Global Regulator & Central Bank News Roundup
Edition 32026Week of January 19
Global developments
The International Monetary Fund raises its global growth forecast slightly to 3.3 percent for 2026, citing technology investment and supportive policies, while projecting continued easing of headline inflation. The outlook reflects persistent trade policy uncertainty, moderate growth across major economies, and downside risks from potential investment reversals, geopolitical shocks, and financial vulnerabilities.
The International Monetary Fund published its January 2026 World Economic Outlook Update, projecting global growth at 3.3 percent in 2026 and 3.2 percent in 2027, alongside a continued decline in global headline inflation from an estimated 4.1 percent in 2025 to 3.8 percent in 2026 and 3.4 percent in 2027. The outlook is slightly revised upward for 2026 relative to the October 2025 World Economic Outlook, reflecting a balance between headwinds from shifting trade policies and tailwinds from technology-related investment, fiscal and monetary support, and broadly accommodative financial conditions. IMF staff assumptions treat trade policies in place at end-December as permanent, including an underlying US effective tariff rate of 18.5 percent (versus 18.7 percent previously) and 3.5 percent for the rest of the world, with policy uncertainty assumed to remain elevated through 2026. The update highlights that trade tensions have abated but remain prone to flare-ups, including a China–United States truce that reduced bilateral tariffs until November 2026 and paused export controls, and US removal of tariffs on some agricultural products for all countries. Growth projections include 1.8 percent in 2026 for advanced economies (with the United States at 2.4 percent and the euro area at 1.3 percent) and just above 4.0 percent for emerging market and developing economies (with China at 4.5 percent and India at 6.4 percent in 2026), while world trade volume growth is expected to slow to 2.6 percent in 2026. Downside risks remain prominent, including the possibility of an AI-driven investment reversal and associated market correction, renewed trade escalation, geopolitical shocks, and fiscal vulnerabilities that could tighten financial conditions. A related Global Financial Stability Update notes accommodative conditions but points to AI-linked equity volatility, increased reliance on shorter-maturity sovereign issuance amid heavy debt supply, and credit-market transparency and underwriting weaknesses highlighted by recent corporate defaults.
The International Association of Insurance Supervisors published its 2026–2027 Roadmap outlining planned work to strengthen supervisory responses to climate and cyber risks, address structural shifts in life insurance, and advance implementation of global standards. Key initiatives include a revised Global Monitoring Exercise methodology from 2026, Insurance Capital Standard consultations and assessments, and multiple Application and Issues Papers on operational resilience, inclusive insurance, recovery and resolution, and fair value to customers.
The International Association of Insurance Supervisors published its Roadmap 2026–2027, setting out a two-year workplan under its Strategic Plan 2025–2029 to monitor insurance-sector risks, maintain global supervisory standards, support supervisors and assess implementation. Priorities include strengthening supervisory responses to climate-related risks and natural catastrophe protection gaps, adapting to accelerating digital innovation and cyber risks, and reinforcing consistent implementation of global standards. Planned work includes continued Global Monitoring Exercise outputs through the annual Global Insurance Market Report and a mid-year update, with a revised Global Monitoring Exercise methodology from 2026. The roadmap also flags follow-on work on structural shifts in life insurance, including enhanced data collection and potential systemic risk analysis on insurers’ increased allocations to alternative assets (particularly private credit) and growth of asset-intensive reinsurance, alongside a review of supervisory material in these areas. On standards, the IAIS plans to adopt Insurance Capital Standard-related Common Framework standards on supervisory reporting and public disclosure of Insurance Capital Standard results for internationally active insurance groups in November 2026, following a public consultation launched at end-November 2025, and will expand implementation assessment work via 2026 baseline self-assessments for Insurance Capital Standard implementation and, in the second half of 2026, qualitative Common Framework standards. The roadmap’s calendar also indicates publication in early 2026 of an Application Paper on operational resilience objectives and toolkit, consultation in Q1 2026 on an updated Application Paper on inclusive insurance markets, consultation in Q2 2026 on an Issues Paper on customers receiving fair value from insurance products, and publication in Q3 2026 of revised Application Papers on recovery and resolution and the updated inclusive insurance Application Paper.
The International Association of Deposit Insurers has launched a public consultation on how deposit insurance frameworks should adapt to financial innovation and digitalisation, focusing on product coverage, operational resilience, and depositor protection. The supporting report highlights challenges from stablecoins, tokenised deposits, e-money and central bank digital currencies, and notes risks from accelerated withdrawals, misinformation, and reliance on cloud-based infrastructure.
The International Association of Deposit Insurers has launched a public consultation, supported by its report on the impact of financial innovation and digitalisation, to assess how rapid technological change is reshaping deposit insurance systems globally and to gather input on how frameworks should adapt. The consultation centres on practical questions around depositor protection and financial stability as new digital products, new market entrants, and new technologies increasingly interact with, and in some cases mimic, deposit-taking activities. The report structures the discussion around three areas: deposit-related products and digital alternatives such as e-money, stablecoins, tokenised deposits and central bank digital currencies; the actors providing and distributing these services, including fintech firms, neobanks, BigTechs, deposit intermediators and other non-insured deposit-taking institutions; and the technologies underpinning change, including digital data access and automation, artificial intelligence, cloud computing, social media and quantum computing. Across these areas, it flags potential pressure points for deposit insurers, including the need to clarify coverage and public understanding where products are deposit-like but not legally deposits, to reassess mandates and risk assessment practices, and to address operational constraints that could affect payout readiness and resolution execution. Examples explored include alternative approaches to protecting e-money users and the operational record-keeping demands of pass-through treatment, questions about user protection if a stablecoin issuer fails and the extent to which deposit insurance could apply to stablecoin reserve assets held as deposits at insured deposit-taking institutions, and the treatment of tokenised deposits as digital equivalents of traditional deposits alongside risks of public confusion with other tokens. The analysis also highlights how faster digital withdrawals and information dynamics, including social media-driven misinformation, may compress intervention timelines, while increased reliance on cloud services and automation can create dual vulnerabilities by affecting both insured institutions and deposit insurers’ own ability to access records and execute reimbursements.
The Financial Stability Board’s 2025 Resolution Report finds that while resolution frameworks are largely in place and aligned with Key Attributes, implementation remains uneven across banks, insurers and central counterparties. It also updated its Good Practices for Crisis Management Groups with a supplementary note drawing on 2023 bank failures, emphasising operational readiness, improved cross-border coordination and more effective engagement with non-member host authorities.
The Financial Stability Board (FSB) published its 2025 Resolution Report, concluding that foundational resolution frameworks are now mostly in place and that many jurisdictions have aligned their regimes with the FSB’s Key Attributes, alongside continued progress in operational planning and resolvability assessments. Implementation remains uneven across banks, insurers and financial market infrastructures, with the report pointing to execution gaps rather than policy gaps. Resolvability assessment results for 29 global systemically important banks and 14 central counterparties that are systemically important in more than one jurisdiction show continued advances in crisis capabilities, but authorities still see persistent challenges in critical areas for bank resolution, notably funding in resolution and effective bail-in execution in cross-border contexts. The report highlights uneven depth of home-host information sharing on resolution funding, ongoing complexities around foreign currency funding, and the difficulty of obtaining timely liquidity data in fast-moving crises when determining non-viability on liquidity grounds. For CCPs, regimes and planning expectations are established but implementation varies, with ongoing work needed on data and management information systems, evaluation and operationalisation of tools and resources, and cross-border coordination. In insurance, progress is likewise described as mixed. Alongside the report, the FSB also published a revised Good Practices for Crisis Management Groups (CMG) paper, updated with a supplementary implementation note, which distils non-binding practices organised around 16 desired outcomes for home and host authorities managing cross-border crisis preparedness for global systemically important banks, covering a broad range of aspects such as CMG membership and representation, use of institution-specific cooperation agreements, outreach and cooperation with host authorities not represented on firm-specific CMGs, and meeting preparation and cadence. The supplementary note draws on lessons from the 2023 bank failures and a member survey, finding existing guidance on engaging non-CMG host authorities is mostly adequate but that timeliness, channels and the scope of information sharing can be improved through advance planning in business-as-usual conditions, including clearer protocols, confidentiality arrangements and consideration of factors such as firm structure, time zones, local financial market infrastructure linkages and capital markets issuance. Looking ahead, the 2026 programme centres on implementation support and monitoring rather than new global resolution standards, including a thematic peer review of public sector backstop funding mechanisms and follow-on work to synthesise practices on funding in resolution, continued task force work on bail-in execution, further efforts to improve operationalisation of resolution tools across sectors, and a stocktake on resolution planning for central securities depositories, among other things.
Active global consultations
The Board of the International Organization of Securities Commissions is consulting on proposed updates to its standards for valuing collective investment schemes, replacing its 2013 principles for these schemes and its 2007 principles for hedge fund portfolios with one set of 13 Recommendations. The consultation reflects market changes since those standards were issued, including more collective investment schemes holding less liquid and illiquid assets, including private assets; greater retail investment in such schemes; and valuation challenges during periods of market stress. The proposed Recommendations focus on registered, authorized or public open-ended funds. They may also serve as good practices for other funds, while money market funds are excluded. The Recommendations cover valuation policies and governance, including independent oversight and arrangements for stressed markets; conflicts of interest and related disclosure; valuation methodology, including fair value, back testing, calibration, price overrides and consistent application; and the use and oversight of third party valuation service providers. They also address forward pricing, alignment of valuation and dealing frequency, controls for stale valuations, net asset value and valuation disclosures, detection and correction of pricing errors, investor compensation where material harm occurs, and record keeping to support compliance, audits and regulatory oversight.
The Board of the International Organization of Securities Commissions is consulting on proposed updates to its standards for valuing collective investment schemes, replacing its 2013 principles for these schemes and its 2007 principles for hedge fund portfolios with one set of 13 Recommendations. The consultation reflects market changes since those standards were issued, including more collective investment schemes holding less liquid and illiquid assets, including private assets; greater retail investment in such schemes; and valuation challenges during periods of market stress. The proposed Recommendations focus on registered, authorized or public open-ended funds. They may also serve as good practices for other funds, while money market funds are excluded. The Recommendations cover valuation policies and governance, including independent oversight and arrangements for stressed markets; conflicts of interest and related disclosure; valuation methodology, including fair value, back testing, calibration, price overrides and consistent application; and the use and oversight of third party valuation service providers. They also address forward pricing, alignment of valuation and dealing frequency, controls for stale valuations, net asset value and valuation disclosures, detection and correction of pricing errors, investor compensation where material harm occurs, and record keeping to support compliance, audits and regulatory oversight.
The Financial Stability Board is seeking feedback on draft guidance for identifying the insurers that should fall within recovery and resolution planning requirements under the Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes for Financial Institutions. The consultation follows the end of the annual global systemically important insurer identification process and sets out how national resolution or supervisory authorities should decide whether an insurer could be systemically significant or critical upon failure, or could affect financial stability if it fails. The draft guidance proposes that authorities apply established criteria covering an insurer’s nature, scale, complexity, substitutability, cross-border activities and interconnectedness, supported by explanatory comments and illustrative indicators that allow for consistent assessment while preserving flexibility for different markets, legal frameworks and supervisory practices. It also specifies cases where recovery and resolution planning should apply regardless of the broader criteria assessment, including when an insurer performs a critical function that cannot be replaced within a reasonable time and cost, or when its failure is likely to significantly affect the financial system or the real economy, including through material harm to policyholders, systemic disruption or loss of confidence. The consultation further proposes aligning Financial Stability Board guidance on critical functions so that a material impact on either the financial system or the real economy would be enough to bring the function within scope.
The Financial Stability Board is seeking feedback on draft guidance for identifying the insurers that should fall within recovery and resolution planning requirements under the Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes for Financial Institutions. The consultation follows the end of the annual global systemically important insurer identification process and sets out how national resolution or supervisory authorities should decide whether an insurer could be systemically significant or critical upon failure, or could affect financial stability if it fails. The draft guidance proposes that authorities apply established criteria covering an insurer’s nature, scale, complexity, substitutability, cross-border activities and interconnectedness, supported by explanatory comments and illustrative indicators that allow for consistent assessment while preserving flexibility for different markets, legal frameworks and supervisory practices. It also specifies cases where recovery and resolution planning should apply regardless of the broader criteria assessment, including when an insurer performs a critical function that cannot be replaced within a reasonable time and cost, or when its failure is likely to significantly affect the financial system or the real economy, including through material harm to policyholders, systemic disruption or loss of confidence. The consultation further proposes aligning Financial Stability Board guidance on critical functions so that a material impact on either the financial system or the real economy would be enough to bring the function within scope.
Regional developments
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority published Phase 2A of the Hong Kong Taxonomy for Sustainable Finance, expanding coverage to manufacturing and information and communications technology sectors, introducing transition elements, and adding a climate change adaptation objective. The updated taxonomy includes time-bound technical criteria, transition plan requirements, and cross-referencing codes, and remains a voluntary tool for now.
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) published Phase 2A of the Hong Kong Taxonomy for Sustainable Finance, updating Hong Kong’s framework for classifying economic activities that contribute to green and sustainable development following consultation on a Phase 2A prototype launched in September 2025. Phase 2A incorporates Phase 1 content (published in May 2024) and supersedes the Phase 1 taxonomy for future references. Phase 2A expands coverage to the Manufacturing and Information and Communications Technology sectors, introduces transition elements alongside green and exclusion classifications, and adds a climate change adaptation objective using an initial whitelist approach focused on water-related measures. The updated taxonomy embeds time-bound technical criteria including sector- and activity-specific sunset dates, adds International Standard Industrial Classification codes to activity cards to support cross-referencing with other major frameworks, and specifies where activity-level or entity-level transition plans are required for certain Transition Activities and Transition Measures; it also clarifies that Transition Measures are eligible for transition capital expenditure and operational expenses financing but cannot be used to claim revenue alignment. The consultation drew 25 responses across banks, asset managers, insurers, corporates, industry and professional associations, and non-government organisations. The Hong Kong Monetary Authority states the taxonomy remains a voluntary tool at this stage and will be developed further in phases, with work to prioritise climate change mitigation and adaptation while considering additional guidance on use cases, monitoring and verification, and potential future incorporation of Do No Significant Harm and Minimum Social Safeguards.
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority released the Project Cargox Recommendation Report outlining 20 recommendations and a roadmap to modernise trade finance through enhancements to data integration, infrastructure, and cross-border connectivity. Key measures include expanding the Commercial Data Interchange, promoting electronic trade documents and digital identity, exploring new payment mechanisms, and aligning with global standards for cross-border digital trade.
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) published the Project Cargox Recommendation Report setting out 20 recommendations and a development roadmap to modernise Hong Kong’s trade finance landscape. The report reflects the work of an HKMA-convened Expert Panel on Cargox of 24 industry experts. The recommendations are structured under three pillars: Data, Infrastructure and Connectivity. Under "Data", they prioritise expanding the Commercial Data Interchange to integrate government logistics and customs data platforms and connect additional commercial trade, logistics, counterparty, e-commerce and historical transaction datasets, including combining trade flow with borrower cash flow data and feeding trade data into SME credit scoring through Commercial Credit Reference Agency 2.0. Under "Infrastructure", the roadmap promotes paperless trade through wider use of electronic trade documents such as electronic bills of lading, considers a trade finance document registry to detect duplicated financing, advances digital identity adoption including CorpID and Legal Entity Identifiers, and explores new payment mechanisms such as central bank digital currencies, tokenised deposits and licensed stablecoins with related payment data integrated into CDI. Under "Connectivity", it calls for strengthening links with the Chinese Mainland, exploring connectivity with the ASEAN Single Window and other overseas trade corridors, and adopting globally interoperable data and documentary standards to support cross-border digital trade. The roadmap sequences delivery across short-, medium- and longer-term horizons through 2030, with early work focused on expanding data availability via CDI.
The Central Bank of Armenia issued its first regulatory package for crypto-asset service providers, effective January 31, 2026, setting licensing, capital, and managerial registration requirements and mandating that services be provided only by registered legal entities. Transitional provisions apply to existing providers and prior public offerings, with compliance deadlines of one year and three months respectively.
The Central Bank of Armenia has published a first package of regulations governing crypto-asset service providers, which will enter into force on January 31, 2026. The package sets requirements on licensing and the acquisition of a qualifying holding, minimum total capital, registration of managers, and the form and content of the crypto-asset offer document, and establishes that crypto-asset services may be provided in Armenia only by legal entities registered and licensed by the Central Bank. Licensing is tied to registration with the Central Bank, meeting capital requirements that vary by service type, having internal policies and procedures, and completing the managers’ registration process. Legal entities and individual entrepreneurs that were providing crypto-asset services when the Law on “Crypto-Assets” entered into force on 04/07/2025 must be registered and licensed within one year from January 31, 2026 or cease providing or offering such services. Issuers or distributors that sold crypto-assets in Armenia through a public offering before the offer-document regulation takes effect must, within three months from January 31, 2026, publish and submit to the Central Bank an offer document meeting the new requirements, provided the crypto-assets remain in circulation and no statutory exemption applies.
The European Banking Authority has transferred its anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism functions to the European Union Authority for Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism. The handover includes key supervisory tools and databases, with AMLA to directly supervise 40 high-risk institutions from 2028, while EBA retains a prudential role in cooperation with AMLA.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) reported that all of its anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT) mandates and functions have been transferred to European Union's Authority for Anti-Money Laundering and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (AMLA), ending EBA’s stand-alone AML/CFT role introduced in 2020. The handover includes core tools and outputs such as the EuReCa database, supervisory insights and risk assessments, while existing EBA AML/CFT guidelines and standards remain applicable until replaced by AMLA and will be supported by transition periods. AMLA will complete the EU Single Rulebook, promote supervisory convergence and coordinate national Financial Intelligence Units to improve cross-border intelligence exchange, and will directly supervise 40 of the most complex high-risk financial institutions or groups from 2028, with EBA continuing to address ML/TF risks through prudential regulation in cooperation with AMLA.
The European Central Bank and the European Systemic Risk Board published a joint report outlining how geopolitical fragmentation and policy uncertainty are transmitting to the euro area and European Union financial system through tighter financial conditions, increased market stress and reduced credit flows. The report proposes an indicator-based monitoring framework and notes material downside risks to growth, highlighting post-2014 declines in lending and cross-border exposures.
The European Central Bank (ECB) and the European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB) published a joint report, assessing how geoeconomic fragmentation, rising geopolitical risks and policy uncertainty can transmit to the euro area and European Union financial system. The report finds that geopolitical shocks and policy uncertainty tend to tighten financial conditions, increase financial market stress and risk premia, and reduce loan growth. The analysis sets out a monitoring framework that groups geopolitical risks into five categories and focuses on the financial transmission channel, where spillbacks occur through higher risk premia and market stress that can raise credit, market, liquidity and operational risks for financial institutions. It draws on a database of 40 indicators and proposes indicator-based monitoring tools, including a geopolitical indicators heatmap, noting an intensification of geopolitical risks in recent years and a surge in policy uncertainty during 2024 and 2025; it also points to a 27% rise in World Trade Organization trade disputes between 2015 and 2024. Model-based results indicate material downside tail risks for the real economy, with geopolitical indicators acting as an increasing drag on Growth-at-Risk since 2014 by one to two percentage points, while granular evidence suggests banks and non-banks adjust by reducing lending and cross-border exposures, including a roughly 6% fall in the probability of new lending relationships and a 9% reduction in average loan amounts for affected banks, alongside a 17% decline in non-bank exposures to the rest of the world after the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The report flags gaps in indicator availability and comparability and points to further work to build more harmonised datasets and complement indicator-based monitoring with more elaborate scenario analyses, positioning the toolkit as a basis for ongoing financial stability assessment and the calibration of macroprudential responses.
The Joint Bank Reporting Committee published its 2026 work programme and initial recommendations on semantic integration for Environmental, Social and Governance Pillar 3 disclosures to support future ESG reporting requirements. Priorities include preparatory work toward a common data dictionary, ongoing harmonisation efforts, and alignment of definitions across frameworks, with further targeted recommendations expected.
The Joint Bank Reporting Committee (JBRC) published its 2026 work programme and in parallel, it issued its first recommendations on semantic integration based on Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Pillar 3 disclosures, intended to support authorities in developing ESG reporting requirements. Work programme priorities include continuous, high-priority semantic integration activities led by the Expert Group on Semantic Integration (EG SINT), covering topics such as EBA ESG reporting and the Single Resolution Board valuation data set, and broader harmonisation work with authorities and industry via the Reporting Contact Group. The plan also includes preparatory work toward a common data dictionary, coordinated with the Data Point Model (DPM) Alliance and a Digital Europe Programme-funded project to be launched by DG FISMA in 2026, with a preliminary report expected by Q4 2026. Other deliverables include a joint note setting a target picture and workstreams for the integrated reporting system by Q2 2026, further harmonisation topics prioritised by industry stakeholders, an investigation of proportionality options for small and less complex institutions, and taking ownership of a set of integrated-reporting terms and definitions by end-Q1 2026. The ESG Pillar 3 recommendations draw on the draft Implementing Technical Standards on ESG disclosures consulted in May 2025 and focus on aligning concepts and definitions across frameworks, including areas such as residual maturity, real estate collateral and valuation choices, energy performance data and treatment of estimated metrics, and classification issues for collateralised loans and physical risk. Additional, more targeted recommendations relevant to ESG reporting requirements are expected in the coming months, and further recommendations covering the ESCB’s Integrated Reporting Framework, FinRep and other areas are under preparation.
The UK Parliament's Treasury Committee has warned that the Bank of England, Financial Conduct Authority and HM Treasury are taking a reactive approach to artificial intelligence in financial services, potentially exposing consumers and markets to harm. It recommends AI-specific stress testing, guidance on applying consumer protection rules, and designation of major AI and cloud providers under the Critical Third Parties Regime by end-2026.
UK Parliament's Treasury Committee has published a report on artificial intelligence in financial services, concluding that the Bank of England, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and HM Treasury are relying on a largely reactive approach that could expose consumers and the financial system to potentially serious harm. The report sets out recommendations to strengthen supervisory tools, improve regulatory clarity for firms and expand oversight of critical technology providers. Evidence to the Committee indicated that more than 75% of UK financial services firms use AI, with the largest take-up among insurers and international banks, including for administrative automation and core activities such as processing insurance claims and credit assessments. The report highlights risks including limited transparency in AI-driven credit and insurance decisions, the potential for financial exclusion from AI-enabled product tailoring, misleading or misinforming outcomes from unregulated AI-enabled financial advice tools such as ChatGPT, and increased fraud, alongside financial stability risks including heightened cyber vulnerabilities, reliance on a small number of US technology firms for AI and cloud services, and the potential for AI-driven trading to amplify herding. It recommends that the Bank of England and the FCA conduct AI-specific stress testing for AI-driven market shocks and that the FCA publish comprehensive, practical guidance for firms by end-2026 on how existing consumer protection rules apply to AI and on accountability and assurance expectations for senior managers under the Senior Managers and Certification Regime. On operational resilience, the report focuses on the Critical Third Parties Regime, which gives the Bank of England and the FCA investigation and enforcement powers over designated non-financial providers such as AI and cloud firms, with HM Treasury responsible for designations. It notes that no organisations have yet been designated and recommends designating major AI and cloud providers by end-2026, with the Bank of England’s Financial Policy Committee monitoring progress and using its recommendation powers to HM Treasury if needed; HM Treasury officials indicated that evidence gathering is under way and that initial designations are expected within 12 months.
The UK Financial Conduct Authority launched a consultation on applying the Consumer Duty to regulated cryptoasset activities for UK retail customers, supported by draft guidance on meeting Principle 12 and PRIN 2A. The proposals align cryptoasset firm obligations with those of other authorised firms, addressing crypto-specific risks in distribution, fair value, communications, among other things.
The UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has published a consultation on how the Consumer Duty will apply to firms carrying on regulated cryptoasset activities for UK retail customers, alongside draft non-Handbook guidance setting out expectations for complying with Principle 12 and PRIN 2A in a cryptoasset context. The proposals would apply the Duty to cryptoasset firms broadly in the same way as other Financial Services and Markets Act 2000-authorised firms, with the guidance focusing on crypto-specific distribution chains, overseas or unidentifiable manufacturers, and the need to support good outcomes for retail customers, including those in vulnerable circumstances. It sets expectations for manufacturers and distributors on defining target markets, assessing and evidencing fair value for fees and charges they control, and ensuring communications and customer support enable informed decisions, with examples of poor practice such as hidden or opaque fees and overly complex redemption or withdrawal processes. The FCA also proposes that the Duty would not apply to trades between participants executed on a UK Qualifying Cryptoasset Trading Platform, while continuing to apply to the operator’s broader interactions with retail customers, and that the Duty would apply to public offers and admissions disclosures for UK-issued qualifying stablecoins but not for other qualifying cryptoassets within the Admissions and Disclosures regime.
The UK Prudential Regulation Authority has confirmed final rules to implement Basel 3.1 from 1 January 2027, restate Capital Requirements Regulation provisions into its Rulebook, and introduce the Strong and Simple regime for small domestic banks.
The UK Prudential Regulation Authority has published final policy statements confirming its rule instruments and supervisory materials to implement the Basel 3.1 standards, restate the remaining relevant provisions of the Capital Requirements Regulation into the PRA Rulebook, and introduce the Strong and Simple simplified capital regime for Small Domestic Deposit Takers. The package is designed to operate alongside HM Treasury’s commencement regulations under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2023 that revoke and replace the relevant CRR provisions to support implementation. Basel 3.1 requirements apply from 1 January 2027, with capital requirements for market risk under the internal models approach applying from 1 January 2028. The 1 January 2027 start date aligns with the PRA’s earlier decision, taken in consultation with HM Treasury, to delay UK implementation of Basel 3.1 by one year. The CRR restatement statement confirms no substantive change from the near-final policy, with minor amendments to align certain materials with the final Basel 3.1 package and updates also covering the PRA’s external credit assessment institution mapping policy. The PRA expects to publish a final reporting taxonomy reflecting the Basel 3.1 package, while HM Treasury will publish a full response to its Policy Update 2025 on applying the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 model of regulation to the UK CRR in due course.
De Nederlandsche Bank reported that Dutch indirect crypto investments via securities rose to EUR 1.2 billion by October 2025, up from EUR 81 million in 2020, though still comprising only 0.03% of total securities holdings. The increase stems mainly from asset value gains, with holdings concentrated in a few foreign-issued instruments; separately, direct crypto holdings by financial institutions stood at EUR 113 million at end-Q3 2025.
De Nederlandsche Bank (DNB) published statistics showing that Dutch companies, institutions and households held around EUR 1.2 billion in indirect crypto investments via crypto-linked securities by October 2025, up from around EUR 81 million at end-2020. Despite the increase, these holdings still represent a small share of the Netherlands’ total securities holdings at about 0.03%. he figures cover three categories of crypto securities: Exchange Traded Funds, Exchange Traded Notes and crypto treasury shares, all of which provide crypto exposure without directly buying or holding crypto-assets. Households held the largest share of crypto Exchange Traded Funds and Exchange Traded Notes at end-October 2025 (EUR 182 million and EUR 213 million respectively), while pension funds held the largest share of crypto treasury shares (EUR 287 million), followed by households (EUR 243 million); investment funds also held EUR 40 million in crypto Exchange Traded Funds. The rise in indirect holdings is attributed mainly to increases in underlying crypto-asset values, with Bitcoin rising by around 72% over the past five years before falling in late 2025, while net purchases were negative by about EUR 45 million over the same period; holdings are also concentrated, with seven securities accounting for 70% of the total and issued by foreign institutions, including in the United States and Sweden. Separately, De Nederlandsche Bank reported direct crypto-asset holdings by the Dutch financial sector of EUR 113 million at end-third quarter 2025, based on reporting from financial institutions collected since early 2025.
Argentina’s National Securities Commission launched a consultation on draft rules introducing a formal process for issuers to change public offering regimes, aiming to simplify transitions while preserving transparency and investor protection. Key provisions include eligibility criteria, staged procedural filings, and a mandatory tender offer for dissenting equity shareholders when shifting to a less stringent regime.
Argentina's National Securities Commission (CNV) has opened a public consultation on draft rules that would introduce a dedicated procedure for issuers to switch between public offering regimes, with the stated aim of simplifying regime changes while maintaining transparency and investor-protection safeguards. The draft would add a new “Change of Regime” section to the CNV Rules and define the “General Regime”. Issuers in the General Regime or the CNV SME regime, whether admitted by shares or negotiable obligations, could request a move to any CNV regime if they meet the destination regime’s requirements and are not in arrears on supervisory fees or, for negotiable obligations, interest or principal, and are not in insolvency or similar proceedings. The process would require approval by an extraordinary shareholders’ meeting, immediate material-event disclosure once the meeting is convened, and staged filings via the TAD platform, including a pre-meeting information document published 20 days in advance and specified post-meeting submissions within five days. For equity issuers moving to a lower-requirement regime, the draft would require a mandatory public tender offer to shareholders who vote against, abstain or are absent, at a fair price supported by guarantees and with supporting shareholders’ holdings immobilised until completion, while CNV approval would be limited to formal and regulatory compliance without assessing the economic merits of the offered price.
The Bermuda Monetary Authority is consulting on amendments to the Insurance Act 1978 to introduce a Parametric Special Purpose Insurer class, establishing a tailored framework for fully collateralised parametric risk transfer. The proposal allows expanded cedant eligibility, preserves existing SPI distinctions, and sets collateral, capital, and governance requirements aligned with the Insurance Code of Conduct.
The Bermuda Monetary Authority (BMA) has published a consultation paper proposing amendments to the Insurance Act 1978 to create a new Special Purpose Insurer class, the Parametric Special Purpose Insurer (PSPI), with a dedicated framework for Bermuda alternative capital insurers and reinsurers adopting parametric business models. The proposed class would also provide an additional pathway for prospective registrants entering the Bermuda market, while existing registrants offering parametric covers would not be required to reclassify. Under the proposal, a PSPI would write fully collateralised business transferring risk via parametric covers with predefined measurable events and specified payout amounts, while retaining the existing SPI distinction between restricted and unrestricted strategies. The framework would expand eligible cedants beyond the current SPI expectation that reinsurance is written only for non-affiliated, regulated cedants generally rated A- or higher by AM Best or similar, allowing PSPIs to transact with other “sophisticated” cedants for direct business based on enhanced criteria. Each contract would require collateral equal to or greater than the full exposure limit, held as cash, cash equivalents, or letters of credit and invested only in high-quality, low-risk assets, alongside a paid-up capital requirement of USD 1 and governance expectations aligned to the Insurance Code of Conduct. The PSPI class would be reserved for traditional parametric business, with innovative insurers conducting parametric activity remaining within the existing Insurance Innovation framework.
Ghana's Securities and Exchange Commission is finalizing a regulatory sandbox framework under the Virtual Asset Service Providers Act, 2025, to allow controlled testing of virtual asset products. Once launched, licensing applications will open for activities including tokenization, virtual asset exchange traded funds, and mining and validation on securities.
Ghana's Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is finalizing a regulatory sandbox framework for Virtual Asset Service Providers under the Virtual Asset Service Providers Act, 2025, creating a controlled environment to test innovative virtual asset products and services under the Commission’s regulatory oversight. Once the framework is complete, the Commission will open applications for licensing across specified virtual asset service categories, including exchanges and trading platforms, issuance, tokenization, virtual asset exchange traded funds, managers, brokerage and investment advisory, and mining and validation on securities. The sandbox is intended to support responsible innovation while ensuring investor protection, market integrity, and compliance with AML/CFT, with lessons from the pilot phase set to feed into future virtual asset policy development.
The Central Bank of Jordan has issued lending-based crowdfunding rules requiring platform licensing, robust governance frameworks, borrower disclosures, and participant caps, while restricting related-party activity and mandating segregation and audit of client funds. The framework applies to platforms targeting Jordanian residents or operated from Jordan and excludes consumer-purpose loans.
The Central Bank of Jordan has issued instructions regulating lending-based crowdfunding activity, applying to companies that operate online platforms to collect funds from participants and extend credit to borrowers for projects in Jordan, excluding consumer-purpose financing. Licensing is required where the operator is based in Jordan or markets the platform to Jordan residents. Firms must maintain board-approved frameworks for credit, pricing, risk management, cybersecurity, outsourcing, conflicts management and AML/CFT, apply customer due diligence, and disclose loan and project information through a borrower loan data report and standardised contracts. Projects may be offered for up to 60 days and participants have a five-business-day cooling-off right. Cumulative participation is capped at 15% of net annual income for natural persons and 30% of net assets for legal persons across Jordanian platforms, with a 25% cap per loan, while the company’s own participation is capped at 10% (up to 30% if under-subscribed). Client funds must be segregated in per-project bank accounts, protected from enforcement actions against the company, not used to earn interest or returns, and be subject to monthly external audit. The instructions also bar cash transactions, restrict related-party projects and participation by owners, board members and key function holders, and set ongoing disclosure and complaint-handling obligations.
The Canadian Securities Administrators finalized amendments to modernize the continuous disclosure regime for investment funds, including streamlined financial statement requirements, new related party transaction reporting via Form 81-107A, and exemptions from duplicative conflict of interest reporting. Changes apply from April 22, 2026, with remaining fund reporting reforms to be addressed separately.
The Canadian Securities Administrators (CSA) published final amendments to modernize the continuous disclosure regime for investment funds, intended to reduce regulatory burden for investment fund managers while maintaining the quality and timeliness of investor disclosure. The package adopts amendments to National Instruments 81-101, 81-102, 81-106 and 81-107, alongside related changes to the companion policy commentary. The changes include exemptions from certain conflict of interest reporting requirements where similar obligations are already met, and introduce a standardized approach to related party transaction reporting, including a new Form 81-107A and a requirement for managers to prepare an annual “Manager’s Report on Related Party Transactions” for inclusion as an appendix to the independent review committee’s annual report to securityholders. Financial statement requirements are streamlined by removing certain class- or series-level disclosures that are not required under International Financial Reporting Standards, and the simplified prospectus form is updated through minor editorial and other revisions. The amendments are set to come into force on April 22, 2026. The CSA indicated that work on the separate initiative to replace the Management Report of Fund Performance with a new Fund Report, and the related Fund Expense Ratio initiative, will be addressed in a subsequent publication.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation adopted revised Guidelines for Appeals of Material Supervisory Determinations, replacing the Supervision Appeals Review Committee with an independent Office of Supervisory Appeals. The Office will decide appeals through panels of external officials and operate separately from supervisory divisions.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) has adopted revised Guidelines for Appeals of Material Supervisory Determinations that establish an Office of Supervisory Appeals as the final level of review for supervisory appeals, replacing the Supervision Appeals Review Committee. Under the revised framework, the Office will sit as an independent, standalone unit within the agency, separate from the supervisory divisions that make the underlying determinations. Appeals will be decided by three-member panels of externally hired reviewing officials, with each panel required to include at least one member with bank supervisory or examination experience and at least one member with industry experience. The Guidelines also clarify the scope and operation of the process, including that the institution bears the burden of proof, the Office will make an independent determination without deferring to either party while remaining bound by FDIC policies, and ex parte communications concerning the substance of an appeal between the Office and supervisory staff must be shared in writing.\
Monetary policy developments
The latest decisions reinforce a broadly cautious bias, with most central banks opting to hold rates steady amid still-uneven disinflation and lingering external risks. Romania’s NBR kept the policy rate at 6.50%, arguing that only a marginal fall in headline inflation alongside firmer core pressures warrants a steady, restrictive stance. In Asia, Bank Indonesia maintained the BI-Rate at 4.75%, emphasising rupiah stabilisation and the 2026–27 inflation objective, while the Bank of Japan held the uncollateralised overnight call rate at ~0.75% on an 8–1 vote following December’s hike. Bank Negara Malaysia likewise left the OPR at 2.75%, judging the setting "appropriate and supportive" as growth stays resilient and inflation remains contained. In Europe, Norges Bank kept its policy rate at 4.00%, signalling it is “not in a hurry” to ease further given underlying inflation near 3% and elevated uncertainty. Kazakhstan’s NBK also stayed on hold, keeping the base rate at 18.0% and flagging persistent pro-inflationary risks from demand, regulated-price adjustments and fiscal/tax uncertainty. Türkiye represented the main outlier for the week, delivering further easing with a 100 bp cut in the one-week repo rate to 37%, while reiterating it will maintain tight conditions until price stability is secured and stands ready to re-tighten if the disinflation path deteriorates.