The ESMA Chair Steven Maijoor delivered the opening remarks at the BVI 2018 Annual Reception in Brussels. In his opening remarks, he discussed Brexit and the issue around ESMA's work on delegation; costs and charges associated with the second Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID II) and oackaged retail investment and insurance-based products (PRIIPs); and ESMA review.
He mentioned the decision of the UK to leave EU and the Single Market has triggered concerns about the risk of regulatory and supervisory arbitrage among the EU27 member states. The potential for a significant shift of entities and activities from the UK has also led to the member states seeking to attract this business. "Both the UCITS Directive and the AIFMD explicitly require there to be enough substance in the entity established in the home member state. ... financial centers in the EU27 should be free to compete based on the particular strengths they can offer relocating firms, like speed and efficiency, but in all cases the EU rulebook should be consistently applied. Otherwise, there could be insufficient substance in the EU27, which may pose risks to ESMA achieving its stability and investor protection mandates." Additionally, speaking about the disclosure of transaction costs for PRIIPs, Mr. Maijoor said "it is only fair that investors are fully informed about something that can have a material impact on their returns, especially when the impact can vary significantly across different products... . PRIIPs and MiFID II have embedded the idea that no cost, whether explicit or implicit, should escape disclosure. On the methodology for calculation, we are aware of the vocal reactions of stakeholders and the extensive coverage in the media of supposed flaws. What I would say to you is that we are ready and willing to look at this issue but that we need to see concrete evidence to assess whether these flaws are real. In the absence of any such evidence, we maintain our view that the methodology is sound and that negative transaction cost figures should be extremely rare."
The ESMA Chair emphasized that a strong Capital Markets Union project must be accompanied by strong EU-wide and national supervision. He added that last September's EC proposal on the review of ESAs "clearly delivers on these expectations." With a more independent funding base, ESMA would be able to expand its supervisory convergence activities, which ultimately benefits the Capital Markets Union project, consumers, and the financial industry. Moreover, Board of Supervisors of ESMA would retain the budget approval powers and the member states would continue to co-decide the general EU Multi-Annual Financial Framework, which also applies to ESMA. "The last aspect I want to mention in the context of the ESAs review are ESMA’s level 3 measures. People say 'don’t fix what is not broken' and this, in my opinion, applies to the process governing our guidelines and Q&As." ESMA has mostly used these supervisory convergence tools on the request of individual national regulators and industry stakeholders seeking more guidance. "While we consult extensively on draft guidelines, the Q&As are reserved for more technical issues and clearly better suited for providing faster responses. In my view there is no need to change the governance principles around these supervisory convergence tools ... . For this reason, last month, we launched a dedicated stakeholder relations survey, which will remain open until the end of March. I would appreciate receiving your feedback on this important matter."
Keywords: Europe, EU, Securities, Brexit, Regulatory Arbitrage, Review of ESAs, Capital Markets Union, ESMA
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.
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.
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.
FSB published a report that examines progress in implementing policy measures to enhance the resolvability of systemically important financial institutions.
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.
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.
RBNZ launched a consultation on the details for implementing the final Capital Review decisions announced in December 2019.
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.
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.
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).