ESMA LIBRARY

The ESMA Library contains all ESMA documents. Please use the search and filter options to find specific documents.
199
DOCUMENTS

REFINE YOUR SEARCH

Sections

Type of document

Your filters
MiFID - Investor Protection X Careers X Corporate Governance X Brexit X Innovation and Products X Corporate Information X Benchmarks X Post Trading X Technical Standards X Q&A X SMSG Advice X Opinion X Final Report X
Reset all filters

Pages

Date Ref. Title Section Type Download Info Summary Related Documents Translated versions
22/06/2012 2012/382 MiFID Q&A in the area of investor protection and intermediaries MiFID - Investor Protection Q&A PDF
319.78 KB
06/07/2012 2012/387 Final report Guidelines on certain aspects of the MiFID suitability requirements Guidelines and Technical standards, MiFID - Investor Protection Final Report PDF
444.15 KB
27/09/2012 2012/600 Draft technical standards under the Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on OTC Derivatives, CCPs and Trade Repositories Post Trading Technical Standards PDF
1.88 MB
27/09/2012 2012/600 Annex VIII Impact assessment- Annex VIII of the Final report on draft Regulatory and Implementing Technical Standards on Regulation (EU) 648/2012 on OTC derivatives, central counterparties and trade repositories Post Trading Final Report PDF
2.32 MB
03/01/2013 2012/874 Report to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on the budgetary implications of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 on OTC derivatives, central counterparties and trade repositories (EMIR) Post Trading Final Report PDF
526.73 KB
12/09/2013 2013/08/ODRG Agreed Understandings to Resolving Cross-border Conflicts, Inconsistencies, Gaps and Duplicative Requirements Post Trading Final Report PDF
442.48 KB
08/08/2013 2013/1087 Final Report on amended EMIR implementing technical standards Post Trading Technical Standards PDF
335.07 KB

The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has sent the European Commission a Final Report proposing an amendment to Article 5 of the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No.1247/2012 (ITS on reporting) on the format and frequency of reporting to trade repositories under EMIR. The amendment relates specifically to the reporting of exchange traded derivatives (ETDs) and proposes postponing the reporting start date by one year. Background Article 5 regards the reporting start date of derivatives to trade repositories, however the current dates do not include a specification of ETDs. This specification would be useful as there is a risk currently that reporting of ETDs is not harmonised unless further regulatory guidance is issued. Based on the need to ensure the consistent implementation of EMIR, ESMA considered that guidelines and recommendations should be developed in relation to this issue. A delay in the reporting date for ETD transactions will allow sufficient time for the development of the relevant guidelines and their implementation by counterparties, trade repositories and regulators. The European Commission has three months to decide whether to endorse ESMA’s draft implementing technical standards.
02/10/2013 2013/1370 Technical advice on third country regulatory equivalence under EMIR – India Post Trading Final Report PDF
2.44 MB
02/10/2013 2013/1373 ESMA Technical advice on equivalence of Australia- OTC and TR (Supplement) Post Trading Final Report PDF
736.17 KB
02/10/2013 2013/1374 Technical advice on third country regulatory equivalence under EMIR – Switzerland (Supplement) Post Trading Final Report PDF
117.72 KB
02/10/2013 2013/1375 Technical advice on third country regulatory equivalence under EMIR – Canada Post Trading Final Report PDF
1.39 MB
18/11/2013 2013/1657 Draft technical standards under EMIR on contracts with a direct, substantial and foreseeable effect within the Union and non-evasion Post Trading Technical Standards PDF
394.75 KB

The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has issued final draft regulatory technical standards (RTS) related to derivative transactions by non-European Union (EU) counterparties. The RTS implement provisions of the Regulation on OTC derivatives, central counterparties and trade repositories (EMIR).
15/03/2013 2013/312 Regulatory technical standards on colleges for central counterparties supplementing Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 Post Trading Opinion PDF
151.67 KB
31/03/2014 2014/03/ODRG Report of the OTC Derivatives Regulators Group (ODRG) on Cross-Border Implementation Issues Post Trading Final Report PDF
159.11 KB
23/09/2014 2014/1164 Annex Annex to the Statement by Steven Maijoor, Chair of ESMA to the ECON hearing, 23 September 2014 Corporate Information Final Report PDF
503.01 KB
01/10/2014 2014/1184 Final report on ESMA's draft technical standards on the Clearing Obligation for Interest Rate OTC Derivatives Post Trading Technical Standards PDF
1.17 MB
18/12/2014 2014/1378 Opinion- Investment-based crowdfunding Innovation and Products Opinion PDF
460.92 KB		 Crowdfunding is a means of raising finance for projects from ‘the crowd’ often by means of an internet-based platform through which project owners ‘pitch’ their idea to potential backers, who are typically not professional investors.  It takes many forms, not all of which involve the potential for a financial return.  ESMA’s focus is on crowdfunding which involves investment, as distinct from donation, non-monetary reward or loan agreement.  Crowdfunding is relatively young and business models are evolving. EU financial services rules were not designed with the industry in mind. Within investment-based crowdfunding a range of different operational structures are used so it is not straightforward to map crowdfunding platforms’ activities to those regulated under EU legislation. Member States and NCAs have been working out how to treat crowdfunding, with some dealing with issues case-by-case, some seeking to clarify how crowdfunding fits into existing rules and others introducing specific requirements.To assist NCAs and market participants, and to promote regulatory and supervisory convergence, ESMA has assessed typical investment-based crowdfunding business models and how they could evolve, risks typically involved for project owners, investors and the platforms themselves and the likely components of an appropriate regulatory regime. ESMA then prepared a detailed analysis of how the typical business models map across to the existing EU legislation, set out in this document.
07/02/2014 2014/146 MiFID practices for firms selling complex products MiFID - Investor Protection, Warnings and publications for investors Opinion PDF
122.37 KB
18/12/2014 2014/1560 Advice- Investment-based crowdfunding Innovation and Products Final Report PDF
482.2 KB		 Crowdfunding is a means of raising finance for projects from ‘the crowd’ often by means of an internet-based platform through which project owners ‘pitch’ their idea to potential backers, who are typically not professional investors.  It takes many forms, not all of which involve the potential for a financial return.  ESMA’s focus is on crowdfunding which involves investment, as distinct from donation, non-monetary reward or loan agreement.Crowdfunding is relatively young and business models are evolving. EU financial services rules were not designed with the industry in mind.  Within investment-based crowdfunding a range of different operational structures are used so it is not straightforward to map crowdfunding platforms’ activities to those regulated under EU legislation. Member States and NCAs have been working out how to treat crowdfunding, with some dealing with issues case-by-case, some seeking to clarify how crowdfunding fits into existing rules and others introducing specific requirements.To assist NCAs and market participants, and to promote regulatory and supervisory convergence, ESMA has assessed typical investment-based crowdfunding business models and how they could evolve, risks typically involved for project owners, investors and the platforms themselves and the likely components of an appropriate regulatory regime. ESMA then prepared a detailed analysis of how the typical business models map across to the existing EU legislation, set out in sections 1 to 6 of this document.
27/03/2014 2014/332 Structured Retail Products- Good practices for product governance arrangements MiFID - Investor Protection, Innovation and Products 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.

Pages