Extraterritoriality of the Regulations and Interconnections of the Derivatives Market: Legal Implications for East and Southeast Asia
Roč.11,č.2(2017)
This article examines the legal implications of the interconnections of the global derivatives market, such as the exchange and over-the-counter (OTC) markets, in East and Southeast Asia. First, we introduce the interconnectedness of the global derivatives market. We then examine some legal implications of such interconnectedness from several angles, such as the extraterritoriality of relevant regulations (notably the reporting, clearing and trading mandates prescribed by the G20 and the new initial margin rule), standard product documentation, the effect of substituted compliance, the potential competition effect due to shifting OTC trades to exchange trading and the effect of consolidating exchanges and/or clearing services. We approach these issues from the perspective of Asian countries in relation to development in core markets, such as those in the US, the UK and Europe.
Derivative; Interconnection; Exchange; ISDA; Extraterritoriality; Territorial Extension; Financial Regulation
p. 323–350
Christopher Chen
Singapore Management University
[1] Bank of International Settlement. (2016) Triennial Central Bank Survey of Foreign Exchange and OTC Derivatives Markets in 2016. [online] Basel: BIS. Available from: http://www.bis.org/publ/rpfx16.htm [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[2] Bank of International Settlement. (2013) Triennial Central Bank Survey – Interest Rate Derivatives Market Turnover in 2013: Preliminary Global Results. Basel: BIS, Available from: http://www.bis.org/publ/rpfx13ir.pdf [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[3] Braithwaite, J.P. (2016). The Dilemma of Client Clearing in the OTC Derivatives Markets. European Business Organisation Law Review, 17, p. 355–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40804-016-0044-0
[4] Brunsden, J. and Stafford, P. (2016) EU and US Strike Derivatives Regulation Deal. Financial Times, 11 February. Available from: https://www.ft.com/content/b7f72eda- cfef-11e5-92a1-c5e23ef99c77 [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[5] Brummer, C. (2012). Soft Law and the Global Financial System: Rule Making in the 21st Century, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[6] Chamorro-Courtland, C. (2012). The Trillion Dollar Question: Can a Central Bank Bail Out a Central Counterparty Clearing House Which Is “Too Big to Fail”? Brooklyn Journal of Corporate, Financial & Commercial Law, 6, p. 433.
[7] Chen, C. (2011) Product Due Diligence and the Suitability of Minibonds: Taking the Benefit of Hindsight. Singapore Journal of Legal Studies, 2011, pp. 309–329.
[8] Chen, C. (2010). Trading Risk: the Contractual Nature of Derivative Instruments and Certain Regulatory Issues, VDM Verlag Dr. Müller.
[9] Chon G. (2014) Massad See End to US–EU Clearing Disputes. Financial Times, 31 July. Available from: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c0a04f92-18c3-11e4-a51a-00144feabdc0. html#axzz3PQyKFc50 [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[10] CME. (2017) CME Group Strategic Partnership with Singapore Exchange. [online] Chicago: CME. Available from: http://www.cmegroup.com/international/partnership- resources/sgx-re-sources.html [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[11] CME. (2017) Eurex/TAIFEX Link. [online] Chicago: CME. Available from: http://www.eurexchange.com/exchange-en/products/eurex-taifex-link [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[12] Cohen, S.S. (1995) Financial Services Regulation: a Mid-Decade Review: Colloquium: The Challenge of Derivatives. Fordham Law Review, 63, p. 1993.
[13] Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No. 285/2014 of 13 February 2012 supplementing Regulation (EU) No. 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to regulatory technical standards on direct, substantial and foreseeable effect of contracts within the Union and to prevent the evasion of rules and obligations. Office Journal of the European Union (L85/1) 12 March. Available from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do? uri=OJ:L:2014:085:0001:0003:EN:PDF [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[14] Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Pub. L. 111-203). United States of America. Washington: Government Publishing Office. In English.
[15] Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (c. 8). United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. London: HMSO. In English.
[16] Flanagan, S.M., 2001. The Rise of a Trade Association: Group Interactions within the International Swaps and Derivatives Association. Harvard Negotiation Law Review, 6, pp. 211–263.
[17] Financial Stability Board. (2016) Implementation and Effects of the G20 Financial Regulatory Reforms – Dashboard. Basel: FSB. Available from: http://www.fsb.org/wp- content/uploads/Report-on-implementation-and-effects-of-reforms-dashboard.pdf [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[18] Financial Stability Board. (2010) Implementing OTC Derivatives Market Reforms. Basel: FSB. Available from: http://www.fsb.org/2010/10/fsb-report-on-implementing-otc- derivatives- market-reforms/ [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[19] G 20. (2009) Leaders' Statement – the Pittsburgh Summit. [online] Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/archives/commission_2010-2014/president/pdf/statement_20090826_en_2.pdf [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[20] Gadinis, S., 2015. Three Pathways to Global Standards: Private, Regulator, and Ministry Network. American Journal of International Law, 109, pp. 1–57. https://doi.org/10.5305/amerjintelaw.109.1.0001
[21] Gao, S. & Chen, C., 2017. Financial Transnationalism and Financial Regulation Change: A Case Study for Derivatives Markets. European Business Organisation Law Review, 19, p. 193–223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40804-017-0064-4
[22] Greenberger, M., 2013. Diversifying Clearinghouse Ownership in Order to Safeguard Free and Open Access to the Derivatives Clearing Market. Fordham Journal of Corporate and Financial Law, 18, pp 245–268.
[23] Henderson, S.K. (2010) Henderson on Derivatives, 2nd Ed., LexisNexis.
[24] Investment ofInsurers, Notice 125. Republic of Singapore. Singapore: MAS. In English.
[25] Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission. (2016) Consultation Conclusions and Further Consultation on Introducing Mandatory Clearing and Expanding Mandatory Reporting. Hong Kong: SFC. Available from: https://www.sfc.hk/edistributionWeb/ gateway/EN/consultation/conclusion?refNo=15CP4 [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[26] Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission. (2013) Consultation Conclusions and Further Consultation on the Securities and Futures (OTC Derivative Transactions – Reporting and Record Keeping Obligations) Rules. Hong Kong: SFC. Available from: http://www.sfc.hk/edistributionWeb/gateway/EN/consultation/doc?refNo=14CP8 [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[27] Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission. (2011) Consultation Paper on the Proposed Regulatory Regime for the Over-the-Counter Derivatives Market in Hong Kong. Hong Kong: SFC. Available from: http://www.sfc.hk/edistributionWeb/gateway/EN/consultation/doc?refNo=11CP6 [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[28] Hudson, A.(2012) The Law on Financial Derivatives 5th Ed., London: Sweet & Maxwell.
[29] Interpretative Guidance and Policy Statement Regarding Compliance with Certain Swap Regulations, 78 FR 45292, 45316–45317. United States of America. Commodities Futures Trading Commission. Washington: CFTC. In English.
[30] Kress, J.C. (2011) Credit Default Swaps, Clearinghouses, and Systemic Risk: What Centralised Counterparties Must Have Access to Central Bank Liquidity? Harvard Journal on Legislation, 48, pp. 49–93.
[31] Monetary Authority of Singapore. (2012) Proposed Regulation of OTC Derivatives. P003–2012. Singapore: MAS. Available from: http://www.mas.gov.sg/News-and- Publications/Consultation-Paper/2012/Consultation-Paper-on-Proposed-Regulation-of- OTC-Derivatives.aspx [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[32] Monetary Authority of Singapore. (2014) ASIC and MAS sign World-First Memorandum of Understanding on Authorities’ Access to OTC Derivatives Trade Repository Data. [online] Singapore: MAS. Available from: http://www.mas.gov.sg/News-and-Publications/Media-Releases/2014/ASIC-and-MAS-sign-World-First-Memorandum-of- Understanding.aspx [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[33] Murphy H. (2017) Database Move Gives Blockchain its First Big Test Case. Financial Times, 9 January. Available from: https://www.ft.com/content/aeb63b96-d64b-11e6- 944b-e7eb37a6aa8e [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[34] Nichol, A. (2013) Hedging against the Next Financial Crisis: Proposals for Managing Systemic Risk in Centrally Cleared Derivatives Transactions. Banking and Finance Law Review, 29, pp. 169–184.
[35] OTC Derivatives Regulators Forum. (2017) Authorities Currently Involved in the OTC Derivatives Regulators’ Forum. Available from: http://www.otcdrf.org/about/members.htm [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[36] Rauterberg, G.V. & Verstein, A. (2013) Assessing Transnational Private Regulation of the OTC Derivatives Market: ISDA, the BBA, and the Future of Financial Reform. Virginia Journal of International Law, 54, pp. 9–50.
[37] Regulation (EU) No. 600/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on markets in financial instruments and amending Regulation (EU) No. 648/2014. Official Journal of the European Union (L 173/84) 12 June. Available from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32014R0600 [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[38] Regulation (EU) No. 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on OTC Derivatives, Central Counterparties and Trade Repositories. Official Journal of the European Union (OJ. L. 201) 27 July. Available from: http://eur- lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A32012R0648 [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[39] Roe, M.J. (2013) Clearinghouse Overconfidence. California Law Review, 101, pp. 1641–1703.
[40] Scott, J. (2014) Extraterritoriality and Territorial Extension of EU Law. The American Journal of Comparative Law, 62, p. 87. https://doi.org/10.5131/AJCL.2013.0009
[41] Securities and Futures Act. Republic of Singapore. Singapore. In English.
[42] Securities and Futures (OTC Derivative Transactions — Clearing and Record Keeping Obligations and Designation of Central Counterparties) Rules (Cap 571AN). Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China. Hong Kong: SFC. In English.
[43] Securities and Futures (OTC Derivative Transactions — Reporting and Record Keeping Obligations) Rules (Cap 571AL), rule 4(1). Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China. Hong Kong: SFC. In English.
[44] Securities and Futures (Reporting of Derivatives Contracts) Regulations 2013 (No. S 668), regulation 2(1). Republic of Singapore. Singapore: MAS. In English.
[45] Shaffer, G. & Pollack, M.A. (2010) Hard vs. Soft Law: Alternatives, Complements, and Antagonists in International Governance. Minnesota Law Review, 94, pp. 706–799.
[46] Stafford P. (2016) US Eyes Prize in Brexit Battle Over Derivatives. Financial Times, 20 October. Available from: https://www.ft.com/content/8ae3e610-908b-11e6-a72e- b428cb934 b78 [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[47] Stafford P. (2014) Quick View: Clearing up Differences. Financial Times, 16 June. Available from: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/3ccba18a-f52d-11e3-91a8-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3PQyKFc50 [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[48] Verdier, P.-H. (2013) The Political Economy of International Financial Regulation. Indiana Law Journal, 88, pp. 1405–1474.
[49] Wendt, F. (2015) Central Counterparties: Addressing Their Too Important to Fail Nature. [online] IMF. Available from: https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2015/wp1521.pdf [Accessed 6 September 2017].
[50] Yadav, Y. (2013) The Problematic Case of Clearinghouses in Complex Markets. Georgetown Law Journal, 101, pp. 387–444.
[51] Financial Times. (2008) Clearing the Way. 17 April. Available from: https://next.ft.com/content/135b1744-0be2-11dd-9840-0000779fd2ac [Accessed 6 September 2017].
Copyright © 2017 Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology