REFINE YOUR SEARCH
Type of document
|Date||Ref.||Title||Section||Type||Download||Info||Summary||Related Documents||Translated versions|
|06/04/2021||ESMA74-362-1853||Final report Draft Guidelines On periodic information to be submitted to ESMA by Trade Repositories||Market data, Supervisory convergence, Trade Repositories||Final Report||PDF
|18/12/2020||ESMA50-157-2403||Final report on Guidelines on outsourcing to cloud service providers||Innovation and Products||Final Report||PDF
|18/06/2020||ESMA32-60-607||Final report on draft RTS including 2020 update RTS on ESEF||European Single Electronic Format||Final Report||PDF
|05/06/2020||ESMA35-36-1946||Final Report Guidelines on certain aspects of the MiFID II compliance function requirements||Guidelines and Technical standards, MiFID - Investor Protection||Final Report||PDF
|03/04/2020||ESMA34-39-968||Final report- Guidelines on performance fees in UCITS and certain types of AIFs||Fund Management, Guidelines and Technical standards||Final Report||PDF
|31/03/2020||ESMA43-370-103||Final report on TA on EMIR 2.2 CCP fines||CCP Directorate, Credit Rating Agencies, Post Trading, Trade Repositories||Final Report||PDF
|07/06/2019||ESMA32-60-474||Draft RTS amending Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/815 on the updates of the taxonomy to be used for the ESEF||Corporate Disclosure, European Single Electronic Format||Final Report||PDF
|15/10/2018||ESMA31-62-1114||2017 Report on EEA prospectus activity||Corporate Finance||Final Report||PDF
|15/03/2018||JC-2018-04||Joint Committee Final Report on Big Data||Innovation and Products||Final Report||PDF
|18/12/2017||ESMA32-60-204||Final report on the RTS on the European Single Electronic Format||European Single Electronic Format||Final Report||PDF
|28/09/2017||ESMA70-154-266||Guidelines on the management body of market operators and data reporting service providers||Guidelines and Technical standards, MiFID - Secondary Markets||Final Report||PDF
|24/08/2017||ESMA70-151-552||Guidelines on transfer of data between Trade Repositories||Guidelines and Technical standards, Post Trading||Final Report||PDF
|10/10/2016||2016/1451||Final Report- Guidelines on transaction reporting, order record keeping and clock synchronisation under MiFID II||Guidelines and Technical standards, MiFID - Secondary Markets||Final Report||PDF
|30/09/2016||2016/1412||Final Report on MAR Guidelines on commodity derivatives||Guidelines and Technical standards, Market Abuse, Market Integrity||Final Report||PDF
Article 7(5) of MAR provides that the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) shall issue guidelines to establish a non-exhaustive indicative list of information which is reasonably expected or is required to be disclosed in accordance with legal or regulatory provisions in Union or national law, market rules, contract, practice or custom, on the relevant commodity derivatives markets or spot markets as referred to in Article 7(1)(b) of MAR. This final report follows the Consultation Paper (CP) issued on March 2016.
Section 2 contains information on the background and mandate, while Section 3 sets out ESMA’s feedback to the CP responses in relation to the scope of the guidelines, the financial instruments and products covered by the examples of information relating directly and indirectly to commodity derivatives and information directly relating to a spot market contract. It also indicates whether and where ESMA has changed the guidelines following the consultation.
Annex I lists questions raised in the CP. Annex 2 provides the legislative mandate on the basis of which ESMA is issuing these guidelines. Annex 3 sets out ESMA’s view on the costs and benefits associated with these guidelines. Annex 4 contains the text of the guidelines.
The guidelines in Annex 4 will be translated into the official languages of the European Union and published on the ESMA’s website. Within 2 months of the issuance of the translations, each national competent authority will have to confirm whether it complies or intends to comply with those guidelines. In the event that a national competent authority does not comply or does not intend to comply, it will have to inform ESMA, stating its reasons. ESMA will publish the fact that a national competent authority does not comply or does not intend to comply with those guidelines.
|26/05/2016||2016/725||Draft RTS on indirect clearing arrangements under EMIR and MiFIR||Guidelines and Technical standards, Post Trading, MiFID - Secondary Markets||Final Report||PDF
|31/03/2016||2016/408||Decision to adopt a supervisory measure taking the form of a public notice and to impose a fine in accordance with Statement of Findings in accordance with Articles 64(5), 65, 67 and 73 of Regulation (EC) No 648/2012 EMIR||Trade Repositories||Decision||PDF
Decision to adopt a supervisory measure taking the form of a public notice and to impose a fine in accordance with Statement of Findings in accordance with Articles 64(5), 65, 67 and 73 of Regulation (EC) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on OTC derivatives, central counterparties and trade repositories
Public notice regarding negligent breach by DTCC Derivatives Repository Ltd of its legal obligation to ensure immediate access for regulators to data reported under EMIR
DTCC Derivatives Repository Ltd (‘DDRL’) is a trade repository registered in the European Union and is part of the DTCC group which includes a number of companies providing post-trading services to the global financial services industry. DDRL was registered by ESMA as a trade repository under Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 on OTC derivatives, central counterparties and trade repositories (‘EMIR’) on 7 November 2013. ESMA has responsibilities for the supervision and enforcement of provisions under EMIR concerning DDRL and other trade repositories registered in the EU.
In May 2014, ESMA’s supervisory team became aware of delays in providing regulators with access to data reported to DDRL under EMIR. Following further examination, the supervisory team formed the view that there were serious indications of the possible existence of facts liable to constitute one or more of the infringements listed in EMIR. The matter was accordingly referred to an independent investigation officer (the ‘IIO’). The IIO considered the evidence referred to him and conducted further investigations, before submitting his findings to ESMA’s Board of Supervisors (the ‘ESMA Board’).
Based on the findings of the IIO and the evidence put before it, the ESMA Board found on 23 March 2016 that an examination of the facts showed that DDRL had committed the following infringement under EMIR and had done so negligently. DDRL committed an infringement of EMIR by not allowing regulators and supervisors direct and immediate access to the details of derivatives contracts they need to fulfil their responsibilities and mandates.
|18/12/2015||2015/1887||Follow-up report on the development of the Best Practice Principles for Providers of Shareholder Voting Research and Analysis||Corporate Finance, Corporate Governance||Final Report||PDF
|21/05/2015||2015/856 Ann1||Investment-based crowdfunding- Insights from regulators in the EU||Innovation and Products||Final Report||PDF
|18/12/2014||2014/1560||Advice- Investment-based crowdfunding||Innovation and Products||Final Report||PDF
|Crowdfunding is a means of raising finance for projects from ‘the crowd’ often by means of an internet-based platform through which project owners ‘pitch’ their idea to potential backers, who are typically not professional investors. It takes many forms, not all of which involve the potential for a financial return. ESMA’s focus is on crowdfunding which involves investment, as distinct from donation, non-monetary reward or loan agreement.Crowdfunding is relatively young and business models are evolving. EU financial services rules were not designed with the industry in mind. Within investment-based crowdfunding a range of different operational structures are used so it is not straightforward to map crowdfunding platforms’ activities to those regulated under EU legislation. Member States and NCAs have been working out how to treat crowdfunding, with some dealing with issues case-by-case, some seeking to clarify how crowdfunding fits into existing rules and others introducing specific requirements.To assist NCAs and market participants, and to promote regulatory and supervisory convergence, ESMA has assessed typical investment-based crowdfunding business models and how they could evolve, risks typically involved for project owners, investors and the platforms themselves and the likely components of an appropriate regulatory regime. ESMA then prepared a detailed analysis of how the typical business models map across to the existing EU legislation, set out in sections 1 to 6 of this document.|
|06/07/2012||2012/387||Final report Guidelines on certain aspects of the MiFID suitability requirements||Guidelines and Technical standards, MiFID - Investor Protection||Final Report||PDF