Template:M summ EUA Annex Abandonment of Scheme: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tag: Reverted |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[Abandonment of Scheme - Emissions Annex Provision|What]] happens if, in its infinite wisdom, the European Union decides that an {{euaprov|Emissions Trading Scheme}} is a silly idea and we should just embrace a future as Venusians, or Scottish vintners or something similar. You may see people tinker around with this — our favourite is “... or there is a proposal to abandon the {{euaprov|Scheme}}... ” which given its looseness (there’s always some wingnut from a minority in an some oil-burning pressure group proposing something like that) and the lack of consequences beyond the transaction should it happen or not happen — it isn’t like it is an illegality or something where you can go to prison if you blithely carry on — there really seems no sensible call for this. | [[Abandonment of Scheme - Emissions Annex Provision|What]] happens if, in its infinite wisdom, the European Union decides that an {{euaprov|Emissions Trading Scheme}} is a silly idea and we should just embrace a future as Venusians, or Scottish vintners or something similar. You may see people tinker around with this — our favourite is “... or there is a proposal to abandon the {{euaprov|Scheme}}... ” which given its looseness (there’s always some wingnut from a minority in an some oil-burning pressure group proposing something like that) and the lack of consequences beyond the transaction should it happen or not happen — it isn’t like it is an illegality or something where you can go to prison if you blithely carry on — there really seems no sensible call for this. | ||
===What happens=== | |||
If there is such an abandonment, the annex allocates the loss by requiring the person writing the option refunding whatever has been paid by way of premium or forward purchase, putting the parties back in the position they would have been in had the transaction never existed. Thereby, whoever went long the EUA exposure is reset to zero: the {{isdaprov|Delivering Party}} has nothing and has to deliver nothing (yay), but has to give back to {{isdaprov|Receiving Party}} anything it had already paid in the expectation of getting something (boo, kind of, but fair enough); and where {{isdaprov|Delivering Party}} has bought a {{isdaprov|Put}} — being the right to sell something at a set price in the future if that happens to be more than the prevailing market price — {{isdaprov|Receiving Party}} has to refund that [[premium]] (boo) but equally doesn't have to pay the strike for an asset that doesn’t exist anymore (yay). | |||
Revision as of 14:55, 4 October 2022
What happens if, in its infinite wisdom, the European Union decides that an Emissions Trading Scheme is a silly idea and we should just embrace a future as Venusians, or Scottish vintners or something similar. You may see people tinker around with this — our favourite is “... or there is a proposal to abandon the Scheme... ” which given its looseness (there’s always some wingnut from a minority in an some oil-burning pressure group proposing something like that) and the lack of consequences beyond the transaction should it happen or not happen — it isn’t like it is an illegality or something where you can go to prison if you blithely carry on — there really seems no sensible call for this.
What happens
If there is such an abandonment, the annex allocates the loss by requiring the person writing the option refunding whatever has been paid by way of premium or forward purchase, putting the parties back in the position they would have been in had the transaction never existed. Thereby, whoever went long the EUA exposure is reset to zero: the Delivering Party has nothing and has to deliver nothing (yay), but has to give back to Receiving Party anything it had already paid in the expectation of getting something (boo, kind of, but fair enough); and where Delivering Party has bought a Put — being the right to sell something at a set price in the future if that happens to be more than the prevailing market price — Receiving Party has to refund that premium (boo) but equally doesn't have to pay the strike for an asset that doesn’t exist anymore (yay).