On 14 January 2013 ESMA received a formal request from the European Commission (the Commission) to provide technical advice to assist the Commission in formulating a Regulation on fees for Trade Repositories (TRs) by a delegated act. In order to deliver its advice to the Commission, ESMA consulted market participants regarding the proposed fee structures for registration, supervision and recognition of TRs. Respondents to this consultation were encouraged to provide the relevant data to support their arguments or proposals.Given the time period established for providing this advice, ESMA was compelled to require responses to the consultation within a short timeframe. In total, ESMA received 8 responses to the consultation. Non-confidential responses can be found on ESMA’s website. ESMA would like to thank respondents for providing input given the short period ESMA was able to consult for. This document sets out a summary of the responses received by ESMA regarding the fee structure for registration, supervision and recognition of TRs in the EU and includes ESMA’s final technical advice to the Commission on the future Regulation on fees for TRs which will be adopted by the Commission in the form of a delegated act. It is worth noting that all major ESMA proposals were supported by respondents and where comments were received ESMA has considered how best to adjust the original proposals. Next steps ESMA will follow-up on this work with the Commission as they work on the adoption of the Commission delegated regulation on fees for TRs.

Reasons for publication On 29 of April 2013 ESMA received a formal request from the European Commission (the Commission) to provide technical advice to assist the Commission in formulating procedural rules to impose fines and periodic penalty payments to trade repositories (TRs) by delegated act. In order to deliver its advice to the Commission, ESMA consulted market participants regarding the procedural rules to impose fines and periodic penalty payments to TRs. Respondents to the consultation were encouraged to provide the relevant information in support of their arguments or proposals. ESMA published the consultation on 18 October 2013. The market participants could provide their comments until 15 November 2013. In total ESMA received two responses to the consultation. The respondents have required confidential treatment for their input. ESMA would like to thank respondents for providing input. Contents This document sets out a summary of the responses received by ESMA regarding the procedural rules to impose fines and periodic penalty payments to TRs and includes ESMA’s final technical advice to the Commission on the future Regulation on the procedural rules to impose fines and periodic penalty payments to TRs which will be adopted by the Commission in the form of a delegated act. It is worth noting that all major ESMA proposals were supported by respondents and where comments were received ESMA has considered them carefully. Next steps ESMA will follow-up on this work with the Commission towards the adoption of the Commission delegated regulation on procedural rules to impose fines and periodic penalty payments to TRs.

ESMA delivers second set of advice on EMIR equivalence Following its technical advice published on 9 September 2013, the European Securities and Market Authority (ESMA) has published a supplement to its advice to the European Commission on the equivalence of the regulatory regime for central counterparties (CCPs) of Japan with the European Markets Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR). This supplement to the September 2013 Final report sets out ESMA’s advice to the European Commission is in respect of the equivalence between the Japanese regulatory regime for commodity CCPs and the regulatory regime for CCPs under EMIR. ESMA proposes conditional equivalence As for ESMA’s advice to the Commission in respect of Japan for CCPs which clear transactions relating to securities, currencies, interest rates, credit, weather, GDP and other indices, ESMA considers that the Japanese regulatory regime for commodity CCPs contains legal provisions and involves supervision and enforcement similar to that of EMIR. The Commission is expected to use ESMA’s technical advice to prepare possible equivalence decisions. Where it adopts such a decision, certain provisions of EMIR may be disapplied in favour of equivalent third-country rules. In particular, ESMA may recognise within the EU a CCP which is authorised outside the EU. The different pieces of advice are available on ESMA’s website.

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.