How to report a bilateral contract (initially classified as a non-standard contract and also reported in a non-standard format) in cases of any price fixing events (e.g. the client exercises an option)? This especially concerns such events which could be interpreted as a standard contract in a stand-alone perspective. (Vanilla) options are considered as being standard contracts (Table 1) and reportable in Phase 1 if executed over an OMP or identical to a product admitted to trading over an OMP (although the REMIT reporting requirement would be met if the trade falls within the scope of EMIR and has been reported as such).
[UPDATED] based on additional input provided by the Agency’s stakeholders
Please see the example in Annex II to the TRUM. In Section 2 of the annex there are several examples on how to report bilaterally traded contracts and executions under those non-standard contracts.
If the price fixing event (e.g. the client exercises an option) is related to a non-standard contract reported with Table 2, then the event should be reported as execution with (Table 1) under the framework of a non-standard contact and not be interpreted as a standard contract. Please see Q. 3.1.28 whether the execution should be reported as EXECUTION or BILCONTRACT contract, also considering that examples reported in Annex II to the TRUM are non-exhaustive.
On the contrary, vanilla options that are considered as standard contracts should be reported with Table 1 and reportable in Phase 1 if traded over an organised market place and do not have reportable executions associated to them.
Last update: 10/07/2017
Subscribe to this Page’s RSS