The European Association of CCP Clearing Houses published a note assessing alternative supervisory architectures for EU central counterparties (CCPs) in the context of Savings and Investment Union discussions and the European Commission’s targeted consultation on capital markets integration. While EACH members hold differing views on the preferred model, ranging from fully centralised to fully national approaches, the note sets out common features it argues are needed for a workable, effective and efficient supervisory framework. Across models, EACH calls for faster, less burdensome approval processes that reduce time to market, including substantially fewer and quicker approvals than those suggested by the European Securities and Markets Authority in its 2025 draft regulatory technical standards. It also highlights the need for clearer and more proportionate supervisory engagement, cost-effective supervision that avoids fee increases for some CCPs, equal treatment to reduce “gold-plating”, and clearer allocation of responsibilities to avoid duplication, including improving the efficiency of supervisory colleges. The note additionally argues for a clearer separation between policy-making and supervisory teams, and for supervision to better support innovation and competitiveness alongside financial stability and orderly markets, including through less prescriptive Level 2 and Level 3 requirements to preserve CCP autonomy and flexibility. EACH adds that any further centralisation should address who bears fiscal responsibility in a CCP default, and that if ESMA were to become a single EU supervisor for CCPs, internal reorganisation may be needed to manage increased workload and compensate for lost local expertise.
European Association of CCP Clearing Houses 2025-10-01
European Association of CCP Clearing Houses sets out principles for effective EU CCP supervision and highlights risks of further centralisation
The European Association of CCP Clearing Houses (EACH) released a note evaluating supervisory frameworks for EU central counterparties (CCPs) amid Savings and Investment Union discussions. EACH advocates for streamlined approval processes, clearer supervisory engagement, and cost-effective supervision, emphasizing innovation support and fiscal responsibility clarity in potential centralization. The note suggests that if the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) becomes the sole EU supervisor, internal restructuring may be necessary to handle increased responsibilities.