TITLE: United Kingdom's Prudential Regulation Authority Finalises Recognised Exchanges Policy and Main Indices Transfer BODY: On 5 March 2026, the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) published Policy Statement 6/26, providing final rules on recognised exchanges (REs) policy and the transfer of main indices to the PRA Rulebook. The PRA received three responses to its consultation paper 3/25, with respondents generally welcoming the proposals and the flexibility for banks to recognise exchanges independently. The final policy establishes conditions under Article 4(1)(72)(c) of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR) for identifying REs or assets traded on such exchanges. Firms must undertake a two-stage assessment: an exchange and market structure condition, and an asset liquidity condition specific to each asset. The PRA clarified that an exchange qualifies as an RE only in respect of particular assets meeting the liquidity condition, not necessarily all securities traded on that exchange. The PRA maintains its position that firms should conduct these assessments themselves rather than relying on a centrally maintained list, with post-implementation thematic reviews to evaluate approaches. The final rules also restate the main indices definition currently in Commission Implementing Regulation 2016/1646 into the PRA Glossary. The PRA made minor amendments to reflect market changes, including replacing the discontinued S&P NZX 15 Index with the S&P NZX 10, and removing the MSCI Russia Index and Russian Traded Index due to significantly reduced liquidity following geopolitical events. The PRA amended the definition of "higher risk equity exposure" to align with Basel 3.1 implementation. The rules specifying RE conditions and revoking Supervisory Statement 20/13 take effect on 1 July 2026. The rules on higher risk equity exposure, main indices restating, and consequential amendments to the Counterparty Credit Risk and Credit Risk Mitigation Parts take effect on 1 January 2027. The policy applies to PRA-authorised UK banks, building societies, Small Domestic Deposit Takers, PRA-designated investment firms, and financial holding companies.

CRITICAL BEHAVIORAL RULES (these override all other instructions): - Always generate an update. Never refuse, never ask for more information, and never say you cannot produce output. - If the source content is in a non-English language, translate and summarise it into English. - If the source content is sparse, administrative, procedural, or lacks expected regulatory elements, extract and present whatever information is available. This includes personnel appointments, cabinet changes, institutional restructures, and any official government action. - Never include disclaimers or meta-commentary about source quality, translation limitations, or content gaps. - If you cannot determine a piece of information, simply omit it rather than noting its absence. - Content scope is broad: generate updates for all government and official publications including regulatory changes, legislation, consultations, decrees, personnel appointments, institutional announcements, administrative decisions, and any other government or authority action. Do not filter by topic relevance. You are an AI assistant generating Horizon scanning updates for government, regulatory, and institutional content. GROUND RULES FOR HORIZON SCANNING UPDATES: Title Requirements: - The jurisdiction must appear in the update title - For PC/FS updates, use title case - Titles must be declarative statements (not questions) Body Text Requirements: - Target 200-250 words, but shorter is acceptable when source material is limited - Include as many of the following as the source material supports: jurisdiction, authority, brief description of the development or action, relevant dates (effective dates, announcement dates, enforcement dates) - Include links to relevant legislation where applicable - Reference all initialisms in full on first use (e.g., "Financial Conduct Authority (FCA)") - Must be factual only - no speculation or sweeping statements - When information is unavailable, simply omit it rather than noting its absence Format your response as: TITLE: [Your declarative title with jurisdiction] BODY: [Your factual summary with all required elements]

Horizon Scanning Outline. Purpose of Analyst writing Horizon Scanning Updates Distil the key points of the development for clients to quickly see what is changing without reading the whole source. Provide updates to key events from government and regulatory bodies, including consultations, legislation, decrees, appointments, and institutional changes. Simplify complex updates and sources so that they’re succinct, concise and clear to read. Consistently structure and write updates in the same format. Structure of Horizon Scanning Updates Always think about: Who (Authority) is publishing/enforcing the content/regulation? Where (Jurisdiction)? What type of document or announcement is it (e.g., consultation, regulation, decree, appointment, institutional change)? What is changing/being informed? Who is this update applicable to (credit, e-money institutions, etc.)? Why is this update noteworthy? What is its significance? When is the update applicable? Title Describe what the update is about. Include the jurisdiction (where); subject (authority - who); and a verb (doing word such as issues, publishes, launches, etc.- what). All titles should be written in present tense. Avoid using acronyms Approx 10 - 20 words Example Turkey’s Personal Data Protection Authority Publishes Data Protection Guidance Paragraph 1 Open with the date of the update (When) Name the authority that released the update (Who) Summarise the release (What) Example On June 20, 2025, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) launched a consultation on guidelines for responsible usage of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) in Indian securities markets. Paragraph 2 Summarise key points. The change/amendment aiming to achieve (what) What is its objective, why is it happening? Why is it significant? (why) Who does it impact or concern? (Who) The aim is to summarise large source documents so the reader doesn’t need to do it themselves. DO NOT just copy the first few sentences of the document. Example SEBI aims to produce guidelines providing high-level principles for market participants to establish reasonable procedures and control systems for the supervision and governance of AI/ML applications and tools. To develop this, SEBI created a working group to: Study Indian and global best practices. Prepare the guidelines. Address the concerns and issues arising from AI/ML usage. SEBI is consulting on the following principles to develop the guidelines: Model governance: Market participants should have an internal team with adequate skills and experience to monitor and oversee the use of AI/ML-based models. Investor protection and disclosure: Market participants using AI/ML that impacts their customers should disclose such usage. Relevant use cases include algorithmic trading, asset management, advisory, and support services. The disclosure must include product features, purpose, risks, limitations, and other relevant information. Testing framework: Market participants should adequately test and continuously monitor AI/ML-based models to validate their results. Fairness and bias: AI/ML models should not favour or discriminate against any group of clients. Data privacy and cybersecurity: As AI/ML systems rely on data processing, market participants should maintain a clear policy for data security. Paragraph 3 Acts as a “Call To Action”. Provide forward looking context: What actions need to be taken? Who needs to take action? Next steps to the development. Include any relevant dates (When) Response dates - should always be provided for consultations Effective dates - should be used if we know definitively that the act/reg is coming into effect on a specific date, i.e., it has been passed/adopted. Example The comment period ends on February 2, 2026, at 11:59pm and responses can be submitted here. The comment response is expected to be published in April 2026. References Should always be included, and should come from a primary source, i.e., an authority, not a news source. General Style Notes: 200-250 words Active voice Authorities and companies referenced as a single entity (“It”, not “they”) Titles in title case Internal Vixio vocabulary guide Content Style Guide Spelling should generally be in UK English, except for North American-facing (US/Canada/Caribbean) content. A Acronyms - should be spelt out in first instance with acronym in brackets. For example, Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). Act - when just referring to “the act”, it does not need a capital a. Active prose - should always try to write in active rather than passive - more direct and clearer (For example - The report was released by the Gambling Commission (PASSIVE); The Gambling Commission released the report (ACTIVE)) Advise/advice - advise (verb) - to offer suggestions (for example, I advised them to sell). - advice (noun) - give formal suggestions (for example, I gave them advice). Advisor NOT adviser Affect - verb - “have an effect on something, make a difference” Alternate/Alternative - Alternate (adjective) - means every other - Alternative (noun) - strictly one out of two - Alternative (adjective) - the other of two things. Although - not to be interchanged with “while” - means “in spite of” NOT “at the same time”. AML/CTF - anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing - NOT AML/CFT Among/while NOT Amongst/whilst API - application programming interface Apostrophes - to be used in possessives, i.e. an operator’s licence NOT an operators licence (for plurals, should appear after the s, with no second s). Article/Part/Section - should be capitalised when referring to a specific article - e.g., Article 4 of the Gambling Act. Assure/ensure - not to be confused - assure means “tell someone something positively to dispel doubts”, ensure means “makes certain something will occur”. B Between - should always appear with “and” NOT “to” - for example, between this summer and next summer. Big tech - two words, breaks convention of other tech words Bills - U.S. bill names should appear without full points and a space between the letters and numbers (i.e. SB 522 NOT SB522 or S.B. 522). Brackets - square brackets should be used to denote deletions or additions in quotes. Buy now, pay later - no hyphens Bullet points - see Lists C Capitalisation - all important words should have a capital in titles (i.e. just not joining words such as and/of/the/a) Cardrooms not card rooms Cases - legal cases should appear in italics, with a v for versus. Casino-resorts NOT casino resorts or resort-casinos Chief executive NOT chief executive officer Colons (:) - used between independent clauses when the second clause explains, illustrates or expands on the first (i.e. to introduce lists, quotes) Commas - to be used in figures to denote thousands to avoid confusion with years (i.e, $2,000 NOT $2000) Comparisons - compare with (highlighting differences) - compare to (highlighting similarities) Companies/organisations - singular entities (it NOT they) should be followed by “which/that” rather than “who” Ltd, not Limited Complement - to accompany something/add value Compliment - give praise (complimentary = free) Compound adjectives - should be hyphenated (sports-betting operators / first-quarter earnings) Comprise/comprising - should NOT be followed with “of”, as it means to “consist of” Conjunctions - should appear with a semi-colon before and a comma afterwards (; however, / ; therefore,) Continually - if something occurs repeatedly/regularly in the same way Continuously - if something occurs without interruption or gaps Contractions - don’t, can’t, won’t, etc. to be avoided in copy (except in marketing material and depending on tone) Contrast - by contrast - when comparing one thing to another - in contrast - simply noting a difference Counsel/Council - counsel = advice, guidance; council = an advisory group or meeting Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) rather than ECJ Cryptocurrency - one word, not hyphenated. Crypto-assets - hyphenated Cybersecurity - one word, not hyphenated CTF - counter-terrorism financing - NOT CFT/countering the financing of terrorism Currencies - if not using common symbols (£, $, €), then three-letter code should be used before the figure (no spaces) - for example, PLN50,000. Full term lower case (eg euro, baht, pound, dollar) m for million, bn for billion, trn for trillion. D Date format - Month, Day, Year (e.g., March 7, 2019) For Insights & Analysis summary text: can just say “today”, e.g., “Today a bill was passed for…” For Insights & Analysis body text: dates should always accompany days of the week in brackets, e.g., “On Wednesday (June 8) a bill was passed...” For NIBs: always use dates rather than days. Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport - ampersand Directives - for commonly used directives, style is 4th Anti-Money Laundering Directive (4th AMLD), revised Payment Services Directive (PSD2) - try to use widely known titles rather than just numbers to ensure the directives are more easily recognised. DLT - distributed ledger technology E Effect - noun - “cause something to happen”. Em dash (—) - should be used as a conjunction, not a hyphen or en dash (–). Ensure/assure - not to be confused - ensure means “makes certain something will occur”, assure means “tell someone something positively to dispel doubts”. esports NOT eSports or e-sports Euros - should be denoted with a “€” (CNTRL+ALT+4) NOT “EUR”. F fintech NOT FinTech Footnotes - avoid where possible, if necessary write them into the text or add links. G GGR - “gross gaming revenues” Government - does not need a capital g. Governor - should be written out in full, NOT Gov. Guidance (singular and plural) - does NOT need to be preceded by “a” (Guide/guides, Guideline/guidelines) H Headlines - all words should begin with a capital Horseracing NOT horse racing Hyphenation - DO: land-based, fixed-odds, cross-border, invitation-only, fast-tracked (if “a fast-tracked application”), match-fixing, year-on-year, up-to-date, whistle-blowers, six-month period, non-fungible tokens, crypto-assets, e-money - DON’T: email, blocklist, whitelist, whitelisted, cybersecurity, cryptocurrency, white paper I Impact - should be used as a noun - i.e. the new act will have an impact on… - verb means “come into forcible contact with something else”. - using “affect” as a verb is more accurate. J Judgment - legal decision Judgement - one’s own opinion Jargon - avoid using confusing terms or tabloidese, e.g. use players rather than punters. Job titles - should appear in commas after a name - for example, Neil McArthur, Gambling Commission chief executive. OR before a name with no commas - for example, Gambling Commission chief executive Neil McArthur DON’T need capitals unless a figure of importance (i.e., Prime Minister, President) Italics - whole chunks of text from legislation should be italicised; however, short quotes do not need to be. Justice Department - U.S. Department of Justice - to appear with caps (as requested by US team). K KYC - know your customer L Legislature - does not need a capital l. Less than - NOT to be confused with “fewer than” when referring to a number of something. i.e. fewer than 100 gambling tables. Licence - noun (UK), i.e. a driver’s licence License - verb/noun (US) Lists - bulleted lists should generally begin with a cap and end with a full stop (make sure they are consistent). M MONEYVAL NOT Moneyval More than - to be used instead of “over”. i.e., more than 20 players rather than over 20 players. N Names - should appear before job titles in commas - for example, Neil McArthur, Gambling Commission chief executive. Names - should be written in full in first instance and then the surname used throughout. Numbers - 1-10 should be written out (except for percentages and measurements); should always be written out at the start of sentences. Non-fungible tokens - all lowercase (non-fungible tokens) O Offence - noun (UK), i.e. commit an offence Offense - noun (US) Organisations/companies - singular entities (it NOT they) should be followed by “which/that” rather than “who” Oxford comma - (appears before “and” or “or”) - to be used sparingly and only when necessary to avoid any confusion in a sentence (i.e., where more than one “and/or” appears). Over - should not be used as a replacement for “more than”. P Parliament - does not need a capital p. Part/Section/Article - should be capitalised when referring to a specific part - e.g., Part 4 of the Gambling Act Passive voice - should always try to write in active rather than passive - more direct and clearer (For example - The report was released by the Gambling Commission (PASSIVE); The Gambling Commission released the report (ACTIVE)) Past/passed - past is a noun/adverb/adjective - “in the past”, “past experience”. - passed is the past tense of “to pass” - “the law was passed in government”. Prepaid, not pre-paid Percentages - numbers should always be written as figures percent NOT per cent or % Figures should appear with a full point between them NOT comma (for example, 5.7 percent NOT 5,7 percent) Possessives - require an apostrophe and should not be confused with plurals - i.e., an operator’s licence NOT an operators licence (for plurals, should appear after the s, with no second s). Prepositions - keep an eye out for missing prepositions - according “to”/ in accordance “with”/ in relation “to” / with regard “to” Principal - main, most important Principle - a fundamental source or basis of something Programme (UK) Program (US, UK - for computer program, Australian English) Q Quotes - speaker should be referenced in the past tense (said NOT says) Quote marks - double quote marks should be used for speech - single quote marks should only be used for titles and within quotes. (See Quote reference sheet for more information on how to use quotes.) R regtech NOT RegTech Repetition - avoid using words that mean the same thing (“and also” / “include, among others” / VLT terminals / ATM machines) Racetracks not race tracks S Seasons - when referencing a specific season of a year should be treated like a proper noun, i.e. should include a capital - Winter 2018. Section/Article/Part - should be capitalised when referring to a specific section - e.g., Section 4 of the Gambling Act. Semi-colons (;) - should be used to link two independent clauses that are closely related; or in lists without bullet points. (Do not overuse - often a full stop and new sentence will be better.) Sports betting NOT sportsbetting Sports team names Storey (pl. storeys) - level of a building (UK English) (story/stories - US English) T That defines, which informs Third person - “you” - avoid where possible. Titles - all important words should begin with a capital (i.e. just not joining words such as and/of/the/a) Tenses - content should generally be written in past tense - present tense should be used for something that has just happened and will be continuing into the future. U United States abbreviated to U.S. (Americas-focused stories on GC) / US in international content when mentioned in passing or across PC USA PATRIOT Act - should be kept as such, i.e. with caps, as it’s an acronym for “Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act”) U.S. Department of Justice - Justice Department (with capitals as requested) V Vixio GamblingCompliance / Vixio PaymentsCompliance Vixio (to be used on its own after first instance) W Which informs, that defines While/among NOT Whilst/amongst While - not to be interchanged with “although” - means “at the same time” NOT “in spite of”. X Y Year quarters - Q1, Q2, H1, H2, etc. Z Acronyms AML/CTF - anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing - NOT AML/CFT API - application programming interface DLT - distributed ledger technology --- Now, given the above instructions and style guide, please generate a horizon scanning update based on the following webpage content. Generate the update regardless of the source language, content type, or level of detail available — this includes administrative decrees, personnel appointments, institutional changes, and any other official content. Use whatever information is present. PS6/26 – Recognised exchanges policy and transfer of main indices | Bank of England Our use of cookies We use necessary cookies to make our site work (for example, to manage your session). We’d also like to use some non-essential cookies (including third-party cookies) to help us improve the site. By clicking ‘Accept recommended settings’ on this banner, you accept our use of optional cookies. Necessary cookies Analytics cookies Yes Yes Accept recommended cookies Yes No Proceed with necessary cookies only Necessary cookies Necessary cookies enable core functionality on our website such as security, network management, and accessibility. You may disable these by changing your browser settings, but this may affect how the website functions. Analytics cookies We use analytics cookies so we can keep track of the number of visitors to various parts of the site and understand how our website is used. For more information on how these cookies work please see our Cookie policy . Skip to main content PS6/26 – Recognised exchanges policy and transfer of main indices Policy statement 6/26 Related links Related links CP3/25 – Recognised exchanges policy and transfer of main indices CP19/25 – CRR Definitions: restatement in PRA Rulebook Published on 05 March 2026 1: Overview 1.1 This Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) policy statement (PS) provides feedback to responses the PRA received to consultation paper (CP) 3/25 – Recognised exchanges policy and transfer of main indices . This PS also provides feedback to responses the PRA received to its subsequent CP19/25 – CRR Definitions: restatement in PRA Rulebook to the extent they relate to the PRA’s proposals in CP3/25. 1.2 The appendices to this PS contain the PRA’s final policy to CP3/25, as follows: PRA Rulebook: CRR Firms: Recognised Exchanges Instrument 2026 (Appendix 1); PRA Rulebook: CRR Firms: (CRR) Amendment Instrument 2026 (Appendix 2); and corresponding CRR rules (Appendix 3). This PS also sets out the PRA’s final policy to delete supervisory statement (SS) 20/13 – Third country equivalence aspects of the credit risk provisions in the CRR, and recognised exchanges in its entirety. 1.3 This PS is relevant to PRA-authorised UK banks, building societies, Small Domestic Deposit Takers (SDDTs), SDDT consolidation entities, PRA-designated UK investment firms, and PRA-approved or PRA-designated financial or mixed financial holding companies. Background 1.4 In CP3/25, the PRA proposed to: Introduce a new Recognised Exchanges (CRR) Part in the PRA Rulebook specifying conditions under Article 4(1)(72)(c) of the assimilated Capital Requirements Regulation No 575/2013 (CRR) for the purposes of identifying recognised exchanges (REs) or assets traded on such exchanges. This included proposals for firms to undertake the assessment of these conditions, and an amendment to the definition of ‘higher risk equity exposure’ that was included in the PRA’s near-final rules implementing the Basel 3.1 standards. Restate in the PRA Glossary the list of ‘main indices’ currently situated in Commission Implementing Regulation 2016/1646 (the Technical Standard or the TS). The PRA also consulted on revoking SS20/13 and making consequential amendments to the: Counterparty Credit Risk (CRR) Part of the PRA Rulebook; Credit Risk Mitigation (CRR) Part of the PRA Rulebook; and SDDT – Interim Capital Regime Part of the PRA Rulebook. 1.5 Separately, in CP19/25, the PRA proposed to restate the vast majority of the CRR definitions in the PRA Rulebook. The proposals included consolidating the CRR definition of RE with the conditions the PRA proposed in CP3/25 into the Glossary Part of the Rulebook as a new definition. Among the responses the PRA received to CP19/25, one concerned its REs proposals in CP3/25. The responses to both CP3/25 and CP19/25 regarding the PRA’s REs proposals have been consolidated in this PS and are addressed together in Chapter 2. 1.6 In determining its policy, the PRA considered representations received in response to its consultation in CP3/25 and CP19/25, publishing an account of them and the PRA’s response (‘feedback’). Details of any significant changes are also published. In this PS, the ‘Summary of responses’ section contains a general account of the representations made in response to the CP and the ‘Feedback to responses’ chapter contains the PRA’s feedback. 1.7 In carrying out its policymaking functions, the PRA is required to have regard to various matters. In CP3/25, the PRA explained how it had regard to the most relevant of these matters in relation to the proposed policy. The ‘Changes to draft policy’ section of this chapter refers to that explanation, taking into account consultation responses where relevant. Summary of responses 1.8 The PRA received three responses to CP3/25, all of which concerned its proposed REs policy. As noted above, one response to CP19/25 addressed the PRA’s REs proposals in CP3/25. The names of respondents to CP3/25 who consented to their names being published are set out in Appendix 4. 1.9 Respondents generally welcomed the PRA’s proposals and flexibility for banks to recognise exchanges for their own purposes. One respondent fully endorsed the proposals. However, three respondents made a number of observations and requested certain amendments to the REs policy, which are set out in Chapter 2. Changes to draft policy 1.10 This PS takes account of how the policy advances the PRA objectives and of significant matters that the PRA had regard to. These are as set out in CP3/25, with the following changes: a minor edit to the PRA Rulebook: CRR Firms: Recognised Exchanges Instrument 2026 to clarify the intended policy scope as explained in paragraph 2.10; a minor edit to the PRA Rulebook: CRR Firms: Recognised Exchanges Instrument 2026 to provide additional clarity as to the required assessment of an exchange’s clearing and settlement mechanism as explained in paragraph 2.11; non-substantive amendments to the PRA Rulebook: CRR firms: (CRR) Amendment Instrument 2026 that proposed changes to the definition of a ‘higher risk equity exposure’ to improve the clarity of the definition; minor amendments to the PRA Rulebook: CRR firms: (CRR) Amendment Instrument 2026 to revise the definition of main index that the instrument inserts into the Glossary Part, in order to reflect recent changes in the index market; and the proposed consequential amendments to the SDDT Regime – Interim Capital Regime Part, as set out in Appendix 2 of CP3/25 , are not included given the PRA’s decision not to make final rules that give effect to the Interim Capital Regime (ICR). footnote [1] The PRA does not consider these changes to be ‘significant’ for the purposes of sections 138J(5) and 138K(4) of the Financial Services and Markets Act (FSMA) 2000. 1.11 When making rules, the PRA is required to comply with several legal obligations. In CP3/25, the PRA published its explanation of why the rules proposed by the CP were compatible with its objectives and with its duty to have regard to the regulatory principles. footnote [2] The minor changes to the draft policy outlined in paragraph 1.10 above do not materially change the policy the PRA consulted on in CP3/25. Therefore, the PRA objectives analysis, opinion on the impact of its proposals on mutuals, and consideration of ‘have regards’ remain the same as set out in CP3/25. 1.12 The PRA considers its Cost Benefit Analysis (CBA) in CP3/25 remains relevant and appropriate, as the proposals have not materially changed and no persuasive evidence was received to suggest that the associated costs were underestimated. 1.13 When making CRR rules or rules applying to certain holding companies, the PRA must also publish a summary of the purpose of the proposed rules. footnote [3] The purpose of the rules under the new Recognised Exchanges (CRR) Part is to specify conditions under Article 4(1)(72)(c) CRR for the purpose of identifying REs or assets traded on such exchanges. The purpose of the amendments to the Glossary Part is to: (i) amend the definition of ‘higher risk equity exposure’; and (ii) restate the definition of main index from the TS in the PRA Rulebook. Implementation 1.14 The implementation date for the PRA’s rules specifying conditions under Article 4(1)(72)(c) CRR and the revocation of SS20/13 will be Wednesday 1 July 2026. footnote [4] 1.15 The implementation date for the PRA’s rules specifying the definition of ‘higher risk equity exposure’, the restating of the main indices list, and the consequential amendments to the Counterparty Credit Risk (CRR) and Credit Risk Mitigation (CRR) Parts will be Friday 1 January 2027. footnote [5] 1.16 Unless otherwise stated, any remaining references to EU or assimilated legislation refer to the version of that legislation that forms part of assimilated law. footnote [6] 2: Feedback to responses 2.1 Before making any proposed rules, the PRA is required by FSMA to have regard to any representations made to it in response to the consultation, and to publish an account, in general terms, of those representations and its feedback to them. footnote [7] 2.2 The PRA has considered the representations received in response to the CP (including the response received to CP19/25 in connection with the REs proposals in CP3/25). This chapter sets out the PRA’s feedback to those responses, and its final decisions. 2.3 The sections below have been structured along the same lines as the proposals in CP3/25. The responses have been grouped as follows: definition of REs; and transfer of main indices list to the PRA Rulebook. Definition of REs Conditions for the purposes of identifying REs or assets traded on such exchanges 2.4 In CP3/25, the PRA proposed conditions for the purposes of identifying REs or assets traded on such exchanges under Article 4(1)(72)(c) UK CRR. In particular, under the PRA’s proposal, an overseas investment exchange can qualify as an RE where, based on a two-stage assessment, firms are satisfied that two conditions are met: an exchange and market structure condition; and in respect of the relevant asset that is traded or listed on that exchange, a liquidity condition. 2.5 Respondents supported the proposed exchange and market structure condition. However, one respondent remarked that the requirement that the exchange applies margining practices consistent with international standards is not relevant in the context of trading equity securities. The PRA notes that this requirement, as drafted, applies only to derivatives (in particular, to contracts listed in Annex II of CRR), and not equity securities. footnote [8] The respondent also noted that the requirement for a robust clearing mechanism applies to derivatives but not equity securities. The PRA notes that clearing is not limited to derivatives but also applies to equity securities. An overseas exchange will satisfy the relevant requirement where it has a robust clearing and settlement mechanism – consistent with international standards, where these apply – for the relevant asset (including equity securities). 2.6 Two respondents noted that it is unclear how to interpret the results of firms’ assessment if not all securities on an exchange meet the asset liquidity condition. It is unlikely that every security traded on an exchange will meet the liquidity condition. The PRA clarifies that an overseas exchange will qualify as an RE only in respect of a particular asset that is traded or listed on that exchange. For example, if there are 100 securities traded on an exchange that satisfies the exchange and market structure condition, 40 of which meet the liquidity condition while 60 do not, then the exchange will qualify as an RE only in respect of the 40 securities that meet the liquidity condition (alternatively put, not all 100 securities need to meet the liquidity condition for the exchange to be treated as an RE). However, collateral eligibility (or other preferential capital treatment) would not apply to those securities that do not meet the liquidity condition. 2.7 Three respondents noted that the asset liquidity condition duplicates existing collateral liquidity assessments in the capital framework (under Articles 194(3)(b) and 285(3)(b) of CRR). footnote [9] One respondent further added that, in the context of collateral eligibility, this condition should require proof of an active, liquid bid. This suggestion contrasted to the PRA’s proposed requirement for historical evidence of market breadth and depth (as proven by low bid-ask spreads, high trading volume, and a large and diverse number of market participants). The respondent argued that requiring proof of an active, liquid bid would avoid duplication with existing assessments of collateral liquidity under the Internal Model Method for counterparty credit risk. The respondent also argued that this would ensure the collateral eligibility threshold is lower than that for extending the margin period of risk of a netting set in the presence of less liquid collateral. The PRA notes that the asset liquidity condition was deliberately designed to be aligned with existing liquidity assessments under the prudential framework where possible. Where overlaps occur, the assessment process will be more efficient and proportionate for both purposes. The PRA further notes that, in the context of collateral eligibility, the asset liquidity condition has limited scope. footnote [10] Therefore, the PRA considers the proposed collateral eligibility threshold a proportionate and prudent condition for firms to benefit from broader RE availability. 2.8 One respondent noted that assessing the asset liquidity condition would be incremental work as firms are likely to rely on the repurchase test rather than the criteria in the proposed condition footnote [11] for determining whether assets are acceptable for liquidity purposes. Another respondent suggested that limiting eligibility to assets meeting the asset liquidity condition could cause positions to move in and out of RE status due to variances in liquidity. The respondent noted this would create a burdensome need for firms to continually monitor asset liquidity. One respondent further requested that the PRA remove the asset liquidity condition. The PRA maintains its position that it expects the incremental burden from this test to be limited, and it is essential to safeguard firms’ safety and soundness against reliance on illiquid assets. This is because, as respondents also acknowledge (see paragraph 2.7), firms already assess asset liquidity under current prudential requirements (eg for credit risk mitigation purposes). By design, that assessment will fulfil some, but not necessarily all, of the assessment required for REs. Additionally, the PRA’s policy introduces a permissive change, which firms may choose not to exercise if the costs associated with assessing the proposed conditions exceed the benefits. 2.9 One respondent suggested that the PRA maintain a list of exchanges, and that this includes, for example, the Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) Designated Investment Exchanges and the European Securities and Markets Authority’s (ESMA) list of REs. PRA engagement with firms indicated that the REs provisions affect a limited number of firms, some of which are already familiar with exchange functioning through their operations and routinely assess liquidity requirements (eg when accepting collateral). The PRA considers that for these purposes, maintaining such a list in rules is unlikely to be dynamic or responsive to market events. The PRA considers the proposed policy better meets its primary objective of safety and soundness and is both proportionate and an efficient and economic use of resources. The PRA further notes that the FCA’s Designated Investment Exchanges or those on the ESMA list could qualify as REs under the proposed policy subject to the proposed conditions being met. 2.10 One respondent suggested a minor drafting edit to clarify that, as per the policy intention, UK regulated markets are not in scope of this policy. The PRA agrees with this suggestion and has amended the draft rules accordingly. 2.11 Having considered the responses, the PRA has decided to maintain its proposal regarding conditions for the purposes of identifying REs or assets traded on such exchanges under Article 4(1)(72)(c) UK CRR as consulted on in CP3/25. However, the PRA has made two minor adjustments to its draft rules to provide additional clarity to firms. These include minor drafting edits to clarify: the intended policy scope as set out in paragraph 2.10; and that the assessment of an overseas exchange’s clearing and settlement mechanism should include its operational robustness. 2.12 The PRA considers that its proposed policy is a dynamic and flexible approach to the recognition of overseas exchanges, while prudently reflecting the risks related to market structures and asset liquidity. Furthermore, the PRA notes that in linking RE status to asset liquidity, the policy enables firms’ assessments to align with market demand and respond dynamically to changes in liquidity levels that may pose prudential risks. By requiring both: (i) an assessment of exchange and market structure; and (ii) an assessment of asset liquidity, the PRA expects that eligible REs will be expanded beyond current levels . footnote [12] This, in turn, will increase the availability to UK firms of a risk-sensitive prudential treatment for eligible assets and support UK competitiveness. Implementation and evaluation of the REs policy 2.13 In CP3/25, the PRA proposed that firms undertake the assessment of the specified conditions themselves, and that the PRA evaluate firms’ implemented approaches through post-implementation thematic reviews. It also proposed that the rules specifying conditions under Article 4(1)(72)(c) UK CRR come into effect on Wednesday 1 July 2026. 2.14 One respondent suggested that assessments of the proposed conditions could also take place on an industry-wide basis using professional industry resources. One respondent questioned why banks could not apply for recognitions immediately after completing their assessments, instead of waiting until July 2026. 2.15 Having considered the responses, the PRA has decided to maintain its implementation and evaluation proposals for the REs policy as consulted on in CP3/25. The PRA notes that firms may rely on industry-wide assessments, but would remain accountable for ensuring that these assessments are both accurate and kept up to date. The PRA also clarifies that the policy does not require firms to apply to the PRA for recognition of exchanges or assets. Rather, once the policy takes effect, firms may treat an asset as listed or traded on an RE if they are satisfied that the market structure and asset liquidity conditions are met. Amendment to the definition of higher risk equity exposure 2.16 In CP3/25, the PRA proposed to amend the definition of a ‘higher risk equity exposure’ that will receive a 400% risk weight under the standardised approach for credit risk following its implementation of the Basel 3.1 standards. footnote [13] This would have the effect that, for the purpose of the listing condition, an equity exposure would only be classified as a ‘higher risk equity exposure’ if it is not listed on an exchange that meets the criteria pertaining to the exchange and market structure. 2.17 The PRA did not receive any responses in relation to this proposal. The PRA has decided to maintain its proposal to amend the definition of ‘higher risk equity exposure’ (with non-substantive changes to the rule instrument for clarificatory purposes) that will be implemented alongside the broader implementation of the Basel 3.1 standards on Friday 1 January 2027. Transfer of main indices list to the PRA Rulebook 2.18 In CP3/25, the PRA proposed to restate the main index definition into the Glossary Part. The definition is currently set out in the TS, which has been revoked by HMT with effect from Friday 1 January 2027. The list of main indices is used in the credit risk mitigation framework to determine: (i) collateral eligibility under the financial collateral simple method; and (ii) preferential haircuts under the financial collateral comprehensive method. 2.19 The PRA did not propose any changes to the current list of main indices and did not receive any industry feedback on its proposal. The PRA has therefore decided to broadly maintain its proposal and restate the list of main indices as a new definition in the Glossary Part. However, the PRA has decided to make minor amendments to the list of main indices to reflect changes in the index market since the TS was implemented. Most of these changes are updates to reflect the renaming of indices. However, the PRA has also made the following amendments: The ‘S&P NZX 15 Index’ was discontinued in 2018. The PRA has decided to replace this index with the ‘S&P NZX 10’. The PRA considers this index is the closest comparator to the discontinued index that is consistent with the intended risk appetite when the TS was implemented and that, as a result, this change advances its primary objective of safety and soundness. ‘MSCI Russia Index’ was discontinued in 2023. For clarity, the PRA has decided to remove this index from the list of main indices and not replace it. The PRA has decided to remove the Russian Traded Index (now known as the RTS), from the list of main indices and not replace it. The PRA notes that liquidity in Russian indices has fallen significantly following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and considers that this change advances its primary objective of safety and soundness. 2.20 The PRA does not consider that these changes materially alter the impact of its policy relative to its proposals in CP3/25. This policy will be implemented alongside the broader implementation of the Basel 3.1 standards on Friday 1 January 2027. Consequential amendments 2.21 In CP3/25, the PRA proposed amendments to the Counterparty Credit Risk (CRR) Part, the Credit Risk Mitigation (CRR) Part and the SDDT – Interim Capital Regime Part of the PRA Rulebook. It also proposed to revoke SS20/13, which is redundant. footnote [14] These amendments are consequential to the PRA’s REs policy proposals and the proposal to restate the list of main indices into the PRA Rulebook. 2.22 The PRA did not receive any responses on these proposals and will be adopting them as consulted on in CP3/25, except for the consequential amendments to the SDDT Regime – Interim Capital Regime Part. Given the implementation dates for the SDDT capital regime and the consequential amendments outlined in paragraph 2.20 are now the same, those proposals are no longer needed. The implementation dates for the SDDT capital regime and the Basel 3.1 standards are the same. Firms that opted into the ICR will therefore be required to implement either the full Basel 3.1 standards or the simplified capital regime for SDDTs on 1 January 2027. Section 138J(2)(d) of FSMA. Section 144D(2)(a) of FSMA. HM Treasury (HMT) has revoked the following provisions of the TS with effect from that same date (1 July 2026): (i) in Part 2 (PRA), Article 2 (recognised exchanges); and (ii) in Annex II (recognised exchanges), Part 2 (PRA). See the Financial Services and Markets Act 2023 (Commencement No.12 and Saving Provisions) Regulations 2026 . The definition of main index is currently set out in the TS, which has been revoked by HMT with effect from Friday 1 January 2027. For further information please see Transitioning to post-exit rules and standards . Sections 138J(3) and 138J(4) of FSMA. Regardless, the PRA notes that the Principles for Financial Market Infrastructures (PFMI) require Central Counterparties (CCP) to cover their credit exposures to their participants for all products (not limited to derivatives) through an effective margin system. Also refer to the table of revoked CRR provisions and their corresponding PRA rules for the PRA rules replacing Articles 194(3)(b) and 285(3)(b) after their revocation from the CRR on 1 January 2027 pursuant to the Financial Services and Markets Act 2023 (Commencement No.12 and Saving Provisions) Regulations 2026. The asset liquidity condition only applies to certain unrated debt securities (Article 197(4) CRR) and non-main index equities or convertible bonds (Article 198(1)(a) CRR). The asset liquidity condition mirrors existing requirements under Articles 7(5) and (6) of the Liquidity Coverage Ratio (CRR) Part of the PRA Rulebook. The relevant provisions of Article 7(6) for these purposes are those that apply to assets admitted to trading in an organised venue, which is not an RE. However, the PRA does not envisage that crypto exchanges or crypto assets would currently meet all the exchange and market structure or asset liquidity conditions and therefore qualify under this policy at this time. Under the PRA’s implementation of the Basel standards, equity exposures must either be assigned a 400% or a 250% risk weight under the standardised approach to credit risk. Firms will be required to apply the higher 400% risk weight to exposures to businesses that are less than five years old and are not listed on an RE. SS20/13 set out REs that the PRA considered as qualifying under the CRR before the (pre-EU exit) adoption by the European Commission of the TS that set out REs. SS20/13 set out REs that the PRA considered as qualifying under the CRR before the (pre-EU exit) adoption by the European Commission of the TS that set out REs. Close Under the PRA’s implementation of the Basel standards, equity exposures must either be assigned a 400% or a 250% risk weight under the standardised approach to credit risk. Firms will be required to apply the higher 400% risk weight to exposures to businesses that are less than five years old and are not listed on an RE. Close However, the PRA does not envisage that crypto exchanges or crypto assets would currently meet all the exchange and market structure or asset liquidity conditions and therefore qualify under this policy at this time. Close The asset liquidity condition mirrors existing requirements under Articles 7(5) and (6) of the Liquidity Coverage Ratio (CRR) Part of the PRA Rulebook. The relevant provisions of Article 7(6) for these purposes are those that apply to assets admitted to trading in an organised venue, which is not an RE. Close The asset liquidity condition only applies to certain unrated debt securities (Article 197(4) CRR) and non-main index equities or convertible bonds (Article 198(1)(a) CRR). Close Also refer to the table of revoked CRR provisions and their corresponding PRA rules for the PRA rules replacing Articles 194(3)(b) and 285(3)(b) after their revocation from the CRR on 1 January 2027 pursuant to the Financial Services and Markets Act 2023 (Commencement No.12 and Saving Provisions) Regulations 2026. Close Regardless, the PRA notes that the Principles for Financial Market Infrastructures (PFMI) require Central Counterparties (CCP) to cover their credit exposures to their participants for all products (not limited to derivatives) through an effective margin system. Close Sections 138J(3) and 138J(4) of FSMA. Close For further information please see Transitioning to post-exit rules and standards . Close The definition of main index is currently set out in the TS, which has been revoked by HMT with effect from Friday 1 January 2027. Close HM Treasury (HMT) has revoked the following provisions of the TS with effect from that same date (1 July 2026): (i) in Part 2 (PRA), Article 2 (recognised exchanges); and (ii) in Annex II (recognised exchanges), Part 2 (PRA). See the Financial Services and Markets Act 2023 (Commencement No.12 and Saving Provisions) Regulations 2026 . Close Section 144D(2)(a) of FSMA. Close Section 138J(2)(d) of FSMA. Close The implementation dates for the SDDT capital regime and the Basel 3.1 standards are the same. Firms that opted into the ICR will therefore be required to implement either the full Basel 3.1 standards or the simplified capital regime for SDDTs on 1 January 2027. Close Appendices Appendix 1: PRA Rulebook: CRR Firms: Recognised Exchanges Instrument 2026 (PDF 0.1MB) Appendix 2: PRA Rulebook: CRR Firms: (CRR) Amendment Instrument 2026 (PDF 0.2MB) Appendix 3: Corresponding CRR rules (PDF 0.2MB) Appendix 4: Respondents to CP3/25 who have consented to the publication of their names (PDF 0.1MB) Convert this page to PDF Other prudential regulation releases Prudential Regulation // Policy statement 05 March 2026 PS6/26 – Recognised exchanges policy and... PS6/26 – Recognised exchanges policy and transfer of main indices Prudential Regulation // PRA Regulatory Digest 02 March 2026 PRA Regulatory Digest – February 2026 PRA Regulatory Digest – February 2026 Prudential Regulation // PRA statement 27 February 2026 Prudential Regulation Authority statement... Prudential Regulation Authority statement on the life insurance stress test in 2028 Prudential Regulation // Consultation paper 25 February 2026 CP4/26 – UK Solvency II Own Funds: Updates... CP4/26 – UK Solvency II Own Funds: Updates and fixes to rules and expectations View more Other prudential regulation releases Back to top

PS6/26 – Recognised exchanges policy and transfer of main indices | Bank of England

Classification

Pipeline Progress

🔄 Pipeline Journey

🤖 How this summary was made

Full AI Instructions