REFINE YOUR SEARCH
Type of document
|Date||Ref.||Title||Section||Type||Download||Info||Summary||Related Documents||Translated versions|
|25/01/2016||2016/96||Slides from ESMA’s Open Hearing on validation and review of CRAs’ methodologies||Credit Rating Agencies||Consultation Paper||PDF
|17/09/2014||2014/850rev||Technical Advice in accordance with Article 39(b) 2 of the CRA Regulation||Credit Rating Agencies||Technical Advice||PDF
|This document has been revised to reflect an amended figure in Table 1 and two re-classifications of solicitation status in Table 2. Article 39b(2) of the CRA Regulation states that the European Commission shall adopt a report by end 2014 – after receiving ESMA’s technical advice – on the appropriateness of the development of a European creditworthiness assessment for sovereign debt. In its request for advice, the Commission asked ESMA to provide input on the issue of sovereign ratings and rating processes including an overview of the market for sovereign ratings, information on operational issues regarding sovereign ratings, information on sovereign rating processes as well as lessons drawn from ESMA’s supervisory experience. Contents For the purposes of this advice, ESMA provides its views based on the quantitative information contained in the CEREP public database and on information publicly disclosed by credit rating agencies registered with ESMA. Additionally, ESMA’s advice has been informed by its first supervisory activities regarding the rating process for sovereign ratings of CRAs which are active in the EU sovereign rating market. In accordance with the CRA Regulation, these supervisory activities did not address the content of the sovereign methodologies themselves but rather were concerned with the independence, transparency and governance of the sovereign rating process. Sovereign credit ratings play a crucial role from a credit market and financial stability perspective, not least because sovereign governments account for the largest group of borrowers in capital markets in terms of volume. In addition the crucial importance of these sovereign ratings can be amplified by the “cascade” effect sovereign ratings have on other asset classes via their presence as factors in other asset methodologies. In the EU the sovereign rating market is composed of nine CRAs established in nine different EU member states. These nine CRAs exhibit a high level of variation with respect to the type and number of sovereign ratings they assign. Sovereign credit ratings themselves can also be differentiated in various ways depending on such factors as local/foreign currency, duration of issuance, whether the rating applies to a specific issuer or issuance and if it is solicited or unsolicited. In addition ESMA would like to emphasise the following points which it believes to be important when considering the appropriateness of the development of a European creditworthiness assessment of sovereign debt.|
|11/11/2019||ESMA70-151-2649||Technical advice on comparable compliance||Post Trading||Technical Advice||PDF
|02/10/2015||2015/1472||Technical Advice on Competition, Choice and Conflicts of Interest in the CRA industry||Credit Rating Agencies||Technical Advice||PDF
|31/05/2013||2013/626||Technical advice on CRA regulatory equivalence on Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Hong Kong and Singapore||Credit Rating Agencies||Technical Advice||PDF
|The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has provided advice to the European Commission in respect of the equivalence between the EU regulatory regime for credit rating agencies and the respective legal and supervisory frameworks of Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, Hong Kong and Singapore. This is in response to the European Commission’s request for technical advice from ESMA on the equivalence of these jurisdictions legal and supervisory frameworks with the EU regulatory regime for credit rating agencies as set out in Regulation (EC) No. 1060/2009 of the European Parliament and the Council on credit rating agencies. The European Commission has already published equivalence decisions on US, Canada and Australia, on 9 October 2012, and on Japan, 28 October 2010. Regarding compliance with the EU requirements on endorsement, ESMA has already indicated that it considers the legal and regulatory regime for CRAs supervision of the following countries as “as stringent as” the EU requirements: 15 March 2012, Hong Kong and Singapore; 18 April 2012, Argentina and Mexico; 27 April 2012, Brazil.|
|18/04/2012||2012/259||Technical advice on CRA regulatory equivalence- US, Canada and Australia||Credit Rating Agencies||Technical Advice||PDF
|On 12 June 2009 the European Commission requested CESR, now ESMA, to provide its technical advice on the equivalence between the legal and supervisory framework of Japan, The United States, and Canada with the EU regulatory regime for credit rating agencies. (Regulation (EC) No. 1060/2009 of the European Parliament and the Council on credit rating agencies ). On 17 November 2009, the Commission also requested CESR to provide its technical advice on Australia. On 28 September 2010, the European Commission published an equivalence decision on Japan. With regard to the compliance with the EU requirements on endorsement, ESMA had already indicated that it considers the legal and regulatory regime for CRAs supervision of the following countries as “as stringent as” the EU requirements: - On 22 December 2011, Japan and Australia; - On 15 March 2012, US, Canada, Hong Kong and Singapore. This report sets out ESMA’s advice to the European Commission in respect of the equivalence between the US (Part I), Canada (Part II) and Australia (Part III) respective legal and supervisory frameworks and the EU regulatory regime for credit rating agencies.|
|02/10/2015||2015/1471||Technical Advice on Reducing Sole and Mechanistic Reliance on Credit Ratings||Credit Rating Agencies||Technical Advice||PDF
|18/07/2019||ESMA33-9-321||Technical Advice on Sustainability Considerations in the Credit Rating Market||Credit Rating Agencies||Technical Advice||PDF
|21/11/2013||2013/1703||Technical Advice on the feasibility of a network of small and medium-sized CRAs||Credit Rating Agencies||Technical Advice||PDF
|The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) has finalised its Technical Advice to the European Commission on the feasibility of a network of small and medium sized credit rating agencies in order to increase competition in the market. The technical advice provides quantitative and qualitative information on small and medium-sized CRAs in the EU, based on the analysis of the periodic reporting obligations of CRAs to ESMA via the central repository CEREP. It also covers some information regarding possible barriers to entry for companies that wish to conduct rating activity in the EU. Contents The main findings of the advice are: • The 22 registered CRAs are established in 11 EU Member States; • None of the small and medium-sized CRAs cover the whole range of the five rating classes considered (corporates (non-financial), financials, insurance, sovereign and public finance, and structured finance). Whilst DBRS and BCRA cover four and three classes respectively, all the remaining small and medium-sized CRAs cover one or two rating classes only. This contrasts with Fitch, Moody’s and S&P that issue ratings for all five possible rating classes; • Small and medium-sized CRAs are mainly active in issuing corporate ratings. Within this rating type, four small and medium-sized CRAs issue a relatively high number of corporate ratings (CERVED and ICAP) or financial and insurance ratings (GBB and AM Best); • Only 6 of the small and medium-sized CRAs provide sovereign ratings (BCRA, Capital Intelligence, DBRS, European Rating, Feri Euro Rating (Feri) and Japan Credit Rating Agency (JCR)), whilst only one (DBRS) issues structured finance ratings; • As of end 2012 the majority of small and medium-sized CRAs issued solicited ratings only, whilst eight issued unsolicited ratings only. Three small and medium-sized CRAs (DBRS, JCR, and Scope) issued both solicited and unsolicited ratings, as was the case also for Fitch, Moody’s and S&P; • As regards geographical coverage of the small and medium-sized CRAs 6 out of 19 (AM Best, Capital Intelligence, Creditreform, DBRS, JCR and Scope) have a coverage that goes beyond one Member State when referring to corporate ratings. As regards the sovereign ratings type, three of the small and medium-sized CRAs cover more than one Member State (Capital Intelligence, Feri and JCR). In both of these ratings types, Fitch, Moody’s and S&P’s rating activities cover all Member States of the EU; • In 2013, 96% of the supervisory fees were paid by S&P, Moody’s, and Fitch, while their turnover from rating and ancillary services was equal to 88% of the total turnover of the 20 registered and certified CRAs in 2012: and • As of July 2013, 14 out of 19 small and medium-sized CRAs have been granted at least one of the regulatory exemptions provided for in the CRA Regulation. Finally, and with reference to the current situation in the segment of small and medium-sized CRAs, ESMA is not aware of any private networks of small and medium-sized CRAs currently in place.|
|03/09/2013||2013/1159||Technical advice on third country regulatory equivalence under EMIR – Australia||Post Trading||Technical Advice||PDF
|03/09/2013||2013/1160||Technical advice on third country regulatory equivalence under EMIR – Hong Kong||Post Trading||Technical Advice||PDF
|03/09/2013||2013/1158||Technical advice on third country regulatory equivalence under EMIR – Japan||Post Trading||Technical Advice||PDF
|03/09/2013||2013/1161||Technical advice on third country regulatory equivalence under EMIR – Singapore||Post Trading||Technical Advice||PDF
|03/09/2013||2013/1162||Technical advice on third country regulatory equivalence under EMIR – Switzerland||Post Trading||Technical Advice||PDF
|03/09/2013||2013/1157||Technical advice on third country regulatory equivalence under EMIR – US||Post Trading||Technical Advice||PDF
|19/12/2016||2016/1672||Technical advice to the Commission on fees for TRs under SFTR and on certain amendments of for fees under EMIR||Post Trading||Consultation Paper||PDF
Reasons for publication
On 15 January 2016 the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) received a formal request from the European Commission (Commission) to provide technical advice to assist the Commission in formulating a Regulation on fees for Trade Repositories (TRs) under SFTR by a delegated act.
The present report contains nine sections. Section 1 refers to the Executive Summary of the report. Section 2 explains the background to our proposals. Section 3 outlines the ESMA’s expected costs. Section 4 establishes the general approach for the determination of fees under EMIR and SFTR. Section 5 explains how ESMA will manage surpluses and deficits under EMIR and SFTR. Section 6 points out the rationale and computation of TRs fees for registration and extension of registration under SFTR. Sections 7 and 8 present the supervision fees under EMIR and SFTR and recognition fees under SFTR. Section 9 refers to the conditions of payment and reimbursement and, finally, Section 10 addresses the instances where delegation to NCAs takes place. Annex I contains the summary of the questions posed by ESMA and Annex II includes the Commission’s mandate to ESMA.
The amendments to fees under EMIR that are consulted in this document are required in order to ensure level –playing field with the ESMA’s fees to TRs under SFTR.
ESMA will consider the feedback it receives to this consultation in Q1 2017 and expects to publish and submit a final report of the technical advice to the European Commission for endorsement by end of Q1/beginning of Q2 of 2017.
|19/12/2014||2014/1569||Technical Advice to the Commission on MiFID II and MiFIR||MiFID - Investor Protection, MiFID - Secondary Markets||Technical Advice||PDF
|Reasons for publication The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) received a formal request (mandate) from the European Commission (Commission) on 23 April 2014 to provide technical advice to assist the Commission on the possible content of the delegated acts required by several provisions of Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID II) and the Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation (MiFIR). The mandate focuses on technical issues which follow from MiFID II and MiFIR and is available on the European Commission website (here). ESMA was required to provide technical advice by no later than six months after the entry into force of MiFID II and MiFIR (2 July 2014). Contents This final report follows the same structure as the Consultation Paper (CP) published by ESMA on 22 May 2014 which is: (1) Introduction, (2) Investor protection, (3) Transparency, (4) Data publication, (5) Micro-structural issues, (6) Requirements applying on and to trading venues, (7) Commodity derivatives and (8) Portfolio compression. This paper also contains summaries of responses to the CP received by ESMA. The rationale of those items covered already in the CP for which no relevant changes have been introduced, is not developed again in this Final Report. ESMA recommends, therefore, to read this report together with the CP published on 22 May 2014 to have a complete vision of the rationale for ESMA’s technical advice. Next steps Delegated acts should be adopted by the Commission so that they enter into application by 30 months following the entry into force of the Directive and Regulation, taking into account the right of the European Parliament and Council to object to a delegated act within 3 months (which can be extended by a further 3 months).|
|24/01/2014||2013/1965||Technical Advice to the Commission on procedural rules to impose fines and periodic penalty payments to Trade Repositories||Post Trading||Technical Advice||PDF
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.
|19/12/2013||2013/1953||Technical Advice to the European Commission on the equivalence between the Argentinean regulatory and supervisory framework and the EU regulatory regime for CRAs||Credit Rating Agencies||Technical Advice||PDF
|01/04/2020||ESMA70-156-2287||Technical Advice to the European Commission on weekly position reports under MiFID II||MiFID - Secondary Markets, Supervisory convergence||Technical Advice||PDF