ASIC's January 2026 report on CFD issuers was framed as a review of distribution practices. Read the regulatory reporting section carefully and a more serious picture emerges: over 70 million erroneous reports submitted to the trade repository. Only one reporting entity out of 52 reviewed consistently reported high-quality data with no identifiable errors or omissions.
For firms operating in the Australian OTC derivatives market, ASIC Report (REP) 828 is the clearest signal yet that ASIC has moved from implementation guidance to active supervision and that regulatory forbearance is likely to come quickly to an end. The question now is not whether you’re able to report.. It is whether your data holds up under scrutiny.
What ASIC Found
The ASIC Derivative Transaction (Reporting) Rules 2024 came into effect in October 2024. REP 828 covers the period immediately following go-live.
ASIC identified failures to:
Report collateral information correctly, or in some cases at all
Report accurate timestamps, prices, notional values and market valuations
Scrutinise data submitted to the trade repository, including erroneous trades with notional values well above hundreds of millions of dollars
Exercise appropriate oversight of third-party reporting delegates
Some of these failures occurred after ASIC had explicitly instructed reporting entities to fix these and other issues with their reporting.
Valid But Wrong: The Problem ASIC Is Now Focused On
The surface-level failures in REP 828 such reporting required data and conforming to validations are visible and correctable. The harder problem is reporting that is structurally compliant but fundamentally inconsistent - what the industry refers to as "valid but wrong" reporting.
A submission that passes schema validation but contains data that does not accurately reflect the underlying transaction. Notional values calculated incorrectly but falling within permissible ranges. UPI classifications that are internally consistent but misaligned with ASIC's asset class taxonomy. Collateral fields populated with placeholder values rather than accurate margin data.
Running your own data against the rules will tell you whether your reports are valid. It will not tell you whether they are right.
What Good Looks Like
ASIC's description of the single compliant reporting entity is instructive. That firm regularly collaborated with peers and other regulators internationally, closely followed ASIC's guidance on third-party oversight, and regularly reconciled data in the transaction repository against its own internal records.
None of these are extraordinary measures. They are the basics of a functioning reporting control framework. The fact that only one out of 52 demonstrated them consistently tells you where most of the market stands.
What Firms Should Be Asking Now
ASIC's supervision is increasing. The shift from implementation guidance to identifying outliers, challenging firms and enforcing remediation follows a pattern already established under EMIR Refit in the UK and EU. APAC is on the same trajectory.
The right questions to be asking now:
Is your collateral data accurate? ASIC found significant failures in collateral reporting. If your collateral and valuation reporting is not reconciling daily to your internal systems, it is likely wrong.
Are your notionals correct? Incorrect notional calculations were observed across all asset classes. This is a calculation error, not an interpretation question.
Who owns your reporting? Inadequate oversight of reporting delegates was a systemic issue in the review. If your delegate is submitting on your behalf, the obligation and the liability remain yours.
Can you evidence your controls? When ASIC asks for evidence of your control framework, the answer cannot be that you trust your delegate.
How KOR Approaches This
The single compliant entity in ASIC's review did three things: reconciled its data regularly, maintained close oversight of its reporting delegate, and engaged actively with regulators to ensure its interpretation of the rules was correct. Technology is what makes those controls sustainable at scale.
KOR's reporting services include a pre-validation layer that checks reports against the ASIC Derivative Transaction Rules before submission, catching errors in timestamps, notional values, collateral fields, and UPI classifications at the point of formation. Catching issues before they enter the regulatory record drastically speeds up remediation, avoiding the cycle of resubmissions after the fact.
For firms who delegate their reporting, ASIC was explicit: inadequate delegate oversight was a systemic failure across the cohort. The obligation does not transfer to your delegate. KOR gives you the visibility to demonstrate you are meeting it.
ASIC has made clear that REP 828 is not the end of its scrutiny - more reviews are expected. If you are not fully confident in your reporting today, the time to act is now.
To discuss how KOR can support your reporting obligations, contact us.
Our partner Resolve DTR provides managed operations for derivative trade reporting, leveraging the KOR platform. For a detailed breakdown of the specific black-spots identified in ASIC's review, read Resolve DTR's ASIC Reporting Blackspots analysis.
Related reading:
