ESMA LIBRARY

The ESMA Library contains all ESMA documents. Please use the search and filter options to find specific documents.
170
DOCUMENTS

REFINE YOUR SEARCH

Sections

Type of document

Your filters
MiFID - Investor Protection X MiFID - Secondary Markets X Corporate Information X Board of Supervisors X Fund Management X Joint Committee X Opinion X Report X
Reset all filters

Pages

Date Ref. Title Section Type Download Info Summary Related Documents Translated versions
04/04/2019 ESMA34-45-651 UCITS Sanction Report 2016/2017 Report PDF
398.96 KB
03/06/2019 ESMA70-156-835 Supervisory Briefing PreTradeTransparency Non-Equity Instruments , Report PDF
148.65 KB
04/06/2020 ESMA34-39-1042 Supervisory briefing on the supervision of costs in UCITS and AIFs , Report PDF
162.41 KB
27/03/2014 2014/332 Structured Retail Products- Good practices for product governance arrangements , Opinion PDF
203.1 KB
Legal basis 1.    Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 (ESMA Regulation)  sets out the European Securities and Markets Authority’s (ESMA) scope of action, tasks and powers which include “enhancing customer protection”, and “foster[ing] investor protection”.  2.    In order to continue delivering on this investor protection statutory objective, ESMA is issuing this opinion on certain aspects linked to the manufacturing and distribution of structured retail products (SRP). This opinion takes into account relevant work done in this field both at European and interna-tional level.  3.    This opinion is without prejudice to the requirements for the provision of investment services and activities established in the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID)  and its implementing measures (notably, Directive 2006/73/EC), the regulatory developments arising from the MiFID review or existing product rules that may apply to SRPs.  4.    ESMA’s competence to deliver an opinion is based on Article 29(1) (a) of the ESMA Regulation. In accordance with Article 44(1) of the ESMA Regulation, the Board of Supervisors has adopted this opinion. Background 5.    In its July 2013 report on ‘Retailisation in the EU’ , ESMA highlighted that, from a consumer protec-tion perspective, retail investors may face difficulties in understanding the drivers of risks and returns of structured products. If retail investors do not properly understand the risk and reward profile of structured products, and if the products are not properly assessed against the risk appetite of retail investors, retail investors might be exposed to unexpected losses and this might lead to complaints, reputational risks for manufacturers and distributors, and a loss of confidence in the regulatory framework and, more broadly, in financial markets. 6.    In 2013, ESMA mapped the measures adopted in the EU Member States in relation to complex products in order to identify issues and to better understand the rationale behind national initiatives (by looking at similarities and differences in the various approaches, and reviewing how complexity has been treated in the different EU Members States). 7.    As a result, ESMA has developed a broad set of non-exhaustive examples of good practices, attached as Annex 1 hereto, illustrating arrangements that firms - taking into account the nature, scale and complexity of their business - could put in place to improve their ability to deliver on investor protection regarding, in particular, (i) the complexity of the SRPs they manufacture or distribute, (ii) the nature and range of the investment services and activities undertaken in the course of that business, and (iii) the type of investors they target. These good practices should also be a helpful tool for competent authorities in carrying out their supervisory action. Opinion 8.    ESMA considers that sound product governance arrangements are fundamental for investor protec-tion purposes, and can reduce the need for product intervention actions by competent authorities. 9.    ESMA considers that, when supervising firms manufacturing or distributing an SRP, competent authorities should promote, in their supervisory approaches, the examples of good practices for firms set out in Annex 1 hereto. 10.    Although the good practices set out in Annex 1 hereto focus on structured products sold to retail investors, ESMA considers that they may also be a relevant reference for other types of financial in-struments (such as asset-backed securities, or contingent convertible bonds), as well as when financial instruments are being sold to professional clients. 11.    The exposure to risk is an intrinsic feature of investment products. The good practices set out in Annex 1 refer to product governance arrangements and do not (and cannot) aim at removing investment risk from products.
05/09/2019 ESMA50-164-2458 Stress simulation for investment funds , Report PDF
868.55 KB
09/01/2020 ESMA22-106-1942 Strategic Orientation 2020-22 , Report PDF
325.47 KB
defr
13/07/2020 ESMA35-43-2427 Sanctions and measures imposed under MiFID II in 2019 Report PDF
563.38 KB
17/07/2019 ESMA35-36-1711 Report on sanctions and measures imposed under MiFID II in 2018 Report PDF
296.09 KB
06/05/2019 ESMA02-91-1958 Report on budgetary and financial management 2017 , Report PDF
546.02 KB
06/05/2019 ESMA02-1733218672-745 Report on budgetary and financial management 2016 , Report PDF
548.5 KB
06/05/2019 ESMA/2016/990 Report on budgetary and financial management 2015 , Report PDF
544.34 KB
01/06/2018 ESMA50-162-215 Product Intervention Analysis CFDs , Report PDF
1.26 MB
01/06/2018 ESMA50-162-214 Product Intervention Analysis Binary Options , Report PDF
776.15 KB
01/08/2013 2013/1072 Practical arrangements for the late transposition of the AIFMD Opinion PDF
93.1 KB
The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has published an Opinion on arrangements for the late imposition of the AIFMD. The scope of the opinion is confined to the provision of collective portfolio management services. Arrangements before implementation of the Directive in all Member States Notification of marketing of EU AIFs when the host MS of the AIFM has not transposed the Directive (Articles 31 and 32 of the Directive) ESMA believes that, if the Directive has been transposed in the home MS of the AIFM, the competent authority of the host MS of the AIFM (Article 32) or home MS of the AIFM (Article 31) may not refuse a valid notification under the Directive on the ground that the Directive has not yet been transposed in the host MS. This applies irrespective of whether the marketing is done using the freedom to provide services or by means of a branch. Management passport (Article 33 of the Directive) ESMA believes that AIFMs established in a MS that has transposed the Directive should be able to manage an EU AIF via the management passport, both using the freedom to provide services or by means of a branch, in a MS where the Directive has not been transposed, irrespective of the provisions currently in place in such jurisdiction since the relevant provisions of the Directive are of a self-executing nature, and provided the AIFM is authorised to manage that type of AIF in accordance with Article 33(1) of the AIFMD. Any local restrictions on AIFMs that are not in accordance with the AIFMD will need to be disapplied.
20/06/2019 ESMA70-155-2925 Position limit on French Power Peak contracts Opinion PDF
235.2 KB
20/06/2019 ESMA70-155-2941 Position limit on French Power Base contracts Opinion PDF
232.18 KB
24/09/2019 ESMA70-155-5827 Position limit on EEX Italian Power Peak contracts Opinion PDF
234.36 KB
24/09/2019 ESMA70-155-2929 Position limit on EEX Italian Power Base contracts Opinion PDF
223.5 KB
20/06/2019 ESMA70-155-4451 Position limit on Czech PXE Power Base contract Opinion PDF
261.58 KB
20/03/2019 ESMA-70-155-5287 Position limit notification for Hungarian Future Opinion PDF
537.44 KB

Pages