Featured Product

    ESAs Respond to Proposal to Review Non-Financial Reporting Directive

    June 11, 2020

    ESAs published their individual responses, along with a joint letter, to the EC consultation on the review of Non-Financial Reporting Directive (NFRD). The EC consultation aimed to collect the stakeholder views on possible revisions to the provisions of the NFRD. The principal focus of this consultation, the comment period for which ended on June 11, 2020, was on the possible options for such revisions. EBA welcomes this consultation and agrees with the need to revise the NFRD in an effort to meet the demand for relevant, reliable and, comparable company disclosures on non-financial matters. In addition, ESAs highlight the need to increase standardization by setting out mandatory requirements and to expand the scope of companies covered by the NFRD, in a proportionate way.

    The three ESAs (EBA, EIOPA, and ESMA) have submitted a joint letter from their Chairs, highlighting certain key messages, which are of particular importance for the future of the non-financial reporting regime in Europe. ESAs agree that there is a need to revise the NFRD, as the demand for relevant, reliable, and comparable company disclosure on non-financial matters goes well beyond the current legislative requirements. A central element of such a revision would be to introduce a higher level of standardization of the disclosure requirements, which companies must apply when preparing their non-financial information. In the short term, it is necessary to pursue a European standardization, which should, however, be compatible with the aim of achieving international standardization in the medium term. ESAs consider it would be important to include the detailed disclosure standards in regulatory or implementing technical standards, setting out mandatory, rather than voluntary, requirements. The absence of mandatory reporting requirements, and the resulting application of a variety of national, regional, and global disclosure frameworks, lowers the comparability between companies’ disclosures and impedes assurance regarding those disclosures. Introducing mandatory disclosure standards would be the best way to promote a change toward more relevant, reliable, and comparable disclosures.

    ESAs suggest that the development of regulatory or implementing technical standards should be placed with a public body. In that context, ESAs could play a leading role in the necessary standard-setting work, having each received strengthened legislative mandates on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) matters in the recent ESA review. The ESAs are already tasked with developing regulatory and implementing technical standards on disclosure of sustainability‐related topics under their remits and would as such ensure the necessary consistency across the different disclosure standards in the sustainable finance area. In addition, ESAs would contribute to a consistent application of the disclosure standards thanks to the ability to issue guidelines, opinions, and Q&As. Furthermore, the ESAs would leverage on a sound due process based on extensive stakeholder engagement via public consultations, regular interactions with the statutory stakeholder groups and ad-hoc outreach activities as well as cooperation with the International Platform for Sustainable Finance and with other public authorities such as the European Environmental Agency and the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights.

    Further to standardization, the scope of companies to be covered is another central aspect of the NFRD revision. ESAs suggest that now would be a suitable time to expand the scope to create transparency on non-financial matters to a larger group of companies, thus also providing information on a wider scale to facilitate financial market participants in discharging their disclosure obligations under the Disclosure Regulation. The expansion should, however, be done in a proportionate way to avoid undue administrative burden on smaller companies and reflect the need to consider a simplified disclosure standard for SMEs. Finally, ESAs highlight the importance of ensuring consistency of the NFRD with other pieces of legislation in the sustainable finance area, notably the Disclosure Regulation, the Taxonomy Regulation, and the prudential disclosure requirements foreseen, for example, in the CRR for credit institutions. This is relevant both when revising the NFRD and when developing the related Level 2 disclosure standards.

     

    Related Links

    Keywords: Europe, EU, Banking, Insurance, Securities, Non-Financial Reporting, Reporting, Reporting, Disclosures, CRR, Climate Change Risk, ESG, Sustainable Finance, Proportionality, NFRD, ESAs, EBA, ESMA, EIOPA

    Featured Experts
    Related Articles
    News

    EBA Analyzes Impact of Unwind Mechanism of Liquidity Coverage Ratio

    EBA published a report analyzing the impact of the unwind mechanism of the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR) for a sample of European banks over a three-year period, from the end of 2016 to the first quarter of 2020.

    November 19, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    ECB Outlines Views on Possible Changes to AnaCredit Rule and TLTROs

    In response to questions from a member of the European Parliament, the ECB President Christine Lagarde issued a letter clarifying the possibility of amending the AnaCredit Regulation and making targeted longer-term refinancing operations (TLTROs) dependent on the climate-related impact of bank loans.

    November 19, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    IASB Begins First Phase of Post-Implementation Review of IFRS 9

    IASB started the post-implementation review of the classification and measurement requirements in IFRS 9 on financial instruments and added the review as a project to its work plan.

    November 18, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    FSB Report Examines Progress in Resolvability of Systemic Institutions

    FSB published a report that examines progress in implementing policy measures to enhance the resolvability of systemically important financial institutions.

    November 18, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EBA Benchmarks National Insolvency Frameworks Across EU

    EBA published a report on the benchmarking of national loan enforcement frameworks across 27 EU member states, in response to the call for advice from EC.

    November 18, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    FSB Reports Assess Impact of Pandemic on Financial Stability

    FSB published a letter from its Chair Randal K. Quarles, along with two reports exploring various aspects of the market turmoil resulting from the COVID-19 event.

    November 17, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    RBNZ Consults on Implementation of Capital Review Changes

    RBNZ launched a consultation on the details for implementing the final Capital Review decisions announced in December 2019.

    November 17, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    IASB Announces Andreas Barckow as the New Chair from July 2021

    The Trustees of the IFRS Foundation, which are responsible for the governance and oversight of IASB, have announced the appointment of Dr. Andreas Barckow as the IASB Chair, effective July 2021.

    November 17, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    HKMA Consults on Capital Rules for Bank Equity Investments in Funds

    HKMA issued a letter to consult the banking industry on a full set of proposed draft amendments to the Banking (Capital) Rules for implementing the Basel standard on capital requirements for banks’ equity investments in funds in Hong Kong.

    November 17, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    ESRB Supports Extension of Macro-Prudential Measure by Swedish FSA

    ESRB published an opinion assessing the decision of Swedish Financial Supervisory Authority (FSA) to extend the application period of a stricter measure for residential mortgage lending, in accordance with Article 458 of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR).

    November 17, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    RESULTS 1 - 10 OF 6153