Is our standing of Article 6 of the RTS correct, that an institution should submit more than one intermediate report for a major ICT-incident, if that incident continues over the 72 hours threshold for the initial intermediate report?
Art. 6 states that an institution has to submit a report in case that after 72 hours the incident is not resolved or when the incident is resolved. Our understanding is that the "or" means that an institute has to submit more than one report in case that the incident is resolved after more than 72 hours.

What is the latest date on which the statement, under Article 63, Paragraph 1 of the Delegated Regulation EU 2017/565, for the respective quarter should be sent by the investment firm and how to determine this date?

May crypto-asset service providers (CASPs) designate persons or entities to provide crypto-asset services on their behalf as agents (similarly to the tied agent regime under MiFID II), where such person or entity is not an authorised CASP?

If a structured deposit has only one variable affecting the return received on maturity (the agreed term), and has an exit fee that is either a fixed sum, a fixed sum for each month remaining until maturity (the agreed term) or a percentage of the original sum invested, would it still be considered a non-complex financial instrument, in accordance with point (v) of Article 25(4)(a) of MiFID II, if the client is entitled to receive the positive market value of the underlying option, if any, if the client exits prematurely, e.g. in the event of unforeseen liquidity requirement? If the structured deposit is exited prematurely, and not on the agreed upon maturity date, the market value of the underlying option will depend on more than one variable, i.e. the underlying index, the volatility of the index, time to maturity.

The cumulative effect of the costs on the return shall show “anticipated spikes and fluctuations of the costs”; does that also apply to the ex-post disclosure of the cumulative effect of the costs on the return?