Articles 40(1), 40(2) and 44(2) make clear the backloading requirements that Market Participants should consider the minimum requirement for the reporting of contracts which were concluded before the date on which the reporting obligation becomes applicable and remain outstanding on that date i.e. 7th April 2016.
Where other information which is required to be reported under REMIT can be extracted from market participants' existing records, market participants shall also report that information.
But could ACER please provide some clarity as to whether trades would need to be backload reported if trades have a delivery and settlement date prior to the 7th April 2016 but where there may be some scenarios whereby there will be some cash flows/payments that will not be able to be made until after this date but will not impact the trade or the delivery.
An example of this may be the result of the way that a trade is priced e.g. the trade is agreed and concluded pre- 7th April 2016 but priced as an average over all of April 2016 hence the price will not be known until it is calculated after 7th April 2016.
On the basis that all aspects of the trade will be concluded/ settled/delivered prior to the 7th April 2016, XXXX would like to confirm ACERs view that these would be out of scope for the backloading requirement based on:
- the agreement and conclusion of the trade and/or any delivery will have taken place prior to the 7th April 2016 and that the outstanding cash flow is not material in the context of REMIT transparency or in relation to market manipulation;
- in the spirit of what REMIT is trying to achieve, reporting these trades to ACER would add little apparent value in terms of transparency, market manipulation or market impact and that
- the TRUM seems to hint (although not explicit) that the delivery of the contracts is the key factor for reporting requirement generally (3.2.1 point (iv)).
Since the contract and all its aspects have been concluded/ settled/delivered prior to 7 April 2016 the obligation to report backloaded contracts does not apply for the above-mentioned scenario.