EMIR 3 Clearing Obligation Reform: New Thresholds and the Active Account Requirement

Get the EMIR 3 clearing obligation calculation wrong and the error does not stay small. A counterparty that miscounts its positions can either declare itself out of scope when it is in, or open an account it never needed at a central counterparty and start paying for clearing capacity it cannot use. Both outcomes show up in the same place: the annual clearing threshold notification to the competent authority, and, for the larger players, the new active account reporting that ESMA started collecting in 2026.

Regulation (EU) 2024/2987, the reform usually called EMIR 3, changed two things that sit at the centre of that calculation. It changed how you decide whether a position counts toward the clearing threshold, and it added a new obligation, the active account requirement, for counterparties that clear euro and Polish zloty interest rate products. Neither change is cosmetic. The first quietly shrinks the population caught by mandatory clearing. The second forces some of the largest in-scope firms to move a measurable share of their clearing into the European Union.

This article walks through both, in the order a reporting or clearing team actually needs them: what changed and when, how the thresholds work now, who has to hold an active account, what the active account reporting looks like, which exemptions survived, and the work that follows.

Related reading: EMIR Reporting Explained

What the EMIR 3 clearing obligation reform changes, and when it took effect

EMIR 3 is Regulation (EU) 2024/2987, which amends the original European Market Infrastructure Regulation, Regulation (EU) No 648/2012. It was published in the Official Journal on 4 December 2024 and entered into force on 24 December 2024. The reform travelled with an accompanying directive in the same package, which adjusts the prudential treatment of concentration risk in the banking and investment-firm framework, but the clearing-side obligations a reporting team cares about live in the Regulation.

The Regulation does not flip every obligation on at once. Several provisions depend on regulatory technical standards that ESMA had to draft and the Commission had to adopt. So the practical timeline runs in stages: the amended clearing-threshold logic and the active account requirement applied from entry into force, while the detail of the representativeness conditions, the reporting templates, and the recalibrated threshold figures arrived through technical standards across 2025 and 2026.

Two dates do the heavy lifting. Counterparties that were subject to the clearing obligation under Articles 4a and 10 of EMIR on 24 December 2024, and that exceeded the clearing threshold in the relevant interest rate categories, fell within the scope of the new active account requirement. That requirement became applicable on 25 June 2025, six months after EMIR 3 entered into force, and that applicability date, not the entry into force itself, is the anchor for the active account deadlines that follow.

How the EMIR 3 clearing thresholds are calculated now

The clearing obligation in EMIR has always worked through thresholds. A counterparty compares its positions in over-the-counter derivatives against asset-class thresholds, and crossing a threshold pulls it into mandatory central clearing for that class. The thresholds themselves sit in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 149/2013: the long-standing values are EUR 1 billion in gross notional for OTC credit derivatives, EUR 1 billion for OTC equity derivatives, EUR 3 billion for OTC interest rate derivatives, EUR 3 billion for OTC foreign exchange derivatives, and EUR 3 billion for OTC commodity and other derivatives.

EMIR 3 changed the input to that comparison. The Regulation amended the definition that feeds the threshold so that a derivative contract cleared by a CCP authorised or recognised under EMIR no longer counts toward the position measured against the threshold. Only OTC derivative contracts that are not cleared by an authorised or recognised CCP are compared against the thresholds specified under Article 10(4), point (b). In plain terms, cleared business drops out of the threshold test, and what remains is the uncleared book.

This is where teams that learned the old EMIR Refit logic get tripped up. Under the previous regime, the relevant split was whether a contract traded on an EU trading venue. EMIR 3 replaced that with a cleared-versus-uncleared split. When I rebuild a clearing-threshold calculation now, the first column I reconstruct is exactly that line, because a firm with a large cleared portfolio and a modest uncleared one can sit below a threshold it would have breached under the old method. The change narrows the population caught by the clearing obligation rather than widening it.

ESMA was mandated to set out the detail of the new threshold regime in technical standards. It published its Final Report on the draft RTS amending Regulation (EU) No 149/2013 to further detail the new EMIR clearing thresholds regime on 25 February 2026 (reference ESMA74-1049116226-944). Until the amending standards are in force, the existing threshold values in Delegated Regulation 149/2013 continue to apply, so the safe reading today is that the calculation input has changed while the headline figures are being recalibrated. Teams should not assume new numbers before the amending RTS is adopted and published.

The active account requirement under Article 7a

The headline novelty of EMIR 3 is the active account requirement, set out in the new Article 7a of EMIR. It targets reliance on clearing services that ESMA and the Commission consider of substantial systemic importance, which in practice means certain products that are heavily cleared outside the European Union. The requirement applies to financial counterparties and non-financial counterparties that are subject to the clearing obligation and that exceed the clearing threshold in any of these categories: interest rate derivatives denominated in euro or Polish zloty, and short-term interest rate derivatives denominated in euro.

A counterparty that becomes subject to the obligation has to notify ESMA and its competent authority and establish an active account at a Union CCP within six months of becoming subject to the obligation. An active account is not a dormant shell. The Regulation requires that the account be permanently functional, that it can clear all new trades in the relevant contracts at all times, and, for the larger firms, that it actually carries a representative volume of cleared trades.

That last condition, the representativeness obligation, is where the EUR 6 billion figure matters. The operational conditions in Article 7a(3), points (a) to (c), apply to all in-scope counterparties and have to be met within the six-month window. The representativeness obligation in point (d) is the additional layer for counterparties whose activity in the relevant classes is large. Counterparties below the EUR 6 billion notional level hold the account and meet the operational conditions, but are not pushed to clear a minimum number of representative trades. The reform is explicit that counterparties already clearing a significant share of their euro and zloty interest rate business at Union CCPs should not be loaded with the full operational burden.

For counterparties that are caught by the representativeness obligation, the test is concrete. They have to clear, on an annual average basis, at least five trades in each of the most relevant subcategories per class of derivative contract during the reference period. Subcategories are built from a combination of trade size and maturity, so a single euro interest rate class breaks into several buckets and each populated bucket needs its five trades. A common misreading here is to treat the number of relevant subcategories as fixed across all classes. It is not uniform: the technical standards set more relevant subcategories for euro interest rate derivative classes than for euro short-term interest rate derivative classes, and fewer again for Polish zloty classes. Build the bucket map from the standards, not from a single round number.

Active account reporting: templates, dates, and frequency

The active account requirement comes with its own reporting stream, separate from EMIR trade reporting and separate from the annual clearing-threshold notification. Article 7b requires in-scope counterparties to report on their compliance with the operational conditions and the representativeness obligation, and ESMA was tasked with producing the templates and instructions.

ESMA published its Final Report on the active account requirement on 19 June 2025 (reference ESMA91-1505572268-4201), having simplified the operational conditions, the stress-testing element, and the reporting fields in response to consultation feedback. It then released the reporting templates and instructions on 13 April 2026. The reporting runs on a six-month cycle: submissions are due on 31 January and on 31 July of each year, and each submission covers a twelve-month reference period. The submission goes to the counterparty’s competent authority, which is why several national supervisors issued their own circulars pointing market participants to the ESMA templates.

EMIR 3 also builds a review loop into the regime. ESMA, working with the European Systemic Risk Board and the Joint Monitoring Mechanism set up by the Regulation, assesses how effective the active account requirement is in reducing reliance on clearing services of substantial systemic importance. The Commission then has six months from receiving that report to prepare its own, which may be accompanied where appropriate by a legislative proposal. The reporting a counterparty files is part of the evidence base that feeds this assessment, so the quality of those submissions has a reach beyond the individual firm.

The trap on the reporting side is assuming that holding an account satisfies the obligation. It does not. A counterparty that opens an active account but never reports, or that reports without evidencing the operational conditions, has not met Article 7b. The reporting is the artifact the supervisor reads, so the account, the connectivity, and the cleared trades all have to be reconstructable from what you file. If you want the detail of the fields and the submission mechanics, our companion piece on the ESMA active account requirement reporting templates walks through the template structure.

Exemptions that EMIR 3 kept and the ones it added

EMIR 3 is not only about pulling more clearing into the European Union. It also adjusted the exemption architecture around the clearing obligation, and teams that scope their books for clearing need to read these alongside the thresholds.

Pension scheme arrangements are the clearest example. EMIR 3 introduced an exemption from the clearing obligation where a Union financial counterparty or non-financial counterparty that is subject to the clearing obligation faces a pension scheme arrangement established in a third country that is itself exempt from clearing under that country’s national law. The aim is a level playing field, so that EU and third-country credit institutions offering clearing services to pension schemes are not treated differently. This sits on top of the long-running treatment of EU pension scheme arrangements.

The reform also created an exemption from the clearing obligation for transactions that result from post-trade risk reduction services, the portfolio-compression and rebalancing exercises that replace existing trades with risk-equivalent ones without adding fresh market risk. ESMA consulted on the detail of that exemption through a dedicated RTS (consultation reference ESMA74-1049116226-877). The reason this matters operationally is that a compression cycle should not be the event that drags a counterparty over a threshold or forces a clearing decision, since its purpose is to reduce risk rather than take it on.

Where teams overreach is in assuming any internal or risk-reducing trade is automatically out of scope. It is not. The exemptions are specific, they carry conditions, and several depend on technical standards that fix what qualifies. Treat each exemption as a defined gate with its own evidence, not as a general principle that risk-reducing activity escapes the clearing obligation.

What reporting and clearing teams should do now

The practical work splits into scoping, account-building, and reporting, and it helps to keep them separate.

Scoping comes first. Rebuild the clearing-threshold calculation on the EMIR 3 basis, with cleared contracts at authorised or recognised CCPs stripped out of the position. Run the result against the existing Delegated Regulation 149/2013 thresholds, and flag the euro and Polish zloty interest rate exposures specifically, because those are what trigger the active account test. A firm can be below the clearing threshold overall yet still need to understand its euro interest rate footprint for the day the recalibrated thresholds land.

Account-building is the six-month clock. If a counterparty is in scope, the notification to ESMA and the competent authority and the establishment of the account run on that window, and the operational conditions have to be demonstrable, not just contractually available. For firms above the EUR 6 billion level, the representativeness obligation means real cleared volume in each populated subcategory, planned across the reference period rather than rushed at the end.

Reporting is the recurring obligation. Map the 31 January and 31 July submission dates into the reporting calendar, align the twelve-month reference period with the data you actually capture, and treat the ESMA templates as the single source of field definitions. The same discipline that supports clean EMIR trade reporting, reconciled positions and a defensible audit trail, is what makes the active account reporting survive a supervisory query. For the wider clearing context, the ESMA CCP stress test work shows how supervisors look at clearing-member resilience, and our note on EMIR initial margin reporting covers the margining obligations that sit beside clearing for uncleared books.

Frequently Asked Questions

When did EMIR 3 enter into force?

Regulation (EU) 2024/2987 was published in the Official Journal on 4 December 2024 and entered into force on 24 December 2024. The amended clearing-threshold logic and the active account requirement applied from that date, while the supporting technical standards, including the reporting templates and the recalibrated threshold figures, followed across 2025 and 2026.

Does cleared business still count toward the clearing threshold?

No. EMIR 3 changed the calculation so that derivative contracts cleared by a CCP authorised or recognised under EMIR are excluded from the position compared against the clearing thresholds. Only uncleared OTC derivative contracts are measured against the Article 10(4), point (b) thresholds, which generally reduces the population caught by mandatory clearing.

Who has to hold an active account?

Financial counterparties and non-financial counterparties that are subject to the clearing obligation and that exceed the clearing threshold in interest rate derivatives denominated in euro or Polish zloty, or in short-term interest rate derivatives denominated in euro. Those are the categories the Regulation treats as clearing services of substantial systemic importance under Article 7a.

What does the EUR 6 billion figure determine?

It separates the counterparties that must only hold a functional account and meet the operational conditions from those that must also meet the representativeness obligation. Above that notional level, a counterparty has to clear a representative volume of trades; below it, the operational conditions apply without the minimum-trades requirement.

How many trades does the representativeness obligation require?

At least five trades, on an annual average basis, in each of the most relevant subcategories per class of derivative contract during the reference period. Subcategories are defined by size and maturity, and the number of relevant subcategories differs by class, so the count of required trades depends on how many subcategories are populated for that counterparty.

When is the active account report due?

The active account reporting runs on a six-month cycle, with submissions due on 31 January and 31 July of each year, each covering a twelve-month reference period. ESMA released the templates and instructions on 13 April 2026, and reports go to the counterparty’s competent authority.

Did EMIR 3 change the threshold figures themselves?

Not immediately. The existing figures in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 149/2013 still apply, while ESMA’s draft RTS to detail the new threshold regime, finalised on 25 February 2026, recalibrates the framework. Until the amending standards are adopted and published, teams should use the current figures and the new cleared-versus-uncleared calculation basis.

Related Articles

• EMIR Reporting Explained – The core EMIR trade reporting obligation, fields, and counterparty scope that sits beside the clearing rules.
• ESMA Active Account Requirement Reporting Templates – A field-level walkthrough of the AAR reporting templates and submission mechanics.
• EMIR Initial Margin Reporting – The margining obligations that apply to uncleared OTC derivatives.
• ESMA 6th CCP Stress Test – How supervisors assess CCP and clearing-member resilience.
• MiFIR Transaction Reporting – The parallel transaction reporting regime for instruments traded on EU venues.

Key Takeaways

• EMIR 3 is Regulation (EU) 2024/2987, published on 4 December 2024 and in force from 24 December 2024.
• The clearing threshold now measures only uncleared OTC positions; contracts cleared at an authorised or recognised CCP drop out of the calculation.
• The existing thresholds in Delegated Regulation (EU) No 149/2013 still apply while ESMA’s 25 February 2026 draft RTS recalibrates the regime.
• The active account requirement under Article 7a applies to firms over the clearing threshold in euro or Polish zloty interest rate derivatives and euro short-term interest rate derivatives.
• In-scope counterparties must notify and open an active account within six months, with the operational conditions demonstrable, not merely available.
• The EUR 6 billion level triggers the representativeness obligation: at least five trades per most relevant subcategory per class, on an annual average basis.
• Active account reporting is due on 31 January and 31 July each year, covering a twelve-month reference period, using the ESMA templates released on 13 April 2026.
• EMIR 3 added clearing-obligation exemptions for third-country pension scheme arrangements and for post-trade risk reduction transactions, each with its own conditions.

Sources and References

• Regulation (EU) 2024/2987 (EMIR 3), Official Journal, 4 December 2024 – EUR-Lex
• Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 (EMIR), consolidated text – EUR-Lex
• Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 149/2013 (clearing thresholds) – EUR-Lex
• ESMA, Final Report on the Active Account Requirement under EMIR 3 (ESMA91-1505572268-4201), 19 June 2025 – ESMA
• ESMA, Final Report on draft RTS amending Regulation (EU) No 149/2013 to further detail the new EMIR clearing thresholds regime (ESMA74-1049116226-944), 25 February 2026 – ESMA
• ESMA, Active Account Requirement reporting templates and instructions, published 13 April 2026 – ESMA

The calculation column to rebuild first

If a team takes one operational step from EMIR 3, it is to rebuild the clearing-threshold calculation on the cleared-versus-uncleared basis and to flag the euro and Polish zloty interest rate exposures separately. That single column decides who falls out of mandatory clearing, who is dragged into the active account requirement, and who has to clear representative volume inside the European Union. Everything else, the templates, the six-month reporting cycle, the recalibrated thresholds still to come, hangs off that line.

Disclaimer: The information on RegReportingDesk.com is for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute legal, regulatory, tax, or compliance advice. Always consult your compliance officer, legal counsel, or the relevant supervisory authority for guidance specific to your institution.