Template:M comp disc EUA Annex (d)(i)(1): Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
'''{{euaprov|Cash Settlement}}''': Trick question. There ''is'' no provision for cash-settlement under the ISDA Emissions Annex. Will that stop counterparties asking you to specify a settlement method? Probably not. Does it matter? Also probably not. What if you ''want'' a cash settlement option? Not out of the ballpark — ones eligibility for EMIR, and as such hedge exempotions, might depend on whether the forward is cash settlable, in theory, or not. There is no good reason for this: it springs from the paranoid brow of those toiler legal counsel who trying to parse the [[De minimis threshold test|eligibility or Emissions derivatives under the refitted delegated regulations of MiFID 2]] — our advice is just don’t go there — but you just never know.
{{emissions comparison|{{euaprov|Settlement}}|{{efetaprov|Delivery, Acceptance and Scheduling Obligations}}|{{ietaprov|Primary Obligation}}}}


'''[[Situation normal]]... ''': Techy drafting slip from {{icds}}: “Number of Allowances to be Delivered” isn’t a thing: there is “{{euaprov|Number of Allowances}}”, which is the notional size of the {{euaprov|Transaction}}, and then there is {{euaprov|Allowances to be Delivered}} which references the particular number of Allowances to be settled under an {{euaprov|Option}} and thus already builds in a number.
'''[[Situation normal]]... ''': Techy drafting slip from {{icds}}: “Number of Allowances to be Delivered” isn’t a thing: there is “{{euaprov|Number of Allowances}}”, which is the notional size of the {{euaprov|Transaction}}, and then there is {{euaprov|Allowances to be Delivered}} which references the particular number of Allowances to be settled under an {{euaprov|Option}} and thus already builds in a number.