It is well-known to derivatives lawyers that back in 2009, at the peak of the financial crisis, G20 leaders agreed that, in order to reduce counterparty’s and operational risks related to over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives trading, by the end of 2012 all standardised OTC contracts would be traded on exchanges or electronic trading platforms and, where appropriate, cleared through central counterparties (CCPs). Moreover, G20 leaders concluded that all OTC derivatives contracts should be reported to trade repositories. As a result of the G20 Pittsburgh’s summit, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act) with famous TitleVII: the Wall Street Transparency and Accountability Act of 2010 was adopted – where 161 pages provide statutory framework for comprehensive regulation of swaps by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and security-based swaps by the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC). According to its provisions, the Dodd-Frank Act should have been implemented by theSECand the CFTC within 360 days following its adoption, meaning by end of July 2011. We are now entering the second quarter of 2012 and neither the CFTC nor theSEChas met a deadline envisaged for a full implementation of Dodd-Frank. The CFTC and theSECare still in the process of drafting rules aiming at implementing Dodd-Frank and, subsequently, G20 Pittsburgh commitment. There is still a group of regulations missing, in particular relating to capital and margin, segregation of uncleared swaps or governance and conflict of interest. The most recent information on the timeline for the adoption of the missing regulations is available on the regulators’ websites:SECstates that the estimated timeline is January – June 2012. The CFTC is more specific and in its final order of23 December 2011it states that the final date for the compliance with TitleVIIof Dodd-Frank is scheduled for16 July 2012. Moreover, the CFTC lists month specific deadlines for adoption of various missing regulations. However, will theUSmeet the G20 deadline? It seems that theUSis well on track in compliance with G20 commitment subject to all remaining regulations being adopted in accordance with schedules published by the CFTC and the SEC. In the EU, the European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR) was adopted by the European Parliament on29 March 2012with the European Parliament approving the text agreed with the Commission. EMIR will enter into force twenty days after its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union, which should be in the summer 2012. This development brings the EU closer towards meeting the G20 commitment. However, there is still a need for EMIR level 2 rulemaking to be prepared by the European Supervisory Authorities – similarly to what the CFTC and theSECare doing right now. Level 2 rulemaking for EMIR shall, according to its Article 4, be developed by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA). ESMA, within six months of adoption of EMIR, shall develop and submit to the Commission draft of regulatory technical standards determining which class of OTC derivatives should be subject to clearing obligations. The G20 deadline will not be met by the EU until such rules are in place and fully operational. So far, ESMA published, on16 February 2012, a discussion paper on draft Regulatory Technical Standards with the deadline for comments on 19 March 2012. The second step for ESMA is to prepare draft of technical standards to be included in the consultation paper, which will most likely be published around the summer of 2012. ESMA is expected to submit its draft of technical standards to the European Commission by 30 September 2012. Final adoption of such standards is most likely to happen by the early 2013, with the implementation and mandatory clearing by mid-2013, somewhat behind the schedule imposed by the G20 leaders. Moreover, timeline for MiFID II will also have an impact on the EU’s ability to meet the G20 deadline due to the need for specifying trading requirements for derivatives. G20 commitment, on the other hand, does not apply to the USand the EU only but also to other jurisdictions that are G20 members, including Japan, Hong Kongor Canada- will they be able to meet such deadline? It seems that others adopted more of a ‘wait and see’ approach in order to follow and will probably replicate what theUS and the EU are preparing right now.Japan, in 2010, passed an amendment to the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act which will provide the Japanese Financial Authority with the authority to regulate OTC derivatives once the implementing measures are finalised (anticipated by November 2012). The Hong Kong Monetary Authority and the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission released a consultation paper on the proposed OTC regulatory regime in October 2011. Public consultation is planned for beginning of 2012 and the adoption of final regulations is foreseen by the end of 2012. Canadian Securities Administrators released a consultation paper on OTC Derivatives Regulation inCanada in November 2010. Specific regulatory proposals have been prepared and will be subsequently published. In this respect, the role of the Financial Stability Board (FSB) should not be neglected; in its report from October 2010 titled “Implementing OTC Derivatives Market Reforms”, the FSB made 21 recommendations addressing practical issues that authorities may encounter in implementing the G20 leaders’ commitments, these relate, in particular, to central clearing or exchange and electronic platform trading. Has the G20 timeline proved too ambitious? I believe it may so, especially from market participants’ perspective. Regulators based in G20 countries work under a tight timeline with specific deadlines in mind. This causes a legitimate fear in the market that current timeline may not offer enough for a proper development of the necessary rule-making which would take into account market participants’ and public’s comments on such rules. Moreover, the G20 leaders envisaged, in 2009, that the reform should be global in order to meet the needs of the 21st century financial markets. Separate issue is whether the on-going reform has global or rather fragmented scope, I tend to believe that the latter, is, unfortunately, what is right now happening. Jacek Kubas is a Legal Specialist at the Financial Law Unit at EBRD. He is a capital market lawyer focusing on legal and regulatory reform of capital markets in Central and Eastern Europe, Russia, Central Asia and Turkey. Prior to joining EBRD, Jacek worked as a legal counsel in Financial Law Division of the European Central Bank, Frankfurt; Germany, providing legal advice on monetary policy implementation and crisis related measures. He graduated from the University Of Gdansk School Of Law. He has also obtained an LL.M. in Financial Services Law from Chicago Kent College of Law and a postgraduate law degree in International Trade Law from the European Institute of University Studies in Turin, Italy. In addition, he completed various courses in banking at German leading universities. Jacek recently passed the New York State Bar Exam and is in the process of formal admission to the NY bar association.