34 posts categorized "Investment Management"
PS 14/09 “Review of the Client Assets Regime for Investment Business” (the ‘PS’), the FCA’s response to CP 13/5 (the ‘CP’), was published on 10 June and amends large elements of the client money and custody asset (CASS) rules. It excludes most elements of the CP relating to the return of client assets following a ‘pooling event’ which are expected to be the subject of further consultation following the current review of the Special Administration Regime.
We have recently launched the summer instalment of the Deloitte Real Estate London Office Crane Survey. This is our flagship report (released bi-annually) which has been monitoring office construction activity in Central London for almost twenty years. The level of construction is widely used as a measure of economic activity - counting the number of cranes / construction sites across Central London is a relatively easy and accurate way to benchmark London’s economic health.
The revised Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID II) and new Regulation (MiFIR) were published yesterday in the Official Journal and will enter into force on 2 July. This is an important milestone as it officially starts the countdown to the 2017 go-live date, establishing the various deadlines that firms, member states, national competent authorities (NCAs) and the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) will need to meet.
In this article, Deloitte’s Gavin Bullock looks at the implications for investment managers of the Government’s consultation on the structure of Local Government Pension Schemes.
On 1 May the Government released a consultation in respect of the structure of Local Government Pension Schemes (LGPS) and opportunities to reduce administration and investment management costs. The proposals set out a number of recommendations, which could have a major impact on the asset management industry given the £178bn of assets currently under management by the LGPS. At this stage, the consultation envisages annual savings of £660m.
Earlier this week, the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) published the much anticipated consultation paper and draft regulatory technical standards (RTS) setting out of risk-mitigation techniques for OTC derivative contracts not cleared by a CCP under Article 11 of the European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR).
Deloitte’s Centre for Financial Services recently published its 2014 outlook for mutual funds. Mutual funds are developing new products. They do this all the time. What’s striking about the latest round of product innovation is just how different these new offerings are from traditional funds.
In the UK, fund managers will develop new offerings to capture the investment that would have previously flowed into annuities. The Chancellor’s decision to end compulsory annuity purchases from April 2015 provides a significant opportunity for fund managers to offer alternative solutions.
30 April 2014: this is the deadline that the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has set for firms to demonstrate compliance with the Risk Mitigation Techniques requirements for non-centrally cleared derivatives set out in the European Markets Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR). This leaves firms just over two weeks not only to ensure that they have processes and controls in place to comply fully, but also that those processes and controls are documented to a standard that will satisfy the regulator. Many firms may be failing to meet one or even both of those targets.
Firms currently in the midst of implementing the European Market Infrastructure Regulation
(EMIR) will be left with little doubt that the cost of doing business in over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives is set to increase. But to date there has been little clarity as to the size of the increase in costs and how they will differ for a cleared trade versus a non-cleared trade. In our paper ‘OTC Derivatives – The new cost of trading’, we explore how much more expensive cleared and non-cleared OTC derivative transactions will become as a result of the EU OTC derivative reform package; how the structure of OTC derivative markets is set to change; and what strategic challenges arise for firms.
It is now several years since the scope of Mobile Device Management (MDM) expanded to become EMM and Bring Your Own Computer (BYOC) morphed into Bring Your Own Device (BYOD). As mobile management technologies enable even wider and better risk management, the consumerisation of IT is pulling the organisational risk profile in the opposite direction. So should organisations approach mobile technology choices with risk and controls as the priority, or should the personal preference of the employees drive the overall approach to risk when buying mobile phones?
There is no right or wrong answer. Clearly mobile device choice can be emotive and personal and it depends on what is most important on a case by case basis. However, blindly pandering to the ‘wants’ of employees removes very valuable protections that would traditionally be seen as ‘needs’ in any IT security context outside of mobile.
Is your business FCA regulated? Do you have responsibility for overall risk management and compliance? Perhaps you have a team of voice traders and wealth managers. If that describes you as a business manager, then chances are that you should be very concerned. However, if you work in Compliance, Risk or Internal Audit, those business concerns could be a source of easy, high impact wins for 2014.
Compliance might do well to look closely at that IT team usually called ‘Voice Infrastructure’. Have you ever wondered what they actually do? It is often a bit of a mystery. So then how transparent do you think Voice Infrastructure teams really are on the day-to-day management of high impact IT compliance risks? I am referring to the sort of risk issues and supporting evidence that become highly visible in scandals such as Libor.