ESMA LIBRARY

The ESMA Library contains all ESMA documents. Please use the search and filter options to find specific documents.
47
DOCUMENTS

REFINE YOUR SEARCH

Sections

Type of document

Your filters
Credit Rating Agencies X IFRS Supervisory Convergence X Short Selling X Opinion X Report X
Reset all filters
Date Ref. Title Section Type Download Info Summary Related Documents Translated versions
10/01/2020 ESMA33-9-340 CRA Market Share Calculation 2019 Report PDF
446.77 KB
20/12/2019 ESMA80-196-3218 Follow-up Report on fees charged by CRAs and TRs , , Report PDF
606.45 KB
16/07/2019 ESMA32-63-717 23rd Extract from the EECS’s Database of Enforcement Report PDF
441.84 KB
27/03/2019 ESMA32-63-672 Enforcement and Regulatory Activities of European Accounting Enforcers in 2018 , Report PDF
1.29 MB
03/04/2018 ESMA32-63-424 Enforcement and Regulatory Activities of Accounting Enforcers in 2017 , Report PDF
955.19 KB
11/01/2018 ESMA80-196-954 Thematic Report- On fees charged by Credit Rating Agencies and Trade Repositories , Report PDF
1.14 MB
20/12/2017 ESMA33-5-209 CRA Market Share Calculation 2017 Report PDF
1012.23 KB
31/10/2017 ESMA32-63-334 Report 21st Extract from the EECS's Database of Enforcement Report PDF
522.76 KB
18/07/2017 ESMA42-111-4138 Peer Review on Guidelines on Enforcement of Financial Information , Report PDF
1.86 MB
12/07/2017 ESMA32-67-284 Review of Fair Value Measurement in the IFRS financial statements , Report PDF
1.58 MB
12/06/2017 ESMA70-146-10 Opinion on CNMV emergency measure under the Short Selling Regulation Opinion PDF
181.85 KB
06/04/2017 ESMA33-9-158 Supervisory Briefing: A Common Approach to the CRA Regulation’s Provisions for Encouraging the use of Smaller CRAs Report PDF
687.07 KB
  1. ESMA is required to play an active role in building a common supervisory culture by promoting common supervisory approaches and practices among nationally appointed Sectoral Competent Authorities (‘SCAs’).
  1. The purpose of this supervisory briefing is to provide guidance to SCAs in relation to the application of Articles 8c and 8d of the CRA Regulation and promote a common supervisory approach and enforcement of these Articles. In this regard, the Supervisory Briefing includes the following:
  1. A Common Supervisory Approach as to which issuers and related third parties are covered by Article 8c and 8d; and,
  1. A Standard Form for documentation in accordance with article 8d.
  1. The common supervisory approach will assist SCAs as well as issuers and related third parties by clearly establishing who should be prioritised for supervision and enforcement under these Articles.
  1. The Standard Form will assist SCAs by guaranteeing standardised and consistent data across different issuers and related third parties. It will also assist issuers and related third parties by providing clarity as to how they may meet their regulatory obligations under these Articles and simplify their internal processes by removing the need to develop in-house templates for documenting compliance under Article 8d.
  1. The Supervisory Briefing will be published on ESMA’s website and on the websites of the nationally appointed SCAs.
 
03/02/2017 ESMA80-1467488426-27 Supervision Annual Report 2016 and Work Programme 2017 , Report PDF
2.49 MB
05/01/2017 ESMA32-63-200 20th Extract from the EECS’s Database of Enforcement Report PDF
498.99 KB
16/12/2016 2016/1662 2016-1662 Competition & Choice in the Credit Rating Industry Report PDF
1.22 MB
04/10/2016 2016/1431 Opinion on a proposed emergency measure by CONSOB under the Short Selling Regulation Opinion PDF
377.17 KB

OPINION OF THE EUROPEAN SECURITIES AND MARKETS AUTHORITY

of 4 October 2016

on a proposed emergency measure by CONSOB under Section 1 of Chapter V of Regulation (EU) No 236/2012

 

 

 

 

 

 

In accordance with Article 44(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010, the Board of Supervisors has adopted the following opinion:

I.   Legal basis

According to Article 27(2) of Regulation (EU) No 236/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2012 on short selling and certain aspects of credit default swaps[1], the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) shall within 24 hours of the notification made by a competent authority under Article 26 of that Regulation, issue an opinion on whether it considers the measure or proposed measure is necessary to address the exceptional circumstances.

II. Background

  1. On 6 July 2016, ESMA issued a positive opinion (ESMA/2016/1078) on an emergency measure proposed by CONSOB under Article 20(2)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EU) No 236/2012. The measure consisted of a ban on net short positions on Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena spa (“BMPS” - ISIN IT0005092165) shares, either directly or through related instruments and irrespectively of the venue or market in which the transactions leading to those positions are conducted. The measure did not apply to trading in index-related instruments and CONSOB did not exempt entities performing market making activities from the scope of the prohibition. The measure was applied from 7 July 2016 at 00:00:01 CET and is applicable until 5 October 2016 at 24:00:00 CET.  
  2. In the notification of 5 July 2016, CONSOB explained the reason for the measure was linked to the request from the European Central Bank (ECB) to BMPS to submit a credible plan outlining the measures to be taken in order to reduce the non-performing loans (NPL) compared to the total loans (i.e. by close to 15 billion EUR, from an actual ratio NPL/total loans of 42% to a target ratio of 20%, by 2018). In the days following the announcement by BMPS of the ECB’s request, BMPS’s share price fell sharply. Furthermore, large net short positions were taken on BMPS shares.  
  3. In accordance with Article 26 of Regulation (EU) No 236/2012, on 3 October 2016, CONSOB notified ESMA of its intention to make use of its powers of intervention in exceptional circumstances and to renew the current emergency measure introduced on 6 July 2016.
  4. Since the introduction of the ban, the results of the EBA stress tests published on 29 July 2016 showed that BMPS was the bank with the lowest results of the panel of 51 banks examined.
  5. On the same day, BMPS announced publicly a complex plan allowing for the de-recognition of the bank’s entire bad loan portfolio through a securitization transaction. The bank also indicated this transaction will create a capital shortfall, which will be filled in by a new capital increase of around 5 billion EUR through a rights issue. An indicative timeline was provided. By the end of September 2016, the board of directors intended to approve a business plan for the bank and call a General meeting of BMPS for October/November to approve the transaction which is expected to be completed (rights issue and de-recognition of the bad loans) by the end of 2016.
  6. In the course of September 2016, important changes in the top management of BMPS occurred: resignations of the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and the Chairman of BMPS as well as the appointment of a new CEO. To date, no new Chairman has been chosen.
  7. On 26 September 2016, BMPS’s board of directors announced a delay in the adoption of the business plan to enable further analysis of the possibility to modify the de-recognition plan in order to include the conversion of bonds into new shares. The approval of the new business plan is expected on 24 October 2016.
  8. After the adoption of the ban, CONSOB noted in the period from 7 July to 23 September 2016 a substantial reduction of the net short positions in BMPS from 7.19% to 4.55% of the share capital and a lower settlement fail ratio on BMPS shares compared to the average Italian equity settlement fail ratio. Despite these effects of the ban, the price of BMPS shares has fallen over the same period by 33%, compared to a 7% increase in the main Italian index FTSEMIB.
  9. The emergency measure notified by CONSOB consists of a ban on net short positions on Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena spa (“BMPS” - ISIN IT0005092165) shares, either directly or through related instruments and irrespectively of the venue or market in which the transactions leading to those positions are conducted. The notification also includes in the scope the financial instruments which give claims to new BMPS shares. This is included to cater for the possibility that BMPS raises capital through a rights issue or the conversion of bonds and to avoid that the build-up of short positions could be channeled through those instruments, circumventing the effectiveness of the ban. The measure does not apply to trading in index-related instruments and CONSOB does not exempt entities performing market making activities from the scope of the prohibition.
  10. The proposed measure is expected to enter into force on 6 October 2016 at 00:00:01 CET and to be applicable until 5 January 2017 at 24:00:00 CET.

III. On the adverse events or developments

  1. ESMA considers that the circumstances described above are adverse events or developments which constitute a serious threat to market confidence and to financial stability in Italy.
  2. More specifically, despite the noticeable effect of the ban introduced on 7 July 2016 on short selling activities on BMPS (the decrease of the overall net short positions in BMPS share capital and the level of fail ratio), the price of BMPS shares has continued to fall (-33% between 7 July and 23 September 2016), although to a lesser extent than in the weeks before the introduction of the ban in July 2016. This denotes that there is still considerable selling pressure on BMPS shares as market uncertainties remain. Besides, although the situation has improved, BMPS remains an issuer with high net short positions, more than 4.5% of the share capital.
  3. It is noted that on 29 July 2016 BMPS has already communicated a plan to reduce the amount of non-performing loans. In this respect, the BMPS announced plan seeks to provide a structural and definitive solution to the entire bad loan portfolio (27.7 billion EUR gross and 9.2 billion EUR net), through the increase in the coverage ratios of impaired exposures and the transfer of the entire bad loan portfolio to a securitization structure. This is considered to be the most important operation of this kind ever on the Italian market. As this would result in a capital shortfall estimated at 5 billion EUR, the plan includes a recapitalization action through a rights issue.
  4. However, the developments that affected the top management of BMPS, the resignation of the CEO and the chairman in the course of September 2016, the appointment of a new CEO and the on-going process for the designation of a new Chairman, have led to a delay in the finalisation and approval of the BMPS business plan as publicly acknowledged by BMPS in its press release of 26 September 2016. In addition, the same announcement indicated the plan initially disclosed late July 2016 could still be modified in order to include the conversion of bonds into new shares for the envisaged capital increase. Therefore, important uncertainties remain as to the final definition and implementation timing of the plan and a threat to market confidence persists regarding BMPS shares.
  5. The combination of still large - though less significant than before - net short positions, the continuous selling pressure of BMPS shares, and the uncertainties of the final content and timing of the plan, which requires significant adjustments to be taken by BMPS, constitute in ESMA´s view a clearly adverse scenario for the stability of the bank and, given its relative size, of the Italian banking sector - BMPS being the third largest Italian bank for total asset value and the value of clients’ deposit. The measure proposed is intended to address this scenario of selling pressure and unusual volatility in the price of BMPS shares.

IV.  On the appropriateness and proportionality of the measure

  1. ESMA considers that the emergency measure under Article 20(2)(a) and (b) of Regulation (EU) No 236/2012 in relation to BMPS shares is appropriate and proportionate to address the threat in the Italian financial markets.
  2. The renewal of the measure is appropriate to help address the expected substantial selling pressures and the unusual volatility causing significant downward spirals in BMPS shares (adverse events and developments as indicated in subparagraph (c) of Article 24(1) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 918/2012[2]), given that it limits the ability to enter into short positions, which may be a relevant factor behind the significant falls experienced in the past. In that sense, to the extent that the measure restricts the ability to adopt short positions, it may also indirectly reduce the risk of a contagion effect to other shares of the Italian banking sector.
  3. The measure remains appropriate compared to other alternatives that would address the threat. A temporary restriction on short selling according to Article 23 of Regulation (EU) No 236/2012 (which CONSOB also adopted on 5 July 2016 before introducing the net short position ban) would not address the extended period of risk resulting from the delays in finalizing the plan.  Similarly, a mere short sale prohibition would not cover activities through derivatives. Beyond that, a total ban including all products could have been considered, but CONSOB has decided to minimise possible detrimental effects on the efficiency of financial markets, and does not extend the restrictions to index-related instruments.
  4. The inclusion in the scope of the financial instruments which gives claims to new shares is appropriate considering the high likelihood of a new capital increase to be undertaken by BMPS, even though it is not yet certain that it would be conducted through a rights issue or the conversion of bonds. Not including such financial instruments could make more complex the decision that has to be taken on the final form of the capital increase and prove detrimental to the successful conclusion of the capital increase.
  5. As to the non-exemption for entities performing market making activities (market makers), ESMA notes that CONSOB considers that, given the broad dispersion of what is considered a market maker in different Member States, should the exemption be introduced, it would apply to a potentially very wide number of entities, affecting therefore the effectiveness of the prohibition. On the one hand, ESMA acknowledges that such a diversity exists and that the exemption for market makers could reach a wide number of entities compared to those that usually perform market making on a regular basis. On the other hand, ESMA considers that the non-application of the exemption to active market makers could have dis-incentivised or made more complex the quoting of BMPS shares by market makers active in this specific share, which could reduce additional liquidity from the market. However, ESMA notes that the introduction of the net short position ban since 7 July 2016 does not seem to have affected the liquidity of BMPS shares. Although the daily average traded quantity of BMPS shares has reduced by 31% in the period from 7 July to 23 September 2016 compared to a pre-ban period from 16 April 2016 to 6 July 2016, it is noted that the average daily traded quantity of all shares traded on the Italian regulated market MTA decreased by 24% and that BMPS shares accounted for less than 1% of total traded volume over the post-ban period. The fall in trading activity seems attributable to external factors (high overall volumes due to Brexit late June/early July and the traditionally low volume period of August) rather than to the introduction of the ban on BMPS.

V.  On the duration of the measure

  1. ESMA considers that the duration of the measure, although it is proposed for the maximum period envisaged in the Regulation and is therefore a long-lasting measure, is justified, given the lack of certainty on the timing for the finalisation and approval of the plan to reduce the amount of non-performing loans.  Despite the announcements made at the end of July 2016 which included an indicative timeline for the approval of the disclosed plan (October/November 2016) and the implementation of this intended plan (by the end of 2016), the BMPS announcement of late July 2016 reflected the delays experienced by BMPS in finalising the plan, notably resulting from the changes of BMPS top management, but has not provided any renewed indicative timeline.
  2. The measure may in any event be lifted before the end of the established period if circumstances that justified the renewal of the measure improve. ESMA recommends CONSOB to monitor closely the situation and to consider lifting the measure before the deadline if the situation so permits, to ensure that the restrictions remain in place for the shortest possible time.

 

This opinion will be published on ESMA’s website.

Done at Paris, 4 October 2016

 

For the Board of Supervisors

 

Steven Maijoor

 

[1] OJ L 86, 24.3.2012, p. 1–24.

[2] OJ L 274, 9.10.2012, p. 1.

28/07/2016 2016/1208 19th Extract from the EECS’s Database of Enforcement Report PDF
488.18 KB
06/07/2016 2016/1078 Opinion on CONSOB emergency measure under the Short Selling Regulation , Opinion PDF
158.94 KB

OPINION OF THE EUROPEAN SECURITIES AND MARKETS AUTHORITY

of 6 July 2016

on a proposed emergency measure by CONSOB under Section 1 of Chapter V of Regulation (EU) No 236/2012

 

 

 

 

 

In accordance with Article 44(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1095/2010 the Board of Supervisors has adopted the following opinion:

  1. Legal basis

According to Article 27(2) of Regulation (EU) No 236/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2012 on short selling and certain aspects of credit default swaps[1], the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) shall within 24 hours of the notification made by a competent authority under Article 26 of that Regulation, issue an opinion on whether it considers the measure or proposed measure is necessary to address the exceptional circumstances.

  1. Background
    1. In accordance with Article 26 of Regulation (EU) No 236/2012, CONSOB notified ESMA on 5 July 2016 of its intention to make use of its powers of intervention in exceptional circumstances and to introduce an emergency measure under Article 20(2)(b) of that Regulation.
    2. The concerned emergency measure consists of a ban on net short positions on Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena spa (“BMPS” - ISIN IT0005092165) shares, either directly or through related instruments and irrespectively of the venue or market in which the transactions leading to those positions are conducted.
    3. The proposed measure will not apply to trading in index-related instruments.
    4. CONSOB has not exempted entities performing market making activities from the scope of the prohibition. CONSOB justifies the absence of an exemption for market makers on the fact that the definition of market makers is not convergent across different jurisdictions.
    5. The proposed measure is expected to enter into force on 7 July 2016 at 00:00:01 CET and to be applicable until 5 October 2016 at 24:00:00 CET.
    6. On 4 July 2016 BMPS published a press release whereby it informed the public of a draft regulatory request coming from the European Central Bank (“ECB”).
    7. In particular, the ECB has requested BMPS to reduce the amount of non-performing loans (“NPL”) by close to 15 billion euro by 2018 and provide the ECB, by 3 October 2016, with a credible plan outlining the measures to be taken by BMPS in order to reduce the NPL compared to the total loans (i.e. from an actual ratio NPL/total loans of 42% to a target ratio of 20% by 2018).
    8. BMPS should submit the above plan by Monday 3 October 2016.
    9. Following the publication of the press release, BMPS price fell by 13.99% in a single day (4 July 2016) in respect to the reference price of the day before. The drop in price continued, more intensely, the following day (-19.39% on 5 July 2016).
  1. On the adverse events or developments
    1. ESMA considers that the circumstances described above are adverse events or developments which constitute a serious threat to market confidence in Italy.
    2. More specifically, it should be noted that the BMPS share price already fell by 26.29% in the period starting from 24 June to 1 July 2016, following the results of the UK referendum. Overall, the price of BMPS shares has fallen by 50% in the last thirteen days, and a substantial selling pressure and unusual volatility in the price of shares issued by BMPS could be reasonably expected as market uncertainty remains. Moreover, BMPS is among the Italian issuers with the highest net short position (roughly equal to 6% of the share capital as at 1 July 2016).
    3. As a result, and at least until the abovementioned BMPS plan to reduce the amount of non-performing loans has been submitted to the ECB, a threat to market confidence persists regarding BMPS shares. If an abrupt decline in the price of BMPS shares continues, there is a risk of contagion effect to other shares of the Italian banking sector.
    4. In this respect, it should be considered that the ECB has requested BMPS to reduce the amount of NPL by close to 15 billion euro by 2018 and that BMPS net equity, according to the Consolidated Report on Operations as at 31 December 2015, was close to 9.5 billion euro. Therefore, the realisation of the plan may require significant adjustment.
    5. The combination of large short positions, severe decline movements in price in the last weeks and the impact of the actions that the bank will need to undertake in view of the relevance of the required measures constitutes in ESMA´s view a clearly adverse scenario for the stability of the bank and, given its relative size, of the Italian banking sector.
  1. On the appropriateness and proportionality of the measure
    1. ESMA considers that the emergency measure under Article 20(2)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 236/2012 in relation to BMPS shares is appropriate and proportionate to address the threat in the Italian financial markets.
    2. The measure is adequate to address the expected substantial selling pressures and the unusual volatility causing significant downward spirals in BMPS shares (adverse events and developments as indicated in letter c) of Article 24(1) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 918/2012), given that it limits the ability to enter into short positions, which may be a relevant factor behind the severe falls experienced in recent dates. In that sense, to the extent that the measure restricts the ability to adopt short positions, it may also indirectly reduce the risk of a contagion effect to other shares of the Italian banking sector.
    3. The measure is appropriate because it is the least stringent of all the measures that would sufficiently address the threat. A temporary restriction on short selling according to Article 23 of the Regulation (EU) No 236/2012 (which CONSOB also adopted on 5 July 2016) would not address the long period of risk as it may not be extended to the described period of three months. Similarly, a mere short sale prohibition would not cover activities through derivatives. Above that, a total ban including all products could have been considered, but CONSOB has decided to minimise possible detrimental effects on the efficiency of financial markets, and does not extend the restrictions to index-related instruments.
    4. As to the non-exemption for entities performing market making activities (market makers), ESMA notes that CONSOB considers that, given the broad dispersion of what is considered a market maker in different Member States, should the exemption be introduced, it would apply to a potentially very wide number of entities, affecting therefore the effectiveness of the prohibition. On the one hand, ESMA acknowledges that such a diversity exists and that the exemption for market makers could reach a wide number of entities compared to those that usually perform market making on a regular basis. On the other hand, ESMA considers that the non-application of the exemption to active market makers could dis-incentivise or make more complex the quoting of BMPS shares by market makers active in this specific share, which could detract additional liquidity from the market.
  1. On the duration of the measure
    1. ESMA considers that the duration of the measure, although it consumes the maximum period envisaged in the Regulation and is therefore a long-lasting measure, is justified, given the intention of covering the deadline BMPS was given by the ECB to deliver the plan to reduce the amount of non-performing loans (3 October 2016).
    2. Besides, the measure may be lifted before the end of the established period if circumstances that justified the imposition of the measure improve. ESMA recommends CONSOB to monitor closely the situation and to consider lifting the measure before the initial deadline if the situation so permits, to ensure that the restrictions remain in place for the shortest possible time.

This opinion will be published on ESMA’s website.

Done at Paris, 6 July 2016

 

[1] OJ L 86, 24.3.2012, p. 1–24.

12/05/2016 ESA/2016/41 Opinion of the ESAs- ECAI credit assessments , Opinion PDF
379.79 KB
29/03/2016 2016/410 ESMA Report on Enforcement and Regulatory Activities of Accounting Enforcers in 2015 , , Report PDF
692.52 KB

Executive Summary

This report provides an overview of the activities of the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) and the accounting enforcers in the European Economic Area (EEA), thereafter, ‘European enforcers’, when examining compliance of financial information provided by issuers listed on regulated markets with the applicable financial reporting framework in 2015. It also provides an overview of the main activities performed at European level, quantitative information on enforcement activities in Europe as well as ESMA’s contribution to the development of the single rule book in the area of financial reporting. In addition, it also outlines ESMA’s activities for 2016 in the area of corporate reporting following its Supervisory Convergence Work Programme.

Supervisory Convergence

Following the implementation of the ESMA Guidelines on enforcement of financial information (hereafter the Guidelines on enforcement), ESMA and European enforcers have further strengthened supervisory convergence in the area of enforcement of financial information. The Guidelines on enforcement significantly contributed to the alignment of supervisory approaches/procedures through the use of harmonised key concepts for examinations, of a common set of enforcement priorities, of common rules for enforcement actions and of a single set of criteria for identifying accounting matters for which coordination at European level within ESMA is needed. In the last area, the number of accounting issues discussed by the enforcers before taking enforcement decisions increased significantly (65 emerging issues in 2015 vs 47 in 2014) and contributed to enhancing supervisory convergence as enforcers should take into account the outcome of these discussions when taking decisions .

In 2015 ESMA and European enforcers evaluated the level of compliance with IFRS in the areas identified as common enforcement priorities for the 2014 annual financial statements on a sample of 189 issuers. This assessment resulted in 40 enforcement actions being taken on shortcomings in the disclosures of assumptions and judgements supporting the recognition of deferred tax assets arising from tax losses, when assessing control or classifying joint arrangements.

As in previous years, ESMA together with European enforcers identified and included in their supervisory practices a set of common enforcement priorities significant for European issuers when preparing their 2015 IFRS financial statements. These priorities include the impact of the financial markets’ conditions in IFRS financial statements, presentation of the statement of cash flows and related disclosures as well as the fair value measurement of non-financial assets and related disclosures. Specific references to some of the 2014 common priorities and to the new IFRS requirements, notably on IFRS 9 Financial Instruments and IFRS 15 Revenue from Contracts with Customers are also part of these priorities.

As a response to increased concerns in the markets, ESMA issued Guidelines on Alternative Performance Measures (hereafter the Guidelines on APMs) which are aimed at contributing to the publication of transparent, unbiased and comparable information by European issuers on their financial performance. The Guidelines on APMs will apply to APMs disclosed by issuers when publishing regulated information or persons responsible for the prospectus. European enforcers had to adapt their supervisory procedures and declare their compliance to these guidelines.

Also as part of the supervisory convergence activities, ESMA issued an Opinion on the application of the IFRS requirements on the cash contributions to Deposit Guarantee Schemes (DGS) in order to address the divergence in the application and enforcement in the accounting treatment applicable to these contributions and to prevent it from becoming widespread.

ESMA published a Statement referring to principles relevant for improving the quality of disclosures as a response to concerns expressed by users on the overload, lack of completeness or relevance of the information provided in the financial statements.

Finally, European enforcers examined the interim or annual financial statements of approximately 1,200 issuers representing an average examination rate of 20% of all IFRS issuers with securities listed on regulated markets, out of which 14% related to unlimited scope examinations and 6% to focused examinations. As a result of these activities, European enforcers took actions addressing material departures against 273 issuers, representing around 25% of the selected sample. The main deficiencies were identified in the areas of financial statements presentation, impairment of non-financial assets and accounting for financial instruments.

Single Rule Book

ESMA actively participated to the accounting standard setting process by providing European enforcers’ positions on all major new standards issued by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) and by contributing to the discussions in the EFRAG Board and the Technical Expert Group (EFRAG TEG) meetings. Notably, ESMA provided specific input to the due process and endorsement advices on IFRS 9, in aspects related to investor protection and financial stability as well as on its interaction with IFRS 4 Insurance Contracts. In addition, ESMA also contributed to the consistent application of IFRS by engaging with the IASB and the IFRS Interpretations Committee (IFRS IC) when relevant issues were identified by enforcers and where a lack of clarity in IFRS could contribute to their divergent application.

In accordance with its mandate under the Transparency Directive, ESMA has submitted to the European Commission for endorsement the draft Regulatory Technical Standards (RTS) on the European Electronic Access Point (EEAP) and published the consultation paper on the draft RTS on European Single Electronic Format (ESEF).

Next Steps

ESMA published its Supervisory Convergence Work Programme which covers, among other topics, the activities of accounting enforcers. In addition to the regular activities, ESMA envisages to start carrying out peer reviews on some of the ESMA Guidelines on enforcement, to publish statements on the implementation of new major IFRS and to develop supervisory briefings to align procedures of European enforcers when monitoring and enforcing the Guidelines on APMs and disclosures in the financial statements.