ESMA Proposes Reporting Reforms That Could Cut Costs for Forex Brokers

The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) is exploring major reforms to reduce the cost of financial reporting across the EU. In a newly launched consultation, ESMA seeks feedback on how to simplify overlapping obligations under MiFIR, EMIR, and SFTR—three core EU reporting frameworks that often require firms to file the same data multiple times.

Forex brokers, especially those involved in derivatives like FX swaps and CFDs, are among the firms most affected. Currently, a single trade might need to be reported to multiple databases for different regulatory purposes: transparency under MiFIR, risk control under EMIR, and financing activities under SFTR. ESMA estimates that up to one-third of EMIR-reported trades are also covered under MiFIR, resulting in industry-wide compliance costs of up to €4 billion annually. Smaller brokers face particularly heavy burdens, as reporting costs may outweigh their operational scale.

To address the issue, ESMA has proposed two key solutions. The first is to split reporting obligations based on either the instrument type or the event type—ensuring each transaction is only reported once under the most relevant framework. The second is a more ambitious “report once” model, where firms would submit standardized data through a single channel to meet the requirements of all three regimes. Both proposals also explore removing dual-sided reporting to further ease compliance.

ESMA has opened the floor for industry feedback and is encouraging forex brokers to share cost data and practical concerns. Topics include how to ease the transition, especially for smaller firms, and whether unified reporting could improve accuracy and efficiency.

The consultation runs until 19 September 2025. A final report is expected in early 2026, potentially paving the way for long-term regulatory streamlining in the EUs financial markets. For brokers, these reforms may offer much-needed relief from costly duplication—without compromising market oversight.