On July 29, ESMA published an updated version of it Q&As on data reporting under the Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation (MiFIR) ((EU) 600/2014). There is one additional Q&A in section 5 about the date to use in field 24 (expiry date) of RTS 23 for financial instruments without a defined expiration date.
The updated Q&As can be found here.
On June 11, the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) published its final report (ESMA70-156-1035) following a call for evidence on frequent batch auctions, a type of periodic auction trading system for equity instruments under the MiFID II Directive (2014/65/EU) and the Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation (600/2014) (MiFIR). READ MORE
On February 18, the European Securities and Markets Authority (“ESMA“) published a press release stating that it has agreed to extend the prohibition of the marketing, distribution or sale of binary options to retail clients for a further three-month period from April 2. READ MORE
On January 22, the European Securities and Markets Authority (“ESMA“) published an updated version of its transitional transparency calculations (“TTC“) required under the MiFID II Directive (2014/65/EU) and the Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation (600/2014) (“MiFIR“).
The update relates to the TTC for commodity derivatives and affects only electricity derivatives.
Further information is contained in section E10 of ESMA’s frequently asked questions (“FAQ“) (ESMA50-164-677) on the TTC, which explains why the last TTC results for commodity derivatives, published on December 6, 2017, have been modified.
The transparency calculations can be found here and the FAQs, which were published on ESMA’s website, can be found here.
On January 4, the Council of the EU published the following notes from the Council Presidency to its Permanent Representatives Committee (“COREPER“) relating to the European Commission’s proposed Regulation and Directive establishing a new framework for prudential requirements for investment firms:
The previous compromise proposals were published in October 2018. The notes do not explain the changes that have been made in the latest revised versions. However, it appears that new text is marked in underlined bold and deletions are indicated in strikethrough.
European Securities and Markets Authority (“ESMA“) published a press release on November 9 stating that it has agreed to renew the prohibition of the marketing, distribution or sale of binary options to retail clients for a further three-month period from January 2, 2019.
ESMA published a decision notice on the prohibition in June, which has been in effect since July 2. In August, ESMA announced that it would extend the prohibition from October 2 for a further three-month period.
ESMA is extending the prohibition again as it considers that a significant investor protection concern related to the offer of binary options to retail clients continues to exist. The measure will be renewed on the same terms as the previous renewal decision.
ESMA intends to adopt the renewal measure in the coming weeks, following which it will publish an official notice on its website. The measure will then be published in the Official Journal of the EU.
Under the Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation (Regulation 600/2014) (“MiFIR“), ESMA can only introduce temporary intervention measures for a three-month period, following which the measures must be renewed or they automatically expire.
ESMA published the two decisions of its board of supervisors on October 11 (both dated September 26, 2018). The following decisions were made on the delegation to the ESMA chair of assessments of third-country trading venues and related to:
The decisions were regarding the treatment of transactions executed by EU investment firms on third-country trading venues, for post-trade transparency under MiFIR, and the treatment of positions held in contracts traded on those venues for the position limit regime under the MiFID II Directive. ESMA published opinions in December 2017 specifying that, subject to third-country trading venues meeting a set of criteria, investment firms trading on those trading venues are not required to make transactions public in the EU via an approved publication arrangement (“APA“).
In the decisions, the board of supervisors delegates responsibility for non-controversial assessments of third-country trading venues for these purposes to the ESMA chair. The decisions specify the criteria that the chair will use when assessing whether to consider a third-country entity as a trading venue for the purposes of Articles 20 and 21 of MiFIR or Article 57(4) of the MiFID II Directive. The board of supervisors retains its powers to perform controversial assessments of third-country trading venues.
On September 27, the European Securities and Market Authority (“ESMA“) published a press release announcing two new data completeness indicators for trading venues detailing the delivery of double volume cap (“DVC“) and bond liquidity data. READ MORE
The European Securities and Markets Authority (“ESMA“) published an updated version on November 14, 2017, of its Q&As on data reporting under the Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation (Regulation 600/2014) (“MiFIR“).
The updated version includes new answers (in section 15: transaction reporting) relating to:
The European Securities and Markets Authority (“ESMA“) published a press release on November 13, 2017 clarifying the application of the trading obligation for shares to trade certain instruments on-venue under the MiFID II Directive (2014/65/EU).
The press release contains a Q&A about the scope of the trading obligation where there is a chain of transmission of orders. ESMA explains that Article 23(1) of the Markets in Financial Instruments Regulation (Regulation 600/2014) (“MiFIR“) determines the scope of the trading obligation for shares admitted to trading on a regulated market or traded on a trading venue by requiring investment firms to ensure that trades they undertake in shares take place on a regulated market systematic internalizer, multilateral trading facility (MTF), or equivalent third-country venue.
Where there is a chain of transmission of orders concerning those shares, all EU investment firms that are part of the chain should ensure that the ultimate execution of the orders complies with the requirements under Article 23(1) of MiFIR.
The European Commission is preparing equivalence decisions for non-EU jurisdictions whose shares are traded systematically and frequently in the EU. However, the absence of an equivalence decision relating to a particular venue indicates that the Commission currently has no evidence that the EU trading in shares admitted to trading in that third country’s regulated markets can be considered as systematic, regular and frequent.
