The Bank of England’s fees regime for incoming central counterparties

Overview

1. Following the UK’s withdrawal from the European Union (the EU), the Bank of England (the Bank) has taken on responsibility for recognising and supervising non-UK central counterparties intending to provide clearing services to clearing members or trading venues established in the UK (‘incoming CCPs’).

2. Under the on-shored European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR),^{footnote [1]} the Bank is required to ‘tier’ incoming CCPs based on the degree to which the CCP poses, or is likely to pose, risks to UK financial stability. An incoming CCP that is designated Tier 2 (where that CCP is systemically important or likely to become systemically important for the financial stability of the UK) will become subject to direct UK supervision and regulation. An incoming CCP that is designated Tier 1 will be primarily supervised and regulated by its home authority.

3. This CP sets out the Bank’s proposed approach to levying recognition fees and annual fees on recognised incoming CCPs pursuant to paragraph 36(1) of Schedule 17A to the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA). The proposals include how the Bank intends to levy fees:

(a) on incoming CCPs at the point of recognition pursuant to EMIR Article 25 (‘recognition fees’);

(b) on Tier 2 CCPs for the assessment of a comparable compliance application upon request pursuant to EMIR Article 25a(1) (‘comparable compliance assessment fee’); and

(c) on recognised incoming CCPs for monitoring and/or supervision on an annual basis (‘annual fees’).

4. This CP is relevant to incoming CCPs that are seeking (or intend to seek) recognition by the Bank to provide clearing services in the UK (including those currently in the Temporary Recognition Regime).^{footnote [2]}

Background

5. The Bank’s approach to monitoring and/or supervising incoming CCPs will depend on the Bank’s assessment of their systemic importance as well as the co-operation arrangements in place between the Bank and their home authorities. The Bank will charge fees to incoming CCPs to reflect the work undertaken by the Bank to review the CCPs’ recognition application and undertake a comparable compliance assessment (where requested), and the level of monitoring and/or supervisory activity undertaken by the Bank following recognition.

6. As set out in the Bank of England’s approach to tiering incoming CCPs under EMIR Article 25, the Bank will undertake a two-stage process to identify whether an incoming CCP should be designated as a Tier 1 or Tier 2 CCP (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Summary of the Bank’s approach to tiering incoming CCPs

7. Once the Bank has tiered an incoming CCP in accordance with the above process, the Bank will assess the CCP’s application for recognition. For all incoming CCPs, the Bank will need to verify, among other things, that the incoming CCP’s application contains the necessary information, that appropriate co-operation arrangements are in place with the CCP’s home authority and that the CCP is subject to effective supervision and enforcement by that home authority. For Tier 2 CCPs, the Bank will need to additionally assess whether the CCP complies with the requirements set out in EMIR Article 16 and Titles IV and V.

8. Under EMIR Article 25a(1), a Tier 2 CCP (a ‘requesting CCP’) may submit a reasoned request that the Bank assesses whether in its compliance with its home regulatory regime, and taking into account any equivalence decisions made by HM Treasury (HMT), that CCP may be deemed to satisfy compliance with the requirements set out in EMIR Article 16 and Titles IV and V. As set out in the Bank of England’s approach to comparable compliance under EMIR Article 25a, the Bank will grant comparable compliance to a requesting CCP for relevant areas of EMIR where the Bank considers equal or comparable supervisory outcomes are achieved through the applicable home regime.

Summary of proposals

9. The Bank proposes to:

Recognition fees

• Replace the current £35,000 fee for the recognition of incoming CCPs with a £50,000 base recognition fee, payable by all incoming CCPs at the point of recognition (for the avoidance of doubt, this fee will not be payable if recognition is not granted or if the application for recognition is withdrawn by the incoming CCP). As part of the recognition process the Bank is required to provide information or advice which HMT considers is necessary to enable it to decide whether to make an equivalence determination. The proposed increase from £35,000 to £50,000 reflects the Bank’s experience of the work required to provide such equivalence advice to HMT and the Bank’s assessment of the work required to be carried out by the Bank in assessing all incoming CCPs for tiering in accordance with EMIR Article 25.
• Introduce a supplementary recognition fee for Tier 2 CCPs (payable in addition to the base recognition fee), which will be calculated for a given incoming CCP to reflect the costs incurred by the Bank in assessing its recognition application that are in excess of the base recognition fee. This reflects the significantly greater amount of work required to assess Tier 2 CCPs in relation to their compliance with EMIR requirements. Indicatively, and subject to the actual costs incurred in each case, the Bank anticipates this supplementary fee will be in the order of £150,000. This fee would be payable (together with the base recognition fee) at the point of recognition (and, for the avoidance of doubt, neither the base recognition fee nor the supplementary fee will be payable if recognition is not granted or if the application for recognition is withdrawn by the incoming CCP).

Comparable compliance assessment fee

• Introduce a flat comparable compliance assessment fee of £30,000 payable by Tier 2 CCPs that submit a reasoned request for comparable compliance to the Bank under EMIR Article 25a(1). This fee would be payable at the point at which a comparable compliance decision is made. The comparable compliance assessment fee would be payable irrespective of whether equal or comparable outcomes are identified and/or if the request for comparable compliance is withdrawn.^{footnote [3]}

Annual fees

• Introduce an annual flat fee payable by Tier 1 CCPs that do not require an informed reliance assessment with the relevant home authority (ie those incoming CCPs that the Bank judges to present the lowest potential risks to UK financial stability).^{footnote [4]} This fee is proposed to be £9,000 for the 2022/23 fee year and will be subject to review at least on an annual basis. As explained in the Proposals section below, these CCPs would be allocated to incoming CCP ‘Group D’.
• Other than for the Tier 1 CCPs covered above, introduce an annual fee payable by all other Tier 1 CCPs and Tier 2 CCPs charged on a cost-recovery basis in aggregate. As explained in the Proposals section below, these CCPs would be allocated to incoming CCP 'Group A', 'Group B' or 'Group C', reflecting the potential risk they pose to UK financial stability and, accordingly, the level of monitoring and/or supervisory activity that will be undertaken by the Bank. Fees will be payable at the beginning of the fee year, based on the expected monitoring and/or supervisory resource to be used to monitor and/or supervise the CCPs. At the end of the fee year, fees may be adjusted, where applicable, to reflect the actual costs incurred by the Bank in exercising its monitoring and/or supervisory functions via a rebate or additional invoice as part of the following year’s fees. All CCPs within a given group will pay the same fees and adjustments will be made in equal proportion across all CCPs in Groups A, B and C.^{footnote [5]}
• Align the annual fee cycle for incoming CCPs to the cycle used for the Bank’s existing fees regime for the supervision of financial market infrastructures (FMIs).^{footnote [6]} The Bank’s fee year is a 12-month period from 1 March to the end of February, with invoices issued no later than Q3 of that fee year. Invoices are issued with 30-day payment terms.

Implementation

10. The proposed implementation date for the proposals contained in this CP is 1 December 2022. For the avoidance of doubt, and as further explained in the Proposals section below, no fees would be levied on incoming CCPs until they have been recognised by the Bank.

Responses and next steps

11. This consultation closes on 15 September 2022. The Bank invites feedback on the proposals set out in this CP. Please address any comments or enquiries to FMIFeedback@bankofengland.co.uk or, alternatively to: Incoming FMI Framework Team, Financial Market Infrastructure Directorate, Bank of England, 20 Moorgate, London, EC2R 6DA.

12. The proposals set out in this CP have been designed in the context of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU and the transition period having come to an end. Unless otherwise stated, any references to EU or EU derived legislation in this CP refer to the version of that legislation which forms part of retained EU law.^{footnote [7]}

Proposals

13. The Bank proposes to levy fees to cover its recognition and monitoring and/or supervisory activity in respect of incoming CCPs, as permitted by the Bank’s fee-levying powers. The costs anticipated to be incurred by the Bank in connection with its recognition and monitoring and/or supervisory activity in respect of incoming CCPs include the costs of relevant supervision staff together with relevant specialist resources, corporate services and other relevant costs.

Proposed recognition fees for incoming CCPs

14. In April 2019, following consultation, the Bank set out in a Policy Statement its fee for the recognition of incoming CCPs.^{footnote [8]} The Policy Statement specifies a £35,000 fee, payable once an incoming CCP has been recognised by the Bank (in the event that an application for recognition is unsuccessful or withdrawn, no fee is levied). The Bank has reviewed the existing recognition fee arrangements to take into account the effect of the new tiering process on the incoming CCP recognition process and the Bank’s up-to-date resource cost estimates, and is consequently proposing revised fees as follows.

Base recognition fees – all incoming CCPs

15. The Bank considers that a base recognition fee of £50,000, payable by all incoming CCPs at the point of their recognition, would be fair, reasonable and proportionate, based on a calculation of the Bank’s expected work effort and the associated costs the Bank anticipates it will incur (including for CCPs that are based in jurisdictions in which there is more than one applicant CCP). This includes the work required for the establishment of co-operation arrangements with relevant home authorities and the delivery of any technical advice on equivalence provided to HMT, as well as a review of the documentation submitted by the applicant CCPs. The proposed £15,000 increase on the current £35,000 recognition fee reflects the Bank’s experience of the work required to provide equivalence advice to HMT, and the addition of a tiering process in EMIR, as well as the Bank’s up-to-date resource costs.

16. The Bank is therefore proposing a base recognition fee, payable by all recognised incoming CCPs (ie both Tier 1 and Tier 2 CCPs), of £50,000. Consistent with the current recognition fee, this would be payable once an incoming CCP has been recognised and would not be levied should the application for recognition be unsuccessful or withdrawn.

Supplementary recognition fees – Tier 2 CCPs only

17. The Bank considers that an additional fee is appropriate in order to cover the significant additional costs expected to be incurred in the assessment of recognition applications made by incoming CCPs which are designated Tier 2. This would include assessing the CCP’s compliance with the requirements of EMIR Article 16 and Titles IV and V. The amount of resource required to conduct such an assessment is expected to vary significantly according to the specifics of the case and the CCP in question.

18. The Bank is therefore proposing to apply an additional cost-recovery fee specific to each Tier 2 CCP, which would be calculated to cover any costs incurred by the Bank in assessing that CCP’s recognition application which are in excess of the base recognition fee. The incoming CCP would be invoiced for this supplementary fee, alongside the base recognition fee, when the recognition decision is made. As with the base recognition fee, the supplementary recognition fee would not be payable should the application for recognition be unsuccessful or be withdrawn. By way of indication, and without prejudice to the actual costs incurred, the Bank estimates the additional resources needed for the assessment of a Tier 2 CCP will likely be in the order of around £150,000.

Proposed comparable compliance assessment fees for Tier 2 CCPs

19. When a Tier 2 CCP makes a reasoned request for a comparable compliance assessment under EMIR Article 25a(1), the Bank will incur additional costs. In these circumstances, it will be necessary for the Bank to review the information submitted by the requesting CCP in order to make a decision whether to grant comparable compliance. This is in addition to the work necessary for assessing the incoming CCP’s application for recognition.

20. Based on the expected work effort and associated costs, the Bank proposes a flat comparable compliance assessment fee of £30,000 per request. The Bank considers that the application of a flat fee would be appropriate and proportionate, given that the estimated work to be incurred in assessing a comparable compliance assessment is not expected to vary significantly according to the circumstances of the case or the CCP in question.

21. The fee would be payable upon each occasion that the Bank undertakes a comparable compliance assessment at the CCP’s request, since the Bank will incur costs in connection with each new assessment. As outlined in the Bank of England’s approach to comparable compliance under Article 25a, if the Bank does not grant comparable compliance to a requesting CCP it will assess the merits of any subsequent request for a comparable compliance assessment on a case-by-case basis. In these circumstances, the Bank will consider if there are reasonable grounds to proceed with a reassessment (for instance, if there is evidence of changes to the requesting CCP’s operations and/or home regulatory regime). Where the Bank is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds, it will proceed with a reassessment and would charge the requesting CCP the flat comparable compliance assessment fee for this reassessment.

22. Comparable compliance assessment fees would be payable at the later of either the point of the requesting CCP’s recognition or, if the comparable compliance decision is made post-recognition, at the point at which the comparable compliance decision is made. Where the requesting CCP is recognised by the Bank, the comparable compliance assessment fee would be payable even when equal or comparable outcomes are not identified, or if the request for comparable compliance is withdrawn. However, if the requesting CCP has not been granted recognition, or its application for recognition has been withdrawn, no comparable compliance assessment fee would be payable by the requesting CCP.

Proposed annual fee regime for incoming CCPs

Interaction with the Bank’s existing FMI fee regime

23. The Bank currently charges annual supervision fees to FMIs supervised under the Banking Act 2009 or FSMA.

24. The Bank’s established approach to fees uses ‘fee blocks’ for each type of FMI (ie there is a separate fee block for CCPs, central securities depositories, and recognised payment systems and specified service providers). This means that costs are allocated to each type of FMI and then further allocated between FMIs within each fee block.

25. The allocation of fees between FMIs within a given fee block is determined by an individual FMI’s ‘category’. FMIs are categorised according to their potential capacity to cause disruption to the UK’s financial system, ranging from the most significant FMIs (Category 1) to the least significant (Category 3). FMIs are charged fees based on their assigned category.^{footnote [9]}

New incoming CCP fee block and groups

26. The Bank proposes to create a new fee block for incoming CCPs (separate from the existing fee block for UK-based CCPs). Incoming CCPs would be placed into ‘groups’ based on the level of monitoring and/or supervisory activity anticipated to be undertaken by the Bank, which will primarily depend on the risk the Bank considers the incoming CCP to pose to UK financial stability (while also taking into account the degree of deference applied with respect to the home supervisory regime). Incoming CCP ‘groups’ can be viewed as broadly analogous to ‘categories’ in the existing regime for UK-based CCPs, though a different methodology is proposed for determining the allocation of incoming CCPs to ‘groups’.

27. All incoming CCPs will be subject to the tiering process, pursuant to which the Bank assesses the risks an incoming CCP poses or is likely to pose to UK financial stability. The Bank’s tiering assessment examines risk factors specific to the incoming CCP, the Bank’s ability to rely on the regulation and supervision of the CCP by its home authority, and the UK’s interest in the incoming CCP relative to the interest of other jurisdictions where the CCP operates. The Bank’s approach to tiering provides a framework for determining the appropriate level of monitoring and/or supervisory activity for an incoming CCP.

28. The Bank therefore proposes to allocate the use of its supervisory resources primarily based upon the amount of risk posed or likely to be posed by the incoming CCPs as identified through the tiering process, and the annual fee charged would reflect the cost of such resources. The Bank proposes to establish four ‘groups’ (A to D) for incoming CCPs, with the level of monitoring and/or supervisory activity undertaken by the Bank being highest for Group A and decreasing to Group D:

• Incoming CCP Group A – incoming CCPs designated as Tier 2 and subject to direct supervision by the Bank.
• Incoming CCP Group B – incoming CCPs designated as Tier 1 and subject to Level 2 informed reliance monitoring activity.
• Incoming CCP Group C – incoming CCPs designated as Tier 1 and subject to Level 1 informed reliance monitoring activity.
• Incoming CCP Group D – incoming CCPs designated as Tier 1 and not subject to informed reliance monitoring activity.

29. The Annex provides further detail on the type of monitoring and/or supervisory activity expected to be undertaken by the Bank for each incoming CCP group.

30. Each incoming CCP’s group allocation (and any changes thereto) would be confirmed to it by the Bank upon recognition and, thereafter, on an annual basis (or more frequently if appropriate), separate to any reviews of the Bank’s tiering decision. Where an incoming CCP is subject to monitoring and/or supervisory activity significantly above or below that which would normally be expected of its group allocation, the Bank may subsequently re-allocate that incoming CCP to a different group for the next fee year.

Methodology for levying fees

31. The Bank proposes:

(a) a flat fee for Incoming CCP Group D, reviewed annually or as appropriate; the Bank considers a flat fee appropriate given that the financial management costs would be disproportionate to calculate fees for Group D on a cost-recovery basis; and

(b) fees for Incoming CCP Groups A, B and C estimated based on expected monitoring and/or supervisory activity, and then applied on a cost recovery basis, in aggregate, by making a final adjustment, where applicable, at the end of each fee year via a rebate or request for additional fees. All incoming CCPs within the same group would be charged the same fee, with higher fees payable by CCPs in Group A and progressively lower fees payable by CCPs in Groups B and C. The relative fees charged for each group would be calculated by means of a pre-determined ratio, reflecting the Bank's calculation of the relative level of monitoring and/or supervisory activity undertaken in respect of for each group.

32. The Bank proposes to calculate fees annually by i) calculating the total cost for the incoming CCP fee block via the budget allocation process; ii) subtracting from that the revenue from the flat fees payable by Group D; and iii) allocating the remaining cost across Groups A to C by means of the fee ratio.

33. The Bank considered other approaches to calculating and charging annual fees for the monitoring and/or supervision of incoming CCPs before deciding to propose the above approach.

• The Bank considered calculating fees on a cost-recovery basis calculated at the level of each individual CCP. Using this method, the Bank would calculate the monitoring and/or supervisory resource spent on a specific incoming CCP in a given fee year and charge fees to that CCP to recover the relevant costs. However, the Bank considers this approach to be highly complex and resource-intensive when applied to the entire potential incoming CCP population. The financial management costs of calculating fees on this basis would be disproportionate to the total cost of monitoring and/or supervisory activity. The Bank also notes that the proposed approach for charging fees for incoming CCPs – calculating cost-recovery in aggregate across the incoming CCP population – mirrors the approach used for charging fees for UK-based CCPs.
• The Bank also considered allocating incoming CCPs to the existing fee block for UK-based CCPs. The existing regime for UK-based CCPs allocates CCPs to categories based on their significance, and potential to cause disruption, to the UK financial system. Since the Bank has established a distinct framework for assessing the risks an incoming CCP could pose to UK financial stability (namely, its approach to tiering) and since the monitoring and/or supervisory resource spent on the majority of incoming CCPs is expected to be significantly lower than the resource spent on UK-based CCPs, the Bank considers it appropriate to create a new fee block for incoming CCPs to reflect the anticipated costs to be incurred by the Bank in monitoring and/or supervising these CCPs. Accordingly, the Bank proposes to calculate the monitoring and/or supervisory resource spent on incoming CCPs separately from the resource spent on UK-based CCPs.

Fee ratio and fees for 2022/23 fee year

34. The proposed ratios for costs across the incoming CCP groups A to C, and fee amounts for the 2022/23 fee year are shown in Table A below.

35. The Bank proposes to keep the level of monitoring and/or supervisory resource allocated to each group under review to ensure it remains appropriate and proportionate. The Bank will also aim to reduce the variability of fee amounts from year-to-year.

Process for levying fees

36. The Bank’s fee year is a 12-month period running from 1 March to the end of February. The Bank proposes to align the annual fee cycle for incoming CCPs with the cycle used for the existing fees regime for the Bank’s supervision of FMIs. Accordingly, the Bank expects to invoice incoming CCPs for annual fees no later than Q3 of the relevant fee year.

37. An incoming CCP would only become subject to annual fees after it has been recognised. An incoming CCP obtaining recognition part-way through the fee year would be charged annual fees on a pro-rata basis from the point of its recognition until the end of that fee year. These annual fees would be in addition to recognition fees and, where applicable, any comparable compliance assessment fee.

38. If it appears to the Bank that, in relation to any fee, in exceptional circumstances relating to a particular case, it would be inequitable to require payment or to retain sums previously paid, it may at its discretion:

• waive the payment;
• reduce the amount payable; or
• offer a whole or partial refund of sums already paid.

Annex

• Supervisory approach to incoming CCP groups

  Incoming CCP group	Indicative tiering assessment	Examples of monitoring and/or supervisory activity undertaken by the Bank
  Group A	Incoming CCPs designated as Tier 2 and subject to direct supervision by the Bank.	Direct supervision, except for any areas where comparable compliance is granted. Annual review of key data. Recognition review as required. Comparable compliance review as required. Inclusion in CCP stress testing.
  Group B	Incoming CCPs designated as Tier 1 and subject to Level 2 informed reliance monitoring activity.	Annual review of key data. Recognition review as required. Multi-layer engagement with the home authority that includes updates and exchange of views on key risks and priorities at least quarterly. Assessment of more detailed supervisory information relating to the CCP received periodically from the home authority which might include (but is not limited to): Summaries of risk reviews, model reviews, significant supervisory reviews. Review and assessment letters sent from the relevant home authority to the CCP. The CCP’s self-assessment against the principles for financial market infrastructures (PFMIs). Periodic information sharing on areas of common interest and horizon-scanning. Joint work with home authority, eg the Bank being invited to join a supervisory visit, to join a supervisory examination or participate in a model review (at least one of these annually). Participation in crisis management group, or equivalent, operated by the home authority, where the CCP is discussed. For interoperable CCPs, participation in the interoperable roundtable.
  Group C	Incoming CCPs designated as Tier 1 and subject to Level 1 informed reliance monitoring activity.	Annual review of key data. Recognition review as required. Participation in appropriate bilateral and multi-lateral fora with the relevant home authority to discuss supervisory issues relating to the CCP at least annually. Assessment of the information regarding the CCP shared by the home authority with the Bank. This might include priorities and the supervisory work plan and high-level summaries of decisions on key matters (eg model changes, extension of services etc).
  Group D	Incoming CCPs designated as Tier 1 and not subject to informed reliance monitoring activity.	Annual review of key data. Recognition review as required. Ad-hoc engagement with the home authority and the CCP as required.