REFINE YOUR SEARCH
Type of document
|Date||Ref.||Title||Section||Type||Download||Info||Summary||Related Documents||Translated versions|
|18/11/2021||ESMA35-36-2418||Draft Guidelines on common procedures and methodologies for the supervisory review and evaluation process (SREP) under IFD||MiFID - Investor Protection||Consultation Paper||PDF
|24/03/2015||2015/610||Draft guidelines on complex debt instruments and structured deposits||MiFID - Investor Protection||Consultation Paper||PDF
|Who should read this paper This paper is primarily of interest to competent authorities and firms that are subject to MiFID, in particular, investment firms and credit institutions performing investment services and activities. This paper is also important for trade associations, investors, and consumer groups, because the guidelines seek to implement enhanced provisions to ensure investor protection with potential impacts for anyone engaged in dealing with or processing of financial instruments. ESMA invites comments on all matters in this paper and in particular on the specific questions summarised in Annex 1. Comments are most helpful if they:• respond to the question stated;• indicate the specific question to which the comment relates;• contain a clear rationale; and• describe any alternatives ESMA should consider. ESMA will consider all comments received by 15 June 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 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.|
|03/06/2020||ESMA50-164-3342||Draft Guidelines on Outsourcing to Cloud Service Providers||Innovation and Products||Consultation Paper||PDF
|31/07/2020||ESMA35-43-2464 TC||Draft joint ESMA and EBA Guidelines on the assessment of the suitability of members of the management body and key function holders||MiFID - Investor Protection||Consultation Paper||PDF
|31/07/2020||ESMA35-43-2464||Draft joint ESMA and EBA Guidelines on the assessment of the suitability of members of the management body and key function holders||MiFID - Investor Protection||Consultation Paper||PDF
|09/07/2013||2013/918||Draft Regulatory Technical Standards on information requirements for assessment of acquisitions and increases in holdings in investment firms (MiFID)||MiFID - Investor Protection||Consultation Paper||PDF
|Executive summary Reasons for publication Article 10b(4) of the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID ) requires Member States to make publicly available the information necessary to carry out the assessment of a proposed acquirer of an investment firm. This information must be provided at the time of the initial notification. This information is aimed at ensuring that competent authorities are provided with adequate and proportionate information in order to assess the acquisition. Article 10a of MiFID, as amended by Article 6(4) of the Omnibus Directive , requires ESMA to draft regulatory technical standards (RTS) to establish an exhaustive list of information referred to in Article 10b(4) of MiFID. ESMA is required to submit the draft RTS to the European Commission (Commission) by 1 January 2014. Contents The proposed RTS set out in this Consultation Paper (CP) are based on the CEBS, CESR and CEIOPS ‘Guidelines for the prudential assessment of acquisitions and increases in holdings in the financial sector required by Directive 2007/44/EC’ (3L3 Guidelines), as well as the report issued by the Commission (in February 2013) to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee, and the Committee of Regions on the application of Directive on acquisitions and increase of holdings in the financial sector. Section II explains the background to the proposals; Section III describes the proposals on the exhaustive list of information to be included by proposed acquirers in their notification. Annex I sets out the legislative mandate to develop draft RTS; Annex II sets out the cost-benefit analysis related to the draft RTS; Annex III lists the questions contained in this CP; and Annex IV sets out the full text of the draft RTS. Next steps ESMA will consider the responses it receives to this CP in Q4, and will finalise the draft RTS for submission to the Commission by 1 January 2014 for endorsement.|
|21/03/2014||2014/300||Draft Regulatory Technical Standards on major shareholdings and indicative list of financial instruments subject to notification requirements under the revised Transparency Directive||Corporate Disclosure, Transparency||Consultation Paper||PDF
|The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has launched a consultation on draft Regulatory Technical Standards (RTS) under the revised Transparency Directive relating to the notification of major shareholdings and the indicative list of financial instruments subject to notification requirements. The consultation runs until 30 May 2014. The revised Transparency Directive 2013/50/EC (TD) was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 6 November 2013 and entered into force on 27 November 2013. ESMA is required to submit certain draft Regulatory Technical Standards (RTSs) on major shareholdings (for details on each RTS, see the relevant section) to the European Commission (Commission or EC) by 27 November 2014. According to Articles 10 and 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing ESMA (ESMA Regulation), ESMA must conduct a public consultation before submitting draft RTSs to the Commission. This Consultation Paper (CP) therefore seeks stakeholders’ views on proposals for such RTSs. The input from stakeholders will help ESMA finalise the draft RTSs. Respondents to this CP are encouraged to consider the costs and benefits that the draft RTSs would imply and provide the relevant data to support their arguments or proposals. The CP also seeks stakeholders’ views on the proposed content of an indicative list of financial instru-ments referenced to shares and with economic effect similar to holding shares and entitlements to acquire shares. To respond|
|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.|
|31/01/2020||ESMA35-43-2131||Draft technical standards on the provision of investment services and activities in the Union by third-country firms under MiFID II and MiFIR||MiFID - Investor Protection||Consultation Paper||PDF
|24/01/2012||2012/30||Draft technical standards on the Regulation (EU) xxxx/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on short selling and certain aspects of credit default swaps||Short Selling||Consultation Paper||PDF
|ESMA will consider the feedback it received to this consultation in February/March 2012 and expects to publish a final report and submission of the draft technical standards to the European Commission by 31 March 2012 for endorsement.|
|11/01/2016||2016/28||Emergency measure by the Greek HCMC under Section 1 of Chapter V of Regulation (EU) No 236/2012 on short selling and certain aspects of credit default swaps||Market Integrity, Short Selling||Opinion||PDF
Emergency measure by the Greek HCMC under Section 1 of Chapter V of Regulation (EU) No 236/2012 on short selling and certain aspects of credit default swaps
II.Previous measures adopted by the Hellenic Capital Market Commission (HCMC)
On the adverse events or developments
ESMA considers that adverse developments which constitute a serious threat to market confidence in Greece could be understood as having considerably decreased with the successful completion of the share capital increase of Attica bank as announced by that bank on the 30th December 2015. Attica Bank has been the last of the five banks to undertake the re-capitalisation process envisaged under Greek law. It represented less than 1 % of the total market capitalisation of the 5 re-capitalised banks before the Attica capital increase and less than 7% after the increase. It also stands for a very small fraction of the Greek banking sector. Not surprisingly, and unlike the other banks mentioned in paragraph 10 above, Attica Bank is not a significant supervised entity under the direct supervision of the ECB.
Although acknowledging that the successful and full conclusion of all the Greek banks’ re-capitalisation is important in order to safeguard the stability of the financial system as a whole and of the Greek capital market, as well as the protection of investors, ESMA considers that given that the capital increase of Attica Bank is agreed, priced, subscribed and publicly announced on the 30th of December 2015, the threat to the financial stability of the bank, and more widely to the financial stability of the Greek financial market, is much less acute than in December 2015.
ESMA notes that the trading of the newly issued shares further to the completed capital increase has not started yet and thus there is a risk of increased volatility in the relevant market and that the confidence in the concerned bank could be affected if price movements were extreme. However, the evolution of the stock price of Attica Bank during the last month does not point towards, on average, a significant downward pressure on the prices. The volatility observed on Attica Bank is relative to the currently volatile stock markets in the EU.
In the trading figures of Attica Bank shares since late November 2015, it is evident that the trading volumes have reduced progressively but the price of the stock has not suffered from a downward price spiral. Only in one occasion (10 December2015) the stock price fell more than 10% in a single session. In general, looking at the last 30 trading sessions, the price has increased by 37%. In the last 10 trading sessions, the price has moved in an overall range (counting intraday minimum and maximum values) of 13% around the average closing price of the period. In terms of closing prices, the maximum fluctuation has been -3,97% since 22 December (observed on January 7 2016). Putting these moves in the context of quite volatile EU stock markets, linked to the international market trends, it is questionable whether the volatility of the stock price of Attica Bank could be qualified as extreme or even high. Obviously, one could argue that the price has found a support thanks, among other things, to the existing ban on short sales. While it is extremely difficult to isolate the price effect of the short selling ban with current data, it is ESMA’s view that, all in all, the pricing history of the stock does not give the impression of a highly fragile situation.
The main risk related with extreme volatility in a re-capitalisation exercise arises when the issuance price of the new shares and the allotment of the volume to be subscribed is not yet complete. In that scenario, significant (downward) price movements can dis-incentivise the investors that were considering to subscribe to new shares or can affect the issuance price in a manner that the re-capitalisation (in terms of the effective amount of funds to be received by the bank) can be put at risk. Once the pricing and the subscription are firm, price moves have a much lower impact on the success prospects of a re-capitalisation. They mainly affect the willingness of the new investors to hold their new shares or to sell them when the new shares start to trade. But the effects of this process on the financial stability of the entity are much less direct than when the volatility scenario precedes the establishment of the price and of the allotment of the capital increase. The latter was the prevalent scenario in most of the other occasions in which the measures of the HCMC was extended and on which ESMA issued positive opinions in the past. In ESMA’s opinion, such scenarios should be distinguished from the case at hand.
The question of whether the risk of falling prices on Attica Bank shares (which has not yet been observed) would endanger the orderly functioning of the whole Greek financial market and its integrity is not evident to ESMA, due to the small size of this particular institution and to the fact that the only pending element is the formal admission to trading of the new shares.
On the appropriateness and proportionality of the proposed measure
ESMA considers that the renewal of the emergency measure limited to the shares of Attica Bank is not appropriate and proportionate to address the above mentioned potential threat stemming from the volatility of the price of the market of Attica Bank shares. Given that the share capital increase of Attica Bank is firm and definitive as well as publicly known, ESMA considers that the prohibition of short sales in the shares of Attica Bank admitted to trading on the Athens Exchange will only serve the purpose of assisting in reducing market volatility until the final admission of the new shares and the first days of their trading. While this may be a positive goal, ESMA notes that the situation of Attica Bank is very different from the ones of the other Greek banks both in terms of quantitative significance with respect to financial stability (much smaller in the case of Attica Bank) and in terms of the timing in the process of re-capitalisation (given that only the final listing of the new shares is pending, as opposed to the fixing of the issuance price and the allotment of the subscriptions).
ESMA is thus of the view that there are alternative tools and measures, including those provided by Article 23 of the Short Selling Regulation consisting in a short term restriction of short selling in case of a significant fall in price, to address extreme market volatility concerns, should this volatility materialise in the coming days and more specifically risks of a downward spiral of the price of Attica shares. Those measures would be in ESMA’s opinion more appropriate and proportionate to address the risks that would arise from that situation than a total ban on short sales.
On the duration of the proposed measure
Considering the above negative opinion on the appropriateness and proportionality of the measure, ESMA is not further assessing the duration of the proposed renewal.
|29/01/2013||2013/149||Emergency measure by the Greek HCMC under Section 1 of Chapter V of Regulation No 236/2012 on short selling and certain aspects of credit default swaps||Short Selling||Opinion||PDF
|30/04/2013||2013/542||Emergency measure by the Greek HCMC under Section 1 of Chapter V of Regulation No 236/2012 on short selling and certain aspects of credit default swaps||Short Selling, Market Integrity||Opinion||PDF
|01/07/2015||2015/1015||ESMA assessment of Israeli laws and regulations on prospectuses||Corporate Disclosure||Opinion||PDF
|25/09/2015||2015/1463||ESMA Consultation Paper on ESEF||Corporate Disclosure, European Single Electronic Format, Transparency||Consultation Paper||PDF
|13/02/2014||2014/175||ESMA Guidelines on Alternative Performance Measures||Corporate Disclosure, IFRS Supervisory Convergence||Consultation Paper||PDF
Reasons for publication In October 2005, the Committee of European Securities Regulators (CESR), ESMA’s predecessor body, published a Recommendation on Alternative Performance Measures (“CESR Recommendation” CESR/05-178b). The CESR Recommendation was issued mainly in order to reinforce the objectives of Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 July 2002 on the application of international accounting standards. Given the CESR Recommendation has now been in force for more than 8 years, ESMA has decided to review it with the objective of strengthening the principles contained in it. ESMA now plans to re-issue the principles as ESMA [draft] guidelines thus ensuring that issuers and NCAs will make every effort to com-ply with them. Contents ESMA is issuing this Consultation Paper (CP) to inform market participants about the background to its decision to revise the CESR Recommendation and seek their views on such revision. Section II “Introduction” indicates the reasons for which ESMA believes that these [draft] guidelines on APMs should be issued. Section III “Scope and purpose of the [draft] guidelines” indicates when the [draft] guidelines apply and how these [draft] guidelines interact with financial statements. Section IV “Compliance and reporting obligations” describes how issuers and NCAs should comply with the [draft] guidelines. Section V “[Draft] Guidelines on APMs (Background)” describes the rationale followed in preparing the [draft] guidelines and explanations on the principles provided, which are included in full in Annex III. ESMA would appreciate any comments and answers from stakeholders on the questions contained in the consultation paper. For your convenience, the questions are summarised in annex II. Next steps ESMA will consider the feedback it receives to this consultation in 2014 and expects to publish final guide-lines in the fourth quarter of 2014.
|19/09/2019||ESMA70-155-8524||ESMA Opinion CNMV revised Accepted Market Practice||Market Abuse, Market Integrity||Opinion||PDF
|28/07/2020||ESMA22-105-1208||ESMA Opinion on 2018 Discharge Report of EP||Corporate Information||Opinion||PDF
|27/05/2021||ESMA22-105-1363||ESMA OPINION ON 2019 DISCHARGE REPORT OF EP||Board of Supervisors, Corporate Information||Opinion||PDF
|25/07/2022||ESMA24-436-1333||ESMA Opinion on 2020 Discharge Report||Board of Supervisors, Corporate Information||Opinion||PDF