OpenLobby.EU
Explore

CME Group

CME

As a leading and diverse derivatives and financial products marketplace, CME Group enables clients to trade in futures, cash and over-the-counter markets – empowering market participants worldwide to efficiently manage risk and capture opportunities.

Lobbying Activity

Meeting with Tatyana Panova (Head of Unit Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union)

24 Apr 2025 · Discussion on Benchmark Regulation

Meeting with Victor Negrescu (Member of the European Parliament)

10 Apr 2024 · Overview of media policies

Meeting with Irena Joveva (Member of the European Parliament)

10 Apr 2024 · Situation of media in Central Europe

Meeting with Katarína Roth Neveďalová (Member of the European Parliament)

10 Apr 2024 · Konkurenceschopnosť EÚ; tradičné média versus nové technológie a médiá

Meeting with Tomáš Zdechovský (Member of the European Parliament)

10 Oct 2023 · Meeting with representative of CME and media reporters

Meeting with Marc Tarabella (Member of the European Parliament)

22 Feb 2022 · GPSR

Response to EMIR Amendment

18 Jul 2017

CME Group welcomes the feedback request from the European Commission (the Commission) proposal for a regulation to amend the European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR) as part of the EMIR review under the Commission’s REFIT programme published on 4 May 2017 (the Final Report). Many of the Commission’s proposals in the Final Report reflect comments previously submitted by CME Group and other derivatives industry organisations as part of responses to the EMIR review; CME Group welcomes the continued willingness of the Commission to engage with market participants on these topics. However, there are a number of issues specifically in relation to the reporting obligation and the supervision of trade repositories that we believe are not fully addressed in the Final Report and which we kindly request the Commission should consider, as set out in the attached paper and summarised below: - CME Group believes that dual sided reporting should be replaced by single sided reporting for all CCP cleared derivative contracts, rather than only for ETDs. We recommend that this model would increase data quality whilst at the same time lowering operational burdens on derivative counterparties; - CME Group recommends that the Commission should clarify the application of the proposal for CCPs to report ETD trades to clarify the extent to which this applies to the Clearing Member to Client leg of a cleared transaction. We believe that sufficient information is contained within the Clearing Member to CCP leg to obviate the need for the Clearing Member to Client leg also to be reported. We recommend that the Commission should take this opportunity to streamline reporting by confirming that the Clearing Member to Client leg is not reportable; - The draft Regulation adds a new paragraph 3a to EMIR Article 81 requiring trade repositories to grant reporting counterparties and CCPs access to all data reported on their behalf in order to allow for the relevant verification of its accuracy. The extent to the obligation on trade repositories and the distinction between this requirement under this provision of the draft Regulation in the Final Report and EMIR Article 80(5) is not clear. On the basis of the limited scope of the obligation as drafted, it is not possible for trade repositories to understand fully the extent of the obligations that the Commission seeks to impose on trade repositories to provide this access and the potential impact on their business; - CME Group welcomes the proposals suggested by the Commission to alleviate certain burdensome requirements faced by non-financial counterparties (NFCs) under EMIR, for example, we support the retention of the “hedging exemption” which promotes risk management by NFCs. However, while we support the proposed changes to Article 9 of EMIR in relation to an exemption for reporting of intra-group transactions involving an NFC, we believe that the Commission should clarify the additional proposal in point (b) of Article 1(7) of the draft Regulation which states that for transactions between a financial counterparty and an NFC-, the financial counterparty is responsible, and legally liable for reporting on behalf of both counterparties to the transaction. It is not clear from this proposal whether the financial counterparty would be required to submit a single report or two reports (one on its own behalf and another on behalf of the NFC-). We believe that the reporting process could be streamlined by submission of a single report by the financial counterparty and recommend that the Commission adopt this model.
Read full response

Meeting with Shane Sutherland (Cabinet of Commissioner Phil Hogan)

27 Jan 2016 · Commodity Markets