We quantify the funding and capital costs of cleared interest rate swaps by XVA, considering current and forthcoming regulations and a bank’s financing structure. Three quarters of outstanding OTC interest rate derivatives are cleared in 2017. Market fragmentation and MVA widened the CCP basis, the price difference for the same interest rate swaps cleared at different CCPs. Accounting fair value measurement by exit price induces P&Ls due to CCP basis risks, resulting in very high KVA for those risks. Cleared trades have been believed to be less capital intensive, but CCP basis risk is capital intensive. We put special focus on the JPY LCH-JSCC basis in our presentation. The funding and capital costs for the following are quantified as MVA and KVA: (1) initial margin, (2) default fund, (3) capital requirements for trade exposures to QCCPs, (4) capital requirements for default fund exposures to QCCPs, (5) leverage ratio (BCBS270 and d424), and (6) market risk capital for CCP basis risk (Basel 2.5, FRTB IMA, and FRTB SbM in d436). CVA and FVA are less material and not considered. The overlapping between funding and capital requirements are disentangled by sorting out a G-SIB's "financing" instruments into 7 layers: (a) retained earnings, (b) common share, (c) additional tier 1, (d) tier 2, (e) TLAC-eligible non-preferred senior, (f) NSFR ASF-eligible long term funding, and (g) short term funding. XVA formula is proposed taking into account of the bank’s whole financing structure.