ESMA LIBRARY

The ESMA Library contains all ESMA documents. Please use the search and filter options to find specific documents.
157
DOCUMENTS

REFINE YOUR SEARCH

Sections

Type of document

Your filters
MiFID - Secondary Markets X Speeches X Warnings and publications for investors X Careers X Joint Committee X Market Abuse X Technical Advice X Opinion X Decision X Statement X
Reset all filters

Pages

Date Ref. Title Section Type Download Info Summary Related Documents Translated versions
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
19/12/2014 2014/1569 Technical Advice to the Commission on MiFID II and MiFIR MiFID - Investor Protection, MiFID - Secondary Markets Technical Advice PDF
2.8 MB		 Reasons for publication The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) received a formal request (mandate) from the European Commission (Commission) on 23 April 2014 to provide technical advice to assist the Commission on the possible content of the delegated acts required by several provisions of Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID II) and the Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation (MiFIR). The mandate focuses on technical issues which follow from MiFID II and MiFIR and is available on the European Commission website (here). ESMA was required to provide technical advice by no later than six months after the entry into force of MiFID II and MiFIR (2 July 2014). Contents This final report follows the same structure as the Consultation Paper  (CP) published by ESMA on 22 May 2014 which is: (1) Introduction, (2) Investor protection, (3) Transparency, (4) Data publication, (5) Micro-structural issues, (6) Requirements applying on and to trading venues, (7) Commodity derivatives and (8) Portfolio compression. This paper also contains summaries of responses to the CP received by ESMA. The rationale of those items covered already in the CP for which no relevant changes have been introduced, is not developed again in this Final Report. ESMA recommends, therefore, to read this report together with the CP published on 22 May 2014 to have a complete vision of the rationale for ESMA’s technical advice. Next steps Delegated acts should be adopted by the Commission so that they enter into application by 30 months following the entry into force of the Directive and Regulation, taking into account the right of the European Parliament and Council to object to a delegated act within 3 months (which can be extended by a further 3 months).
31/07/2014 2014/944 Potential Risks Associated with Investing in Contingent Convertible Instruments Warnings and publications for investors, Innovation and Products Statement PDF
106.1 KB		 The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) is issuing this statement to clarify to institutional investors risks from a newly emerging asset class referred to by most market participants as contingent convertibles instruments (CoCos). If they work as intended in a crisis CoCos will play an important role to inhibit risk transfer from debt holders to taxpayers. They along with standards to improve the quality and quantity of bank capital reflect a considerate response to the former regulatory capital framework. However, it is unclear as to whether investors fully consider the risks of CoCos and correctly factor those risks into their valuation. ESMA believes there are specific risks to CoCos and that investors should take those risks into consideration prior to investing in these instruments.
02/12/2014 2014/BOA/05 Decision by the ESA BoA concerning Investor Protection Europe sprl Joint Committee, Board of Appeal Decision PDF
229.85 KB		 The Joint Board of Appeal of the ESAs decides on the inadmissibility of an appeal brought by IPE sprl, a company based in Brussels, against a decision by ESMAThe Joint Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities published today its decision in an appeal brought by Investor Protection Europe (IPE) sprl, a company based in Brussels, against a decision of the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) of 10 June 2014 not to initiate an investigation under Article 17 of the ESMA Regulation regarding an alleged breach of Union law by the Commission de Surveillance du Secteur Financier of Luxembourg.  The Board of Appeal unanimously decided that the appeal was inadmissible, and in the light of that decision, did not consider the substance of IPE’s complaint.
17/07/2014 2014/C1/02 Board of Appeal Decision Joint Committee, Board of Appeal Decision PDF
368.94 KB		 The Joint Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities (the European Banking Authority, the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority and the European Securities and Markets Authority) published its decision in an appeal brought by SV Capital OÜ, an Estonian company, against a decision of the EBA. This was the second appeal to be considered by the Board of Appeal in this matter between the same parties concerning the question whether the suitability of the managers of a significant branch of a bank raised a question of Union law. Following the Board of Appeal’s affirmative decision of 24 June 2013, the appellant requested the EBA to initiate an investigation against the Estonian and Finnish Financial Supervision Authorities because their alleged failure to take action in respect of individuals in the Estonian branch of Nordea Bank Finland PLC whom it was alleged were not fit and proper persons to be key function holders in the bank. The EBA decided that it would not initiate an investigation.  The Board of Appeal decided that the EBA had been right to raise the matter with the national supervisors, but that having done so, it was entitled to take no further action in the light of their responses. The Board accordingly dismissed the appellant’s appeal against the EBA’s decision.
03/02/2015 2015/224 ESMA’s technical advice on possible delegated acts concerning the Market Abuse Regulation Market Abuse Technical Advice PDF
1021.03 KB		 This advice:•    specifies the MAR market manipulation indicators, by providing examples of practices that may constitute market manipulation as well as proposing “additional” indicators of market manipulation; •    recommends to set the minimum thresholds that exempt certain market participants in the emission allowance market from publicly disclosing inside information at six million tonnes of CO2eq per year and at 2,430 MW rated thermal input;•    suggests the way to determine to which regulator delays in disclosure of inside information needs to be notified.  •    provides clarifications on the enhanced disclosure of managers’ transactions. - ESMA recommends disclosing  any acquisition, disposal, subscription or exchange of financial instruments of the relevant issuer or related financial instruments carried out by managers,, further illustrated through a non-exhaustive list of types of transactions subject to this obligation.  . ESMA also clarifies the transactions that can be allowed by the issuer during a closed period when normally managers are prohibited to trade; and•    proposes procedures and arrangements to ensure sound whistleblowing infrastructures – i.e. EU national regulators should allow the receipt of reports of infringements, including appropriate communication channels and guarantee the protection of reporting and reported persons, with respect to their identity and their personal data. Next steps ESMA has sent its technical advice to the European Commission for its consideration in drafting its implementing standards regarding MAR. ESMA’s regulatory technical standards regarding MAR will be delivered in July 2015.
28/01/2016 2016/102 Statement by Steven Maijoor on behalf of the ESAs Joint Committee, Speeches Statement PDF
107.74 KB

Statement at the ECON scrutiny hearing on behalf of the ESAs.
02/05/2016 2016/666 Opinion on draft RTS 2 non-equity transparency MiFID - Secondary Markets Opinion PDF
193.79 KB
02/05/2016 2016/666 ANNEX Annex- Opinion on draft RTS 2 non-equity transparency MiFID - Secondary Markets Opinion PDF
633.28 KB
02/05/2016 2016/668 Opinion on draft RTS 21 position limits MiFID - Secondary Markets Opinion PDF
152.8 KB
02/05/2016 2016/668 ANNEX Annex- Opinion on draft RTS 21 position limits MiFID - Secondary Markets Opinion PDF
124.02 KB
25/05/2016 2016/724 Requirements for reference data submission under Article 4 MAR Market Abuse, Market Integrity Statement PDF
88.1 KB
30/05/2016 2016/730 Opinion on draft RTS 20 on ancillary activity MiFID - Secondary Markets Opinion PDF
148.29 KB
30/05/2016 2016/730 ANNEX Annex- Opinion on draft RTS 20 on ancillary activity MiFID - Secondary Markets Opinion PDF
220.42 KB
20/06/2016 2016/940 Statement by Steven Maijoor at ECON MiFID II/MiFIR Scrutiny Session, 21 June 2016 Speeches, MiFID - Secondary Markets Statement PDF
235.65 KB
13/06/2016 2016/943 Statement by Verena Ross at ECON Public Hearing on Securitisation Board of Supervisors, Speeches Statement PDF
242.38 KB
17/06/2016 2016/982 Opinion on inside information disclosure under the Market Abuse Regulation Market Abuse Opinion PDF
278.89 KB
25/11/2020 70-155-8842 ESMA statement on DTO Final Brexit, MiFID - Secondary Markets Statement PDF
79.5 KB
24/06/2013 BoA 2013-008 Board of Appeal Decision Joint Committee, Board of Appeal Decision PDF
242.72 KB		 The joint Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities (EBA, ESMA and EIOPA) has published today its decision in an appeal brought by an Estonian company against a decision of the EBA. It concerned the question whether the suitability of the managers of a significant branch of a bank may be a matter within EU law, and not just national law. Allowing the appeal, the Board of Appeal interpreted Directive No. 2006/48/EC consistently with the EBA Guidelines on the assessment of the suitability of members of the management body and key function holders. It came to the conclusion that the “fit and proper” requirement is not restricted to the persons who direct the business of the credit institution. The matter therefore was within the EBA’s powers of investigation. Although the appellant criticised the way in which the EBA dealt with its complaint, the Board of Appeal made it clear that it did not accept that criticism. It considered that the EBA dealt with the complaint in an appropriate manner. The ground on which the appeal was allowed was one of interpretation of the applicable legal provisions. The case was remitted to the EBA to adopt the appropriate decision in accordance with the Board of Appeal’s findings. This is for information only. The decision consists of the signed Decision only. For any enquiries, please contact EIOPA’s Press Office: Anzhelika Mayer Tel.: +49 69 9511 1968
13/01/2014 BoA 2013-014 Board of Appeal Decision Global Private Rating Company v. ESMA Joint Committee, Board of Appeal Decision PDF
361.96 KB		 Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities dismisses appeal made by a refused CRA-applicant against ESMA On 10 January 2014, the Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities handed down its decision on an appeal by the appellant, Global Private Rating Company “Standard Rating” Ltd, against the refusal by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) to register it as a credit rating agency. This is the first appeal against a decision by ESMA refusing an applicant registration as a credit rating agency. The Board of Appeal unanimously decided that the appeal should be dismissed, and that ESMA’s refusal decision should be confirmed. It stated that it accepted the appellant’s point that the registration of a credit rating agency by ESMA is a new process, and recognised that the procedures will to an extent take time fully to work out. Nevertheless, because of the responsibilities placed on credit rating agencies and their importance in the financial system generally, it considered that the onus must be on an applicant to satisfy ESMA that the relevant requirements are met. The application and its contents must be very clear, and it is not ESMA’s responsibility as regulator to remedy deficiencies.

Pages