ANALYSIS: Broadridge calls for reporting harmonisation amid Asian rewrites

The US fintech giant supported last month the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) and the Australian Securities and Investments Commission’s (ASIC) new over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives reporting requirements which took effect on October 21.

Speaking to FOW following this event, Broadridge’s vice president for operations, data and enterprise solutions for Asia-Pacific (APAC) said he hoped the region will continue to align with prior initiatives from the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the European Securities and Markets Authority’s (ESMA) European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR) Refit.

“We see the regulatory reporting rewrites in Singapore and Australia as clearly part of a wider, continuing journey of equivalency and harmonisation around the world, following the example of EMIR Refit in Europe and CFTC regulations in the US this year,” said Carl Hovland (pictured) in an interview.

“This harmonisation is all about how we get reporting data into a format that regulators across jurisdictions can understand at the more systemic level, driving convergence so that data is fungible across various regulations. Broadridge has been on this journey for more than a decade now, after supporting Dodd-Frank and the roll-out of regulation from the CFTC as well as EMIR regulation under ESMA.”

One day before the MAS and ASIC reporting requirements go-live, Broadridge announced it was “proactively expanding” its offering to include other updated regulatory regimes, including Hong Kong and Canada next year. Broadridge told FOW the Canadian rewrite is scheduled to go-live on July 25 2025 while Hong Kong has an indicative date of September 25 next year.

“There is still a little more to be done in terms of bringing about true convergence and equivalency. The way these regulations tend to evolve is that it is led by the US or Europe before rippling through markets towards regulators in Asia implementing similar measures,” Hovland told FOW.

“We see a new cycle beginning that is being led by the US, with the CFTC already talking about adding new fields for 2026, specifically in Critical Data Elements (CDE) that Asia-Pacific is yet to catch up.”

Kaizen’s director of EMIR reporting Tim Hartley in August said the industry is getting much better at collaborating, discussing the regulatory changes and reaching a consensus.

“Next year, we are probably going to see changes in Switzerland and to MiFID reporting,” said Hartley at the time. “Most of the major regimes are going through changes either this year or next year. For global firms operating in multiple jurisdictions, there is a significant regulatory burden to keep reporting and adhere to the new changes.”

Broadridge said a day before the MAS and ASIC rewrite took effect last month the firm expects a continued drive to equivalency and harmonisation across global regulatory jurisdictions.

“We anticipate that the regulatory wave will continue, and we are proactively working on behalf of our clients to help them meet their compliance requirements,” said Broadridge general manager for regulatory trade and transaction reporting Ben Cooling in a statement last month.

“The upcoming Canadian and Hong Kong rewrites are part of a global initiative aimed at enhancing the consistency and transparency of derivatives reporting, reflecting similar updates by regulators in the United States, Japan, and Europe.”

In late September, ISDA’s O’Malia told a forum in Japan that recent regulatory measures in the Asian country have created a “strong case for the broader use” of derivatives across the sector.

Singapore Exchange (SGX) reported strong trading volume growth of 35% in September across its equities, commodities and foreign exchange (FX) segments as Asian markets benefited from the recent shift in regional sentiment.

In an Acuiti survey in association with SGX on industry sentiment across global derivatives markets, the market intelligence firm said last month: “For firms that had exposures or operations in Asia, the sell-side and proprietary trading firms were most likely to be increasing exposures, while hedge funds and asset managers were taking a more cautious approach to the region - and in some cases reducing exposures, particularly to onshore China.”