BIS Consultations

Key dates

2026-05-06

CPMI-IOSCO published the consultation on updated CCP resilience guidance and PQD disclosures

2026-06-30 Deadline

Deadline to submit consultation comments to the CPMI and IOSCO secretariats

Suggested considerations

• Compliance teams may wish to review the January 2025 BCBS-CPMI-IOSCO initial margin report to map likely changes to CCP resilience guidance and PQD disclosure expectations.
• CCPs may wish to assess whether their current margin simulation tools, responsiveness metrics, override governance, and public disclosures could support the kind of targeted enhancements described in the consultation.
• Clearing members and clients may wish to evaluate how more detailed CCP disclosures could affect margin forecasting, model validation, and due diligence workflows.
• Firms may wish to prepare consultation submissions by the 30 June 2026 deadline, particularly if they have views on feasibility, data granularity, disclosure lags, or governance implications.
• Compliance and legal teams may wish to monitor whether the final amendments create new reporting or disclosure obligations under the revised CCP guidance and PQD standards.

What changed

The consultation proposes targeted additions to the CPMI-IOSCO 2017 guidance on the resilience of central counterparties and to the 2015 PQD standards for CCPs. The stated purpose is to incorporate relevant elements of the January 2025 BCBS-CPMI-IOSCO final report on transparency and responsiveness of initial margin in centrally cleared markets. The areas specifically addressed are simulation tools, the measurement of initial margin responsiveness, margin model governance frameworks, the use of margin model overrides, and CCP public disclosures.

Key dates

2026-02-26

Basel Committee published the consultation and launched the draft consolidated guidelines and sound practices website

2026-06-26 Deadline

Deadline for comments on the consultation

Suggested considerations

• Compliance teams may wish to review the consultative document and assess whether the new modular structure affects internal policy libraries, control inventories, or regulatory mapping tools.
• Firms may wish to compare their current reliance on BIS guidelines and sound practices against the consolidated version to identify any content that has been removed as outdated, duplicative, or superseded.
• Stakeholders may wish to submit comments by 2026-06-26 if the draft structure, organization, or accessibility of the consolidated guidance would affect supervisory implementation or internal interpretive work.
• Supervisory liaison teams may wish to confirm that local or group-wide references to BIS guidance remain aligned with the consolidated presentation rather than legacy PDF documents.

What changed

The Committee has launched a draft consolidated version of its guidelines and sound practices in a modular format on a new BIS website section. It says the new structure reorganises existing guidance, mirrors the format used for the Basel Framework, and is intended to make the materials more user-friendly and easier to navigate. The Committee states there was no intention to introduce new expectations through this exercise.

Key dates

2025-12-05

Basel Committee publishes the consultation on machine-readable Pillar 3 disclosure

2026-03-05 Deadline

Deadline for comments on the consultative document

Suggested considerations

• Compliance teams may wish to review current Pillar 3 disclosure production processes and determine whether quantitative disclosures can be generated in a machine-readable format.
• Banks may wish to map any existing PDF-based Pillar 3 outputs against likely technical data structure requirements, including whether disclosures could be published on a website or via a central repository.
• Supervisors and policy teams may wish to assess how local disclosure arrangements align with the proposed global standard and whether current formats already satisfy the envisaged approach.
• Firms subject to overlapping regional disclosure regimes may wish to compare current machine-readable standards with the Basel Committee proposal to identify expected implementation gaps.

What changed

The consultation proposes a new standard for machine-readable quantitative Pillar 3 disclosures across Basel Committee member jurisdictions. It would introduce both a requirement and technical specifications for producing disclosures in a machine-readable format, while leaving the substantive disclosure obligations unchanged. The consultation also contemplates that national supervisors would choose whether disclosures are posted on banks’ own websites or in a central repository.

Key dates

2025-12-05

Basel Committee publishes the consultative document on machine-readable Pillar 3 disclosures

2026-03-05 Deadline

Deadline for comments on the proposed additions to the disclosure standard

Suggested considerations

• Compliance teams may wish to review the consultative document and assess whether current Pillar 3 publication processes could support machine-readable output.
• Banks with existing machine-readable disclosure regimes may wish to map their current approach against the proposed global standard to identify any gaps or duplication.
• Supervisory affairs teams may wish to consider whether disclosures are currently hosted on bank websites or through a central repository model, since the proposal leaves that implementation choice to national supervisors.
• Stakeholders may wish to evaluate the technical specifications for the required machine-readable formats and the associated data taxonomy requirements.
• Interested firms may wish to submit comments by the consultation deadline if they want to influence the final standard.

What changed

The Committee is proposing additions to its disclosure standard that would require quantitative Pillar 3 disclosures to be available in standardised machine-readable formats across member jurisdictions. The proposal includes technical specifications for producing machine-readable disclosures, while leaving the substantive disclosure content unchanged. National supervisors would decide whether banks publish the machine-readable disclosures on their own websites or through a centralised data repository.