REFINE YOUR SEARCH
Type of document
|Date||Ref.||Title||Section||Type||Download||Info||Summary||Related Documents||Translated versions|
|14/09/2011||2011/288||Call for evidence- Empty voting||Corporate Disclosure, Corporate Governance, Transparency||Consultation Paper||PDF
|26/01/2011||2011/35||Call for evidence- Request for technical advice on possible delegated acts concerning the Prospectus Directive (2003/71/EC) as amended by the Directive 2010/73/EU||Prospectus, Corporate Disclosure||Consultation Paper||PDF
|26/09/2014||2014/1186||Consultation paper on draft RTS on prospectus related issues under the Omnibus II Directive||Prospectus, Corporate Disclosure||Consultation Paper||PDF
|ESMA invites comments on all matters in this paper and in particular on the specific questions summarised in Annex I. Comments are most helpful if they:• respond to the question stated;• indicate the specific question to which they relate;• contain a clear rationale; and• describe any alternatives ESMA should consider.ESMA will consider all comments received by 19 December 2014. All contributions should be submitted online at www.esma.europa.eu under the heading ‘Your input - Consultations’. Publication of responses All contributions received will be published following the close of the consultation, unless you request otherwise. Please clearly and prominently indicate in your submission any part you do not wish to be publically disclosed. A standard confidentiality statement in an email message will not be treated as a request for non-disclosure. A confidential response may be requested from us in accordance with ESMA’s rules on access to documents. We may consult you if we receive such a request. Any decision we make not to disclose the response is reviewable by ESMA’s Board of Appeal and the European Ombudsman.Data protection Information on data protection can be found at www.esma.europa.eu under the heading ‘Legal Notice’.Who should read this paper This document will be of interest to all stakeholders. It would primarily be of interest to investors, issuers, offerors or persons asking for admission to trading on a regulated market, as well as to any market participant who is affected by Directive 2003/71/EC of 4 November 2003 (the Prospectus Directive) as amended by Directive 2010/73/EU and Directive 2010/78/EU and its Regulation (Commission Regulation (EC) No 809/2004) and Delegated Regulations (Commission Delegated Regulation (EC) No 486/2012, No 862/2012, No 759/2013 and No 1392/2014.|
|15/12/2017||ESMA31-62-802||Consultation Paper on draft RTS under the new Prospectus Regulation||Prospectus||Consultation Paper||PDF
|12/07/2019||ESMA31-62-1239||Consultation Paper on Guidelines on prospectus disclosure||Prospectus||Consultation Paper||PDF
|15/06/2011||2011/141||Consultation paper- ESMA’s technical advice on possible delegated acts concerning the Prospectus Directive as amended by the Directive 2010/73/EU||Prospectus, Corporate Disclosure||Consultation Paper||PDF
|24/09/2020||ESMA74-362-773||CP on MiFID II MiFIR review report||Benchmarks, MiFID - Secondary Markets, MiFID II: Transparency Calculations and DVC, Post Trading||Consultation Paper||PDF
|22/03/2012||2012/212||Discussion Paper- An Overview of the Proxy Advisory Industry. Considerations on Possible Policy Options||Corporate Disclosure, Corporate Governance||Consultation Paper||PDF
|This Discussion Paper focuses on the development of the proxy advisory industry in Europe, which mainly serves institutional investors such as asset managers, mutual funds and pension funds. Following its fact-finding work in 2011, ESMA recognises the proxy advisory industry within Europe is, or is expected to be, growing in prominence and investors are, or are expected to be, increasingly using proxy advisor services. In this paper ESMA identifies several key issues related to the proxy advisory market which may have an impact on the proper functioning of the voting process. The range of policy options that ESMA will consider, and on which it seeks further input from market participants, consists of four broad areas, including: 1. No EU-level action at this stage 2. Encouraging Member States and/or industry to develop standards 3. Quasi-binding EU-level regulatory instruments 4. Binding EU-level legislative instruments ESMA will consider these options based on the feedback it receives from market participants, and, if appropriate, will undertake further policy action, either directly or by providing an opinion to the European Commission. The reason to bring up some policy options is due to the fact that proxy advisors are currently not regulated at a pan-European level. Nevertheless, there are relevant European rules that apply to investors (e.g. for UCITS management companies when exercising voting rights). In addition, there are also well-recognised corporate governance standards that apply to issuers at a national level (based on the “comply or explain approach”) and some complements to improve standards of stewardship among investors. All feedback received from this Discussion Paper will be duly considered. ESMA expects to publish a feedback statement in Q4 of 2012 which will summarise the responses received and will state ESMA’s view on whether there is a need for policy action in this area.|
|15/03/2013||2013/316||Draft Regulatory Technical Standards on specific situations that require the publication of a supplement to the prospectus||Prospectus, Corporate Disclosure||Consultation Paper||PDF
|The Consultation Paper sets out a draft Regulatory Technical Standard concerning situations that require the systematic publication of a supplement to the prospectus which the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) is obliged to develop in accordance with Article 16(3) of the Prospectus Directive. The listed situations are concrete examples of the general obligation in Article 16(1) to mention in a supplement every significant new factor, material mistake or inaccuracy relating to information included in the prospectus which is capable of affecting the assessment of the securities. ESMA believes that the test whether a new factor, mistake or inaccuracy qualifies as a triggering event for producing a supplement is the same test as whether information should be included in the prospectus. As a consequence, significance or materiality should be assessed according to the same qualitative and/or quantitative criteria used when drafting the prospectus. In light of this, ESMA has identified a short list comprising 10 situations, which will always require issuers, offerors or persons asking for admission to trading to draw up and publish a supplement to the prospectus.The CP includes a draft Regulatory Technical Standard setting out the situations that would require a systematic publication of a supplement as well as the minimum content of such a supplement. Responses to the consultation should be submitted online by 28 June 2013.|
|06/07/2017||ESMA31-62-649||Draft technical advice on content and format of the EU Growth prospectus||Prospectus||Consultation Paper||PDF
|06/07/2017||ESMA31-62-532||Draft technical advice on format and content of the prospectus||Prospectus||Consultation Paper||PDF
|06/07/2017||ESMA31-62-650||Draft technical advice on scrutiny and approval of the prospectus||Prospectus||Consultation Paper||PDF
|13/12/2011||2011/444||ESMA’s technical advice on possible delegated acts concerning the Prospectus Directive as amended by the Directive 2010/73/EU||Prospectus, Corporate Disclosure||Consultation Paper||PDF
|The purpose of this consultation document from ESMA is to seek comments on the technical advice that ESMA proposes to give to the European Commission on a number of possible delegated acts.|
|20/06/2012||2012/380||ESMA’s technical advice on possible delegated acts concerning the Prospectus Directive as amended by the Directive 2010/73/EU||Prospectus, Corporate Disclosure||Consultation Paper||PDF
|Responses to this consultation paper should be submitted online by 20 August 2012.|
|01/10/2012||2012/607||Further amendments to ESMA’s Recommendations for the consistent implementation of the Prospectus Regulation regarding mineral companies||Prospectus, Corporate Disclosure||Consultation Paper||PDF
|04/03/2021||ESMA32-382-1138||Guidelines on disclosure requirements under the Prospectus Regulation||Guidelines and Technical standards, Prospectus||Guidelines & Recommendations||PDF
|01/10/2019||ESMA31-62-1293||Guidelines on risk factors under the Prospectus Regulation||Guidelines and Technical standards, Prospectus||Guidelines & Recommendations||PDF
BG - Преводът е предоставен от Центъра за преводи за органите на Европейския съюз.
CS - Tento překlad vypracovalo Překladatelské středisko pro instituce Evropské unie.
DA - Denne oversættelse er udarbejdet af Oversættelsescentret for Den Europæiske Unions Organer.
DE - Die Übersetzung erfolgte durch das Übersetzungszentrum für die Einrichtungen der Europäischen Union.
EL - Η παρούσα μετάφραση έγινε από το Μεταφραστικό Κέντρο των Οργάνων της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης.
ES - Texto traducido por el Centro de Traducción de los Órganos de la Unión Europea.
ET - Selle tõlke tegi Euroopa Liidu Asutuste Tõlkekeskus.
FI - Euroopan unionin elinten käännöskeskus on tehnyt tämän käännöksen.
FR - La présente traduction a été fournie par le Centre de traduction des organes de l’Union européenne.
HR - Za prijevod se pobrinuo Prevoditeljski centar za tijela Europske unije.
HU - Ezt a fordítást az Európai Unió.
IT - La presente traduzione è stata fornita dal Centro di traduzione degli organismi dell’Unione europea.
LT - Šį tekstą išvertė Europos Sąjungos įstaigų vertimo centras.
LV - Šo tulkojumu ir nodrošinājis Eiropas Savienības iestāžu Tulkošanas centrs.
MT - Din it-traduzzjoni ġiet ipprovduta miċ-Ċentru tat-Traduzzjoni għall-Korpi tal-Unjoni Ewropea.
NL - Deze vertaling is verzorgd door het Vertaalbureau voor de organen van de Europese Unie.
PL - Tłumaczenie wykonane przez Centrum Tłumaczeń dla Organów Unii Europejskiej.
PT - Esta tradução foi fornecida pelo Centro de Tradução dos Organismos da União Europeia.
RO - Această traducere a fost asigurată de Centrul de Traduceri pentru Organismele Uniunii Europene.
SK - Preklad vyhotovilo Prekladateľské stredisko pre orgány Európskej únie.
SL - Prevod je zagotovil Prevajalski center za organe Evropske unije.
SV - Den här översättningen har utförts av Översättningscentrum för Europeiska unionens organ.
|18/07/2013||2013/998||Guidelines on the model MoU concerning consultation, cooperation and the exchange of information related to the supervision of AIFMD entities||International cooperation, Fund Management||Guidelines & Recommendations||PDF
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)
|08/06/2015||2015/920||Impact of the Best Practice Principles for Providers of Shareholder Voting Research and Analysis||Corporate Disclosure, Corporate Governance||Consultation Paper||PDF
|Responding to this Call for Evidence ESMA invites comments on all matters in this paper and in particular on the specific questions presented throughout the paper. Comments are most helpful, if they:a. respond to the question stated;b. indicate the specific question to which they relate; andc. contain a clear rationale. ESMA will consider all comments received by 27 July 2015. All contributions should be submitted online at www.esma.europa.eu under the heading ‘Your input - Consultations’. Publication of responses All contributions received will be published following the close of the Call for Evidence, unless you request otherwise. Please clearly and prominently indicate in your submission any part you do not wish to be publically disclosed. A standard confidentiality statement in an email message will not be treated as a request for non-disclosure. A confidential response may be requested from us in accordance with ESMA’s rules on access to documents. We may consult you, if we receive such a request. Any decision we make not to disclose the response is reviewable by ESMA’s Board of Appeal and the European Ombudsman.Data protection Information on data protection can be found at www.esma.europa.eu under the heading Legal Notice.Who should read this Call for Evidence This Call for Evidence will be of relevance to persons and entities participating in the voting chain, particularly proxy advisors, investors, companies listed in Europe, proxy solicitors and consultants.|
|23/03/2011||2011/81||Recommendations- ESMA update of the CESR recommendations on the consistent implementation of Commission Regulation (EC) No 809/2004 implementing the Prospectus Directive||Guidelines and Technical standards, Prospectus, Corporate Disclosure||Guidelines & Recommendations||PDF