Connect with us
MARE BALTICUM Gaming & TECH Summit 2024

Fintech

SEC Issues Notice of Substituted Compliance Application and Proposed Substituted Compliance Order for United Kingdom and Re-Opens Comment Period for Notice and Proposed Substituted Compliance Order for France

Published

on

Washington, D.C.–(Newsfile Corp. – April 5, 2021) – The Securities and Exchange Commission voted to take two actions to continue to advance implementation of security-based swap regulation under Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.  The Commission is publishing a notice of application and proposed substituted compliance order in response to an application from the United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).  In addition, the Commission is re-opening the comment period on the notice of application and proposed substituted compliance order in relation to the application by France’s Autorité des Marchés Financiers (AMF) and Autorité de Contrôle Prudentiel et de Résolution (ACPR).

“These actions reflect the Commission’s continued commitment to stand up the Dodd-Frank Title VII regime, prepare for the registration of security-based swap dealers later this year, and continue engaging with our foreign counterparts,” said SEC Acting Chair Allison Herren Lee.  “I thank our UK, French and EU colleagues for their commitment in advancing strong cross-border regulatory cooperation.”

The FCA application seeks substituted compliance for UK-regulated firms based on compliance with UK requirements.  The proposed substituted compliance order for the UK provides that certain UK-regulated firms that are also registered with the Commission as security-based swap dealers and major security-based swap participants conditionally may satisfy certain requirements under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by complying with comparable UK requirements.  The Commission would retain the authority to inspect, examine and supervise these firms and take enforcement action as appropriate. 

The Commission also is re-opening the comment period on the French notice of application and proposed substituted compliance order.  The re-opened comment period will give market participants and the public an opportunity to consider potential changes to the proposed order and additional questions related to the proposed order.  

These actions reflect the Commission’s consideration of the comparability of applicable non-U.S. requirements, and incorporate conditions intended to help promote comparability in practice.

The public comment periods for the UK and French applications will remain open for 25 days following publication of the actions in the Federal Register.  Additional information about substituted compliance applications is available at: https://www.sec.gov/page/exchange-act-substituted-compliance-and-listed-jurisdiction-applications-security-based-swap.

*   *   *

FACT SHEET

UK and France Substituted Compliance Applications and Proposed Commission Orders

Apr. 5, 2021

Action

The Commission is taking two actions to continue to advance the availability of substituted compliance for certain non-U.S. security-based swap dealers and major security-based swap participants, in anticipation of those firms’ registration with the Commission beginning October 6, 2021.

The Commission is publishing notice of an application by the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), requesting substituted compliance for UK-regulated security-based swap dealers and major security-based swap participants.  The Commission also is publishing a proposed order to conditionally provide substituted compliance to UK-regulated firms. 

The Commission is also re-opening the comment period on the notice of substituted compliance application by France’s Autorité des Marchés Financiers (AMF) and Autorité de Contrôle Prudentiel et de Résolution (ACPR) and the related proposed substituted compliance order.

Substituted Compliance Framework

Exchange Act rule 3a71-6 conditionally provides that non-U.S. security-based swap dealers and major security-based swap participants may satisfy certain requirements under section 15F of the Exchange Act by complying with foreign requirements that the Commission has found to be comparable.  The Commission’s comparability assessment must consider the scope and objectives of the foreign requirements and also the effectiveness of the foreign financial supervisory and enforcement frameworks.   

Rule 3a71-6 further conditions substituted compliance on the Commission and the foreign financial regulatory authority entering into a supervisory and enforcement memorandum of understanding and/or other arrangement addressing supervisory and enforcement cooperation and other matters related to substituted compliance.  

Substituted compliance does not constitute exemptive relief, but instead provides an alternative method by which non-U.S. dealers and major participants may comply with applicable U.S. requirements.  The Commission retains the authority to inspect, examine and supervise those firms and take enforcement action as appropriate.

The registration compliance date for security-based swap dealers and major security-based swap participants is October 6, 2021, and market participants will begin counting security-based swap transactions and positions toward the registration thresholds on August 6, 2021.  See “Key Dates for Registration of Security-Based Swap Dealers and Major Security-Based Swap Participants,” available at: https://www.sec.gov/page/key-dates-registration-security-based-swap-dealers-and-major-security-based-swap-participants.

The FCA’s Application

The FCA requests that the Commission grant substituted compliance in connection with requirements under the Exchange Act regarding: 

  • Risk control – requirements related to capital, margin, risk management systems, trade acknowledgment and verification, portfolio reconciliation and dispute reporting, portfolio compression and trading relationship documentation.
  • Recordkeeping and reporting – requirements related to record creation, record maintenance, reporting, notices and quarterly securities counts.
  • Internal supervision and compliance – requirements related to supervision, conflicts of interest and chief compliance officers, and certain related matters.
  • Counterparty protection – requirements related to fair and balanced communications, disclosure of material risks and characteristics, disclosure of material incentives or conflicts of interest, daily mark disclosure, “know your counterparty,” suitability of recommendations and clearing rights disclosure.

In support, the FCA’s application includes analyses that compare UK requirements with relevant requirements under the Exchange Act.  The application also includes information regarding the financial supervisory and enforcement frameworks in the UK.

The FCA’s application is available on the SEC website.
 

Proposed Substituted Compliance Order for UK Firms

The Commission is publishing for comment a proposed substituted compliance order in connection with the FCA’s application.  The proposed order reflects the Commission’s preliminary assessments regarding the comparability of applicable UK requirements, and the effectiveness of the UK financial supervisory and enforcement frameworks.  The proposed order incorporates certain conditions or other limits including:

  • Trading Relationship Documentation – Firms would not receive substituted compliance in connection with certain disclosure-related provisions for transactions with U.S. counterparties, but would receive it for transactions with non-U.S. counterparties.
  • Portfolio Reconciliation and Dispute Reporting – Firms would have to report counterparty valuation disputes directly to the Commission, based on UK timing requirements.
  • Capital – Firms would need to: (a) maintain an amount of assets that are allowable under Exchange Act rule 18a-1, after applying applicable haircuts under the Basel capital standard, that equals or exceeds the firm’s current liabilities coming due in the next 365 days; (b) make a quarterly record listing: (i) the assets maintained under the condition described in (a) above, their value, and the amount of their applicable haircuts; and (ii) the aggregate amount of the liabilities coming due in the next 365 days; (c) maintain at least $100 million of equity capital composed of highly liquid assets, as defined in the Basel capital standard; and (d) include its most recent statement of financial condition (i.e., balance sheet) filed with its local supervisor, whether audited or unaudited, with its written notice to the Commission of its intent to rely on substituted compliance.
  • Internal Supervision – Firms’ internal supervision frameworks must also promote compliance with certain residual U.S. requirements and the conditions to the proposed order.
  • Compliance Reports – Firms must provide compliance reports directly to the Commission.
  • Suitability – The firm’s counterparty must be treated as a “per se professional client” under UK requirements and must not be a “special entity” as defined in Exchange Act section 15F(h)(2)(C) and Exchange Act rule 15Fh-2(d).
  • Daily Mark Disclosure – The firm must be required to reconcile, and in fact reconcile, the portfolio containing the relevant security-based swap on each business day.
  • Recordmaking – Firms would need to: (a) apply substituted compliance to a linked substantive Exchange Act requirement, when a recordmaking requirement is linked to that substantive Exchange Act requirement for which a positive substituted compliance determination is being made; (b) apply substituted compliance to Exchange Act rule 18a-1 with respect to certain records that are important for the Commission to examine for compliance with Exchange Act rule 18a-1; and (c) preserve the data elements to create certain records required by the Commission’s rule and furnish the record in the format (e.g., blotter or ledger) required by that rule.
  • Record Preservation – Firms would need to: (a) apply substituted compliance to a linked substantive Exchange Act requirement, when a record preservation requirement is linked to that substantive Exchange Act requirement for which a positive substituted compliance determination is being made; and (b) apply substituted compliance to Exchange Act rule 18a-1 with respect to certain records that are important for the Commission to examine for compliance with Exchange Act rule 18a-1.
  • Unaudited Financial and Operational Reporting – Firms would need to: (a) report periodic unaudited financial and operational information in the manner and format specified by Commission order or rule; (b) present the financial information in the filing in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles that the firm uses to prepare general purpose publicly available or available to be issued financial statements in the UK; and (c) apply substituted compliance to Exchange Act rule 18a-1 if subject to that rule.
  • Annual Audited Reports – Firms would need to: (a) simultaneously transmit to the Commission a copy of audited financial reports filed with UK authorities; (b) include with the filing contact information of a person who can provide further information about the reports; (c) file accountant’s reports covering the financial reports if the firm is not required by UK law to have its financial reports audited; (d) file compliance or exemption reports addressing statements related to Exchange Act rule 18a-4 for which substituted compliance is not available; (e) file supporting schedules related to Exchange Act rule 18a-4; and (f) apply substituted compliance to Exchange Act rule 18a-1.  Firms that change their fiscal year end would need to (a) simultaneously transmit to the Commission a copy of any notice required to be sent by comparable UK laws; and (b) include contact information of a person who can provide further details about the notice.
  • Notification – Firms would need to: (a) simultaneously transmit to the Commission a copy of any notice required to be sent by comparable UK laws; (b) include contact information of a person who can provide further details about the notice; (c) apply substituted compliance to Exchange Act rule 18a-1 (if subject to that rule) with respect to any required notifications related to that rule; and (d) apply substituted compliance with respect to a category of records required to made and kept current under Exchange Act rule 18a-5 with respect to the requirement to provide notification of a failure to make and keep current that category of records.
  • Access to Books and Records – Firms would remain subject to Exchange Act requirements to keep books and records open to inspection by the Commission and to furnish promptly to the Commission legible, true, complete, and current copies of those records of the firm that are required to be preserved.
  • English Translations – Firms would need to promptly provide an English translation of any record, report, or notification upon request.

The Commission is requesting comment on each of the proposed determinations and conditions.
 

Re-Opening of Comment Period on Substituted Compliance Notice and Proposed Order for France

The French substituted compliance application addresses the same Exchange Act requirements that are the subject of the UK notice and proposed substituted compliance order.  The application includes analyses that compare French and European Union requirements with relevant requirements under the Exchange Act, as well as information regarding the financial supervisory and enforcement frameworks in France.  The application is available on the SEC website.

The Commission is re-opening the comment period on the notice of the French application and the related proposed substituted compliance order.  The re-opened comment period will give market participants and the public an opportunity to consider potential changes to the proposed order and additional questions related to the proposed order.  The proposed conditions relate to capital, trade acknowledgement and verification, and trading relationship documentation and mirror those included in the UK proposed substituted compliance order.  The additional questions, in part, seek comment on whether the more granular approach to recordmaking, record preservation, and reporting taken in the proposed UK proposed substituted compliance order should be incorporated into the French final substituted compliance order.  Other questions are intended to promote consistency across the two proposed orders given the similarity of the regimes.
 

Next Steps

The Commission will seek public comment on these actions for 25 days following publication in the Federal Register. 

Security-based swap market participants are urged to be mindful of the October 2021 registration compliance date for security-based swap dealers and major security-based swap participants, and relevant firms should take action to prepare for registration.  For further information, firms may contact the Office of Derivatives Policy in the Commission’s Division of Trading and Markets, at 202-551-5870.

Fintech

How to identify authenticity in crypto influencer channels

Published

on

 

Modern brands stake on influencer marketing, with 76% of users making a purchase after seeing a product on social media.The cryptocurrency industry is no exception to this trend. However, promoting crypto products through influencer marketing can be particularly challenging. Crypto influencers pose a significant risk to a brand’s reputation and ROI due to rampant scams. Approximately 80% of channels provide fake statistics, including followers counts and engagement metrics. Additionally, this niche is characterized by high CPMs, which can increase the risk of financial loss for brands.

In this article Nadia Bubennnikova, Head of agency Famesters, will explore the most important things to look for in crypto channels to find the perfect match for influencer marketing collaborations.

 

  1. Comments 

There are several levels related to this point.

 

LEVEL 1

Analyze approximately 10 of the channel’s latest videos, looking through the comments to ensure they are not purchased from dubious sources. For example, such comments as “Yes sir, great video!”; “Thanks!”; “Love you man!”; “Quality content”, and others most certainly are bot-generated and should be avoided.

Just to compare: 

LEVEL 2

Don’t rush to conclude that you’ve discovered the perfect crypto channel just because you’ve come across some logical comments that align with the video’s topic. This may seem controversial, but it’s important to dive deeper. When you encounter a channel with logical comments, ensure that they are unique and not duplicated under the description box. Some creators are smarter than just buying comments from the first link that Google shows you when you search “buy YouTube comments”. They generate topics, provide multiple examples, or upload lists of examples, all produced by AI. You can either manually review the comments or use a script to parse all the YouTube comments into an Excel file. Then, add a formula to highlight any duplicates.

LEVEL 3

It is also a must to check the names of the profiles that leave the comments: most of the bot-generated comments are easy to track: they will all have the usernames made of random symbols and numbers, random first and last name combinations, “Habibi”, etc. No profile pictures on all comments is also a red flag.

 

LEVEL 4

Another important factor to consider when assessing comment authenticity is the posting date. If all the comments were posted on the same day, it’s likely that the traffic was purchased.

 

2. Average views number per video

This is indeed one of the key metrics to consider when selecting an influencer for collaboration, regardless of the product type. What specific factors should we focus on?

First & foremost: the views dynamics on the channel. The most desirable type of YouTube channel in terms of views is one that maintains stable viewership across all of its videos. This stability serves as proof of an active and loyal audience genuinely interested in the creator’s content, unlike channels where views vary significantly from one video to another.

Many unauthentic crypto channels not only buy YouTube comments but also invest in increasing video views to create the impression of stability. So, what exactly should we look at in terms of views? Firstly, calculate the average number of views based on the ten latest videos. Then, compare this figure to the views of the most recent videos posted within the past week. If you notice that these new videos have nearly the same number of views as those posted a month or two ago, it’s a clear red flag. Typically, a YouTube channel experiences lower views on new videos, with the number increasing organically each day as the audience engages with the content. If you see a video posted just three days ago already garnering 30k views, matching the total views of older videos, it’s a sign of fraudulent traffic purchased to create the illusion of view stability.

 

3. Influencer’s channel statistics

The primary statistics of interest are region and demographic split, and sometimes the device types of the viewers.

LEVEL 1

When reviewing the shared statistics, the first step is to request a video screencast instead of a simple screenshot. This is because it takes more time to organically edit a video than a screenshot, making it harder to manipulate the statistics. If the creator refuses, step two (if only screenshots are provided) is to download them and check the file’s properties on your computer. Look for details such as whether it was created with Adobe Photoshop or the color profile, typically Adobe RGB, to determine if the screenshot has been edited.

LEVEL 2

After confirming the authenticity of the stats screenshot, it’s crucial to analyze the data. For instance, if you’re examining a channel conducted in Spanish with all videos filmed in the same language, it would raise concerns to find a significant audience from countries like India or Turkey. This discrepancy, where the audience doesn’t align with regions known for speaking the language, is a red flag.

If we’re considering an English-language crypto channel, it typically suggests an international audience, as English’s global use for quality educational content on niche topics like crypto. However, certain considerations apply. For instance, if an English-speaking channel shows a significant percentage of Polish viewers (15% to 30%) without any mention of the Polish language, it could indicate fake followers and views. However, if the channel’s creator is Polish, occasionally posts videos in Polish alongside English, and receives Polish comments, it’s important not to rush to conclusions.

Example of statistics

 

Wrapping up

These are the main factors to consider when selecting an influencer to promote your crypto product. Once you’ve launched the campaign, there are also some markers to show which creators did bring the authentic traffic and which used some tools to create the illusion of an active and engaged audience. While this may seem obvious, it’s still worth mentioning. After the video is posted, allow 5-7 days for it to accumulate a basic number of views, then check performance metrics such as views, clicks, click-through rate (CTR), signups, and conversion rate (CR) from clicks to signups.

If you overlooked some red flags when selecting crypto channels for your launch, you might find the following outcomes: channels with high views numbers and high CTRs, demonstrating the real interest of the audience, yet with remarkably low conversion rates. In the worst-case scenario, you might witness thousands of clicks resulting in zero to just a few signups. While this might suggest technical issues in other industries, in crypto campaigns it indicates that the creator engaged in the campaign not only bought fake views and comments but also link clicks. And this happens more often than you may realize.

Summing up, choosing the right crypto creator to promote your product is indeed a tricky job that requires a lot of resources to be put into the search process. 

Author Nadia Bubennikova, Head of agency  at Famesters

Author

Nadia Bubennikova, Head of agency at Famesters

Continue Reading

Fintech

Central banks and the FinTech sector unite to change global payments space

Published

on

central-banks-and-the-fintech-sector-unite-to-change-global-payments-space

 

The BIS, along with seven leading central banks and a cohort of private financial firms, has embarked on an ambitious venture known as Project Agorá.

Named after the Greek word for “marketplace,” this initiative stands at the forefront of exploring the potential of tokenisation to significantly enhance the operational efficiency of the monetary system worldwide.

Central to this pioneering project are the Bank of France (on behalf of the Eurosystem), the Bank of Japan, the Bank of Korea, the Bank of Mexico, the Swiss National Bank, the Bank of England, and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. These institutions have joined forces under the banner of Project Agorá, in partnership with an extensive assembly of private financial entities convened by the Institute of International Finance (IIF).

At the heart of Project Agorá is the pursuit of integrating tokenised commercial bank deposits with tokenised wholesale central bank money within a unified, public-private programmable financial platform. By harnessing the advanced capabilities of smart contracts and programmability, the project aspires to unlock new transactional possibilities that were previously infeasible or impractical, thereby fostering novel opportunities that could benefit businesses and consumers alike.

The collaborative effort seeks to address and surmount a variety of structural inefficiencies that currently plague cross-border payments. These challenges include disparate legal, regulatory, and technical standards; varying operating hours and time zones; and the heightened complexity associated with conducting financial integrity checks (such as anti-money laundering and customer verification procedures), which are often redundantly executed across multiple stages of a single transaction due to the involvement of several intermediaries.

As a beacon of experimental and exploratory projects, the BIS Innovation Hub is committed to delivering public goods to the global central banking community through initiatives like Project Agorá. In line with this mission, the BIS will soon issue a call for expressions of interest from private financial institutions eager to contribute to this ground-breaking project. The IIF will facilitate the involvement of private sector participants, extending an invitation to regulated financial institutions representing each of the seven aforementioned currencies to partake in this transformative endeavour.

Source: fintech.globa

The post Central banks and the FinTech sector unite to change global payments space appeared first on HIPTHER Alerts.

Continue Reading

Fintech

TD Bank inks multi-year strategic partnership with Google Cloud

Published

on

td-bank-inks-multi-year-strategic-partnership-with-google-cloud

 

TD Bank has inked a multi-year deal with Google Cloud as it looks to streamline the development and deployment of new products and services.

The deal will see the Canadian banking group integrate the vendor’s cloud services into a wider portion of its technology solutions portfolio, a move which TD expects will enable it “to respond quickly to changing customer expectations by rolling out new features, updates, or entirely new financial products at an accelerated pace”.

This marks an expansion of the already established relationship between TD Bank and Google Cloud after the group previously adopted the vendor’s Google Kubernetes Engine (GKE) for TD Securities Automated Trading (TDSAT), the Chicago-based subsidiary of its investment banking unit, TD Securities.

TDSAT uses GKE for process automation and quantitative modelling across fixed income markets, resulting in the development of a “data-driven research platform” capable of processing large research workloads in trading.

Dan Bosman, SVP and CIO of TD Securities, claims the infrastructure has so far supported TDSAT with “compute-intensive quantitative analysis” while expanding the subsidiary’s “trading volumes and portfolio size”.

TD’s new partnership with Google Cloud will see the group attempt to replicate the same level of success across its entire portfolio.

Source: fintechfutures.com

The post TD Bank inks multi-year strategic partnership with Google Cloud appeared first on HIPTHER Alerts.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Latest news

Trending