As Europe’s financial markets prepare for the transition to T+1 settlement by October 2027, ECSDA is publishing the first version of its CSD Implementation Overview Dashboard — a living document that will be updated regularly as preparations advance.

This Dashboard is designed to give markets the information they need: a clear, consolidated view of what will be implemented by CSDs in each market, enabling participants, issuers, and investors to prepare accordingly.

Transparency, coordination, and timely information sharing are key to a smooth T+1 transition — and this Dashboard is ECSDA’s and CSDs’ contribution to that effort.

Disclaimer:
In case of discrepancies between this table and the latest official communication of the relevant CSD, the latter prevails. ECSDA accepts no liability for the content of this Dashboard, which is provided for the purposes of a high-level overview across European markets and ensuring transparency in advancement of the preparation, allowing CSD participants and other FMIs to prepare the move in an orderly way.

Link to the Dashboard – Last updated: 29/06/2026

The EU T+1 Industry Committee has published the Gating Event FAQs and Best Practice document, marking an important step in the industry’s preparation for T+1 settlement by October 2027.
This document provides practical guidance on the implementation of the Gating Event mechanism for Securities Financing Transactions (SFTs), a key tool designed to address the intraday liquidity challenges arising from the move to T+1.

Access the full document – Gating Event – FAQs and Best Practice

At the meeting of the ECSDA Senior Industry Council hosted by Euroclear France in Paris, the ECSDA Board officially welcomed DTCC, GLEIF, TMX CDS – The Canadian Depository for Securities Limited, and Vermiculus as new ECSDA Affiliates.

Their arrival further strengthens our Affiliate community and reflects the growing interest of market infrastructure stakeholders in engaging with ECSDA and its members.

They join our existing Affiliates: Montran, Scorpeo, and Swift – Link to the list of ECSDA Members and Affiliates

We look forward to working together and fostering dialogue across the post-trade ecosystem.

ECSDA welcomes the review of the Shareholder Rights Directive (SRD) as an opportunity to further enhance transparency, operational efficiency, and cross-border harmonisation in the exercise of shareholder rights across the EU.

• While SRD II has improved shareholder identification, information flows, and shareholder participation, ECSDA notes that broader capital market integration has also been driven by infrastructure modernisation, common standards, and technological developments.
• ECSDA strongly supports the harmonisation — or removal — of shareholder identification thresholds and the harmonisation of key general meeting dates in order to reduce fragmentation, operational complexity, and legal uncertainty in cross-border scenarios.
• The paper advocates for more standardised and digitalised processes for evidence of entitlement, voting confirmation, and transmission of information, supported by ISO standards and fully digital communication channels to improve cross-border STP and shareholder participation.
• ECSDA supports the introduction of a more functional and harmonised definition of “shareholder” to reduce inconsistencies arising from divergent national legal frameworks and ownership concepts across Member States.
• ECSDA generally supports extending the scope of SRD, including to unlisted and digital securities, while stressing the need to ensure operational feasibility, proportionality, and legal consistency across the regulatory framework.
• The paper also supports the establishment of a “Golden Operational Record” maintained by Issuer-CSDs as a centralised and reliable source of corporate event information, improving data integrity and operational efficiency across the custody chain.
• ECSDA underlines the continued systemic importance of CSDs and intermediaries in ensuring scalability, resilience, standardisation, and secure information flows within integrated European capital markets.

Read the full answer.

ECSDA recognises the importance of ensuring that the Settlement Finality framework remains both technologically advanced and neutral across traditional infrastructures, DLT, and other emerging technologies. It also supports targeted harmonisation where necessary to enhance consistency and strengthen legal certainty.

The settlement finality framework is a core pillar of the safety of settlement and payment systems in the EU and has proven its resilience in well-known crisis situations, as confirmed by the 2023 Commission Report, also recalled in the Explanatory Memorandum to the Proposal.

Any amendment should, therefore, be approached with caution. The application of the Settlement Finality Legislation provisions effectively modifies how standard insolvency law operates, which may affect the position of other creditors of the insolvent entity. Such a change of the standard insolvency process is justified for the purposes of financial stability for systems with systemic relevance.

This underscores the importance of carefully assessing whether changes to certain core definitions, such as the finality moments, are indeed necessary, as well as ensuring a consistent set of system designation criteria that preserve systemic relevance as the key principle justifying the exceptional insolvency regime.

ECSDA welcomes the reform’s general objectives. However, SFD has already clearly defined all relevant aspects of settlement finality concerning CSD activities. Therefore, transforming the SFD into a more rigid instrument is not necessary to achieve further harmonisation in our area. And we need to remind that other barriers essential to be addressed remain untouched (see AMI-SeCo Post-trade barriers report).

Read the full document.

ECSDA welcomes CPMI-IOSCO’s aim to clarify expectations under PFMI Principle 15 and improve consistency in how FMIs address General Business Risk (GBR). We support guidance that supplements rather than reopens the PFMI and that remains outcomes-based, proportionate, and technology-neutral.

In that context, we particularly highlight that European CSDs already operate under a stringent, detailed CSDR prudential and operational framework specified in the technical standards. Although we may not expect other jurisdictions to fully endorse the European approach as applicable to all other regions through the international guidance, the clarity and accuracy of the relevant European provisions for CSDs should serve as an example of a high-quality implementation of the international guidance. The final guidance should pursue high-level international alignment and aspire for further clarity, providing regional flexibility rather than imposing parallel, potentially conflicting obligations.

We suggest that the final guidance:

• Clarifies scope and interactions with other risk families and with existing EU law under CSDR, notably RTS (EU) 2017/390 (prudential requirements) and RTS (EU) 2017/392 (authorisation, supervisory and operational requirements).
• Maintains flexibility in tools, focusing on identification and governance of GBR and not prescribing specific measurement models, vendor tooling, or external assurance that could be disproportionate for CSDs.
• Adjusts transparency, ensuring disclosures are on a legitimate “need-to-know” basis and do not require publication of commercially sensitive information or routine notice of minor technical changes.
• Calibrates LNAFE expectations to recognise (i) the low-frequency/high-impact-nature of certain shocks, (ii) the existing EU CSDR prudential requirements, recovery and winddown frameworks, and (iii) that capital should not be duplicated for the going concern, ‘business as usual’ risk management and recovery and orderly wind-down phases.

Read the full response