wish to confirm that exam-response playbooks address on-site review, direct-from-system access, redaction, and summarization options for especially sensitive documents.
Compliance and information security teams may wish to ensure escalation paths are ready if examiners disagree about whether information should receive enhanced handling.
Firms may wish to verify incident-response and supervisory-notification procedures can support rapid engagement if a material supervisory-information breach is suspected.
What changed
The agencies said they will use a coordinated approach to identify highly sensitive data and documents during examinations and will apply enhanced handling procedures to reduce cybersecurity risk while preserving examiner access. The statement says review may occur on-site rather than by transferring materials onto agency systems, and the agencies may use other protective methods such as direct digital review from the bank's own systems or review of redacted or summarized materials where appropriate.
Compliance impact
The publication signals heightened expectations for how examination materials are accessed, reviewed, and protected, especially where cybersecurity exposure is a concern. The agencies frame the change as a confidentiality and operational-control measure rather than a new regulatory standard, but a material breach can trigger prompt bank notification obligations and supervisory scrutiny.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), along with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (collectively, the agencies), issued a joint statement today on the handling of highly sensitive information during examinations of supervised banks.
Why this matters
This is a policy statement issued jointly by OCC, Federal Reserve, and FDIC addressing examination procedures and data security practices for supervised banks. It establishes binding expectations around identification, minimization, and handling of highly sensitive information, plus a specific 72-hour breach...
Agencies issue joint statement on handling of highly sensitive information during bank examinations
Why this matters
This is a coordinated policy statement from the Federal Reserve, FDIC, and OCC addressing cybersecurity procedures and data breach notification protocols (72-hour requirement) for bank examinations.
Agencies Issue Joint Statement on Handling of Highly Sensitive Information During Bank Examinations The federal bank regulatory agencies today issued a joint statement describing enhanced security procedures for review of highly sensitive information in connection with examinations of supervised banks, such as…
Why this matters
This is a coordinated policy statement from the OCC, Federal Reserve, and FDIC describing enhanced procedures for managing highly sensitive information during bank examinations.
CFTC announces establishment of joint data standards under Financial Data Transparency Act of 2022, affecting multiple financial regulatory agencies and market participants. This is informational guidance on standardized data reporting requirements across banking, capital markets, and payments sectors.
CFTC no-action letter to Cboe Digital Exchange regarding designated contract market dormancy procedures. This is informational guidance affecting crypto/digital asset trading venues and their operational procedures.
This regulatory update from the CFTC is focused on strengthening the liquidity and resilience of the U.S. Treasury market, which is a critical part of the capital markets.
The CFTC issued FAQs on March 20, 2026, providing clarification on how registered entities and market participants should handle crypto assets and blockchain technologies in their operations, building directly on the agency's tokenized collateral guidance and no-action relief issued in late 2025 and early 2026. This guidance is critical because it operationalizes the SEC-CFTC joint interpretation issued just three days earlier (March 17, 2026), which established a binding regulatory framework classifying 16 crypto assets as digital commodities and clarifying the treatment of non-security crypto assets under federal law.
Key dates
March 17, 2026
SEC-CFTC Joint Interpretation Effective; The foundational joint interpretation establishing crypto asset taxonomy and digital commodity classification became effective upon Federal Register publication
March 20, 2026
FAQs Published; CFTC Market Participants Division and Division of Clearing and Risk issue clarifying FAQs effective immediately
January 18, 2027 (Estimated)
GENIUS Act Stablecoin Exclusion; Final implementing rules for payment stablecoins issued by permitted issuers; interim staff position applies now
Within 30–60 Days Deadline
Disclosure & Program Updates; Firms must revise Form ADV, disclosure documents, offering materials, and custodial arrangements to reflect the new regulatory framework
Immediate Deadline
Compliance Review Required; Asset classification audits, staking arrangement reviews, and investment contract assessments must begin now; enforcement posture is live
Suggested considerations
*Immediate (0–30 days):
*Asset Classification Audit: Map every crypto asset in your portfolios, products, or platforms against the five-category framework (digital commodities, digital collectibles, digital tools, stablecoins, digital securities) established in the March 17 joint interpretation.
*Investment Contract Review: Identify any assets subject to active issuer promises of essential managerial effort—those remain securities regardless of category and cannot be treated as digital commodities.
*FAQ Implementation Review: Obtain and review the full CFTC FAQs (available at https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/9200-26) to identify specific operational questions relevant to your entity type.
*Notification Protocol Establishment: If relying on the no-action relief for tokenized collateral, establish procedures to notify the CFTC of significant operational, system, or cybersecurity issues affecting digital asset collateral use (required for first three months of relief).
What changed
The CFTC FAQs address implementation questions arising from two prior staff positions:
Tokenized Collateral Guidance (CFTC Staff Letter 25-39): Established the framework allowing futures commission merchants (FCMs) and designated contract markets (DCMs) to accept digital assets as...
No-Action Position (CFTC Staff Letter 26-05): Provided temporary relief permitting FCMs to accept payment stablecoins, Bitcoin, and Ether as customer margin collateral, subject to specific...
How registered entities should operationalize tokenized collateral acceptance
Compliance with notification and operational risk management requirements
This regulatory update announces the appointment of a new executive director at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), which is relevant for firms in the banking, capital markets, and payments sectors.
This announcement of a new CFTC Chief of Staff is informational in nature and does not require immediate action from firms. It is relevant to banking, capital markets, and crypto firms due to the CFTC's regulatory oversight in these areas, as well as topics around governance and operational resilience.
The CFTC approved a final rule on December 18, 2025, that codifies existing staff no-action positions and eliminates duplicative business conduct and documentation requirements for swap dealers and major swap participants. This rule resolves over a decade of regulatory uncertainty, reduces operational costs, and harmonizes CFTC requirements with SEC and Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board standards.
Key dates
April 4, 2025
- CFTC Staff Letter 25-09 issued, establishing no-action position on PTMMM requirement
September 12, 2025
- CFTC issued further amended exemptive order permitting JSCC to clear interest rate swaps
September 24, 2025
- CFTC issued Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (comment period opened)
October 24, 2025 Deadline
- Comment period deadline (ISDA and SIFMA submitted comments on this date)
December 18, 2025
- CFTC approved final rule (subject to pre-publication technical corrections)
Suggested considerations
*Immediate Actions (Pre-Implementation)
*Implementation Actions (Upon Effective Date)
trade disclosure systems to remove PTMMM generation and delivery requirements
based operations, review implications of superseded Staff Letter No. 23-01
*Ongoing Compliance
What changed
The final rule introduces the following substantive amendments:
Exceptions for Swaps Intended to be Cleared (ITBC Swaps)
Swap dealers and major swap participants are exempted from certain External Business Conduct Standards and swap trading relationship documentation requirements when executing swaps that are intended by the parties to be cleared contemporaneously with execution.
The Securities and Exchange Commission today issued an order granting temporary exemptive relief from certain compliance dates adopted under Regulation NMS: Minimum Pricing Increments, Access Fees and Transparency of Better Priced Orders as follows:…
Why this matters
This regulatory update from the SEC relates to compliance with certain rules under Regulation NMS, which impacts capital markets participants such as broker-dealers and banks.
The Securities and Exchange Commission today issued an order granting conditional exemptive relief related to certain requirements of the National Market System Plan governing the Consolidated Audit Trail (CAT NMS Plan), Rule 613 of Regulation NMS, and…
Why this matters
This regulatory update from the SEC relates to the Consolidated Audit Trail (CAT) requirements, which impact capital markets participants such as broker-dealers and asset managers.
The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced that Ken Johnson, who has been serving as Chief Operating Officer (COO) since December 2017, will retire from the agency in December. “Ken has been an integral leader at the SEC for more than two…
Why this matters
This regulatory update announces the departure of the SEC's Chief Operating Officer, which is a senior leadership change at the regulator. It impacts firms across the banking, investment management, and capital markets sectors, particularly around reporting, governance, and operational resilience requirements.