(4)On 1 September 2013, the Commission received the technical advice of the European Markets Supervisory Authority (ESMA) on the legal, supervisory and enforcement arrangements in the USA 2 regarding, among others, the operational risk mitigation techniques applicable to OTC derivative contracts not cleared by a CCP. In its technical advice, ESMA found that the legally binding requirements on timely confirmation, portfolio reconciliation and portfolio compression in the USA were equivalent to the legally binding requirements applicable under Regulation (EU) No 648/2012. ESMA considered that at the moment of its assessment, however, the USA regime for dispute resolution was not equivalent with that of Article 11(1) of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012. ESMA also observed that the equivalence between regimes for bilateral margins could not be assessed at the time, as the technical standards specifying the rules on bilateral margins in the Union had not yet been developed.
Recital 4
- 2 ESMA/2013/BS/1157, Technical advice on third country regulatory equivalence under EMIR — US, Final report, European Securities and Markets Authority, 1 September 2013. ↩