Elective eligible counterparties - COBS Provision: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 2: Line 2:
{{mifid categorisation}}
{{mifid categorisation}}


The famous "{{cobsprov|elective ECP}}" categorisation. As you'll see from the snapshot below:
The famous {{cobsprov|elective ECP}}categorisation:
*Many {{cobsprov|per se professional client}}s are also {{cobsprov|per se eligible counterparties}} - but not all.
*Many {{cobsprov|per se professional client}}s are also {{cobsprov|per se eligible counterparties}} but not all.
*Those {{cobsprov|per se professional client}}s that are not {{cobsprov|per se eligible ECP}}s - ie that are {{cobsprov|elective ECP}}s - can only be treated as {{cobsprov|ECP}}s if ''they'' have requested this categorisation. Now one might, of course, gently put that idea in such a client's head: nothing wrong with that. Politely suggesting an elective ECP might wish to think about requesting an upgrade is one thing - but one cannot unilaterally categorise an elective ECP as an ECPwithout them first requesting it.
*Those {{cobsprov|per se professional client}}s that are not {{cobsprov|per se eligible ECP}}s — i.e., that are {{cobsprov|elective ECP}}s can only be treated as {{cobsprov|ECP}}s if ''they'' have requested this categorisation. Now one might, of course, gently put that idea in such a client’s head: nothing wrong with that. Politely suggesting an elective ECP might wish to think about requesting an upgrade is one thing but one cannot unilaterally categorise an elective ECP as an ECP without them first requesting it.
*an "elective professional client" (ie one is able to be ugraded from retail to professional) cannot further request to be treated as an {{cobsprov|ECP}}.
*an "[[elective professional client]]" (ie one is able to be upgraded from retail to professional) cannot further request to be treated as an {{cobsprov|ECP}}.