See also 2013/811 Confirmation of compliance with guidelines

ESMA finalises supervisory co-operation agreements for alternative investment funds The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has approved seven co-operation arrangements between EU securities regulators and their global counterparts with responsibility for the supervision of alternative investment funds, including hedge funds, private equity and real estate funds. ESMA’s Board of Supervisors, at its July meeting, approved Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) with authorities from the Bahamas, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico and the United States, including the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). ESMA has now negotiated 38 agreements on behalf of the 31 EU/EEA national competent authorities for securities markets supervision. The co-operation agreements allow for the exchange of information, cross-border on-site visits and mutual assistance in the enforcement of respective supervisory laws. ESMA had approved 31 MoUs with other non-EU regulators in May. The agreements cover third-country alternative investment fund managers (AIFMs) that market alternative investment funds (AIFs) in the EU and EU AIFMs that manage or market AIFs outside the EU. The agreements also cover co-operation in the cross-border supervision of depositaries and AIFMs’ delegates. National securities regulators in the EU, as the supervisors of AIFMs, are in the process of signing MoUs with those jurisdictions relevant to their market. The existence of co-operation arrangements between the EU and non-EU authorities is a precondition of the Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (AIFMD) for allowing managers from third countries access to EU markets or to perform fund management by delegation from EU managers by 22 July 2013. The co-operation arrangements are applicable from 22 July, and will enable cross-border marketing of AIFs to professional investors between jurisdictions. This is subject to the non-EU jurisdiction not being listed as a non-cooperative jurisdiction by the Financial Action Task Force and, as from the entry into force of the passport for non-EU managers, having co-operation agreements in place with EU Member States regarding the exchange of information on tax matters. The content of the ESMA MoUs follow the IOSCO Principles on Cross-Border Supervisory Co-operation of 2010, and complements the terms and conditions of the IOSCO Multilateral MoU Concerning Consultation and Co-operation and the Exchange of Information of 2002 (MMoU). ESMA had originally contacted all the authorities that have signed the IOSCO MMoU of 2002. ESMA has now approved MoUs with those 42 authorities that responded to ESMA’s call. ESMA continues to negotiate the MoU with the Chinese authority.   Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) MoU with AFSA (Albania) MoU with ASIC (Australia) MoU with BMA (Bermuda) MoU with Canadian authorities  Accompanying letter MoU with CDVM (Morocco) MoU with CFTC (US) Accompanying letter MoU with CIMA (Cayman Islands) MoU with CMA (Kenya) MoU with CMSA (Tanzania) MoU with CNBV (Mexico) MoU with CVM (Brazil) MoU with DFSA (Dubai) MoU with FCSM (Mauritius) MoU with FINMA (Switzerland) MoU with FSA (Labuan) MoU with FSC (BVI) MoU with FSC (Guernsey) MoU with FSC (Isle of Man) MoU with FSC (Jersey) MoU with HKMA (Hong Kong) MoU with ISA (Israel) MoU with JFSA (Japan) MoU with MAFF (Japan) MoU with MAS (Singapore) MoU with METI (Japan) MoU with OCC and FED (US) MoU with OSFI (Canada) MoU with SC (Malaysia) MoU with SC (Republic of Srpska) MoU with SC (The Bahamas) MoU with SCA (UAE) MoU with SEBI (India) MoU with SEC (Montenegro) MoU with SEC (Pakistan) MoU with SEC (Thailand) MoU with SEC Macedonia (FYROM) MoU with SFC (Hong Kong) MoU with US SEC Accompanying letter   MoU with EFSA (Egypt)   MoU with FMA (New Zealand)   MoU with FSB (South Africa)   MoU with SSC (Vietnam)   MoU with FSC and FSS (South Korea)

Legal Basis According to Article 5(2) of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on OTC derivatives, central counterparties and trade repositories (EMIR), the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) shall develop draft regulatory technical standards specifying the class of OTC derivatives that should be subject to the clearing obligation, the date or dates from which the clearing obligation takes effect, including any phase in and the categories of counterparties to which the obligation applies, and the minimum remaining maturity of the OTC derivative contracts referred to in Article 4(1)(b)(ii) of EMIR. Background and Procedure On 1 October 2014, ESMA submitted a draft regulatory technical standard (RTS) on the clearing obligation to the European Commission pursuant to Article 10(1) of Regulation No (EU) 1095/2010 (the ESMA Regulation) and Article 5(2) of EMIR. This draft RTS covered Interest Rate Swaps. On 18 December 2014, the Commission informed ESMA of its intention to endorse with amendments this draft RTS and submitted to ESMA a modified version of the RTS (the “modified RTS”) introducing, among others, (1) amendments to the date on which the frontloading obligation starts to apply and (2) a new provision on the treatment of non-EU intragroup transactions. Pursuant to Article 10(1) of the ESMA Regulation, this notification from the Commission opens a period of six weeks during which ESMA may amend its draft RTS on the clearing obligation on the basis of the Commission’s proposed amendments and resubmit it to the Commission in the form of a formal opinion. ESMA has to send a copy of its formal opinion to the European Parliament and to the Council. In accordance with Article 44(1) of the ESMA Regulation the Board of Supervisors has to adopt a formal opinion. Executive Summary ESMA agrees with the ultimate objectives of the modifications that the European Commission intends to introduce. However, ESMA considers that the tool proposed by the Commission for the matter related to the non-EU intra group transactions is not appropriate from a legal perspective and, in the case that the Commission intention is to define a later application date for those transactions, ESMA stands ready to explore, in coordination with the Commission, a different manner to incorporate that provision. ESMA backs the modifications on the frontloading section, though has a few observations and improvements with respect to several recitals. ESMA proposes to incorporate the suggestion of the Commission to deal with the application of the 8 billion threshold to investment funds for the definitions of types of counterparties as a specific provision in the text of the RTS.

Today’s document published by ESMA contains opinions on 16 UK-based pension schemes where the UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) is the competent authority for securities markets. After the exemptions are granted by the FCA, ESMA will publish the list of the types of entities/ arrangements that have been exempted.