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.

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.