ASIC launches small business strategy, helping to educate and protect small businesses
All Firms
ASIC launches new digital resources for small business directors
All Firms
Written reply to Parliamentary Question on centralised digital service
BankPayment Provider
No description available.
Asset ManagerBankWealth Manager
The Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (Bafin) warns consumers about the services offered on the website lotus-handeln(.)com. According to information available to Bafin, the operators are offering cryptoasset services on the website without the required authorisation. The operators of the website are not supervised by Bafin.
Crypto ExchangeFintech
No description available.
All Firms
The German Financial Supervisory Authority (Bafin) warns about offers on the website alta-roc(.)com. The website is identical to the one previously operated at alta-roc(.)de.
All Firms
The Upper Tribunal upheld the FCA's decision to ban Richard Fenech and Heather Dunne from working in financial services. The Tribunal agreed that both acted dishonestly by providing a backdated appointed representative agreement to the FCA.The Tribunal found that Ms Dunne falsely claimed she had given advice to some pension schemes before she had done so. Also, that she had failed to take proper care when giving pension transfer advice. Meanwhile Mr Fenech failed to properly oversee her work....
Wealth ManagerAll Firms
No description available.
BankAsset ManagerBroker Dealer
Investment advice MiCA Asset management Advice on crypto-assets: the AMF updates its doctrine in relation to FIAs
Wealth ManagerAsset ManagerFintech
ASIC proposes improved pre-IPO advertising flexibility and global alignment
Broker DealerAsset Manager
ASIC disqualifies Victorian director Antonio Torcasio for 5 years
All Firms
The German Financial Supervisory Authority (Bafin) warns about fixed-term deposit offers on the website zinsanlageprofi(.)net. Contrary to the information given in the website’s legal notice, the company is not regulated by Bafin. Furthermore, based on current information, there is no connection between the website and MOS Finanzmakler GmbH, Bad Kreuznach, Germany. This is likely a case of identity fraud.
BankPayment ProviderFintech
No description available.
The CSSF is formally drawing attention to the CNC Q&A 26/038, which provides detailed interpretative guidance on the **new accounting regime introduced by the Law of 7 August 2023** for large not‑for‑profit associations, public‑utility associations and foundations. This matters for compliance teams because these entities are now aligned with the accounting regime for “medium‑sized undertakings” under Luxembourg company law, with specific obligations on annual accounts formats, filing, and chart‑of‑accounts choices that require governance, process and system changes.
What Changed
- - Large associations, associations recognised as being of public utility and foundations are now subject to the accounting regime applicable to “medium‑sized undertakings” under the amended...
- Annual accounts for affected entities must include a non‑abridged balance sheet, a profit and loss account (at least in abridged format), and notes to the accounts containing disclosures required by...
- Affected entities must use statutory LRCS layouts for the balance sheet and profit and loss account and file their annual accounts in classic format with the Luxembourg Trade and Companies Register...
- Large associations, public‑utility associations and foundations remain exempt from the mandatory use of the Standard Chart of Accounts (Plan Comptable Normalisé – PCN) and from eCDF standard data...
- Affected entities may voluntarily adopt the PCN; if they do not adopt PCN, they must maintain an internal chart of accounts and ensure robust, documented mapping between internal accounts and...
Suggested Considerations
- Identify all Luxembourg associations, public‑utility associations and foundations within or related to the group that are impacted by the Law of 7 August 2023 and confirm their size classification (small, medium‑sized, large) and whether they fall under the “medium‑sized undertakings” regime.
- Review existing accounting policies, charts of accounts and annual accounts formats for affected entities to ensure alignment with LRCS statutory layouts, including non‑abridged balance sheet, appropriate profit and loss format, and required notes disclosures.
- Decide at governing‑body level whether each affected entity will voluntarily adopt the PCN or maintain an internal chart of accounts, documenting the rationale, governance approvals and compliance impacts of the chosen option.
- Where PCN is not adopted, design, implement and document a robust mapping from the internal chart of accounts to the statutory LRCS balance sheet and profit and loss layouts, ensuring audit‑ready documentation and traceability.
- Update accounting systems and reporting tools for affected entities to support LRCS statutory layouts, consistent layout adaptations, and classic‑format filing with the RCS, including necessary changes to interfaces and data capture.
Key Dates
- Law of 7 August 2023 introducing the new accounting regime for associations and foundations enters into force and defines classification as “small associations”, “medium‑sized associations” and “large associations” with corresponding accounting obligations
- CNC plans to publish an accounting guide dedicated to the new accounting regime for ASBLs classified as small, medium‑sized and large associations, and associations recognised as being of public utility
- CSSF press release is published, formally drawing supervisory attention to CNC Q&A 26/038 and the related upcoming CNC accounting guide
Compliance Impact
Non‑compliance may result in defective or non‑compliant annual accounts filings, potential rejection or queries from the RCS, and heightened supervisory scrutiny by the CSSF where the entities are linked to regulated groups, with knock‑on effects on group reporting and reputational risk. For larger public‑interest or group‑related entities, persistent non‑compliance could trigger audit qualifications and regulatory concerns about governance and internal control over financial reporting.
AI-generated analysis. May contain errors or omissions — verify with the
original CSSF source
before acting. Full disclaimer.
BankInsuranceAsset Manager No description available.
The CSSF is formally drawing attention to CNC Q&A 26/038, which provides detailed interpretative guidance on the **new accounting regime introduced by the Law of 7 August 2023** for large not‑for‑profit associations, public‑utility associations and foundations. This matters for compliance teams because these entities are now subject to annual accounts obligations aligned with the regime for “medium‑sized undertakings” under the Luxembourg commercial companies law, with specific rules on formats, exemptions from PCN/eCDF, and forthcoming detailed guidance for all association size categories.
What Changed
- - Large not‑for‑profit associations, associations recognised as being of public utility and foundations are required to prepare annual accounting documents consisting at a minimum of annual accounts...
- These entities fall within the regime applicable to “medium‑sized undertakings”, which drives the required content and level of detail of their annual accounts (balance sheet, profit and loss account...
- The law and the CNC Q&A confirm that large associations, public‑utility associations and foundations are not legally required to use the Standard chart of accounts (Plan comptable normalisé, PCN) or...
- Although exempt from mandatory PCN use and eCDF standard data collection, these entities must still file their annual accounts with the Luxembourg Trade and Companies Register (RCS) using statutory...
- Large associations, public‑utility associations and foundations are exempt from the obligation to file the PCN trial balance (balance générale) via the eCDF platform, even though they may still...
Suggested Considerations
- Identify whether the organisation qualifies as a large association, an association recognised as being of public utility or a foundation under the Law of 7 August 2023, and document the classification decision with reference to Articles 18, 36 and 52 of that law.
- Update internal accounting policies to require annual accounts to be prepared in accordance with the regime for undertakings referred to in Article 47 LRCS, including minimum content (balance sheet, profit and loss account and notes) and disclosure requirements.
- Decide formally whether to adopt the PCN on a voluntary basis or to maintain an internal chart of accounts, and record this decision in accounting governance documents approved by the board or governing body.
- Where PCN is not adopted, design and implement a detailed and documented mapping from internal general ledger accounts to LRCS statutory balance sheet and profit and loss layouts to ensure accurate preparation and filing of annual accounts.
- Review and, where necessary, redesign annual accounts templates to comply with LRCS layouts while making only permitted adaptations (for example, titles and subtotals) that maintain clarity, comparability and consistency over time.
Key Dates
- Earliest financial year start date from which adjusted size criteria under Articles 35 and 47 LRCS may be applied to undertakings and groups, which indirectly affects categorisation and accounting obligations of entities subject to commercial‑law size criteria
- Law of 7 August 2023 introducing the new accounting regime for associations and foundations is adopted, setting the legal basis for reclassification and annual accounts obligations
- Default application date of the adjusted LRCS size criteria for undertakings and groups where early application from 01 January 2023 is not chosen
- New LRCS size thresholds start to determine the categorisation of pre‑existing Luxembourg undertakings and, by analogy, influence assessments of “medium‑sized” status relevant to associations
- CNC plans to publish an accounting guide dedicated to the new accounting regime for not‑for‑profit associations (ASBLs) classified as small, medium‑sized and large, as well as public‑utility associations and foundations
Compliance Impact
Non‑compliance primarily exposes large associations, public‑utility associations and foundations to deficiencies in statutory annual accounts and registry filings, which can lead to legal and governance risks, increased audit findings and potential supervisory concerns where the CSSF has a stake. For CSSF‑regulated firms, reliance on non‑compliant counterparties may undermine financial reporting integrity and due‑diligence standards, with knock‑on effects in broader regulatory reviews.
AI-generated analysis. May contain errors or omissions — verify with the
original CSSF source
before acting. Full disclaimer.
BankAsset ManagerAll Firms
Das Staatssekretariat für Wirtschaft (SECO) hat eine Änderung der Liste der sanktionierten natürlichen Personen, Unternehmen und Organisationen der Verordnung vom 21. März 2025 über Massnahmen gegenüber Personen und Organisationen, die mit den Taliban in Verbindung stehen (SR 946.231.07), publiziert.
All Firms
Written reply to Parliamentary Questions on access to cash and physical banking services
BankPayment Provider
Written reply to Parliamentary Question on minors who incurred excessive or unauthorised spending through online platforms
BankPayment Provider
No description available.
All Firms
EBA, EIOPA and ESMA propose amendments to bilateral margin requirements 03 August 2026 Joint Committee Trading The European Supervisory Authorities (EBA, EIOPA and ESMA – the ESAs) today published a final report on draft Regulatory Technical Standards (RTS), proposing to simplify the bilateral margin requirements of the European Commission’s Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/2251. The proposed amendments aim to simplify the bilateral margin framework for counterparties that are subject to initia...
The ESAs have issued a Final Report and draft RTS proposing targeted amendments to Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/2251 so that counterparties below the EUR 8 billion initial margin threshold under EMIR are fully exempt from exchanging initial margin, both on new and existing uncleared OTC derivatives. This materially simplifies bilateral margining for smaller in-scope counterparties, reduces operational and custodial burdens, and aligns the EU regime with similar reforms already implemented in other jurisdictions (e.g. UK EMIR). Compliance teams must prepare now for the transition from a “legacy-only” margining obligation to a complete exemption once the EUR 8 billion AANA threshold is no longer met.
What Changed
- - Counterparties whose average aggregate notional amount (AANA) of non-centrally cleared OTC derivatives falls below the EUR 8 billion threshold will no longer be required to exchange initial margin...
- The current framework, under which below-threshold counterparties are exempt from initial margin for new trades but must continue to exchange initial margin for pre-existing “legacy” contracts, will...
- Article 28(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/2251 will be amended to explicitly extend the exemption from initial margin requirements to outstanding contracts where one of the two counterparties...
- The RTS introduce a clearer operational framework for entry into and exit from the initial margin regime based on the annual AANA calculation for March–May, including scenarios where one or both...
- Once a counterparty falls below the EUR 8 billion threshold under the revised rules, firms will be permitted to terminate related initial margin processes, including ceasing ongoing calculation,...
Suggested Considerations
- Map all EMIR in-scope entities within the group and identify those whose AANA of non-centrally cleared OTC derivatives is close to or below the EUR 8 billion threshold, to assess which relationships may benefit from the expanded exemption.
- Review current collateral and margin frameworks to identify legacy contracts where initial margin is still being exchanged solely because the regime requires continuation despite the counterparty having fallen below the EUR 8 billion threshold.
- Prepare an internal policy update so that, once the RTS enter into force, initial margin requirements are switched off for counterparties below the EUR 8 billion threshold on both new and existing uncleared OTC derivatives, subject to group risk appetite.
- Update EMIR margin procedures and AANA calculation processes to ensure accurate annual determination of whether each counterparty is above or below the EUR 8 billion threshold, including documentation of the March–May calculation methodology.
- Review and amend collateral agreements, credit support annexes (CSAs) and associated legal documentation to incorporate the revised treatment for below-threshold counterparties, including terms for stopping margin exchange and potentially releasing segregated collateral.
Key Dates
- ESAs publish the Final Report and draft RTS proposing amendments to Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/2251 to simplify bilateral margin requirements for counterparties below the EUR 8 billion initial margin threshold
- The European Commission reviews and, if satisfied, endorses the draft RTS amending the EMIR bilateral margin Delegated Regulation; exact date to be set by the Commission’s internal process
- Following Commission endorsement, the RTS are subject to scrutiny by the European Parliament and the Council under the standard RTS procedure before publication in the Official Journal
- The amended RTS enter into force on the date specified in the Official Journal (typically 20 days after publication), from which firms can legally apply the new exemption regime
- By the date three years after entry into force, the ESAs must complete a review of the application and impact of the exemption from initial margin requirements in Article 28(1), potentially informing further changes
Compliance Impact
The amendments reduce the risk of technical non-compliance for below-threshold counterparties by simplifying obligations, but firms that fail to correctly apply the new threshold-based exemption (e.g. continuing or ceasing margin exchanges incorrectly) may face supervisory findings, remediation demands and potential sanctions under EMIR. Non-compliance could also create contractual disputes and counterparty risk misalignment if margin treatment is inconsistent across jurisdictions or relationships.
AI-generated analysis. May contain errors or omissions — verify with the
original ESMA source
before acting. Full disclaimer.
BankBroker DealerAsset Manager Derivatives or structured products Marketing Retail investors Journalists Investment management companies The ACPR and AMF Joint Unit publishes its analysis on the distribution, fees and performance of structured products
Asset ManagerBroker DealerWealth Manager No description available.
Asset Manager
No description available.
Broker DealerBank
The Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (Bafin) warns consumers about the services offered on the websites kingstonhorizonpartners(.)com and the login area at kingstonhorizonpartners(.)pro. According to information available to Bafin, the operators are providing financial and investment services on the websites without the required authorisation.
All Firms
The financial supervisory authority Bafin warns about term deposit offers on the website eurowerte(.)de. It is suspected that the unknown operators of the website are offering banking transactions and financial services without the required authorisation.
All Firms
The German Financial Supervisory Authority (Bafin) warns against the websites westcapital(.)ai and westcapital(.)pro, which are operated under the name WestCapital. It is suspected that the unknown operators are offering financial and crypto-asset services without authorisation.
FintechCrypto ExchangeAll Firms
Transaction reporting requirements become smarter, simpler and more proportionate under new rules from the FCA. Transaction reports are critical to the FCA’s ability to detect and investigate market abuse, monitor market functioning and supervise firms effectively.The new rules are designed to ensure the FCA continues to receive accurate, high-quality data while eliminating duplicative or low-value reporting. By removing unnecessary reporting the changes will reduce regulatory burden and supp...
Broker DealerAsset ManagerAll Firms
ASIC cancels Australian credit licence of Zenoz Enterprises Pty Ltd
Fintech
ASIC seeks orders against Royce Capital, Royce (Aust) Real Estate, Louie Kortesis and Paul Chiodo for alleged misconduct
Asset ManagerWealth Manager
Following an external recruitment process, the Bank of England (the Bank) has appointed Nicholas Segal as Chair of its Enforcement Decision Making Committee (EDMC), and Peter King as Deputy Chair, with effect from 1 August 2026.
The Bank of England has appointed **Nicholas Segal** as Chair and **Peter King** as Deputy Chair of the Enforcement Decision Making Committee (EDMC), effective 1 August 2026, following expiry of the terms of Sir William Blair and Philip Marsden. This is a governance and enforcement leadership change, not a change to the EDMC Procedures, but compliance teams should anticipate potential shifts in enforcement approach and decision‑making tone across prudential regulation, FMI, resolution, securitisation, wholesale cash distribution, critical third parties and note issuance.
What Changed
- - The EDMC now has a new Chair (Nicholas Segal) and Deputy Chair (Peter King), replacing Sir William Blair and Philip Marsden whose terms ended in July 2026.
- The appointments are the outcome of an external recruitment process commenced in October 2025, aligned with the EDMC’s governance framework and five‑year renewable term structure.
- The scope of the EDMC’s remit continues to cover contested enforcement decisions across the Bank’s statutory regimes: Prudential Regulation, Financial Market Infrastructures, Resolution,...
- The EDMC Procedures, published in January 2024, remain the operative framework for how contested enforcement cases are handled, including panel constitution, hearing processes, and decision‑making...
- The EDMC continues to operate with functional separation from investigation teams and the Bank’s executive, preserving independence in contested enforcement decisions.
Suggested Considerations
- Map all existing and potential enforcement exposures to the EDMC’s statutory remit, covering prudential regulation, FMI, resolution, securitisation, wholesale cash distribution, critical third parties and notes issuance.
- Review internal enforcement‑response playbooks to ensure they explicitly recognise the EDMC’s independent role and the January 2024 EDMC Procedures, including how contested cases will be heard and decided.
- Update board and senior management briefings on BoE/PRA enforcement to reflect the change in EDMC leadership and likely implications for contested case strategy and settlement versus contest decisions.
- Assess ongoing and anticipated enforcement matters for which the firm might contemplate contesting; incorporate the EDMC’s composition and procedures into litigation and regulatory strategy planning.
- Train Legal, Compliance and relevant business teams on the practical implications of the EDMC Procedures (panel size, hearing processes, written and oral representations, decision timelines) with scenario‑based exercises for contested cases.
Key Dates
- EDMC established by the Court of Directors to provide independent decision‑making in contested enforcement cases and functional separation from investigation teams
- EDMC Procedures published, setting out detailed processes for contested enforcement decisions, including panel composition and hearing arrangements
- Bank of England commences recruitment for additional EDMC members, including a new Chair and Deputy Chair, to join in summer 2026
- Closing date for applications for EDMC panel member roles, including potential Chair and Deputy Chair candidates
- Term of Sir William Blair as EDMC Chair and of Philip Marsden as EDMC Deputy Chair expires
Compliance Impact
Non‑compliance with BoE enforcement requirements within the EDMC’s remit can result in significant financial penalties, public censure, business restrictions and senior management consequences, which will be determined by the EDMC in contested cases. The independent nature of the EDMC heightens the need for robust evidentiary support and procedural discipline where firms decide to contest enforcement actions.
AI-generated analysis. May contain errors or omissions — verify with the
original BoE source
before acting. Full disclaimer.
BankBroker DealerAll Firms
The PRA Regulatory Digest is for people working in the UK financial services industry and highlights key regulatory news and publications delivered for the month.
BankInsuranceAll Firms
No description available.
Bank
No description available.
Asset ManagerHedge Fund
No description available.
Asset ManagerBroker DealerBank
No description available.
Broker DealerAll Firms