Miami International Holdings, Inc. (MIH), a technology-driven leader in building and operating regulated financial markets across multiple asset classes, announced it ceremoniously rang the opening bell at its Princeton, N.J. headquarters in honor of The World Federation of Exchanges' (The WFE) Ring the Bell for Climate initiative on November 12, 2024.   MIAX Rings the Opening Bell in Support of The WFE Ring the Bell for Climate Initiative 2024 "The impact of climate change can be seen both globally and in our own backyards, and MIH's participation in this year's Ring the Bell for Climate initiative is intended to raise awareness of the important climate-related issues facing our industry," said Thomas P. Gallagher, Chairman and CEO of MIH. "MIH employees are actively involved in addressing our climate impact through initiatives focused on reducing our carbon footprint, waste reduction, office building efficiency and the launch of new climate-related products."The WFE Ring the Bell for Climate initiative aims to bring exchanges together to highlight the importance of sustainability issues in the finance industry and demonstrate the efforts exchanges are taking to address these important issues. This year's initiative aligns with the start of COP29, a global climate summit where world leaders will gather in Azerbaijan to measure progress and negotiate the best ways to address climate change.MIH's new MIAX SapphireTM trading floor, currently under construction in Miami, Florida, sits inside 545 Wyn, a 298,000-square-foot office and retail building in Miami's Wynwood neighborhood. The building features an innovative water conservation system, including a 19,000-square-foot green roof designed to reduce, absorb, and filter rainwater runoff while providing an extra layer of insulation. The building also features low flow, solar-powered faucets and recycling containers throughout, among other sustainability elements. In 2023, MIH's Minneapolis, MN office location won a Jackson Control Sustainability Award after undergoing $37.5 million worth of improvements spanning a decade, including energy efficiency and building automation features.Information on The WFE Ring the Bell for Climate 2024 campaign is available at https://www.world-exchanges.org/news/articles/exchanges-ring-bell-support-climate-initiatives-and-sustainability.

Good morning. I’m pleased to speak with the Small Business Capital Formation Advisory Committee. As is customary, I’d like to note that my views are my own as Chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission, and I am not speaking on behalf of my fellow Commissioners or the staff. I want to welcome the four new members to the Committee. I thank each of you for your willingness to serve, and for bringing your important perspectives on behalf of investors. Today, I understand the Committee will focus on three topics, ranging from venture capital fundraising to exemptions for private fund advisers, and lastly the challenges faced by new fund managers. With regards to the first topic, venture capital funds play an important role in alternative capital raising. Their advisers also give advice to startups and entrepreneurs themselves. Small and early-stage funds often start out raising money from friends and family. Success, though, often means eventually outstripping those friends’ and families’ available capital. That’s why both relationship-based fundraising and public advertising can play critical roles at different stages. Together, these fundraising methods have helped develop our vibrant private markets alongside our robust public markets. I believe Congress understood this by including in the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and the Investment Company Act of 1940 certain exemptions from adviser registration and from being an investment company. Today, the $30 trillion private fund sector—private equity, private credit funds, hedge funds, venture capital—in aggregate surpasses the size of the U.S. banking sector.[1] In addition, I understand the Committee also will hear about challenges facing new fund managers. A core principle of our securities laws is about fairness and access. Regardless of anyone’s background, color, gender, or geography, anyone who wishes to access our capital markets should have the same opportunities to do so. I look forward to hearing about how the SEC can best support those who are just starting out in the fund management business. Thank you. [1] Per SEC Staff analysis of Form ADV data, inclusive of assets attributable to securitized asset funds, as of year-end 2022.

Global Fintech leader Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc., today announced the appointment of Alix Jules as AI Business Transformation Leader at Broadridge, effective November 11, 2024. Jules will be based in New York City and will report into Roger Burkhardt, Head of AI for Broadridge. "We are excited to have Alix join Broadridge where we are dedicated to leveraging AI to better serve our clients, empower our staff and drive efficiency in operations," said Roger Burkhardt, Head of AI for Broadridge. "Alix’s background in digital and AI driven transformations brings invaluable “hands on” expertise to our business and operations teams as they transform the ways in which we service our clients and meet the needs of the financial services industry.  He brings deep and practical understanding of both the human and technical elements of business transformations.” In this role, Jules is responsible for leading the global vision, strategy and transformation agenda for internal initiatives that will enhance productivity, improve quality and accelerate time to market.  “I am excited to join an organization that is dedicated to driving value and helping clients increase efficiency through technology-driven solutions,” said Jules. “I look forward to leveraging my experience and expertise to unlock the transformative potential of AI.” Jules brings transformation leadership experience with a proven track record of translating GenAI and other digital productivity tools into streamlined business operations to achieve more efficient business outcomes. Prior to joining Broadridge, Jules held leadership roles with Google, IBM and Verizon Business.  This appointment further strengthens Broadridge’s commitment to advancing AI-powered innovations, including BondGPT, OpsGPT and Tradeverse, a newly launched, real-time, multi-asset global data platform designed to deliver the value of AI to clients.

Euroclear enters a partnership with Transcend with the aim to introduce a new joint collateral optimisation service. The service will bring together Euroclear’s industry-leading collateral management infrastructure and data with Transcend’s best-in-class optimisation platform to address clients’ collateral optimisation needs. The collaboration is announced just before the 2024 Collateral Conference, Euroclear's premier event for the collateral management community. The new service is expected to launch in Q1 of 2025. Transcend is a leading technology company providing solutions including inventory management, collateral eligibility and optimisation. These innovative solutions help global market participants achieve better financial and operational performance by automating complex liquidity, funding and inventory decision making. Transcend's optimisation platform leverages data from dealers, triparty agents, securities depositories and other sources to allow for holistic optimisation across collateral venues and straight through processing of allocations and movements.  Available through existing Euroclear connectivity, the new service will easily integrate critical data for smart decision making and settle optimised collateral allocations. By leveraging Transcend’s technology, clients will be able to configure optimisation scenarios, include external collateral pools to determine the best collateral use at Euroclear and perform 'what-if' analyses on specific constraints. Olivier Grimonpont, Head of Product Management, Market Liquidity at Euroclear, commented: “New regulatory requirements have made collateral optimisation a priority for dealers. This new service brings to the market the combined expertise of Euroclear and Transcend. Euroclear’s long-standing collateral management experience and robust infrastructure combined with Transcend’s best-in-class optimisation and booking technology offers an unparalleled solution to meet our clients’ needs for collateral optimisation.” “We are excited to partner with Euroclear in offering our industry leading optimisation platform to the Euroclear's leading collateral management platform to seamlessly optimise their collateral, liquidity and funding decisions. Transcend’s technology is already used by the world’s largest financial institutions and this joint service enables a quick way for Euroclear customers to seamlessly take advantage of our sophisticated platform and capabilities,” Bimal Kadikar, Transcend’s founder and CEO.

The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC), the premier post-trade market infrastructure for the global financial services industry, today announced the launch of enhancements to its interactive, public-facing Value at Risk (VaR) calculator adding cross-margining and repo transaction functionalities. These enhanced risk tools are intended to support firms as they prepare for the expansion of U.S. Treasury Clearing in 2025 and 2026. The calculator functionality, developed for the Fixed Income Clearing Corporation’s (FICC) Government Securities Division (GSD), provides users with estimated calculations of potential cross-margining reductions at FICC as well as other enhancements. The new tools follow a significant surge in FICC's GSD total volume activity, which is now clearing a record-setting USD$8.8 trillion in average daily activity as of October. By providing users with access to new tools, firms can enhance their understanding of GSD’s risk management and margin requirements capabilities. “FICC is the leading provider of trade comparison, netting and settlement for U.S. Treasury transactions, and we continue to innovate and provide increased transparency to meet the needs of the industry as the markets evolve,” said Laura Klimpel, Managing Director, Head of DTCC's Fixed Income and Financing Solutions. “FICC is laser-focused on providing the highest level of service and value to our diverse set of clients.” The cross-margining VaR calculator enables users to estimate the potential cross-margin reduction on a sample portfolio containing GSD cash positions and CME Group futures solely based on FICC’s cross-margining methodology. Participants can determine whether they can take advantage of greater margin savings on a combined portfolio, including eligible positions at GSD and future contracts. Traders can use these tools collectively to calculate all available margins across multiple accounts using portfolio management to offset trades, which helps with capital efficiencies and may serve to reduce the need for unnecessary position liquidation. “Our risk management team is focused on creating new capabilities that support greater transparency for market participants. These enhancements represent a significant step forward to better understanding and managing members’ obligations while ultimately safeguarding the Treasury Market,” said Tim Hulse, Managing Director, Financial Risk & Governance at DTCC.

FIA has announced the names of six new members of the FIA Hall of Fame. The new members will be honored at an awards ceremony during FIA's 50th International Futures Industry Conference in Boca Raton, Florida, on 9-12 March 2025.     "We established the FIA Hall of Fame to recognize the people who have made exceptional contributions to the growth and development of the listed and cleared derivatives industry," said FIA President and CEO Walt Lukken. "The 2025 group of inductees have provided exceptional leadership, wisdom and vision to propel our industry forward. We are honored to present them with this recognition."   The following leaders will join the 2025 Hall of Fame:    Mark Bagan, former MGEX CEO and MIAX executive (posthumous)   Laura Cha, former Chair of HKEX   Terry Duffy, Chairman and CEO of CME Group   Jeff Sprecher, Founder, Chair, and CEO of Intercontinental Exchange   Debbie Stabenow, US Senator (MI) and Chair, Senate Agriculture Committee   Don Wilson, Founder and CEO, DRW  The Hall of Fame celebrates individuals in the listed and cleared derivatives industry who have made key contributions to the markets during their careers. Inductees come from both the private and public sectors and are chosen by a distinguished panel comprised of existing FIA Hall of Fame members and global industry executives.      Members of the Hall of Fame are selected based on their lifetime contributions to the industry, with a focus on demonstrated leadership, innovative and impactful achievement, break-through accomplishment, industry collaboration and volunteerism and dedication.    Inductees reflect the diverse nature of the industry with unique backgrounds and experiences. They all demonstrate a passionate determination to build strong, healthy, safe and competitive markets.   The Hall of Fame was established in 2005 on FIA’s 50th anniversary. Learn more about the FIA Hall of Fame.

A summary of Deutsche Börse Group's business indicators for October 2024 is now available on the Deutsche Börse website: Trading Statistics There you can also find the Excel file 'Major business figures' containing historic business indicators for the respective reporting segments.

Overview Hong Kong’s role as a leading international financial centre has strengthened by increasing participation of both international and Mainland investors. To enhance Hong Kong’s competitiveness as a trading and risk management hub and an international financial centre, HKEX, under the support of the HKSAR Government and in consultation with regulatory authorities, has completed a market consultation and decided to keep Hong Kong's securities and derivatives markets open to provide trading, clearing and settlement services during severe weather conditions. This initiative will make Hong Kong's markets available for local, mainland and international investors to respond to the latest global market development during Hong Kong's trading hours, including trading and risk management on index rebalancing days, regardless of the weather conditions. To ensure safety, remote working and the use of online services are strongly encouraged on a Severe Weather Trading (SWT) day, and no public-facing physical outlets should provide services.  HKEX will also make some operational adjustments to ensure the market continues operating in a robust and resilient manner, as certain services provided only via physical outlets will be unavailable. Click here for full details.

The ninth edition of the Singapore FinTech Festival (SFF) concluded successfully on 8 November with 65,000 participants from 134 countries and regions in attendance.2  Key highlights of SFF 2024 include: The invite-only Insights Forum brought together more than 2,300 policymakers, regulators, investors, and industry leaders for in-depth discussions across 40 roundtables. Topics ranged from the future of financial infrastructure to pathways for achieving global net-zero goals. More than 3,400 government and regulatory attendees across 665 central banks, regulatory institutions and government organisations participated in the Regulation Zone. Key discussion areas included Artificial Intelligence (AI) solutions, quantum research and finance, cross-border data flow, and digital asset growth. The Technology Zone featured 64 sessions exploring AI and quantum technologies, blockchain, and e-commerce and payments applications, showcasing real-economy impact across sectors. At the Founders and Investors Zone, over 580 meetings between investors and startup founders were hosted during Investor Hours, catalysing new opportunities and partnerships with meaningful capital. The Talent Zone delivered 180 mentorship sessions and certification programmes in collaboration with academic partners, building a future-ready talent pipeline. The ESG Zone spotlighted Gprnt’s launch of its inaugural Disclosure and Marketplace offerings, tools meant to simplify sustainability reporting for businesses and connect them to an ecosystem of solutions to support their decarbonisation efforts. 3  The SFF organising team expresses sincere appreciation to all sponsors, speakers, partners and attendees who contributed to SFF 2024’s success.4  SFF 2025 marks the Festival’s 10th anniversary. Join us from 12 to 14 November 2025 for this milestone event and to celebrate a decade of growth and innovation in FinTech. We look forward to welcoming and bringing together the global policy, finance and tech community next year, to continue driving meaningful progress and collaboration for decades ahead. The Insights Forum will continue as a two-day event, from 10 to 11 November.

Key points Protecting consumers – especially financially vulnerable consumers – from harm is an enduring priority for ASIC. ASIC is particularly concerned with predatory lending practices and business models we consider are designed to circumvent consumer protections. We have a number of court cases seeking to crack down on this type of behaviour. Good morning to you all. I would like to begin by acknowledging the Gadigal people as the traditional owners and custodians of the land we are meeting on. I pay my respects to their elders past, present and emerging – and extend that respect to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people here today. It’s a pleasure to be here this morning – and, on behalf of my fellow panellists, can I first thank AFSA for bringing us together for this important conversation. I have been invited to open this session with some reflections on what stewardship means to ASIC and how our work – together with that of our fellow regulators – promotes confidence in the credit system. To frame that discussion, I will start by briefly outlining ASIC’s role within the credit system – and then talk about some of the work we are doing in this area.   The examples I will draw on include our work on financial hardship, which to my mind most effectively demonstrates ASIC’s stewardship role in action. I also want to talk about some of our other work in relation to vulnerable consumers, particularly in regard to recent credit-related enforcement action. ASIC’s role within the credit system First to ASIC’s role in the credit system. Like each of the agencies represented on this panel, ASIC has a distinct remit – and that remit brings us each into contact with different participants in the credit system. In ASIC’s case, the participants we most often interact with are the entities that we regulate – which includes the consumer credit sector. In that sense, our role as a steward is to affect change – at the company level – to drive good consumer outcomes. How does ASIC affect that change? The short answer is by promoting a culture of compliance and accountability. We have a suite of regulatory resources to achieve this – up to and including enforcement action. Our resources are, of course, finite. So we must make decisions about where to direct them to achieve the maximum impact. That means identifying and targeting what we consider to be the most significant sources of harm. In the face of ongoing cost-of-living pressures, it’s fair to say we are having reported to us significant levels of credit and debt related harms. As such, protecting consumers – especially vulnerable consumers – from poor conduct across the sector is an enduring priority for ASIC. Financial hardship As you may be aware, financial hardship has been an area of sustained focus for us for some time. You are likely aware of this because one of the most effective regulatory resources we have to affect change is communication – and we have been unequivocal in our public commentary and in our engagement with lenders about the importance of the hardship obligations. I want to share with you a high-level timeline of our financial hardship work. Not only because of its relevance to our discussion today. But also because it provides an example of stewardship in action – and the different regulatory and enforcement levers we have at our disposal to help achieve fairness and good consumer outcomes in the credit system. In mid-2023, we began seeing evidence of increasing levels of financial distress among consumers. Through our supervisory work we also saw signs that some large lenders did not appear to be meeting their obligations to customers in financial hardship. In August that year we wrote an open letter to lenders, communicating our expectations. We then commenced an extensive data collection exercise, collecting 900,000 hardship notices from 30 lenders, relating to half a million credit accounts across a two-year period. We also commenced a deeper review into 10 particular home lenders. We analysed data on how notices were handled, reviewed 80 case studies and conducted site visits involving over 170 staff. In the course of this work, we observed that lenders were not providing adequate information to their customers about hardship. Some failed to identify when a customer was giving a hardship notice – meaning that customers either didn’t receive timely assistance or didn’t receive assistance at all. We also observed that the process was confusing and frustrating. So much so, that around one in three applicants (35%) dropped out on at least one occasion after giving a hardship notice. We communicated these findings and our recommendations in a report released in May: ‘Hardship, hard to get help: Lenders fall short in financial hardship support’ (REP 783). We also provided individual written feedback to each lender in our review and asked them to prepare an action plan. We are following up to ensure those actions are taken – and are considering further regulatory action in relation to some issues we identified through the review. Coinciding with the publication of our report, ASIC’s Moneysmart website launched it’s ‘Just Ask’ campaign. The objective of this campaign was both to raise consumers' awareness about their rights in relation to hardship notifications – and to break down the emotional barriers preventing them from seeking assistance. We are continuing to collect hardship-related data until at least June 2025 – and will further engage with lenders where we identify indicators of poor customer outcomes.  An additional and important component of our work in relation to hardship is enforcement. In September 2023, ASIC commenced civil penalty proceedings in the Federal Court against Westpac, alleging it had failed to respond to customers’ hardship notices on multiple occasions within the time required by law. We took court action to underline our concerns as to the seriousness of this issue for the consumers affected, and to send a broader message to the industry about our likely approach in circumstances where the issues we had identified are not rectified. Enforcement On that note, I want to turn in more detail to the subject of enforcement – both as a means to redress specific cases of misconduct and also, as a stewardship tool, to signal a deterrence message to industry more broadly. ASIC publicly communicates its enforcement priorities each year. In fact, tomorrow at the ASIC Annual Forum I will be announcing our 2025 enforcement priorities. While I can’t divulge the details now, I can say that for as long as we continue to see consumer harms in the credit sector, this will remain a focus for us. We are particularly concerned with predatory lending practices and business models we consider are designed to circumvent consumer protections – and we have a number of court cases seeking to crack down on this type of behaviour. In one of these cases, which commenced a fortnight ago, we allege that a lender called Oak Capital engaged in systemic unconscionable conduct by using a lending model requiring a company to be the named borrower for loans the company did not benefit from, or have any genuine interest in. We alleged this structure was designed for the purpose of avoiding important consumer credit protections that would apply if the loans had been made to residential borrowers. Despite the purported business loan arrangements, the individuals seeking the loans provided their own homes as security – and, given their distressed financial circumstances, several of these individuals defaulted on their loans and Oak Capital repossessed their homes. As a result of the loans being treated as unregulated, we allege Oak Capital deprived its clients of important consumer protections, including the responsible lending obligations, the right to make a hardship application and protection from being charged excessive interest. In another recent case, ASIC was successful in proceedings against a company called Rent4Keeps for overcharging vulnerable consumers for essential household goods – with the Federal Court finding its business model breached the Credit Act. The court found the arrangements – which were styled as ‘consumer leases’ so they would fall outside of the credit protections – were in fact credit contracts, and that the interest rate cap and other requirements under the Credit Act had been breached. By breaching its obligations, hundreds of its customers were charged well above the amount that could lawfully be charged and did not receive other important consumer protections. What these two cases have in common, as do several others we are investigating, is a business model that we say has been designed to avoid consumer credit protections. We have also taken recent action in relation to unlicensed lending practices by car dealerships, and in relation to debt management firms. Finally, another significant recent enforcement outcome is the case we took against Harvey Norman and Latitude. Last month the Federal Court found that Harvey Norman Holdings Limited and Latitude Finance Australia had engaged in misleading conduct and made false or misleading representations in relation to a national advertising campaign promoting a 60-month interest-free and no deposit payment method. ASIC was concerned the advertisements masked the fact consumers were required to take out a credit card, such as the Latitude GO Mastercard, to purchase goods – and that many may have been unaware of the financial arrangements they were entering into. Namely, a continuing credit contract, requiring them to pay an establishment fee and/or monthly account service fees – and, in certain circumstances, other types of fees and interest. These matters are but a small subset of the work we are doing in relation to enforcement of the consumer credit protections. Unfortunately we find there is no end of demand for our attention. Promoting confidence in the credit system Finally, to address the second part of the question we are here today to discuss: how does all of this promote confidence in the credit system? To answer that, it’s worth considering what erodes confidence. When things go wrong, when consumers are harmed, when they find themselves in debt for products they’re being overcharged for – that erodes confidence at the individual level. But what erodes confidence in the system itself is when the sector in question falls short of community expectations – and we need not look too far into the past to see examples of this. As the lessons from recent history teach us, sustaining a culture of compliance is easier – and better for all – than the effort required to correct the course after the fact. To that end, ASIC continues to collaborate with our peer regulators, including AFSA, APRA and the ATO, to act within our respective remits to promote confidence and good outcomes in the credit system. Thank you and I look forward to continuing this conversation with my fellow panellists.

When trouble strikes, firms need to get a grip on their derivatives exposures quickly. That can mean having to scour hundreds of pages of paper or PDF documents to determine what options are available, a grueling process that can take time. But in volatile, fast-moving markets, delays cost money. There is a better way. A digital approach to documentation allows firms to zero in on critical clauses at the push of a button. And the latest upgrades to the ISDA MyLibrary digital documentation platform mean that process has become easier than ever before. MyLibrary is an online hub that houses core ISDA documentation in digital form, including the 2002 ISDA Master Agreement, the 2021 ISDA Interest Rate Derivatives Definitions and the 1998 FX and Currency Option Definitions. Launched in 2021, the platform now hosts over 135 derivatives documents and document versions, giving users the ability to access and navigate commonly used agreements in one place. As part of a series of recent improvements, the MyLibrary search function has been significantly enhanced, allowing users to rapidly identify all occurrences of specific terms across documents, meaning firms can find the critical provisions, rights and obligations associated with their trades even more quickly than before. Users can also now search by date, ensuring they can, within seconds, drill down to the prevailing primary and ancillary documents at the time a particular trade was executed and digitally bookmark key passages. Both these developments will improve efficiency and reduce risk at times when key contractual terms need to be identified swiftly. Just think about the alternative. A firm would need to pull together the original document or definitions and all the relevant supplements that prevailed at the time the trade was agreed, then trawl through what could be hundreds of pages to find the pertinent provisions. Bookmarking would basically involve a highlighter pen and sticky notes. That would take manpower and time at a point when every second counts. Combined with ISDA Create, a digital platform for the negotiation and execution of derivatives contracts that captures and stores the resulting legal data, firms can access the specific details of their negotiated trades within a few clicks of a mouse, giving them a complete picture of their exposures. Having reviewed its rights, a firm might opt to take the nuclear option of terminating a trade with a counterparty, but that process has become incredibly complicated in recent years – something that became clear when Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank failed last year. Specifically, new mandatory margining and collateral segregation requirements for non-cleared derivatives, plus the implementation of bank resolution regimes and the potential for temporary stays on termination, created acute complexities that banks would have been navigating for the first time, potentially slowing their response. As a remedy, we recently launched the ISDA Close-out Framework – essentially, an online decision tree that sets out the questions firms would need to ask, the steps they would need to take and the order in which they would need to take them when dealing with a termination. We’ll shortly be launching a series of ‘tabletop’ exercises, in which senior executives from different parts of a firm will work through a hypothetical termination scenario, using the Close-out Framework as a reference tool. As regulators increasingly focus on internal bank processes for managing the default of a counterparty, we hope this will be a useful preparatory resource to help firms plan for the worst. A critical part of the close-out process is the physical delivery and receipt of termination notices, but this has long been problematic if firms have moved offices without updating the address details in their documentation. A more recent issue emerged during the pandemic lockdowns, making it extremely difficult to deliver or receive notices. Our response is the ISDA Notices Hub – an online platform that will enable the instantaneous delivery and receipt of critical termination notices, eliminating risk exposures and potential losses that can result from delays in terminating derivatives contracts. We’re currently working on building the platform, which will launch next year on S&P Global Market Intelligence’s Counterparty Manager platform. This is all part of an effort to create a digital solution for managing terminations – from the review of documents to sending termination notices and navigating the close-out process. Together, these solutions will allow firms to cut errors and risk and redeploy resources, making derivatives markets safer and more efficient, even in the most turbulent of times. Visit the ISDA Solutions InfoHub to learn more.

The Board of IOSCO congratulates the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board (IAASB) on achieving an important milestone of finalizing their International Standard on Sustainability Assurance (ISSA) 5000, General Requirements for Sustainability Assurance Engagements and Proposed Conforming and Consequential Amendments to Other IAASB Standards. IOSCO notes the extensive and thorough outreach program conducted by the IAASB throughout the lifecycle of the development of ISSA 5000 and were pleased to have actively participated in many of their activities over this period. IOSCO reiterates its support for this work and commends the IAASB for its timely development of the Standard in response to the public need for assurance standards to cover all sustainability assurance providers. The final Standard is responsive to the key considerations and observations set out by IOSCO in its 2023 report and public statement. IOSCO believes the Standard can support high-quality assurance over sustainability-related information and may enhance consistency, comparability and reliability of sustainability-related information provided to the market. The final Standard, together with the IAASB’s plan to develop implementation support materials and other capacity-building efforts, can contribute to enhancing trust in the sustainability-related information provided to investors. Jean-Paul Servais, Chair of IOSCO, said: “When I began my mandate as IOSCO Board Chair, I emphasized the need for speed in developing a comprehensive international regulatory toolkit for sustainability-related disclosures and the assurance thereof. A strong assurance framework for sustainability-related reporting needs to be focused on the public interest and should be profession – and framework – agnostic. I commend the IAASB for delivering sustainability assurance standards well on time with a view to enable the assurance of 2024 corporate disclosure.” “IOSCO will continue to play a key role in promoting global consistency in the assurance of sustainability-related information”, he added.

Thank you for inviting me to speak here today.1 The Clearing House is a great place to talk about the evolution of clearing and settlement of payments in the United States. The key question I want to address today is, what roles should the private sector and the Federal Reserve play in payments? As a strong believer in the benefits of a capitalist system, I hold the view that it is generally the private sector that can most reliably and efficiently provide goods and services to the economy. And I apply this view to the payments ecosystem. It is that perspective that underlies a question I often ask when forming my positions on the appropriate role the Federal Reserve should play in a wide variety of initiatives: What is the fundamental market inefficiency that would be solved by government intervention and can only be solved by government intervention? If there isn't a satisfactory answer, then I believe government shouldn't intervene in private markets. Does this mean I believe the Federal Reserve should not be involved in payments? No. While I generally believe that government shouldn't directly compete with the private sector, there are situations where government involvement is needed to solve for market inefficiencies that may arise because of things like incomplete markets, coordination problems, or a lack of resilience. As a policymaker, I have applied that same question to issues ranging from bank regulation to monetary policy. For an example in the payments area, three years ago there was an increase in public discussion about creating a new payment instrument called a central bank digital currency (CBDC). The Federal Reserve Board was compiling a report and seeking public comment on the potential benefits and risks of the idea. In a speech I gave in August 2021, I asked, what problem would a CBDC solve? In other words, what market failure or inefficiency demands this specific intervention?2 In more than three years, I have yet to hear a satisfactory answer as applied to CBDC. Given today's audience and my position serving as the chair of the Board's payments committees, I want to focus on the important roles the private sector and the Federal Reserve play in our ever-evolving payment system. To set the stage for that discussion, I think it is helpful to recap some history around payments and clearing in the United States.3 In the early decades following the country's founding, banks generally had state charters. While state banknotes and checks circulated locally as payment instruments, there were difficulties clearing and settling checks across states. One way of describing this is to say that the early U.S. payment system suffered from incomplete markets. The Second Bank of the United States was created in 1816 and, due to its federal charter, it was able to create a national system for clearing checks and banknotes. This in turn led to a more complete national clearing and settlement process. When the charter for the Second Bank lapsed, clearing and settlement of banknotes and checks fell back to state-chartered banks. Many of the earlier inefficiencies resurfaced. For example, porters in New York City would deliver checks and exchange them for gold or other coins and then transport that "specie" to the payee. Hauling these money bags around New York posed obvious risks, and these risks multiplied by the mid-19th century when the number of banks in New York grew rapidly. As this audience is well aware, the New York Clearing House Association (NYCH) was founded in 1853 and served as a central location for the clearing process, which soon evolved, with certificates replacing coins. Furthermore, by being part of a common infrastructure, all members had a reasonably good idea of the quality of each other's balance sheets. In modern economic language, the NYCH became a coordination mechanism that improved clearing by getting banks to clear and settle payments in a well-organized manner. It also reduced asymmetric information about the quality of member balance sheets. By performing this function for New York banks, which constituted a relatively large share of the U.S. financial system, the clearing and settling of payments improved nationally. In this sense, the NYCH was the closest thing the United States had at that time to a central bank.4 While this was an improvement, not all important financial intermediaries were members of the NYCH or other such private arrangements. That is, there were gaps. And financial panics, sometimes driven by gaps and problems in check clearing, were a regular feature of the latter 19th and early 20th century. The Panic of 1907 was a classic example of that. Depositors and investors lost confidence in certain New York banks that had been combined into large, complex, and opaque trust companies that were not members of the NYCH. This resulted in runs on those trusts, which led to broader liquidity problems. Although the NYCH had the ability to provide liquidity to those trusts, the provision of that liquidity was delayed. It appears that at the time, the NYCH was, reasonably, observing some form of Bagehot's dictum when deciding whether to provide liquidity. Under that dictum, you want to know that the institution to which you're providing liquidity is solvent. If it isn't, then the liquidity extension could be akin to throwing good money after bad. But because the trust companies at the time weren't member institutions, the clearinghouse didn't have a good enough understanding of their balance sheets to know whether they were solvent.5 Some banks refused to clear checks from other institutions, which led to an erosion of depositor confidence and more failures. This historical example points to another aspect of a payment system that is important—resilience of the system. These problems highlighted by the 1907 panic—coordination failures and a lack of resilience—could have been mitigated with the help of a central bank. Paul Warburg, an influential banker at the time, argued that such a central bank could "establish and maintain a perfect system of credit, enabling the general banks to transform cash credits into actual cash with such absolute ease and certainty that the use of cash credit, instead of actual cash, will not cease, no matter what may happen."6 In 1913, Congress agreed and created the Federal Reserve. It positioned the Federal Reserve at the center of the banking system by establishing a nationwide check-clearing system and a telegraph wire transfer service that is now known as Fedwire®. The Fed was also intended to function as a lender of last resort so that suspension of payments would no longer be necessary. In the 1970s, the Fed promoted more efficient check-clearing by adding the automated clearinghouse service. Our job in providing these services and carrying out our responsibilities was and continues to be to make sure the payment system functions efficiently and resiliently, promoting the kind of confidence that is vital for a modern economy. The lesson from this history, as relevant now as ever, is that the payment system has been one of those areas in which the best efforts of the private sector have sometimes fallen short. The decentralized and diverse nature of banks in the United States is a feature that goes back to the 1800s and has the merits of promoting competition and a vibrant economy. However, when engaging in clearing and settling payments, coordination problems and information asymmetries across banks can be, and were, destabilizing. While the private sector made advances in resolving those issues, the Panic of 1907 showed that those steps were not sufficient. As successful as the NYCH was for its members, it could not protect its members and the economy from risks in the growing share of finance occurring outside its walls. This contributed to the motivation to establish the Federal Reserve and its role in payments. Fast forward to today, and we are once again in an era of rapid change and innovation in money and payments. Some of this will not pan out. Some of this change is about delivering services already available but doing so with new technologies. And some of it is leveraging new technology to rethink existing payment, clearing, and settlement structures. How will all of this come together? And what will be the respective roles of the private sector and the Federal Reserve? Let's break it down, keeping in mind my principle that the Federal Reserve should focus on addressing issues that the private sector cannot address alone and, in doing so, promote an efficient and resilient U.S. payment system. I'll start by discussing the important roles that the private sector now plays in the payment system and in the evolution of payments under way. The private sector connects consumers and businesses to the payment system, with financial institutions competing to provide services to their customers. Such competition can lead to better products and services for consumers as profit-seeking competitors look for opportunities to win over customers including through the adoption of new technologies. I have noted my concern that some see these new technologies as an opportunity for the public sector to play a bigger role in payments, which may crowd out private investment. I believe this would be a policy mistake and a better approach is one in which the private sector continues to have a significant footprint, with the role of government limited. One important reason for that is that the private sector, through competition, is typically best situated to sort out good ideas from bad ideas, rather than central banks or other public-sector institutions choosing winners and losers. At the early stages of innovation, the true value-added of the application of new technologies is murky. Market competition helps sort that out and typically leads to a wider range of products that can be better suited to the needs of consumers. But just as was the case in the time of Warburg, there remain problems in payments that can't be fully resolved by the private sector. And just as we have done throughout history, the Federal Reserve stands ready to support the evolution in payments and do so primarily through our operational role in the payment system, by providing core clearing and settlement infrastructure on which the private sector can innovate. Notably, the Fed has the unique ability to provide the infrastructure to reliably settle interbank obligations using balances at the central bank, which enhances the stability of the banking system and the broader economy, reflecting the lessons learned in 1907 and through earlier banking panics. Compared with many other countries where a small number of large banks dominate, the United States has thousands of banks and credit unions. Connecting those many organizations to a payment network requires a significant amount of coordination. One recent example of an area in which we're playing such a coordination role is in instant payments. The role we're playing with FedNow is to help with that coordination problem using our existing connections to those thousands of institutions. And that approach is consistent with my overall view of the appropriate role of government—to narrowly address problems like those of coordination that can't always be efficiently solved by the private sector alone. In doing so, we complement the private sector and promote responsible and efficient innovation in the broader market. With respect to new and emerging technologies in finance, I can think of two ways in which the private sector is uniquely positioned to develop and deploy them while the government is not well suited to do so. First is the question of innovation risk—the investment in new payment technologies is large and comes with risk of failure. Private-sector entities, risking their own funds and seeking to turn a profit, will have a greater incentive to accurately gauge demand for these technologies and bring those products to market faster. Second, despite the current fascination around the world with industrial policy, rarely can the government match the ability of the private sector to efficiently allocate resources and explore how well new technologies can address actual shortcomings in the current payment system. It is too early to tell whether some of the new technologies will relieve significant frictions in the payment system, but it is going to be the private sector, betting with its own money, that is best positioned to explore this question. If problems emerge, as they did with check clearing in the 19th century, then government can play a constructive role in overcoming them. Well before this point, however, it makes sense for the public and private sectors to look down the road together and engage in dialogue about potential issues and opportunities that might arise. For example, through the Bank for International Settlements, the Fed is engaged with the private sector to explore how tokenization technology might be used to facilitate cross-border payments in a faster and cheaper manner. This project brings together multiple central banks and private-sector financial firms in collaboration to potentially facilitate a better-functioning monetary system.7 That process of working together to promote the efficiency and safety of the payment system, as the Federal Reserve has done for decades, can lead to outcomes that benefit households, businesses, and the overall economy. American entrepreneurship and technical prowess have generated exciting innovations in payments, and they will continue to do so. The role of the Federal Reserve is to support that initiative and engage with the private sector to promote innovation while guarding against risks to financial stability. We've managed this balancing act before and will continue to do so. And, together, we will ensure that the payments ecosystem continues to move forward for the benefit of households and businesses. 1. The views expressed here are my own and are not necessarily those of my colleagues on the Federal Reserve Board.  2. See Christopher J. Waller (2021), "CBDC: A Solution in Search of a Problem?" speech delivered at the American Enterprise Institute, Washington (via webcast), August 5.  3. I am drawing on material in Stephen Quinn and William Roberds (2008), "The Evolution of the Check as a Means of Payment: A Historical Survey," Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, Economic Review, vol. 93 (4), pp. 1–28.  4. See Eugene Nelson White (2016), The Regulation and Reform of the American Banking System, 1900–1929 (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press). Return to text 5. See Jon R. Moen and Ellis W. Tallman (1999), "Why Didn't the United States Establish a Central Bank until after the Panic of 1907?" Working Paper Series 99-16 (Atlanta: Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, November)  6. See Paul M. Warburg (1911), "A United Reserve Bank of the United States," Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science in the City of New York, vol. 1 (January), pp. 302–42.  7. See Bank for International Settlements (2024), "Private Sector Partners Join Project Agorá," webpage, September 16.

The European Banking Authority (EBA) today launched a consultation on its draft Guidelines that will specify proportionate retail diversification methods to be eligible for the preferential risk weight under the standardised approach for credit risk. The Consultation paper follows the recommendations from the EBA Advisory Committee on Proportionality for 2024 in the credit risk area The consultation runs until 12 February 2025. In its draft Guidelines the EBA is setting out criteria to assess under which circumstances, retail exposures can be considered as diversified under the credit risk standardised approach for determining capital requirements in the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR). The requirement to have a diversified portfolio, (i.e. that a portfolio consists of a significant number of exposures with similar characteristics) ensures that the risks credit institutions will have to bear for such exposures are reduced. In addition, the requirement to be diversified is mandatory for retail exposures to be assigned the preferential retail risk weight under the Standardised Approach for credit risk. As a starting point, the EBA is considering the 0.2% granularity criterion set out in the Basel framework, according to which no individual exposure in the retail portfolio should exceed 0.2% of the retail portfolio. Under the EBA’s proposal, institutions with exposures above the 0.2% granularity criterion will, however, still be considered sufficiently diversified, as long as no more than 10% of their retail portfolio exceeds the 0.2% threshold. This adjustment ensures a proportionate and harmonised approach, which takes into account the significant number of smaller institutions in EU. In addition, the approach taken is simple, which allows the calculation to be done by all institutions and is thereby proportionate to the size of institutions and their retail portfolios.  Consultation process Comments to the consultation paper can be sent by clicking on the "send your comments" button on the EBA's consultation page. The deadline for the submission of comments is 12 February 2025. The EBA will hold a virtual public hearing on this consultation paper on Monday 16 December 2024, from 15:00 to 16:00 CET. The EBA invites interested stakeholders to register using this link by Thursday 12 December 2024 at 16:00 CET. The dial-in details will be communicated to those who have registered for the meeting. All contributions received will be published following the end of the consultation, unless requested otherwise. Legal basis and background The draft Guidelines have been developed according to Article 123(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR), as amended by Regulation (EU) 2024/1623.   Documents Consultation Paper on Guidelines on proportionate retail diversification methods (467.94 KB - PDF) Download Related content Consultation12 FEBRUARY 2025 Consultation on Guidelines on proportionate retail diversification methods GuidelinesUnder consultation Guidelines on proportionate retail diversification methods

François Villeroy de Galhau, Governor of the Bank of France, re-elected as Chair of the BIS Board of Directors for a second three-year term Tiff Macklem, Governor of the Bank of Canada, announced as incoming Chair of the Consultative Council for the Americas for a two-year term Both to take effect in January 2025 The Board of Directors of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) has re-elected François Villeroy de Galhau, Governor of the Bank of France, as its Chair and announced that Tiff Macklem, Governor of the Bank of Canada, will become Chair of the BIS Consultative Council for the Americas (CCA).   Mr Villeroy de Galhau will commence his second three-year term on 12 January 2025. Mr Macklem's appointment is for a term of two years starting 1 January 2025. The BIS Board of Directors is responsible for determining the strategic and policy direction of the BIS, supervising its Management and fulfilling the specific tasks given to it by the Bank's Statutes. The CCA was established in May 2008 as an advisory committee to the BIS Board. It comprises the Governors of the BIS member central banks in the Americas: Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Peru and the United States.  The BIS Representative Office for the Americas, located in Mexico City, provides the secretariat for the CCA. Mr Macklem succeeds Roberto Campos Neto, Governor of the Central Bank of Brazil, as CCA Chair. The BIS Board expressed its gratitude to Mr Campos Neto for his leadership in furthering important cooperative initiatives during his tenure in areas such as growth and productivity, the conduct of monetary policy and digital payments and innovation.

The European Banking Authority (EBA) today released the final methodology, draft templates, and template guidance for the 2025 EU-wide stress test, along with the milestone dates for the exercise. The methodology and templates cover all relevant risk areas and incorporate feedback received from the industry. The stress test exercise will formally start in January 2025, following the release of the macroeconomic scenarios, with the results scheduled for publication in early August 2025. The 2025 EU-wide stress test adopts a constrained bottom-up approach, incorporating some top-down elements. Balance sheets are assumed to remain constant, with the primary focus being the evaluation of the impact of adverse shocks on banks’ solvency. Participating banks will be required to estimate the progression of common risk factors (credit, market, counterparty, and operational risks) under a baseline and an adverse scenario. Additionally, banks must project how these scenarios will affect key income streams. For net fee and commission income, securitisation risk weights, and the credit loss trajectory of sovereign exposures, banks will use pre-defined parameters. In addition, the projections of net interest income will be centralised. The methodology also defines the sample of banks involved in the exercise. The draft stress test templates and guidance published today might need some minor technical adjustments before their final publication at the launch. Key Milestones for the 2025 EU-wide Stress Test: Launch of the exercise: second half of January 2025 First submission of results to the EBA: end of April 2025 Second submission to the EBA: early June 2025 Final submission to the EBA: early July 2025 Publication of results: beginning of August 2025 Compared to the previous stress test, the timeline has been adjusted to accommodate the feedback received from the industry and the entry into force of the revised Capital Requirements Regulation and Capital Requirements Directive (CRR3/CDR VI). Background The aim of the EU-wide stress test is to assess the resilience of EU banks to a common set of adverse economic developments, identifying potential risks, informing supervisory decisions, and increasing market discipline. The EBA conducts the stress test in a bottom-up fashion with some top-down elements, using consistent methodologies, scenarios, and key assumptions developed jointly with other authorities. The exercise is coordinated by the EBA in cooperation with the European Central Bank, the European Systemic Risk Board, and the Competent Authorities from all relevant national jurisdictions. To give banks sufficient time to prepare, the EBA published the methodology and templates well ahead of the formal launch, when the relevant macroeconomic scenarios will be released. Documents 2025 EU-wide stress test - Methodological Note (1.73 MB - PDF) Download 2025 EU-wide stress test - Template Guidance (1.25 MB - PDF) Download 2025 EU-wide stress test - Templates [xlsx] (19.24 MB - Excel Spreadsheet) Download Related content Page EU-wide stress testing

Survey of up to eighty large domestic banks and twenty-four U.S. branches and agencies of foreign banks. The Federal Reserve generally conducts the survey quarterly, timing it so that results are available for the January/February, April/May, August, and October/November meetings of the Federal Open Market Committee. The Federal Reserve occasionally conducts one or two additional surveys during the year. Questions cover changes in the standards and terms of the banks' lending and the state of business and household demand for loans. The survey often includes questions on one or two other topics of current interest. 2024 October* July April January 2023 October July April January 2022 October July April January 2021 October July April January 2020 October September July April January 2019 October July April January 2018 October July April January 2017 October July April January 2016 October July April January 2015 October July April January 2014 October July April January 2013 October July April January 2012 October July April January 2011 October July April January 2010 October July April January 2009 October July April January 2008 October July April January 2007 October July April January 2006 October July April January 2005 October July April January 2004 October July April January 2003 October August April January 2002 October August April January 2001 October August May March January 2000 November August May January   1999 November August May January   1998 November September August May January 1997 November August May January *Current Release

In recognition of Financial Literacy Month’s theme “Money on your Mind? Talk about it.”, the Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) urges Canadians to talk openly about financial plans and goals with family members and loved ones to help prevent financial abuse. According to the CSA's 2024 Investor Index, 36 per cent of Canadians are aware of at least one instance of senior financial abuse – a seven per cent increase from 2020. Among the most common types of abuse respondents were aware of, were fraudulent investment opportunities, pressure to sign a document that wasn’t understood, exploiting a power of attorney for financial gain, and cashing in investments without permission.Beyond financial loss, CSA research also shows that victims of financial fraud experience loss of trust and confidence, higher stress and feelings of anger and depression."Financial fraud and abuse can have devastating consequences that reach far beyond financial implications," said Stan Magidson, CSA Chair and Chair and CEO of the Alberta Securities Commission. "By having candid conversations about finances, families can break the taboo around discussing money and build important understanding, support and trust that can help safeguard their loved ones’ well-being." To help prevent the financial abuse of those you care for, the CSA encourages you to: Have open and honest conversations: Use open-ended questions to talk about financial goals, future wishes or possible issues or concerns. Keep an open mind and demonstrate patience, which can turn a potentially awkward conversation into a positive discussion that builds understanding and trust. Raise awareness of the red flags of investment fraud: Discuss common warning signs like unregistered individuals and investment firms, high-pressure sales tactics, promises of risk-free investments and unexpected offers (particularly those received via social media, dating or chat apps or text message). Tool to help: Sign up to receive investor alerts from the CSA to stay up to date about current threats. Stay alert to signs of trouble: Be on the lookout for signs that friends or family members could be experiencing financial abuse. Signs may include unusual financial withdrawals, unexplained debts or sudden changes in behaviour. If you’re concerned, the checklist below can help start the conversation. Tool to help: Financial Concern Checklist. Suggest naming a Trusted Contact Person (TCP): Encourage family members and loved ones to learn about and consider naming a TCP. A TCP acts as a point of contact with your financial advisor in case of concerns about your well-being or concerns about financial abuse. Tools to help: Is your advisor asking you for a Trusted Contact Person? and You’re my Trusted Contact Person form. For more information on talking with your loved ones about money, and combating senior financial abuse, please visit the CSA’s online resource about financial abuse. The CSA, the council of the securities regulators of Canada’s provinces and territories, coordinates and harmonizes regulation for the Canadian capital markets. For investor inquiries, please contact your local securities regulator.

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission today announced it is awarding nearly $4 million to two whistleblowers who provided information leading to the successful enforcement of a covered action.  Information from both whistleblowers formed the basis for the CFTC's investigations underlying the covered action. One whistleblower provided information earlier in time and the other reported that the violative practices had continued. The initial whistleblower was awarded a higher award amount based on the timeliness of the reporting, among other factors. “Timely reports to the CFTC are critical for enforcement,” said Director of Enforcement Ian McGinley. “They help prevent further harm to customers or market participants and hold wrongdoers accountable to the fullest extent possible.” The violations resolved in the covered action related to the integrity of the markets the CFTC oversees and of the investigations it conducts. Each whistleblower provided specific, credible, and timely assistance to the CFTC that led to the charges being successfully resolved. “We encourage all whistleblowers to come forward as soon as possible, since the timeliness can affect the award determination,” said Whistleblower Office Director Brian Young. “This is a perfect example of how the whistleblower rules allow for increased awards for timely initial reports and additional assistance while also providing a decreased award for those who unreasonably delay reporting.” Counsel to the Director William Durbin of the CFTC Whistleblower Office handled this award.  About the CFTC’s Whistleblower Program The Whistleblower Program was created under Section 748 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010. Since issuing its first award in 2014, the CFTC has granted approximately $390 million in whistleblower awards. Those awards are associated with enforcement actions resulting in over $3.2 billion in monetary sanctions. The CFTC issues awards related not only to the agency’s enforcement actions, but also in connection with related actions brought by other domestic or foreign regulators, if certain conditions are met. The Commodity Exchange Act provides confidentiality protections for whistleblowers. Regardless of whether the CFTC grants an award, the CFTC will not disclose any information that could reasonably be expected to reveal a whistleblower’s identity, except in limited circumstances. Consistent with this confidentiality protection, the CFTC will not disclose the name of the enforcement action in which the whistleblower provided information, or the exact dollar amount of the award granted. Whistleblowers may be eligible to receive between 10 - 30 percent of the monetary sanctions collected. All whistleblower awards are paid from the CFTC’s Customer Protection Fund, which was established by Congress, and is financed entirely through monetary sanctions paid to the CFTC by violators of the CEA. No money is taken or withheld from injured customers to fund the program. * * * * * Anyone with information related to potential violations of the CEA or the CFTC’s rules and regulations can submit a tip electronically by filing a Form TCR (tip, complaint or referral) online. Visit Whistleblower.gov for more information about CFTC’s Whistleblower program. RELATED LINKS WB Award 25-WB-01

The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU’s financial markets regulator and supervisor, has today published its latest edition of the Spotlight on Markets Newsletter. Your one-stop-shop in the world of EU financial markets focused in October on the European Supervisory Authorities’ (ESAs) rules to facilitate access to financial and sustainability information on the European Single Access Point or ESAP. Have a look at the details here and watch ESMA’s explainer video. In addition, ESMA with the National Competent Authorities launched an EU-wide campaign on Frauds and Scams.  ESAs also published the 2024 Joint Report on principal adverse impacts (PAI) disclosures under the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR). The Report assessed both entity and product-level PAI disclosures and showed that financial institutions have improved the accessibility of their PAI disclosures. ESMA put forward its first consolidated Report on Sanctions – In 2023, more than 970 administrative sanctions and measures were imposed across EU Member States and fines amounted to more than 71 million EUR.  We also provided details and insights into the functioning of the EU Emissions Trading System market in our 2024 EU Carbon Markets report (recording and presentation here) and published two Consultation Papers – one on draft technical advice under the Prospectus Regulation and one on amendments to MiFID research regime – and a Call for Evidence on Prospectus Liability. Last but not least, together with the European Central Bank and the European Commission, ESMA announced the next steps for the transition to T+1 governance. Other publications: Public Statement on accounting for carbon allowances in the financial statements | visuals; Report ‘​From black box to open book?’ | visuals; 2024 European Common Enforcement Priorities for corporate reporting | visuals; Manual on post-trade Transparency; Opinion on the assessment of pre-trade waivers considering MiFIR Review Transitional Provisions; and  Joint Committee 2025 Work Programme. The newsletter features a full overview of all publications, together with information on hearings and webinars. For updates, follow us on X and LinkedIn. Related Documents Download All FilesDownload Selected Files DateReferenceTitleDownloadSelect 12/11/2024 ESMA Newsletter Newsletter October 2024