In this speech, David Chaplin, Head of Enforcement and Litigation, examines how behaviour in regulatory investigations is evolving. Drawing on recent PRA and Bank enforcement cases, he discusses a shift towards earlier engagement and candour, and considers how this can support faster, more efficient enforcement while maintaining appropriate and effective regulatory outcomes. Speech   It is a real pleasure to be in Leeds for the Fifth Conference on Financial Law and Regulation. Leeds is an important base for the Bank of England as we build a stronger national presence and deepen our engagement with institutions, practitioners and scholars across the UK. The Bank first opened a Leeds branch in 1827,footnote[1] and our growing presence here reflects a commitment: not only to operate from different locations, but to engage across the country with the professional and intellectual communities that shape our financial system. It is therefore particularly fitting to be here at the University of Leeds, contributing to a conference that brings together legal, regulatory and academic perspectives on some of the most challenging questions facing financial law and regulation today. Some of these questions arise in the context of investigations and enforcement. And that’s what I am going to talk about. Introduction For a long time, there was a relatively settled picture of what a regulatory enforcement investigation looks like: how it begins, how it proceeds, and when (where appropriate) responsibility for regulatory breaches is acknowledged and action taken. That model has served an important purpose, and in many cases, it continues to do so. What I want to discuss today though is how, in a growing number of PRA and Bank enforcement cases, that familiar pattern is changing. I’ll explore how that change has come about, what it entails, and why we think it matters. Recently, we have seen a clear and consistent shift in how the subjects of our investigations are engaging with us. This is a change we have championed and will continue to encourage because of the benefits it brings for all concerned. What is that trend? Put simply, it is that subjects of investigations are engaging with us earlier in the investigations and enforcement process and proactively identifying, acknowledging and remediating breaches. This is not something isolated to a small number of cases. It is not behaviour confined to exceptional or isolated circumstances. Rather, what we are seeing is a sustained change in approach, which we see as having the potential to become the new default: a shift in how responsibility and candour are being understood and acted upon in regulatory enforcement. We believe this represents a genuine sea change in how a growing number of enforcement cases are now being approached. The focus here is not on the launch of a new policy, but on how a policy we have already introduced is playing out in practice and the impact it is having on behaviour in live enforcement cases. Our remit As a reminder, the PRA is responsible for the supervision of approximately 1,300 banks, building societies, credit unions, insurers and major investment firms. In addition to this, the Bank of England has broader regulatory responsibilities, including the supervision of certain financial market infrastructures in the UK. In the enforcement space, we have powers to discipline firms, including through financial sanctions, public censures and the temporary suspension of permissions. We also continue to pursue individual accountability and to publish outcomes in appropriate cases, including, where necessary, prohibiting individuals who are not fit and proper in order to protect the wider regulated community. Before going further, it is worth stepping back and making a broader point about the character of PRA and Bank enforcement. The PRA is a supervision-led rather than an enforcement-led regulator. Our investigations and enforcement resource has always been precision-focused, and used in a targeted way to support supervisory aims. This reflects a need to look back and understand what has gone wrong, as well as a need to look forward and positively influence future behaviour, including in relation to matters where there may be shortcomings apparent, but (perhaps just by good fortune) crystallised harm has not yet arisen. While the enforcement division works closely with supervisors and supports their aims, we are functionally independent from supervision, which helps ensure that we approach matters objectively and with fresh eyes. Our enforcement activity stretches across the entire gamut of PRA-authorised firms: large and small deposit-takers, designated investment firms, insurers, reinsurers and credit unions. Enforcement action is brought to support specific supervisory objectives, strategies, and outcomes. In the PRA context, this is guided by its primary statutory objectives: to promote the safety and soundness of PRA‑authorised firms and to secure an appropriate degree of protection for policyholders. That approach has resulted in a steady number of public outcomes each year, and we expect that to continue. Our focus is on cases that deliver appropriate outcomes while sending clear deterrent signals to the wider community of PRA-authorised firms, individuals and Bank regulated entities. But what is changing, against that steady position, is how those cases are conducted and resolved, and how efficiently and constructively accountability is achieved. ‘Contentious regulatory work’ - the investigations and enforcement orthodoxy To understand why this matters, let’s briefly consider the orthodox model that has traditionally shaped regulatory enforcement cases. That model typically followed a familiar pattern: The regulator opens an investigation and gathers evidence, perhaps over a significant period. The evidence is analysed and tested. Once a settled regulatory view has formed, if the regulator considers that breaches have been identified and action is appropriate, a proposal for action is put to the subject. This may be treated as a case to answer and engagement often becomes, at least in the first instance, defensive: the subject, and their counsel, often adopt a defensive posture, with initial engagement focused on minimising exposure by challenging the regulator’s conclusions. Admissions may eventually come as part of a settlement, but often late on in the process. This approach has driven a set of familiar conventions, on the part of investigation subjects and those advising them, including caution about taking early positions; the labelling of learning and remediation as “enhancements” rather than corrections; careful avoidance of any acknowledgement of rule breaches until the regulator’s view is known; and a tendency to approach enforcement as “quasi‑litigation" rather than as a process of regulatory accountability. It is important to say that this approach may not be wrong or improper. In some cases (particularly where facts are contested or responsibility is genuinely unclear) it may be entirely appropriate. But it is not the only model, and it is not the best model for every situation. If it is treated as the only model, we risk losing the opportunity, in appropriate cases, to do something better — better not only for the regulator but also better, undoubtedly, for the subject of investigations and the wider regulated community. And it bears pausing here to note that, every (not the majority, but every) enforcement case where we have made findings of breaches of rules by a firm to date has been resolved by settlement (that’s 21 cases in total).footnote[2] To date, no firm cases have been contested at our Enforcement Decision Making Committee or the Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber). We do not open investigations unless the statutory thresholds for doing so are met and our investigation opening criteriafootnote[3] are engaged. But we do not think the fact that all our actions against firms have settled is a function of the PRA only pursuing cases where breaches are clear and obvious at the point of opening an investigation. Rather, it reflects the fact that firms, by the time we reach a settlement proposal, have understood the nature of the case against them and internally acknowledged the weaknesses and failings within their systems, controls and governance frameworks. Firms typically recognise the value in the certainty of a settlement and the opportunity to demonstrate contrition and move on from past wrongdoing or failures. This might be taken to suggest that the approach followed historically where an investigation may be treated as a contentious or adversarial endeavour may be misplaced and unnecessary in many cases. Not all investigations result in enforcement action. It remains the case, that some investigations are closed with no action taken, and that will inevitably continue. We do not open investigations lightly, but the fact that some investigations conclude without findings of breach reflects an important feature of how we approach enforcement. We do not open investigations with a predetermined outcome, nor do we focus only on the most straightforward or easily provable cases. This also demonstrates a central point that PRA and Bank investigations are conducted with an open mind; something that will not change. But I am talking about a different, yet substantial, category of investigations: cases where there is often a realistic and shared understanding at an early stage that a regulatory breach is very likely to have occurred. Such scenarios are not uncommon and often arise as a result of independent reports firms may have commissioned, section 166 “skilled person” reviews,footnote[4] root cause analysis exercises or post incident reports. Such work is often sufficient to enable a firm to understand what went wrong, why and how; and who is accountable for this. In cases such as these, the traditional orthodoxy can lead to unnecessarily slow, resource intensive, and expensive processes. The consequence, which we have seen many times, can be investigations that take much longer than they need to. This increases cost, uncertainty, and strain for firms, individuals, and, yes, for regulators alike. It can also introduce significant delay between the events which may have prompted an investigation and the publishing of a settled enforcement outcome. It needn’t be like this. Efficiency, speed and regulatory burden Efficiency and speed are not abstract virtues in enforcement. They matter because quick and efficient investigations reduce prolonged uncertainty for firms and individuals, as well as allowing regulatory resources to be deployed where they add most value and where they enable the regulator to be most effective. Quick and effective investigations also enable lessons from enforcement outcomes to reach the wider market more quickly, with the aim of improving understanding and therefore behaviours, to the benefit of firms, individuals and the regulator. This also connects to a broader discussion about efficiency and regulatory burden on firms. Some of that regulatory burden arises directly from the need to comply with rules. Regulators should, of course, keep their rules under review and look to reform them where appropriate to reduce burden in a way which is proportionate to risk. There are rightly many recent examples of regulators, including the PRA, seeking to do this. In an enforcement context, reducing regulatory burden does not, however, mean reducing enforcement activity such that the incentive to properly and fully comply with the letter and spirit of rules diminishes. But regulatory burden does not arise only from compliance with rules. It can also be driven by the conduct and behaviour of parties and unnecessary procedural friction. Where enforcement can be carried out in a way that uncovers the facts and delivers accountability more quickly, without compromising deterrence, and without unnecessary duplication of effort, that is a real and meaningful reduction in regulatory burden. From the Bank’s perspective, efficient enforcement is not about rushing. It is about doing the right work meticulously, in the right order, without unnecessary delay, to ensure an appropriate regulatory outcome is achieved. Over recent years, we have focused on how enforcement policy design can support that aim with clear architecture and incentives which promote efficiency and candour. Incentives A helpful analogy here is civil justice. In civil litigation, early engagement is not just encouraged; it is structurally incentivised. Under the Civil Procedure Rules, the overriding objective, costs rules, and judicial expectations all push parties towards narrowing issues, accepting responsibility where appropriate, and resolving disputes proportionately. Accordingly, a party that resists the obvious, or prolongs proceedings unnecessarily, does so at real risk. I referred earlier to a tendency to treat investigations and enforcement as “quasi litigation” – investigations and enforcement are not civil litigation, quasi or otherwise. This has been affirmed at the Court of Appeal: a regulator is not an “ordinary litigant” and the conduct of cases is not to be treated as “ordinary litigation”.footnote[5] But the underlying insight holds: behaviour follows incentives. And what we have sought to do in our enforcement policy is rebalance incentives, without compromising rigour or fairness. The Early Account Scheme as a signal That brings me to the Early Account Scheme — the “EAS”. The EAS was introduced as part of an enforcement policy update we made in 2024.footnote[6] It is available to subjects under investigation in appropriate cases, and it is best understood as a signal to subjects of PRA and Bank investigations about how we expect mature regulatory engagement to work in appropriate cases. It signals that: early, high quality internal investigation is valued; comprehensive and accurate factual accounts matter; early admissions of regulatory breaches made well in advance of settlement are meaningful; and proactive candour can materially affect the efficiency and outcome of an investigation. The EAS is available to both firms and individuals, and gives subjects a mechanism to adapt their approach to regulatory engagement, in effect an architecture for co-operation with appropriate checks and balances. Specifically, it gives a subject an opportunity to produce a candid Account (with an expectation that this will be done in six months or less) which is comprehensive, accurate and timely, supported with relevant material, and arrived at through an appropriately rigorous process. This is not a process that relies on the subject simply providing an account in isolation. It is a collaborative and iterative endeavour, with the PRA actively engaging, testing and, where necessary, challenging the content of the Account as it is developed. Our existing investigative tools remain fully available, including the use of compulsory powers where appropriate, and an Account produced under the EAS sits alongside the broader evidential picture, including documentation and information already held by Supervision. In addition, senior management accountability is built into the process, through attestation as to the accuracy and completeness of the Account. We also retain the ability to pursue any lines of enquiry that are not adequately reflected in an Account. Taken together, these features are designed to ensure that early candour is accompanied by rigour, not at the expense of it. Where a subject produces an Account in this way, and makes early admissions, providing they have ceased the behaviour giving rise to the breaches, and carried out necessary remediation, they may be entitled to an enhanced discount of up to 50% on any regulatory penalty. What do we mean by “early admissions”? This is an area where precision matters. ”Early admissions” do not mean general expressions of regret, tactical concessions made once settlement parameters are already clear, or pure factual acknowledgements distinguished from regulatory breaches. What we mean by early admissions in PRA and Bank cases is the acceptance of relevant facts and regulatory breaches which are made significantly in advance of any settlement proposal and at a stage where those admissions genuinely shape the scope, direction, and duration of the investigation. In other words, open and candid regulatory engagement in good faith. This mirrors what comprises one of our fundamental expectations as to firm engagements with the regulator more generally: to be open and co-operative.footnote[7] What the lived experience shows so far We recognise that this may demand an adjustment in mindset and requires an element of trust. That includes confidence that subjects who come forward early will be treated fairly, in line with the framework we have set out. But what has been striking is how these signals have already translated into real behavioural change. We welcome this change. Across a growing number of our enforcement investigations, we are now seeing earlier without prejudice engagement, investigation subjects volunteering structured factual accounts, and admissions being made months, and in some cases years, earlier than would previously have been typical. This is evident if you look at our cases since the EAS policy was published in early 2024 with admissions as to rule breaches now regularly being proactively made early on and, in one case, with a firm even making clear that it would, in light of the facts and matters, be appropriate for a financial sanction to be imposed (crucially, this was before any such proposal had been put before the firm). A number of these cases were already in progress when the EAS policy was published so were not formally on the “EAS track”. However, the way that these outcomes were arrived at represents a response to the policy signal the EAS policy sent upon publication. And in March this year we published our first outcome in a firm case in which the EAS policy was formally applied. This was action in respect of U K Insurance Limited, a subsidiary of Direct Line Insurance Group plc (now owned by Aviva).footnote[8] It proved to be a successful pilot case. We were impressed with how the subject engaged and the commitment the firm demonstrated to self-reflection and contrition which was completely in tune with what we are hoping to achieve with the scheme. The firm engaged proactively and candidly with our investigation team during the EAS process and provided a comprehensive, timely, accurate and fulsome Account. Shortly following production of the Account, and (critically) significantly in advance of any settlement proposal being put to the firm by the PRA, the firm made admissions, both as to relevant facts and regulatory rule breaches. This meant our investigation could proceed efficiently and quickly and we recognised this by giving the firm the maximum discount. Collectively these recent examples represent a break with our past actions. They represent a pattern of change in how subjects are choosing to engage with enforcement. It’s one we hope will continue and why we would describe what is happening as genuinely significant. It is grounded not just in policy language, but already in observable behaviour across our cases. For the PRA and the Bank, it means more focused and efficient investigations, better use of specialist resources, and outcomes delivered closer to the underlying events. For firms and individuals under investigation, it means shorter periods of uncertainty, reduced cost and disruption (an opportunity to acknowledge, reflect and move on from breaches) and stronger incentives for governance, escalation, and remediation. Bringing this together Enforcement works best when it is understood not as a contest, but as a disciplined process for accountability, learning and rebuilding trust, with responsibility recognised early enough for it to do its job properly. The approach I have described today is new and may take some getting used to. It will sit alongside more traditional approaches rather than replace them entirely. But the destination, an appropriate regulatory outcome, has not changed. What is changing, in many cases, is the route taken to get there and the pace at which we arrive. Together, these developments represent a sea change in how regulatory investigations and enforcement are conducted. They bring new optionality and scope for faster outcomes. They mark not just a change in form, but in substance, in how subjects of investigations engage with us and how accountability is achieved. I would like to thank Edward Aldred, Tara Connolly, Geoff Egerton and Ossie Fikret for their help in preparing this speech. And to colleagues across the Bank, including in particular Olie Dearie, Rob Price and Aaron Schroeder-Willis, for their helpful comments. p.128, Till Time’s Last Sand, A History of the Bank of England, David Kynaston. (https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/CalmView/Record.aspx?src=CalmView.Persons&id=DS%2FUK%2F700&pos=1). This is notwithstanding the statutory framework set out in the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 governing the process around investigations and enforcement which provides a mechanism for the Upper Tribunal to determine our cases. See the Bank of England / PRA Investigation Referral Criteria  for the considerations that inform the decision to open an investigation. See section 166, Financial Services and Markets Act 2000. 57 – 60, FCA v Seiler and Whitestone [2024] EWCA Civ 852 . The Bank of England’s approach to enforcement: statements of policy and procedure (January 2024, updated further in November 2024) See e.g. PRA Fundamental Rule 7: “A firm must deal with its regulators in an open and co-operative way, and must disclose to the PRA appropriately anything relating to the firm of which the PRA would reasonably expect notice.” https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/news/2026/march/pra-fines-uk-insurance-limited

Market capitalisation of €6.7 million 33rd listing on Euronext in 2026 Euronext today congratulates Eduform’Action, a reference entrepreneurial group in the training sector, on its transfer from Euronext Access to Euronext Growth in Paris (ticker code: ALEFA). Eduform'Action is a multi-specialist entrepreneurial group focused on initial training, continuing education and apprenticeships. The group has built a national training platform structured around four strategic verticals: healthcare, management & workplace safety, housing & energy renovation and digital & technology. It brings together an ecosystem of schools, apprenticeship training centres and training organisations united by a shared ambition: to develop talent and meet skills needs. Each year, Eduform'Action supports nearly 60,000 learners across mainland France and overseas territories, with the support of its 1,500 expert trainers. In a market shaped by evolving job roles, the group aims to build a leading player capable of supporting private companies and public sector organisations with their long-term skills and employability challenges. At market opening on Thursday 25 June 2026, the share price was €0.34, based on the closing price on Euronext Access Paris on 24 June 2026. This gave the company a market value of €6.7 million. Cécile Béziat, Chief Executive Officer of Eduform’Action, said: “The transfer of Eduform’Action to Euronext Growth is a sign of the Group’s maturity, four years after its launch and following 2025 results that fully validate our strategy. This move enhances our visibility with investors and marks a key milestone in the Group’s development, as we now aim to scale up our operations.” Caption: Cécile Béziat, Chief Executive Officer of Eduform’Action, and her team, rang the bell during a ceremony this morning to celebrate the transfer to Euronext Growth of Eduform’Action.

FTSE Russell, LSEG’s global index provider, today announces that it has reached agreement with China Construction Bank (CCB) to launch the FTSE CCB Dim Sum (Offshore CNY) Green Bond Index, developed in collaboration with the bank.  The new index offers a transparent, rules-based benchmark designed to measure the performance of offshore RMB-denominated (“Dim Sum”) green bonds, supporting investor access to a fast-growing segment of the global fixed income market. The FTSE CCB Dim Sum (Offshore CNY) Green Bond Index combines targeted exposure to the offshore RMB-denominated Dim Sum bond market with robust green bond eligibility criteria aligned with internationally recognised standards, including the Climate Bonds Initiative (CBI), within a framework designed to reflect the investable CNH green bond universe.  The new index enables investors to access offshore RMB-denominated green bond exposure through a clear, investable benchmark and to allocate capital more efficiently to China-related sustainable fixed income within global portfolios.  Stephanie Maier, Head of Sustainable at FTSE Russell, said:  “The development of a transparent benchmark for offshore RMB green bonds marks an important step in expanding access to China-related sustainable fixed income. As highlighted in the UK–China Economic and Financial Dialogue, deepening cross-border investment opportunities remains a key priority, and this index supports investors seeking diversification while contributing to the internationalisation of RMB.” Ying Yan, General Manager at China Construction Bank London Branch, commented: “We are pleased to collaborate with FTSE Russell and have reached agreement to launch the FTSE CCB Dim Sum (Offshore CNY) Green Bond Index, one of the first dedicated benchmarks for the offshore RMB green bond market. This initiative reflects our continued commitment to advancing green finance and supporting the development of the offshore RMB market. The index provides investors with a clear and structured framework to access this growing segment, facilitating capital allocation to sustainable projects and contributing to the broader development of China’s green bond market.”

Nasdaq (Nasdaq: NDAQ) announces that trading in Flat Capital AB (publ) (ticker: FLAT B) commences today on the Nasdaq Stockholm Main Market. Flat Capital is a Mid Cap company within the Financials sector and the 24th company to be admitted to trading on Nasdaq’s Nordic and Baltic markets* in 2026.  Flat Capital is a listed investment company with a clear and focused business model: to invest in assets that are expected to create long-term value in a cost-efficient manner. The company has a broad investment mandate across sectors, geographies, and asset classes, and invests in companies that challenge established industries. Notable investments include Klarna and Defensor Group. Founded in 2013, Flat Capital operates with a lean organization, supported by Sebastian Siemiatkowski’s experience and global network, enabling access to differentiated investment opportunities and efficient decision-making.  “A move to Nasdaq Stockholm's main market will give Flat the opportunity to broaden its investor base towards more institutional capital moving forward. This is also a natural next step in our ongoing work to professionalize how we run Flat, and it reflects where the company stands today. Over time, we expect it to support greater liquidity in the share, which benefits all our shareholders”, comments Rickard El Tarzi, CEO of Flat Capital.  “We are pleased to welcome Flat Capital to Nasdaq Stockholm’s Main Market. The transition from Nasdaq First North Growth Market to the Main Market marks an important milestone in the company’s development and reflects its progress in recent years. With its distinctive investment approach, Flat Capital is well positioned for this next phase. We look forward to supporting the company going forward,” says Adam Kostyál, Head of European Listings at Nasdaq and President of Nasdaq Stockholm.  *Main markets and Nasdaq First North at Nasdaq Copenhagen, Nasdaq Helsinki, Nasdaq Iceland and Nasdaq Stockholm as well as Nasdaq Baltic 

Connection facilitates investment opportunities for institutional investors in a growing market Clearstream is the only ICSD to offer access to Kenyan market Kenya is Clearstream’s 60th domestic market link Clearstream, Deutsche Börse Group’s post-trade business, opens a new domestic link to Kenya on June 29, 2026. The connection provides institutional investors with efficient access to the local market through a unique omnibus account structure, supporting Kenyan government bonds, infrastructure bonds and treasury bills. Standard Chartered Kenya will serve as Clearstream’s cash correspondent bank for Kenyan Shilling and local custodian with the Central Bank of Kenya. This expansion comes as Kenya solidifies its position as a leading economic hub in East Africa, showing consistent growth and attracting significant international investor interest. This momentum is further reinforced by Kenya’s expected inclusion in global market indices and underscores its rising prominence among international investors. The new link addresses this growing demand, enabling capital to flow more easily into one of the continent’s most promising markets. The connection to Kenya is Clearstream’s 60th domestic market link, making it the only ICSD to offer access to the country. This allows Clearstream's clients to easily settle and safekeep Kenyan Government debt securities, use Kenyan debt instruments in collateral management facilities, and perform foreign exchange services for the Kenyan Shilling, all through a single point of access without any local registration or account opening processes. Clearstream’s global market link network connects 60 domestic markets as well as the international market via one single access point, overcoming the challenges of cross-border investing and directing investment flows where they are needed. Jan Willems, Head of Global Markets at Clearstream, said: “The new link to Kenya is an important milestone as it follows Clearstream’s strategic aim to facilitate global investment and provide further access for our clients to attractive and growing markets. We are delighted to partner with Standard Chartered and the Central Bank of Kenya to connect the Kenyan market to our global network.” David Luusa, Director Financial Markets at the Central Bank of Kenya, added: “The Central Bank of Kenya welcomes the establishment of the Clearstream-Kenya Link which is expected to provide efficient access by international investors to Kenyan Government securities, supported by the Dhow Central Securities Depository (DhowCSD). This is a significant milestone in developing Kenya’s financial markets. The link is expected to deepen liquidity, broaden the investor base, and enhance resilience of the domestic debt market. This development underscores our commitment to strengthening and modernizing financial market infrastructure, fostering greater integration with the global financial system, and advancing Kenya’s position as one of the leading financial centers in Africa.” Birju Sanghrajka, Chief Executive Officer & Head of Coverage, Corporate & Investment Banking at Standard Chartered Kenya, commented: “Standard Chartered Kenya is pleased to collaborate with the Central Bank of Kenya and Clearstream to make Kenya, Clearstream’s 60th domestic market link globally and second in Africa after South Africa. This marks an important milestone in the development of Kenya’s financial markets. Increased foreign participation in local government securities is anticipated to bring capital into the economy, broaden the investor base, enhance market liquidity, and promote higher standards of transparency and efficiency.”

182 new firms licenced and registered in DIFC in 2025, a 16% increase on 2024 – and third consecutive year of double-digit registration growth.  Fund management sector remains core to DIFC’s ecosystem, expanding to 121 Authorised Firms, and 276 funds in total. Within the broader wealth and asset management sector, assets under management rose to US$ 176 billion up 4% year on year, and assets under advisory at US$ 220 billion up 22% year on year. Strong 15% growth in the insurance sector, particularly within reinsurance, reinforcing DIFC’s position as a regional hub. Combined balance sheets of banks operating in DIFC reached US$ 251 billion, representing a 19% year-on-year increase and a 195% increase from 2015. Over-the-counter (OTC) market saw over 100% growth in value and volume of transactions with US$ 13 trillion in Q4 2025. The Dubai Financial Services Authority (DFSA), the independent banking, financial services, and markets regulator of Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC), today published its 2025 Annual Report: Shaping the Financial Markets of the Future. 2025 marked a third consecutive year of double-digit growth across DIFC’s financial ecosystem: the DFSA licensed and registered 182 new firms – a 16% increase on 2024 – bringing the total number of regulated entities to 1,050, spanning banking, capital markets, wealth and asset management, insurance, and fintech. Since the close of the reporting period on 31 December 2025, Dubai has advanced to seventh place globally in the Global Financial Centres Index (39) published in March 2026 – its highest-ever ranking – reflecting the sustained international confidence in the Emirate’s economic strength, regulatory environment, and long-term strategy. The report comes amid continued momentum within DIFC and Dubai’s financial sector: building on DIFC’s position as the leading international financial centre across the Middle East, Africa, and South Asia (MEASA) region, Dubai continues to advance its ambition of becoming a global top four hub for finance, investment, and innovation by 2033 under the Dubai Economic Agenda (D33) and DIFC 2030 Strategy. Fadel Al Ali, Chairman, DFSA said: “The Dubai Financial Services Authority (DFSA) continues to support the rapid growth of Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC), in line with the Dubai Economic Agenda (D33) and DIFC 2030 strategies, which seek to position the Emirate as a global top four hub for finance, investment, and innovation by 2033. In 2025, we welcomed 182 regulated entities into our jurisdiction, bringing the total number to 1,050 – our third consecutive year of double-digit growth. Today, this dynamic and thriving ecosystem includes the vast majority of global systemically important banks (G-SIBs), as well as an extensive network of wealth and asset managers, capital markets firms, banks, insurers, auditors, and professional services firms. The recent Global Financial Centres Index placing Dubai seventh globally – its highest-ever position – reflects the strength of what we are building together. Our 2025 Annual Report: Shaping the Financial Markets of the Future, reflects our shared national vision of developing the United Arab Emirates, Dubai, and DIFC into the world’s centre of choice for financial services; a place that does not just help to lead the future of the industry, but actively shapes it.” Mark Steward, Chief Executive, DFSA stated: “As outlined within our Annual Report: Shaping the Financial Markets of the Future, 2025 saw a third consecutive year of double digit growth in Dubai’s International Financial Centre. This signals continued strong confidence in DIFC and Dubai, and a broadening and deepening of the ecosystem, underscored by the DFSA’s risk-based, international regulatory environment. This momentum has continued into 2026 against a backdrop of ongoing global uncertainty. In times of uncertainty, investors look for jurisdictions like DIFC with strong risk-based regulatory frameworks and approaches,  institutional depth, and long-term strategic credibility. The response over the last months, from my DFSA colleagues, as well as our stakeholders in both the government and from the banking, insurance, and financial sectors, has been outstanding as we continue to lay the groundwork for the future of financial markets.” Driving sustainable, scalable, and high-quality growth The report outlines strong performance across the financial services sector, with sustained growth in licensed firms, market participants, and financial activity throughout 2025. The DFSA continued to attract high-quality institutions and foster an environment that supports long-term, sustainable expansion across banking, insurance, capital markets, fintech, and wealth and asset management. Authorisation activity remained robust, with 182 new firms licenced and registered, bringing the total to 1,050 regulated entities – a 16% increase from 2024 – reflecting strong and sustained demand from international and regional firms seeking to establish operations in DIFC. The report also highlights continued diversification across the financial ecosystem and growing recognition of DIFC as a gateway to regional and global markets. Key sector highlights: Capital Markets: The DFSA continued its efforts to deepen and enhance Dubai’s capital markets ecosystem through regulatory improvements, infrastructure enhancements, and initiatives aimed at increasing market participation and investor confidence. During 2025, the total value of new debenture listings reached US$ 30.6 billion, bringing outstanding listings to US$ 147.4 billion. DIFC maintained its position as one of the world’s leading jurisdictions for sukuk, with US$ 107.9 billion in outstanding listings. OTC market saw unprecedented growth on value and volume of transactions with US$ 13 trillion in Q4 2025. Wealth and Asset Management: The sector continued to represent a core pillar of the DIFC ecosystem, both in scale and depth. The fund management sector expanded to 121 Authorised Firms, with USD$ 176 billion in assets under management – reflecting the UAE’s growing position as a jurisdiction of choice for fund structuring and management. More broadly, the sector comprises over 320 Authorised Firms with US$ 220 billion in assets under advisory. DIFC has become a top five global hub for hedge funds, with 87 registered in the Centre, including two of the world's largest. Banking: Driven by disciplined growth and client confidence, the consolidated balance sheet of DIFC banks reached US$ 251 billion as at Q4 2025, a 19% year-on-year increase and a 195% increase from year-end 2015. Private banking continued to expand, with assets under advisory reaching US$ 103.8 billion, representing 23% year-on-year growth, and a client base of over 14,000 – further reinforcing DIFC’s position as a leading centre for wealth activity. Insurance: The sector demonstrated continued strong growth, with a 15% increase in insurance-related entities, reinforcing DIFC’s position as a leading regional hub. As of 31 December 2025, the aggregate amount of gross written premium reached a record high of US$ 4.24 billion by reinsurers and reinsurance underwriters and US$ 3.38 billion by insurance brokers, reflecting increased capacity, product offerings, and market participation. Enforcement and Market Integrity: The DFSA maintained a proactive supervisory and enforcement approach throughout 2025, reinforcing accountability, transparency, and compliance across the financial sector.  The Enforcement team progressed 17 matters at the investigative stage – nine complex and eight standard – concluding seven by year-end. The DFSA received 322 complaints regarding firms or individuals within its jurisdiction, resolving 81% within 28 days, and issued 49 consumer alerts – a 69% increase on 2024 – reflecting heightened vigilance against scams and unauthorised activity targeting the DIFC market. Shaping policy through strategic collaboration A key theme of the 2025 Annual Report is the importance of collaboration in shaping the future regulatory environment. Throughout the year, the DFSA worked closely with government entities, international standard-setting bodies, financial institutions, and industry stakeholders to strengthen policy frameworks and support market development. The Authority expanded its international engagement through strategic partnerships, regulatory dialogues, and memoranda of understanding (MoUs) with peer regulators and global organisations, reinforcing DIFC’s role as an active contributor to the evolution of international financial regulation and best practice. By year-end 2025, the DFSA was a signatory to 120 MoUs, five multilateral MoUs, and eight innovation agreements – facilitating regulatory cooperation and collaboration across jurisdictions. Innovating responsibly and managing risk As innovation accelerates across global finance, the DFSA continued its efforts to balance technological advancement with effective risk management and regulatory oversight. During 2025, the Authority introduced and enhanced frameworks covering digital finance, digital assets, sustainable finance, and technology-enabled financial services, whilst strengthening supervisory capabilities designed to safeguard market integrity and investor confidence. The DFSA’s Tokenisation Regulatory Sandbox – launched in March 2025 – attracted 96 expressions of interest from firms across six jurisdictions, demonstrating strong global appetite for DIFC’s regulated innovation pathway. The DFSA’s annual artificial intelligence (AI) survey revealed that 52% of DIFC firms actively used AI in 2025, up from 33% in 2024, with generative AI adoption increasing 166% year-on-year – underlining the pace of technological change across the financial sector and the importance of proportionate, risk-based regulatory oversight. Driving operational excellence The DFSA’s commitment to operational excellence was reflected throughout 2025 in continued investment in regulatory efficiency, digital transformation, and organisational capability. With the launch of DFSA Connect – a next-generation online platform for authorisation and approvals processes – the DFSA saw a 25% increase in authorisation applications whilst maintaining service quality and regulatory rigour. As Dubai continues its rise toward being a top four global financial centre by 2033, the DFSA’s 2025 Annual Report reflects a more modern and forward-looking vision aligned with the evolving financial landscape, highlighting the Authority’s role in enabling sustainable, scalable, and high-quality growth across DIFC’s financial ecosystem while reinforcing market integrity, resilience, and innovation. The full DFSA Annual Report 2025: Shaping the Financial Markets of the Future is available at: DFSA Annual Report 2025 – English DFSA Annual Report 2025 – Arabic Fadel Al Ali, Chairman, DFSA (right) and Mark Steward, Chief Executive, DFSA (left)

New route optimizations on the Shanghai <> Tokyo and Shanghai <> Hong Kong network segments further improve connectivity between Shanghai Tonglian Data Center and major financial centers across APAC and North America. Supports China onshore/offshore trading, FTSE China A50 strategies, and cross-market commodities arbitrage as Chinese markets are increasingly integrated into global trading flows Avelacom, the ultra-low latency connectivity and infrastructure provider, has completed a series of network optimizations from Shanghai Tonglian Data Center (上海通联数据中心). The optimized network architecture enhances connectivity from Shanghai to Hong Kong, Tokyo, Singapore, and onward to Chicago, supporting a range of latency-sensitive trading strategies. Among the key use cases enabled by the new routes are China onshore/offshore trading, FTSE China A50 trading, and cross-market commodities trading between China and global derivatives markets. The new network segments deliver: Less than 16.5 ms RTD between Shanghai and Hong Kong Less than 50 ms RTD between Shanghai and Singapore Less than 24 ms RTD between Shanghai and Tokyo, supporting low-latency connectivity towards CME Group markets Shanghai plays a key role in Asian trading infrastructure. Demand for deterministic low-latency connectivity between China and international financial centers continues to grow as trading firms increasingly deploy cross-market and cross-region strategies. Aleksey Larichev, CEO of Avelacom, comments: “Chinese markets are increasingly integrated into global trading flows. Venues such as SHFE and CFFEX are traded alongside international markets including CME, SGX and HKEX. As a result, cross-market latency becomes a critical factor for trading firms operating across regions.”

The results of the Federal Reserve Board's annual bank stress test confirmed that large banks are well positioned to weather a severe recession and able to continue to lend to households and businesses. Despite absorbing more than $708 billion in total loan losses under this year's hypothetical scenario, capital declined only 1.6 percentage points in aggregate, staying above minimum capital requirements. "Today's results underscore the strength of the banking system," Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle W. Bowman said. "As we work to increase the transparency and accountability of the stress test, public feedback will help us continue to improve and instill greater confidence in the stress test and its results." As the Board previously announced, today's results will not impact large bank capital requirements, which have been published today. The current capital requirements will stay in place until 2027, when the stress test will be run with loss-estimating models that take public feedback into consideration. All 32 banks tested remained above their minimum common equity tier 1 capital requirements during this year's hypothetical recession scenario, which was similar in severity to the prior test. The hypothetical scenario this year included a severe global recession with a 39 percent decline in commercial real estate prices and a 30 percent decline in house prices. The unemployment rate also increased to a peak of 10 percent, and economic output declined commensurately. Three main factors influenced the results of this year's test, with two leading to a larger decline in the aggregate capital ratio than last year, and one more than offsetting this decline: Projected capital decreased from higher loan losses due to increased loan balances and the increased severity of certain scenario variables; Projected capital decreased from lower projected unrealized gains in bank securities due to smaller hypothetical declines in interest rates during the scenario; and Projected capital increased from higher interest income due to recent bank financial performance and smaller hypothetical declines of interest rates during the scenario. The total projected losses include roughly $200 billion in credit card losses, $160 billion in losses from commercial and industrial loans, and $75 billion in losses from commercial real estate. 2026 Federal Reserve Stress Test Results (PDF) 2026 Large Bank Capital Requirements (PDF) Related Content Stress Tests

The Securities and Exchange Commission has appointed Kathleen M. Hutchinson as Director of the agency’s Office of International Affairs (OIA). OIA advises the Commission on international policy matters, coordinates with foreign authorities across the globe to facilitate cross-border enforcement and supervisory cooperation and provides technical assistance. Ms. Hutchinson has served as OIA’s Acting Director since January 2025. She started at the SEC in 2003 as an attorney-advisor in the Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations, now the Division of Examinations, and joined OIA in 2008. Ms. Hutchinson has held several other positions in OIA, including Deputy Director and Assistant Director. She has twice served as Acting Director of the office. “Kathleen has exhibited her dedication to public service and her commitment to our mission for over two decades, and I am grateful for her readiness to lead our Office of International Affairs on a permanent basis,” said SEC Chairman Paul S. Atkins. “She has effectively guided many international initiatives with our counterparts abroad, and I look forward to her continued leadership and counsel on international policy and cooperation issues.” Ms. Hutchinson said, “The talented staff in our Office of International Affairs make it a privilege to come to work each day and serve investors and our markets. Advancing the SEC’s international priorities through engagement with foreign counterparts on policy issues, supervisory and enforcement matters, and technical assistance is critical to the SEC’s ability to carry out its mission. I’m grateful to Chairman Atkins for this opportunity and look forward to continue working with the Commission, my SEC colleagues, and foreign authorities to address evolving challenges facing global markets today.” Kathleen earned a J.D./M.A. from American University’s Washington College of Law and School of International Service. She holds a B.A. from Binghamton University. She began her legal career in private practice in Washington D.C. and New York City.

Please refer to the Regulatory Circulars listed below for the newly listed symbols and the corresponding market for the underlying security used for openings on the MIAX Exchanges: MIAX Options Regulatory Circular 2026-89 MIAX Pearl Options Regulatory Circular 2026-88 MIAX Emerald Options Regulatory Circular 2026-72 MIAX Sapphire Options Regulatory Circular 2026-92 These newly listed symbols will be available for trading beginning Thursday, June 25, 2026.

Welcome to the State of Small Business Symposium. Thank you to the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland for hosting this event.1 And thanks to each of you for your interest in small businesses and the vital role they play in creating jobs, expanding economic opportunities, and building vibrant communities. Along with innovation, small and new businesses and entrepreneurship were major, longstanding focal points of my research before I arrived at the Fed. Understanding small and new businesses is critical to understanding the U.S. economy. What happens in these storefronts, offices, shop floors, and even basements and garages shapes households, neighborhoods, and, ultimately, the aggregate outcome for the U.S. economy.2 Consider this: 99.9 percent of businesses in the U.S. have fewer than 500 employees, and since 1995 those businesses have accounted for 61 percent of net new job creation.3 Monetary policymakers' actions matter deeply to owners and employees of small firms. Achieving our dual mandate of maximum employment and stable prices will create the conditions where small businesses and all Americans can thrive. Due to the prevalence of small businesses in the U.S., policymakers and researchers must have high-quality data about this important part of the economy. The Federal Reserve's Small Business Credit Survey (SBCS) is an essential source for such data.4 As a national sample of businesses with fewer than 500 employees, the SBCS provides insights into firms' financing requirements, debt needs, and experiences, generally. I am grateful to all the Federal Reserve System staff who worked to make the survey and the collection and analysis of data from it possible. As an economist who starting surveying firms as early as the dissertation process and throughout many countries, I appreciate the ongoing effort it takes to consistently produce such a survey. These researchers are not only consistently producing the survey, but they have also increased its size and scope over the last decade. This year marks 10 years since the survey went national—going from a four-Bank regional effort to a Systemwide collaboration. The questions have expanded, too, and the survey now captures near-real-time small business credit conditions, financing frictions, and emerging operational challenges that are often not directly observable in other economic statistics or administrative datasets. The full 2025 survey will be presented later today, but I want to call attention to one notable finding: the use of artificial intelligence (AI) by small businesses. The survey found that nearly half of small employer firms reported using AI in some capacity, and 71 percent of these firms reported increased productivity as a result. These data suggest that many small businesses are resourceful, adaptable, and eager to find innovative tools that help them manage and grow their operations. This finding is the diametric opposite of the conventional wisdom that large firms have an advantage in deploying AI. But as someone who spent her career studying innovation, I am not at all surprised to see small, and especially new, businesses experimenting with and deploying AI. Some of the most significant breakthroughs this country has ever witnessed came from startups using frontier technologies in new and innovative ways.5 This finding on AI usage is just one example of the timely and relevant insights into small business decision-making the SBCS captures. If you are a researcher (or future researcher—graduate or undergraduate student), practitioner, or policymaker who wants to better understand the financial experience of small firms, I encourage you to explore the survey's data in depth. They provide insights related to which firms access credit, how they seek it, why they are being turned down, and what they plan to do next. From both my own research and from my visits to communities around the country, I know that access to credit plays a key role in small firms' ability to get established, grow, create jobs, spur innovation, and strengthen their communities. Thank you for attending this year's symposium and for your interest in small businesses and the SBCS. The organizers have created an exciting program for you today and tomorrow. This is an important time for us to understand the challenges and opportunities facing small businesses and the solutions supporting them. Thank you again for being part of this symposium. 1. The views expressed here are my own and are not necessarily those of my colleagues on the Federal Reserve Board or the Federal Open Market Committee.  2. Lisa D. Cook, "Entrepreneurs, Innovation, and Participation," speech delivered at the 2024 Women for Women Summit, Charleston, SC, October 10, 2024.  3. U.S. Small Business Administration Office of Advocacy, 2025 Small Business Profile (PDF) (Small Business Administration, June 2024).  4. Federal Reserve Banks, 2026 Report on Employer Firms from the 2025 Small Business Credit Survey (Federal Reserve Banks, March 2025).  5. Lisa D. Cook, "Artificial Intelligence, Big Data, and the Path Ahead for Productivity," speech delivered at the Technology-Enabled Disruption Conference: Implications of AI, Big Data, and Remote Work, Atlanta, GA October 01, 2024. 

The attached option classes will begin trading on the MIAX Options Exchange, MIAX Pearl Options Exchange, MIAX Emerald Options Exchange, and MIAX Sapphire Options Exchange on Thursday, June 25, 2026.Market Makers can use the Member Firm Portal (MFP) to manage their option class assignments.  All LMM and RMM Option Class Assignments must be entered prior to 6:00 PM ET on the business day immediately preceding the effective date.  All changes made after 6:00 PM ET on a given day will be effective two trading days later.MIAX Options and MIAX Emerald Options Primary Lead Market Maker (PLMM) assignments and un-assignments will not be supported via the MFP.  MIAX Emerald® Options Exchange MIAX Sapphire® Options Exchange MIAX Pearl® Options Exchange MIAX Options® Exchange

Energy security, climate change and the green transition have become increasingly important determinants of price stability. While the transition may create inflationary pressures in the short run, it can also reduce vulnerability to some of the most important sources of supply-side inflation over the longer term. As climate and energy related shocks become more frequent, maintaining price stability will require understanding how these factors affect inflation, and the distinct roles of monetary, fiscal, and climate policy in building a more resilient economy. Swati Dhingra Member of the Monetary Policy Committee Speech Introduction Good evening, and thank you for the invitation to speak. Recent events in the Gulf are another reminder that inflation is often driven by forces beyond the reach of monetary policy. The recent rise in energy prices has once again exposed the vulnerability of economies to geopolitical shocks and the difficult choices they create for central banks. Increasingly, those shocks are linked to climate and energy systems. Dependence on fossil fuels, the physical impacts of climate change, and the policies required to decarbonise economies are no longer peripheral risks: they are all becoming more important determinants of inflation and macroeconomic stability. This evening, I want to explore what that means for inflation, for the clean energy transition, and for central banks in the years ahead. Climate risks to inflation Climate change is relevant to inflation through three distinct channels. The first is the economy’s ongoing dependence on geopolitically exposed fossil fuels, which significantly affect headline inflation via direct energy components of CPI as well as a wide range of energy-intensive goods and services. The second is the physical impact of a changing climate, as increasingly frequent and severe extreme weather events disrupt supply, particularly in the agricultural sector. The third is the policy response to climate change, as the measures required for a green transition can generate their own inflationary pressures. In other words, the drivers, the consequences, and the solutions to climate change are all relevant to price stability (Talbot, 2026)footnote[1]. These channels are becoming more material over time. Climate-related shocks can, in principle, be assessed like any other shock, by weighing their expected effects on inflation and output. But two features make them particularly challenging: their salience for households, especially through food and energy prices, and their increasing frequency and severity, which make their first-round effects progressively harder to look through (NGFS, 2026aOpens in a new window ). Before discussing these channels, it is worth being clear about the role of monetary policy. Climate policy is rightly the responsibility of elected governments. The role of central banks is not to deliver the transition, but to maintain price stability in an economy increasingly affected by climate change and the green transition. The question I will address here is not whether central banks should pursue climate objectives, but how climate-related shocks affect inflation and the conduct of monetary policy. Energy prices are ‘systemically significant’ for inflation, because a wide range of goods and services depend critically on energy as an input. As shown in Figure 1, energy price shocks have coincided with the vast majority of UK inflationary episodes. Energy price spikes coincided with eight of the ten episodes in which inflation was near or above 5%. Click here for full details.

Icelandic króna will be fifth currency available for settling instant payments through TARGET services ECB and Seðlabanki Íslands agreement will take effect as of 2028 The European Central Bank (ECB) and Seðlabanki Íslands today signed an agreement for Iceland to join the Eurosystem’s TARGET Instant Payment Settlement (TIPS) system. This will allow payments in Icelandic króna to be settled instantly in central bank money as of 2028. The Icelandic króna will be the fifth currency available for settling retail payments instantly using the Eurosystem’s TARGET Services. The euro, Swedish krona and Danish krone are already available for settling payments in TIPS, while the Norwegian krone is scheduled to join in 2028. “We are delighted that more and more European countries, including from outside the European Union, are joining the Eurosystem’s TARGET Services,” said ECB President Christine Lagarde after signing the agreement. “This reinforces the integration of Europe’s financial infrastructures, supports its strategic autonomy, brings economies of scale and strengthens economic relations.” “This is an important step in modernising Iceland’s payments landscape and ensuring it is fit for the future,” said Seðlabanki Íslands’s Governor Ásgeir Jónsson. “Joining TIPS will strengthen both the security and efficiency of instant payments in Iceland. It will enhance the resilience of our payment infrastructure and bring our payment processes into line with SEPA practices, while enabling Iceland to benefit from the scale and expertise of the Eurosystem’s TARGET Services.” TARGET Services are developed and operated by the Eurosystem and rely on central bank money to facilitate transfers between banks, businesses and individuals. All TARGET Services are designed to be able to host transactions in currencies other than the euro. TIPS is the retail payment settlement system that enables banks and other payment service providers to offer their customers real-time fund transfers around the clock, every day of the year.

The Supervisory Board of Deutsche Börse AG has extended Stephanie Eckermann's (49) Executive Board mandate by three years, ahead of schedule, until the end of May 2030. Stephanie Eckermann is responsible for the Post-Trading division of the Executive Board, comprising the Securities Services and Fund Services businesses of the post-trading service provider Clearstream. She joined the Executive Board in June 2024. Her current contract was due to end in May 2027.

As the EU moves towards a decarbonised energy system, the role of gas is evolving. Reducing fossil gas dependence can support the EU’s 2050 climate neutrality target, while also raising important questions around security of supply, affordability and competitiveness. ACER’s 2026 Monitoring Report on decarbonising the EU's gas market examines four key dilemmas: Can renewable gases reduce gas import dependency while keeping energy prices affordable? Will natural gas continue to shape electricity prices during the energy transition? Can the EU decarbonise its gas sector without undermining industrial competitiveness? How can methane emissions be tackled, given the potential for low-cost abatement but rising implementation risks?​ What did ACER monitoring find?  ACER’s monitoring shows that gas decarbonisation can follow two main strategies: Displacing natural gas, by reducing demand or switching to renewables, and reducing its greenhouse gas footprint, for example through carbon capture, storage and measures to address methane leaks. Gas demand reductions are not guaranteed. EU gas demand reached 340 bcm in 2025, up 2% from 2024, which could slow progress towards the EU’s decarbonisation goals. Gas continues to provide system flexibility and remains important for industrial competitiveness. Gas still affects electricity prices and industry. Gas-fired power plants were economically competitive in 40% of hours in 2025, while low-carbon electricity systems paid on average 40% less than more carbon-intensive peers. Biomethane is promising but still limited. Biomethane is the most mature renewable gas option, but with 4.3 bcm of output in 2024, it represents only 2% of gas network injections. Methane emissions remain a supply-chain challenge. 85% of methane emissions linked to EU gas and oil consumption occur outside the EU, making implementation of the EU Methane Regulation key but challenging. Together, these findings show that no single solution can decarbonise the gas sector. A balanced portfolio of technologies and policy measures will be needed, including electrification, biomethane, hydrogen, carbon capture and storage, methane emissions reduction and clean flexibility solutions. Read more   Webinar On 24 September 2026, ACER will hold a webinar to present the main findings of this report. Register for free.

In March 2026, ACER received a proposal from the European Network of Transmission System Operators for Electricity (ENTSO-E) to amend the methodology for the regional sizing of reserve capacity. After reviewing the proposal and exchanging with stakeholders, ACER has decided to amend the methodology. What is the methodology about? The methodology for the regional sizing of reserve capacity (first approved by ACER in 2023) allows regional coordination centres (RCCs) to assess the reserves needed at regional level, taking into account volumes shared between transmission system operators (TSOs) through bilateral agreements.  This coordination helps reduce procurement costs and ensure a more efficient distribution of reserves across Europe. Based on their assessment, RCCs provide TSOs with recommendations on how to optimise reserve capacity volumes, leveraging the flexibility of the EU electricity system. What’s new in the amended methodology? As previously requested by ACER, the methodology now: Establishes that all RCCs must rely on data from the previous 12 months when assessing the minimum volume of reserves needed for the following year. This ensures the data used reflects the most relevant and frequent system conditions. Specifies, for each system operation region, how much reserve capacity is needed to cover positive and negative imbalances.  Introduces a 24-month rolling implementation deadline for assessing the short-term availability of reserve capacity (for sharing agreements established after 1 July 2026). Enhances transparency by strengthening and streamlining RCCs’ reporting obligations. These changes will help RCCs size reserve capacity more efficiently, address TSOs’ operational risks and enhance the process’ transparency and coordination. What are the next steps?  As previously agreed, RCCs must implement the methodology’s main changes by 1 July 2026. Access the ACER Decision

AutoRek, the global provider of automated reconciliation and financial controls, has opened a new office in Miami and appointed two senior sales executives to its growing US team. Gil Johnson joins as Sales Director focused on hedge funds and alternative investment managers, and James Inskip joins as Sales and Relationship Manager focused on banks and wealth managers. The appointments build on AutoRek’s existing New York presence and reflect the company’s commitment to growing significantly in North America. The expansion comes as US financial institutions face a wave of operational complexity, such as rising transaction volumes, new payment rails, digital assets and growing pressure to replace legacy on-premise infrastructure. Firms that haven’t yet made that move are finding it increasingly hard to keep pace operationally, and AutoRek is seeing that demand accelerate across the institutions it serves. “The US market opportunity for AutoRek is significant, and we’re building the right team to capture it,” said Chris Livesey, CEO of AutoRek. “Gil and James bring deep domain knowledge and established networks across the institutions we serve. Their experience, combined with our Miami presence, gives us the platform to grow meaningfully in North America.” Gil Johnson brings more than 20 years of experience across investment management and fintech. A former proprietary equities trader, he spent over six years at Bloomberg working with hedge funds and money managers before leading new business development for the hedge fund segment at a major financial technology firm. His perspective is grounded in having sat on the buy side himself, and he understands the pressures investment professionals face from the inside. “The firms I work with are dealing with more complexity than ever, with more asset classes, more volume and tighter controls,” said Johnson. “AutoRek handles that complexity at a scale and precision that others don’t. That’s what drew me here.” James Inskip brings 17 years of experience selling enterprise reconciliation and investment management solutions to tier-one banks and asset managers. He has spent his career watching the market evolve, from on-premise deployments, through managed services, to where clients are now. James sees the demand for self-serve SaaS platforms that give clients direct control over their reconciliation environment without relying on a vendor for every change. “The market has shifted,” said Inskip. “Firms want to build and manage their own reconciliations, add accounts, update match rules – all on their terms. And they need a platform that’s cloud-hosted, AI-ready and gives them full access to do that. That’s exactly what AutoRek offers.” AutoRek plans to continue growing its US team through 2026.  

Fiserv, Inc. (NASDAQ: FISV) (the “Company”), a leading global provider of payments and financial services technology solutions, today announced the expiration and results of its tender offers to purchase for cash (the “Offers”) any and all of its outstanding 5.150% Senior Notes due 2027 (the “2027 Notes”) and 4.400% Senior Notes due 2049 (the “2049 Notes” and, together with the 2027 Notes, the “Notes”). The Offers were made under the Offer to Purchase, dated June 16, 2026 (the “Offer to Purchase”). Capitalized terms used but not defined in this news release have the meanings given to them in the Offer to Purchase. The Offers expired at 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on June 23, 2026 (the “Expiration Date”). According to information provided by Global Bondholder Services Corporation, the Tender and Information Agent for the Offers, $1,330,795,000 aggregate principal amount of Notes were validly tendered by the Expiration Date and not validly withdrawn. This amount excludes $22,771,000 aggregate principal amount of Notes reflected in Notices of Guaranteed Delivery under the guaranteed delivery procedures specified in the Offer to Purchase (the “Guaranteed Delivery Procedures”) that were submitted by the Expiration Date, all of which remain subject to performance of the delivery requirements under the Guaranteed Delivery Procedures. The table below includes information about the aggregate principal amount of Notes referred to above broken out between 2027 Notes and 2049 Notes. Title of Security CUSIP No. / ISIN No. AggregatePrincipal AmountOutstanding AggregatePrincipal AmountTendered(1) Principal AmountReflected in Noticesof GuaranteedDelivery(2) 5.150% SeniorNotes due 2027 337738 BJ6 / US337738BJ60  $750,000,000 $516,181,000 $1,801,000 4.400% SeniorNotes due 2049 337738 AV0 / US337738AV08 $2,000,000,000  $814,614,000 $20,970,000   (1) These amounts exclude the principal amounts of Notes for which Holders have delivered Notices of Guaranteed Delivery that remain subject to compliance with the Guaranteed Delivery Procedures.   (2) To be accepted for purchase, Notes reflected in Notices of Guaranteed Delivery must be validly tendered using the Guaranteed Delivery Procedures by 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on June 25, 2026.   The Consideration for each $1,000 principal amount of Notes accepted for purchase in the Offer is $1,005.65 for 2027 Notes and $797.61 for 2049 Notes. In addition to the Consideration, Holders whose Notes are accepted for purchase will receive a cash payment representing the accrued and unpaid interest (such interest as described below, the “Accrued Interest”) on such Notes from the last interest payment date up to, but not including, the Settlement Date (as defined below). Interest will cease to accrue on the Settlement Date for all Notes accepted for purchase, including those tendered pursuant to the Guaranteed Delivery Procedures. The Company intends to accept for purchase the principal amount of all Notes specified in the table above (including Notes reflected in Notices of Guaranteed Delivery that are validly tendered using the Guaranteed Delivery Procedures by 5:00 p.m., New York City time, on June 25, 2026) and pay the applicable Consideration and Accrued Interest for such Notes on the Settlement Date, which is expected to be June 26, 2026 unless extended (the date on which such payment occurs is the “Settlement Date”). The description of the Offers in this news release is only a summary and is qualified in its entirety by reference to the Offer to Purchase. Citigroup Global Markets Inc. (“Citigroup”), J.P. Morgan Securities LLC (“J.P. Morgan”), TD Securities (USA) LLC (“TD Securities”) and Wells Fargo Securities, LLC (“Wells Fargo Securities”) are the lead dealer managers for the tender offers. Investors with questions regarding the tender offers may contact the lead dealer managers at the following telephone numbers: (i) Citigroup at (800) 558-3745 (toll-free) or (212) 723-6106 (collect), (ii) J.P. Morgan at (866) 834-4666 (toll-free) or (212) 834-3554 (collect), (iii) TD Securities at (866) 584-2096 (toll-free) or (212) 827-2842 (collect), and (iv) Wells Fargo Securities at (866) 309-6316 (toll-free) or (704) 410-4235 (collect). Global Bondholder Services Corporation is the tender and information agent for the tender offers and can be contacted at (855) 654-2014 (toll-free) (bankers and brokers can call collect at (212) 430-3774) or by email at contact@gbsc-usa.com. None of the Company or its affiliates, their respective boards of directors, the lead dealer managers, the co-dealer managers, the tender and information agent, and the trustee with respect to any Notes is making any recommendation as to whether Holders should tender any Notes in response to the Offers, and neither the Company nor any such other person has authorized any person to make any such recommendation. Holders must make their own decision as to whether to tender any of their Notes, and, if so, the principal amount of Notes to tender. This news release is for informational purposes only and does not constitute an offer to sell, or a solicitation of an offer to buy, any security. No offer, solicitation or sale has been or will be made in any jurisdiction in which such an offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful. The Offers were only made pursuant to the Offer to Purchase. Holders of the Notes are urged to carefully read the Offer to Purchase before making any decision with respect to the Offers.

Zenith, the innovator of Ethereum-compatible digital asset infrastructure on Canton Network, today announced it has joined Progmat’s high-profile Tokenized JGB / On-chain Repo Working Group. This elite consortium, backed by Japan’s biggest banks and global giants like BlackRock Japan, is set to revolutionize one of the world’s largest repo markets by moving tokenized Japanese Government Bonds (TJGBs) and repo transactions onto institutional-grade blockchain solutions. Launched under the Digital Asset Co-Creation Consortium (DCC), the Working Group unites MUFG Bank, Mizuho Bank, Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, State Street Trust and Banking, SBI Securities, Japan Exchange Group’s Market Innovation & Research, and other major players. The group is conducting an intensive joint study on tokenizing rights to Japanese Government Bonds and enabling fully on-chain repo transactions using tokenized JGB collateral paired with stablecoin cash legs via lending protocols. Key innovations targeted include T+0 instant settlement, true 24/7 availability, and seamless cross-border access, unlocking new liquidity in Japan’s massive ¥250–270 trillion (approximately US$1.6 trillion) JGB repo market, which accounts for roughly 10% of the global government bond-backed repo market (estimated at approximately US$16 trillion). This initiative comes as tokenized securities in Japan have already surpassed JPY 333–360 billion (approximately US$2.1–2.25 billion) in cumulative issuance, predominantly real estate-focused. The Progmat-led effort now aims to scale institutional-grade tokenized JGBs, potentially capturing a significant share of the $1.7 trillion repo ecosystem on-chain. Heslin Kim, Co-founder and CBO at Zenith, said: “We are thrilled to join this game-changing initiative with Progmat and Japan’s financial powerhouses. As the canonical Ethereum-compatible execution layer for Canton Network, Zenith enables institutions and developers to natively deploy applications and customizable Virtual Blockchains that work seamlessly with Canton’s compliant, privacy-enabled infrastructure. This collaboration positions us at the forefront of bringing real-world assets on-chain and could transform liquidity in Japan’s $1.6 trillion repo market for global investors.” The Working Group kicked off in May 2026, with a comprehensive report expected in October 2026 and potential TJGB issuance pilots targeted for later this year. Zenith will contribute actively to key areas including protocol design, interoperability standards, and regulatory compliant infrastructure. As tokenized U.S. Treasuries gain global traction, Japan is poised to lead Asia in on-chain government-bond innovation, delivering faster settlement, reduced counterparty risk, and broader participation in its enormous repo market. The curated selection process by the DCC and Zenith’s subsequent invitation reinforce Zenith’s fundamental position as the core scaling primitive for Canton Network’s global composability, encompassing all on-chain environments, protocols, and assets, while bridging traditional finance and blockchain for measurable efficiency gains at institutional scale.