REFINE YOUR SEARCH
Type of document
|Date||Ref.||Title||Section||Type||Download||Info||Summary||Related Documents||Translated versions|
|03/02/2017||ESMA80-1467488426-27||Supervision Annual Report 2016 and Work Programme 2017||Credit Rating Agencies, Trade Repositories||Report||PDF
|28/05/2021||ESMA81-393-98||Supervisory Briefing on Benchmark administrators’ presence in their Member States of location and outsourcing||Benchmarks, Supervisory convergence||Report||PDF
|15/05/2009||09-220||Feedback statement- MAD Level 3 – Third set of CESR guidance and information on the common operation of the Directive to the market||Market Abuse||CESR Document||PDF
|09/06/2010||10-333||Technical Advice- The Equivalence between the Japanese Regulatory and Supervisory Framework and the EU Regulatory Regime for Credit Rating Agencies||CESR Archive, Credit Rating Agencies||Technical Advice||PDF
|17/05/2011||2011/144||Final advice- ESMA´s Technical Advice to the Commission on Fees for CRAs||Credit Rating Agencies||Technical Advice||PDF
|18/04/2012||2012/259||Technical advice on CRA regulatory equivalence- US, Canada and Australia||Credit Rating Agencies||Technical Advice||PDF
|On 12 June 2009 the European Commission requested CESR, now ESMA, to provide its technical advice on the equivalence between the legal and supervisory framework of Japan, The United States, and Canada with the EU regulatory regime for credit rating agencies. (Regulation (EC) No. 1060/2009 of the European Parliament and the Council on credit rating agencies ). On 17 November 2009, the Commission also requested CESR to provide its technical advice on Australia. On 28 September 2010, the European Commission published an equivalence decision on Japan. With regard to the compliance with the EU requirements on endorsement, ESMA had already indicated that it considers the legal and regulatory regime for CRAs supervision of the following countries as “as stringent as” the EU requirements: - On 22 December 2011, Japan and Australia; - On 15 March 2012, US, Canada, Hong Kong and Singapore. This report sets out ESMA’s advice to the European Commission in respect of the equivalence between the US (Part I), Canada (Part II) and Australia (Part III) respective legal and supervisory frameworks and the EU regulatory regime for credit rating agencies.|
|21/11/2013||2013/1703||Technical Advice on the feasibility of a network of small and medium-sized CRAs||Credit Rating Agencies||Technical Advice||PDF
|The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has finalised its Technical Advice to the European Commission on the feasibility of a network of small and medium sized credit rating agencies in order to increase competition in the market. The technical advice provides quantitative and qualitative information on small and medium-sized CRAs in the EU, based on the analysis of the periodic reporting obligations of CRAs to ESMA via the central repository CEREP. It also covers some information regarding possible barriers to entry for companies that wish to conduct rating activity in the EU. Contents The main findings of the advice are: • The 22 registered CRAs are established in 11 EU Member States; • None of the small and medium-sized CRAs cover the whole range of the five rating classes considered (corporates (non-financial), financials, insurance, sovereign and public finance, and structured finance). Whilst DBRS and BCRA cover four and three classes respectively, all the remaining small and medium-sized CRAs cover one or two rating classes only. This contrasts with Fitch, Moody’s and S&P that issue ratings for all five possible rating classes; • Small and medium-sized CRAs are mainly active in issuing corporate ratings. Within this rating type, four small and medium-sized CRAs issue a relatively high number of corporate ratings (CERVED and ICAP) or financial and insurance ratings (GBB and AM Best); • Only 6 of the small and medium-sized CRAs provide sovereign ratings (BCRA, Capital Intelligence, DBRS, European Rating, Feri Euro Rating (Feri) and Japan Credit Rating Agency (JCR)), whilst only one (DBRS) issues structured finance ratings; • As of end 2012 the majority of small and medium-sized CRAs issued solicited ratings only, whilst eight issued unsolicited ratings only. Three small and medium-sized CRAs (DBRS, JCR, and Scope) issued both solicited and unsolicited ratings, as was the case also for Fitch, Moody’s and S&P; • As regards geographical coverage of the small and medium-sized CRAs 6 out of 19 (AM Best, Capital Intelligence, Creditreform, DBRS, JCR and Scope) have a coverage that goes beyond one Member State when referring to corporate ratings. As regards the sovereign ratings type, three of the small and medium-sized CRAs cover more than one Member State (Capital Intelligence, Feri and JCR). In both of these ratings types, Fitch, Moody’s and S&P’s rating activities cover all Member States of the EU; • In 2013, 96% of the supervisory fees were paid by S&P, Moody’s, and Fitch, while their turnover from rating and ancillary services was equal to 88% of the total turnover of the 20 registered and certified CRAs in 2012: and • As of July 2013, 14 out of 19 small and medium-sized CRAs have been granted at least one of the regulatory exemptions provided for in the CRA Regulation. Finally, and with reference to the current situation in the segment of small and medium-sized CRAs, ESMA is not aware of any private networks of small and medium-sized CRAs currently in place.|
|19/12/2013||2013/1953||Technical Advice to the European Commission on the equivalence between the Argentinean regulatory and supervisory framework and the EU regulatory regime for CRAs||Credit Rating Agencies||Technical Advice||PDF
|31/05/2013||2013/626||Technical advice on CRA regulatory equivalence on Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Hong Kong and Singapore||Credit Rating Agencies||Technical Advice||PDF
|The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has provided advice to the European Commission in respect of the equivalence between the EU regulatory regime for credit rating agencies and the respective legal and supervisory frameworks of Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Hong Kong and Singapore. This is in response to the European Commission’s request for technical advice from ESMA on the equivalence of these jurisdictions legal and supervisory frameworks with the EU regulatory regime for credit rating agencies as set out in Regulation (EC) No. 1060/2009 of the European Parliament and the Council on credit rating agencies. The European Commission has already published equivalence decisions on US, Canada and Australia, on 9 October 2012, and on Japan, 28 October 2010. Regarding compliance with the EU requirements on endorsement, ESMA has already indicated that it considers the legal and regulatory regime for CRAs supervision of the following countries as “as stringent as” the EU requirements: 15 March 2012, Hong Kong and Singapore; 18 April 2012, Argentina and Mexico; 27 April 2012, Brazil.|
|17/09/2014||2014/850rev||Technical Advice in accordance with Article 39(b) 2 of the CRA Regulation||Credit Rating Agencies||Technical Advice||PDF
|This document has been revised to reflect an amended figure in Table 1 and two re-classifications of solicitation status in Table 2. Article 39b(2) of the CRA Regulation states that the European Commission shall adopt a report by end 2014 – after receiving ESMA’s technical advice – on the appropriateness of the development of a European creditworthiness assessment for sovereign debt. In its request for advice, the Commission asked ESMA to provide input on the issue of sovereign ratings and rating processes including an overview of the market for sovereign ratings, information on operational issues regarding sovereign ratings, information on sovereign rating processes as well as lessons drawn from ESMA’s supervisory experience. Contents For the purposes of this advice, ESMA provides its views based on the quantitative information contained in the CEREP public database and on information publicly disclosed by credit rating agencies registered with ESMA. Additionally, ESMA’s advice has been informed by its first supervisory activities regarding the rating process for sovereign ratings of CRAs which are active in the EU sovereign rating market. In accordance with the CRA Regulation, these supervisory activities did not address the content of the sovereign methodologies themselves but rather were concerned with the independence, transparency and governance of the sovereign rating process. Sovereign credit ratings play a crucial role from a credit market and financial stability perspective, not least because sovereign governments account for the largest group of borrowers in capital markets in terms of volume. In addition the crucial importance of these sovereign ratings can be amplified by the “cascade” effect sovereign ratings have on other asset classes via their presence as factors in other asset methodologies. In the EU the sovereign rating market is composed of nine CRAs established in nine different EU member states. These nine CRAs exhibit a high level of variation with respect to the type and number of sovereign ratings they assign. Sovereign credit ratings themselves can also be differentiated in various ways depending on such factors as local/foreign currency, duration of issuance, whether the rating applies to a specific issuer or issuance and if it is solicited or unsolicited. In addition ESMA would like to emphasise the following points which it believes to be important when considering the appropriateness of the development of a European creditworthiness assessment of sovereign debt.|
|02/10/2015||2015/1471||Technical Advice on Reducing Sole and Mechanistic Reliance on Credit Ratings||Credit Rating Agencies||Technical Advice||PDF
|02/10/2015||2015/1472||Technical Advice on Competition, Choice and Conflicts of Interest in the CRA industry||Credit Rating Agencies||Technical Advice||PDF
|05/01/2016||2015/1791||Peer Review Report Compliance with SSR as regards Market Making activities||Supervisory convergence||Report||PDF
|03/02/2015||2015/224||ESMA’s technical advice on possible delegated acts concerning the Market Abuse Regulation||Market Abuse||Technical Advice||PDF
|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.|
|13/07/2016||2016/1130||Final Report on the Market Abuse Regulation Guidelines||Market Abuse, Market Integrity||Report||PDF
|04/10/2016||2016/1415||ESMA reporton on securities financing transactions and leverage in the EU||Post Trading, Risk Analysis & Economics - Markets Infrastructure Investors||Report||PDF
|16/12/2016||2016/1662||2016-1662 Competition & Choice in the Credit Rating Industry||Credit Rating Agencies||Report||PDF
|05/02/2016||2016/234||ESMA’s supervision of credit rating agencies and trade repositories- 2015 annual report and 2016 work plan.||Credit Rating Agencies, Trade Repositories||Report||PDF
The European Securities and Markets Authority’s (ESMA) annual report and work programme has been prepared according to Article 21 of Regulation 1060/2009 on credit rating agencies as amended (the CRA Regulation) and Article 85 of Regulation 648/2012 on OTC derivatives, central counterparties and trade repositories (EMIR). It highlights the direct supervisory activities carried out by ESMA during 2015 regarding credit rating agencies (CRAs) and trade repositories (TRs) and outlines ESMA’s main priorities in these areas for 2016.
ESMA adopts a risk-based approach to the supervision of CRAs and TRs in accordance with its overall objectives of promoting financial stability and orderly markets and enhancing investor protection. This risk-based approach requires the analysis of information from a variety of sources and the application of multiple supervisory tools including day-to-day supervision, cycle of engagement meetings with supervised entities, on-site inspections and dedicated investigations.
In order to build on the expertise that ESMA has developed through its supervision of CRAs and TRs, ESMA created a single Supervision Department in November 2015. ESMA intends to draw on the best practices identified from the supervision of both types of entity to further enhance its supervisory effectiveness in future.
|16/02/2016||2016/297||Follow-up MMF||Fund Management, Supervisory convergence||Report||PDF
|29/03/2016||2016/410||ESMA Report on Enforcement and Regulatory Activities of Accounting Enforcers in 2015||Corporate Disclosure, IFRS Supervisory Convergence, Supervisory convergence||Report||PDF
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.
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).
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.