Open Season For Instrument Codes?
This might be slightly belated, but there are some considerations to note about Thomson Reuters opening the Reuters Instrument Codes (RICs) to outside desktops and feeds a few weeks ago. Whether RICs were opened up in response to the European Union's antitrust inquiries, as some have suggested, or just to lead the way to more commercial opportunities for Thomson Reuters, one has to wonder whether simply making once-proprietary codes open-source is the way this should be handled.
Thomson Reuters' opening of RICs follows Bloomberg's decision to open its instrument codes back in 2009, while the Cusip standard operated by Standard & Poor's has always been open. Should instrument codes be handled like the legal entity identifier (LEI), which will have its administrators and operators chosen under guidelines set by agencies including Europe's Financial Stability Board (FSB)?
Ed Ventura, president of industry consultancy Ventura Management Associates, suggests such a possibility. "There's a cost to maintain them," he says of the instrument codes. "They should be open, but I am sensitive to the commercial understanding of it."
While it might not be feasible or possible to standardize several different proprietary instrument codes, in another facet of identification – the LEI – the task before the industry now is to implement a federated model out of the central operating units and local operating units structure that the Financial Stability Board (FSB) has designated for administering the LEI.
"The fastest way to get LEIs into the world is to re-use an existing infrastructure," says Tim Lind, global head of legal entity and corporate actions, enterprise content, at Thomson Reuters. "A federated model itself will take more time to set up, but we support the FSB recommendations to ensure that the governance is appropriate and that public interests are ultimately served, not the interest of any one commercial entity or anyone who harbors any other ambitions that would be associated with the LEI."
Between now and March 2013, it remains to be seen which providers will end up with designations to administer the LEI, and beyond that, just how a variety of providers in different geographies will form a federated model. What was originally foreseen – a tight and comprehensive combination of the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Swift and the Association of National Numbering Agencies (Anna) that was also backed by the industry itself - has given way to something more uncertain.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@waterstechnology.com or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.waterstechnology.com/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.com to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.com to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@waterstechnology.com
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@waterstechnology.com
More on Regulation
American Bankers Assoc. asks SEC: Do you know what you’re doing?
The industry group disagrees severely with regulators’ interpretation of the Financial Data Transparency Act, hinting at possible legal action in a recently published comment letter.
DORA will change the buy vs. build debate… maybe
Waters Wrap: With DORA’s deadline looming, trading firms are having to reassess their long-term tech strategies. Anthony wonders if that means more building and less buying.
The SEC needs a hand with artificial intelligence
The SEC wants to take a tough stance on AI, but it has a talent problem… or a marketing problem. Or both…
Off-channel messaging (and regulators) still a massive headache for banks
Waters Wrap: Anthony wonders why US regulators are waging a war using fines, while European regulators have chosen a less draconian path.
Banks fret over vendor contracts as Dora deadline looms
Thousands of vendor contracts will need repapering to comply with EU’s new digital resilience rules
Chevron’s absence leaves questions for elusive AI regulation in US
The US Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the Chevron deference presents unique considerations for potential AI rules.
Aussie asset managers struggle to meet ‘bank-like’ collateral, margin obligations
New margin and collateral requirements imposed by UMR and its regulator, Apra, are forcing buy-side firms to find tools to help.
The costly sanctions risks hiding in your supply chain
In an age of geopolitical instability and rising fines, financial firms need to dig deep into the securities they invest in and the issuing company’s network of suppliers and associates.