Source: http://docplayer.es/94893-Guia-sobre-catalogacion-de-los-instrumentos-financieros-como-complejos-o-no-complejos.html
Timestamp: 2017-08-19 17:24:31
Document Index: 26172443

Matched Legal Cases: ['artículo 79', 'artículo 38', 'artículo 79', 'artículo 79', 'artículo 79', 'artículo 79', 'artículo 79', 'artículo 79', 'artículo 79', 'ARTÍCULO 79', 'artículo 79', 'artículo 2']

GUÍA SOBRE CATALOGACIÓN DE LOS INSTRUMENTOS FINANCIEROS COMO COMPLEJOS O NO COMPLEJOS. - PDF
GUÍA SOBRE CATALOGACIÓN DE LOS INSTRUMENTOS FINANCIEROS COMO COMPLEJOS O NO COMPLEJOS.
Download "GUÍA SOBRE CATALOGACIÓN DE LOS INSTRUMENTOS FINANCIEROS COMO COMPLEJOS O NO COMPLEJOS."
Joaquín Carmona Vidal
1 GUÍA SOBRE CATALOGACIÓN DE LOS INSTRUMENTOS FINANCIEROS COMO COMPLEJOS O NO COMPLEJOS. DEPARTAMENTO DE SUPERVISIÓN ESI-ECA 14 de octubre de 2010 Este documento no tiene carácter normativo y por lo tanto no establece nuevas obligaciones. La guía tiene como finalidad transmitir al sector y, en concreto a las entidades que prestan servicios de inversión, pautas que la CNMV considera adecuadas para el cumplimiento de diversos aspectos de la normativa en vigor a la fecha de emisión de este documento y así facilitar su comprensión y la adaptación de las entidades a la misma. La finalidad de la evaluación de la conveniencia es conseguir la protección adecuada de los inversores en la venta de productos a clientes minoristas que no tengan la experiencia y/o conocimientos suficientes para entender las características y riesgos asociados a dichos productos. El nivel de protección y los requisitos de conveniencia aplican de distinta forma si el instrumento se considera complejo o no complejo. Así, en el caso del servicio de recepción y transmisión de órdenes, bajo determinadas circunstancias que detalla el artículo 79 bis de la Ley del Mercado de Valores en su apartado octavo, no se requiere que las entidades obtengan información del cliente a efectos de evaluar la conveniencia si el producto es no complejo. En el caso de instrumentos complejos, la entidad siempre debe evaluar la conveniencia de tal forma que en el supuesto de que el instrumento no resulte conveniente para el cliente, la entidad sólo podrá tramitar la operación solicitada si previamente le advierte de ello. Por ello, una correcta clasificación de los instrumentos financieros por parte de las entidades es fundamental en atención a una adecuada protección de los clientes. Teniendo en cuenta la relevancia de esta cuestión así como las dudas planteadas al respecto CESR publicó en noviembre de 2009 un documento de preguntas y respuestas 1 en el que detalla en qué categoría deberían incluirse determinados instrumentos financieros, que generalmente son o pueden ser dirigidos a clientes minoristas, así como diversas consideraciones y aclaraciones sobre los criterios recogidos en el artículo 38 de la Directiva 2006/73/EC 2 para considerar un producto como no complejo. En el curso de las actuaciones de supervisión de la CNMV se han detectado algunas incidencias en relación con la clasificación de determinados instrumentos financieros comercializados a clientes minoristas, por lo que se considera conveniente recordar algunos de los criterios establecidos por CESR en su documento de preguntas y respuestas sobre productos complejos y no complejos que la CNMV viene aplicando en su práctica supervisora. 1 CESR Q&A MiFID complex and non complex financial instruments for the purposes of the Directive s appropriateness requirements. (Ref: CESR/09-559) 2 Recogidos en el artículo 79 bis apartado 8 letra a) párrafos 2 y 3 de la LMV
2 Se incorporan como anexos de la presente guía una tabla resumen con un listado no exhaustivo de instrumentos complejos y no complejos y el correspondiente documento de CESR. 1. Acciones preferentes o privilegiadas y participaciones preferentes. Las acciones preferentes o privilegiadas que no incluyan un derivado implícito se consideran, a los efectos de aplicar los procedimientos relativos a la evaluación de la conveniencia, instrumentos no complejos si están admitidas a negociación en un mercado regulado. Si no lo están, deberán ser evaluadas teniendo en cuenta los criterios del segundo y tercer párrafo del artículo 79 bis 8 a) de la LMV. En caso de que incluyan un derivado implícito (un derecho de amortización anticipada por parte del emisor, por ejemplo) siempre se consideraran instrumentos complejos. Las participaciones preferentes, en la medida que incorporan un derivado implícito, deberán considerarse instrumentos complejos. 2. Derechos de suscripción preferente. En principio, los derechos de suscripción preferente entran en el tipo de valores mobiliarios que se describen en el artículo 79 bis 8 a) párrafo tercero 3 que no pueden clasificarse como instrumentos financieros no complejos. Sin embargo, en el proceso de asignación automática a los accionistas con motivo por ejemplo de una ampliación de capital, los derechos de suscripción preferente no constituyen instrumentos financieros en sí mismos y deben ser considerados como un componente de la acción cuando el instrumento que se puede suscribir al ejercer el derecho sea el mismo que el que dio lugar al derecho de suscripción. Esta interpretación es extensiva a la adquisición en el mercado secundario de los derechos de suscripción estrictamente necesarios para redondear el número de derechos necesarios para adquirir la acción pertinente. No obstante cuando el ejercicio de los derechos de suscripción implica la compra de instrumentos financieros que son diferentes a las acciones que dieron lugar a los mismos, tales derechos deben considerarse como instrumentos complejos o no complejos según la clasificación de los instrumentos que se ofrecen para la compra. Por ejemplo si los derechos de suscripción que provienen de unas acciones dan derecho a adquirir obligaciones convertibles (instrumentos complejos), los citados derechos deben considerarse complejos. Cuando los derechos de suscripción se adquieran en el mercado secundario deberán ser clasificados como productos complejos, salvo en el caso mencionado anteriormente en relación con el redondeo necesario para adquirir la acción pertinente. 3 "valores que den derecho a adquirir o a vender otros valores negociables o que den lugar a su liquidación en efectivo, determinada por referencia a valores negociables, divisas, tipos de interés o rendimientos, materias primas u otros índices o medidas"
3 3. Instrumentos del mercado monetario, bonos y otras formas de deuda titulizada Se considera como criterio general que este tipo de instrumentos financieros son no complejos, salvo que incorporen un derivado implícito o que incorporen estructuras que dificulten al inversor comprender el riesgo asociado al producto. Algunos instrumentos de deuda que puede considerarse que incorporan un derivado implícito son: bonos vinculados a derivados de crédito (CDS), bonos estructurados cuyo rendimiento se referencia a la rentabilidad de un índice de deuda, bonos estructurados cuyo rendimiento se referencia a la rentabilidad de una cesta de acciones tanto si el nominal está 100% garantizado como si no lo está, instrumentos estructurados cuyo rendimiento se referencia a la rentabilidad de un subyacente como materias primas o cesta de materias primas. Aquellos bonos u otro tipo de deuda que incorporan una opción de amortización anticipada para el emisor, el tenedor o para ambos, no pueden catalogarse como no complejos. También se considerarían instrumentos complejos aquellos que incorporen estructuras que dificulten al inversor comprender el riesgo asociado al producto, por ejemplo, determinadas estructuras de deuda titulizada (MBS, CDO, ABS). En cualquier caso no necesariamente se debe clasificar este tipo de instrumentos automáticamente como no complejos, ya que tendrán que ser evaluados bajo los criterios del artículo 79 bis 8 a), párrafo 2 y 3 de la LMV para determinar su clasificación como complejos o no complejos. 4. Cédulas, bonos y participaciones hipotecarias y otros instrumentos que cuentan con el respaldo de un grupo de activos. Este tipo de instrumentos se consideran instrumentos no complejos cuando se trata de bonos tradicionales con una garantía incorporada que mejora sus condiciones al disminuir el riesgo de impago. No obstante, cuando el grupo de activos que respaldan la emisión está fuera del balance del emisor ( structured covered bonds ), se considera que el instrumento es similar a la deuda titulizada (en este caso un ABS o Asset Backed Security), por lo que no deben clasificarse automáticamente como no complejos. Asimismo si estos instrumentos incorporan un derivado implícito o estructuras que hacen difícil para el inversor entender el riesgo asociado al producto, deben clasificarse como complejos. 5. Deuda subordinada No se establecen criterios diferentes a los aplicables al resto de instrumentos de deuda ya analizados con respecto a este tipo de instrumento financiero, debiendo evaluarse los aspectos relacionados con la incorporación o no de derivados implícitos, y la estructura del instrumento.
4 6. IIC de inversión libre e IIC inmobiliarias Las IIC de inversión libre y las inmobiliarias en general no están constituidas como IIC armonizadas por lo que deberán ser evaluados teniendo en cuenta los criterios establecidos en el artículo 79 bis 8 a) párrafo 2 de la LMV. Entre estos requisitos está el que existan posibilidades frecuentes de venta. 7. Evaluación bajo los criterios del artículo 79 bis apartado 8 letra a) párrafos 2 y 3 de la LMV. El objetivo del párrafo 2 es definir un marco para catalogar como no complejos sólo a los productos transparentes, líquidos y que puedan ser entendidos por los clientes minoristas ya que no es posible enumerar todos los tipos de instrumentos financieros que pueden ser razonablemente clasificados como no complejos, a efectos de los requisitos de conveniencia. Por su parte el párrafo 3 establece que los instrumentos derivados y otros similares no pueden en ningún caso clasificarse como no complejos. Se considera relevante recordar algunas consideraciones y aclaraciones relacionadas con estos conceptos que CESR recoge en su documento: - Respecto a la frecuencia de las posibilidades de venta, con carácter general se considera que la frecuencia debe ser diaria o semanal y, muy excepcionalmente, podrán considerarse plazos periódicos más largos. En los casos en los que la determinación de la frecuencia no es obvia, las entidades deben analizar el criterio de forma particular tomando en consideración la información disponible, el tipo de instrumento, así como las prácticas de mercado para ese instrumento en concreto. - Puede entenderse que los precios están públicamente disponibles cuando los precios son fácilmente accesibles por medio de canales sencillos de localizar por el cliente medio. - Los precios deben ser, bien precios de mercado (precios a los que un número de participantes en el mercado están dispuestos a operar y que son determinados siguiendo normas transparentes y no discrecionales) o, en su ausencia, precios suministrados o validados por sistemas de valoración independientes del emisor del producto (son sistemas de valoración aceptables aquellos suministrados por entidades expertas en proporcionar dichas valoraciones que se dedican a esta actividad de forma recurrente en el tiempo y que tengan en cuenta las disposiciones normativas sobre los conflictos de interés). - No en todos los casos debe entenderse que un instrumento admitido a cotización en un mercado regulado, diferente del de las acciones, cumple el requisito de que existan posibilidades frecuentes de venta, reembolso u otro tipo de liquidación del instrumento. La admisión a negociación ofrece la posibilidad de que puedan existir oportunidades frecuentes de venta, pero no asegura que en la práctica existan. De forma análoga, la existencia de precios públicamente disponibles no asegura automáticamente que se cumpla el criterio de que existan posibilidades frecuentes de venta, reembolso u otro tipo de liquidación del instrumento. Las entidades deben ser especialmente diligentes cuando evalúen instrumentos cotizados en mercados con escasa liquidez. - Para considerar que existe información suficiente a disposición del público sobre las características del instrumento la información debe recoger con suficiente detalle las
5 características del instrumento financiero: precio, estructura, cómo se calcula su rentabilidad, rendimiento, emisor, mercado, existencia de garantías, riesgos, horizonte temporal, así como otras que puedan afectar a su valor, rendimiento o a la liquidez del instrumento, etc. Además, el acceso a la información debe ser fácil, y ésta será imparcial, clara y no engañosa de acuerdo con el artículo 79 bis 2 de la LMV. Asimismo la entidad debe plantearse si el idioma en el que se facilita la información permite que sea comprensible de modo que un cliente minorista medio pueda emitir un juicio fundado para decidir si realiza una operación sobre ese instrumento. - Se entiende que la información se encuentra a disposición del público si se puede acceder a ella a través de medios fáciles de encontrar por un cliente medio. Los criterios que definen la accesibilidad a la información son: número y naturaleza de las fuentes y canales que la publican y la facilidad del cliente para reproducir, imprimir o descargarse la información.
6 6/9 ANEXO 1.- LISTADO (NO EXAHUSTIVO) DE INSTRUMENTOS FINANCIEROS COMPLEJOS Y NO COMPLEJOS4. INSTRUMENTOS NO COMPLEJOS INSTRUMENTOS QUE DEBEN EVALUARSE BAJO LOS INSTRUMENTOS COMPLEJOS CRITERIOS DEL ARTÍCULO 79 BIS APARTADO 8 LETRA a) PÁRRAFOS 2 y ACCIONES (i) Acciones ordinarias de sociedades admitidas a cotización en mercados regulados 5 (ii) Acciones privilegiadas ordinarias de sociedades admitidas a cotización en mercados regulados 6. (i) Acciones que no estén admitidas a cotización en mercados regulados (ii) Acciones admitidas a cotización en mercados de terceros países 7 (i) Acciones convertibles. (ii) Acciones privilegiadas convertibles o con un derecho de amortización anticipada (derivado implícito) y Participaciones preferentes. (iii) Derechos de suscripción preferente para adquirir acciones que sean automáticamente no complejas. (iii) Certificados de depósito de acciones (iv) Derechos de suscripción preferente para adquirir acciones (u otros instrumentos) que no son automáticamente no complejas. (v) Acciones de instituciones de inversión colectiva no armonizadas abiertas o cerradas.. 2. INSTRUMENTOS DEL MERCADO MONETARIO, BONOS Y OTRAS FORMAS DE DEUDA TITULIZADA (i) Instrumentos del mercado monetario que no incorporen un derivado implícito. Se incluyen: - Letras del Tesoro. - Certificados de depósito. (i) Certificados de depósito respecto de bonos y otras formas de deuda titulizada. (ii) Títulos de deuda de interés variable (floating rate notes) (iii) Determinados valores de deuda titulizada (Asset Backed Securities o ABS), otros instrumentos estructurados y bonos (i) Instrumentos del mercado monetario, bonos y otras formas de deuda titulizada que incorporen un derivado implícito. Se incluyen: - Credit Linked Notes 4 Este cuadro debe leerse junto con el texto de la guía 5 También se aplicará a acciones admitidas a cotización en mercados equivalentes de terceros países cuando la Comisión Europea haya publicado una lista de esos mercados. 6 También se aplicará a acciones admitidas a cotización en mercados equivalentes de terceros países cuando la Comisión Europea haya publicado una lista de esos mercados 7 Tras la publicación de la lista de mercados equivalentes de terceros países por la Comisión Europea solo se aplicará a aquellos mercados que no se hayan considerado equivalentes.
7 7/9 - Pagarés (ii) Bonos que no incorporen un derivado implícito. Se incluyen entre otros: - Bonos y obligaciones corporativas. - Bonos del Tesoro. - Cédulas, bonos y participaciones hipotecarias. estructurados con garantía de un grupo de activos. - Instrumentos estructurados cuyo comportamiento está ligado al comportamiento de un índice de bonos. - Instrumentos estructurados cuyo comportamiento está ligado a al comportamiento de una cesta de acciones con o sin gestión activa. - Instrumentos estructurados con un nominal plenamente garantizado y cuyo comportamiento está ligado al comportamiento de una cesta de acciones, con o sin gestión activa. - Bonos y obligaciones convertibles. - Bonos que pueden amortizarse por el emisor antes de su madurez (Callable Bonds). - Bonos que permitan al tenedor obligar al emisor a recomprárselos en determinados momentos (Puttable Bonds). (ii) ABS (asset backed securities) y otros instrumentos estructurados que incluyan un derivado o incorporen estructuras que dificulten el entendimiento por parte del inversor del riesgo vinculado al producto. (iii) Bonos estructurados con garantía de un grupo de activos (por ejemplo bonos de titulización hipotecaria o de créditos públicos) que incluyan un derivado o que incorporen estructuras que dificulten el entendimiento por parte del inversor del riesgo vinculado al producto. 3. UCITS Y OTRAS INSTITUCIONES DE INVERSIÓN COLECTIVA
8 8/9 (i) Participaciones o acciones de IIC armonizadas (i) Participaciones de fondos no armonizados (ii) Acciones de instituciones de inversión colectiva no armonizadas abiertas o cerradas. N/A 4. OTROS INSTRUMENTOS FINANCIEROS Otros instrumentos financieros que no estén específicamente mencionados en el primer párrafo del artículo 79 bis apartado 8 letra a) de la LMV. (i) Instrumentos financieros recogidos en los apartados 2 a 8 del artículo 2 de la LMV (derivados, CFD). (ii) Valores que den derecho a adquirir o a vender otros valores negociables o que den derecho a su liquidación en efectivo determinada por a valores negociables, divisas, tipos de interés o rendimientos, materias primas u otros índices o medidas incluyendo: - Warrants - Covered warrants
9 ANEXO 2. CESR Q&A MiFID complex and non complex financial instruments for the purposes of the Directive s appropriateness requirements. (Ref: CESR/09-559)
10 COMMITTEE OF EUROPEAN SECURITIES REGULATORS Date: 3 November 2009 Ref.: CESR/ Q&A MiFID complex and non complex financial instruments for the purposes of the Directive s appropriateness requirements CESR, avenue de Friedland, Paris, France - Tel +33 (0) , web site:
11 Table of contents Executive summary...3 Introduction...4 Section 1 Shares...5 Section 2 Money market instruments, bonds and other forms of securitised debt...8 Section 3 UCITS and other collective investment undertakings Section 4 Other non-complex financial instruments under Art. 38 of the Level 2 Directive: Issues of general interpretation ANNEX I Non-exhaustive list of MiFID complex / non-complex financial instruments
12 Executive Summary On 14 May 2009, CESR published a consultation paper (CP) entitled MiFID complex and noncomplex financial instruments for the purposes of the Directive s appropriateness requirements (Ref. CESR/09-295). In that CP, CESR set out for consultation its analysis of a range of types of MiFID financial instruments and its views on how these were likely to fit within the complex/noncomplex categories of financial instruments for the purposes of the Directive s appropriateness requirements. Parallel to publishing this Q&A, CESR publishes its Feedback Statement (FS) responding to comments it received in response to the CP (Ref. CESR/09-558). This set of Q&As reflects CESR s statement of its policy following its consultation paper. The Q&As should be read in conjunction with the preceding CP and the FS. These Q&As clarify the categorisation of financial instruments as complex or non-complex for the purposes of MiFID s appropriateness requirements, including the treatment of: types of shares and the categorisation of subscription/nil paid rights; money market instruments, bonds and other forms of securitised debt, including the treatment of money market instruments, asset-backed securities, bonds and other forms of securitised debt. Also clarified is the categorisation of instruments that embed a derivative, callable and puttable bonds, covered bonds and depository receipts among others; units in collective investment undertakings for the purposes of the appropriateness requirements, including UCITS 1 and non-ucits; and certain other products such as Exchange Traded Commodities (ETCs). It also clarifies the interpretation of the criteria set out under Art. 38 of the MiFID Level 2 Directive. This includes such issues as the interpretation of frequent opportunities to dispose or redeem an instrument, liquidity and also when comprehensive information can be considered to be publicly available. CESR stresses that its analysis, and the range of products considered, does not aim to be exhaustive, given the number and variety of types of MiFID products traded in the world s financial markets. Its focus is financial products that are (or can be) transacted by retail clients. The central aim of the MiFID appropriateness test is to prevent complex products from being sold on an execution-only basis to retail clients who do not have the experience and/or knowledge to understand the risks of such products. These Q&As do not consider any possible future extension of the scope of application of MiFID standards (for example, as a result of any current or future proposals from the European Commission). 1 Undertakings for Collective Investments in Transferable Securities. 3
13 Introduction 1. On 14 May 2009, CESR published a consultation paper (CP) entitled MiFID complex and non-complex financial instruments for the purposes of the Directive s appropriateness requirements (Ref. CESR/09-295). In that CP, CESR set out for consultation its analysis of a range of types of MiFID financial instruments and its views on how these were likely to fit within the complex/non-complex categories for the purposes of the Directive s appropriateness requirements Parallel to publishing this Q&A, CESR also publishes its Feedback Statement (FS) responding to comments it received during the consultation period (Ref. CESR/09-558). This set of Q&As reflects CESR s statement of its policy following its consultation paper. The Q&As should be read in conjunction with the preceding CP and the FS. 3. CESR stresses that its analysis, and the range of products considered, does not aim to be exhaustive, given the number and variety of types of MiFID products traded in the world s financial markets. Its focus is financial products that are (or can be) transacted by retail clients. The central aim of the MiFID appropriateness test is to prevent complex products from being sold on an execution-only basis to retail clients who do not have the experience and/or knowledge to understand the risks of such products. 4. In terms of the type of instrument or financial product, the way in which the appropriateness requirements apply differs according to whether the instrument/product is deemed non-complex or complex for these purposes. In practical terms, this distinction matters because the appropriateness test must always have been undertaken by a MiFID firm where the service or transaction involves a complex product. For non-complex products, the test does not need to be undertaken in certain specified circumstances - meaning that the resulting transactions can be carried out in a way that can be described as execution-only. The MiFID Level 1 Directive (Art. 19(6)) lists specific types of instruments/products that can always be treated as non-complex for these purposes, then provides in the Level 2 Directive (Art. 38) a set of criteria for other non-complex products not specifically listed. These provisions together also indicate some specific types of MiFID products that should always be treated as complex for the purposes of the appropriateness requirements. 5. These Q&As do not consider any possible future extension of the scope of application of MiFID standards (for example, as a result of any current or future proposals from the European Commission). 2 This paper will make references to two MiFID Directives: the Level 1 Directive 2004/39/EC and the Level 2 Directive 2006/73/EC. The appropriateness requirements are set out in Art. 19(5) of the MiFID Level 1 Directive and Art.s 36 and 37 of the MiFID Level 2 Directive. The prescribed exceptions to the appropriateness test are set out in Art. 19(6) of the MiFID Level 1 Directive and Art. 38 of the MiFID Level 2 Directive. 4
14 Section 1 Shares 6. According to the MiFID Level 1 Directive Art. 19(6), shares admitted to trading on a regulated market or in an equivalent third country market are non-complex instruments for the purposes of the appropriateness requirements. Any other types of shares that are not expressly mentioned in Art. 19(6) will have to be assessed as per the criteria in Art. 38 of the Level 2 Directive. What is a regulated market? 7. A market falling under MiFID s (Level 1 Art. 4(1)(14)) definition of regulated market. This can include investment exchanges and other types of multilateral markets regulated in accordance with MiFID Title III; it does not include those systems defined by MiFID as multilateral trading facilities (MTFs). Art. 47 of the Level 1 Directive requires that each Member State maintains an updated list of regulated markets for which it is the home Member State and communicates this information to other Member States and the European Commission. The Commission is required to publish a list of regulated markets, notified to it, on a yearly basis in the Official Journal of the European Union. What is an equivalent third country market? 8. Art. 19(6) of the MiFID Level 1 Directive states that a third country market shall be considered as equivalent to a regulated market if it complies with equivalent requirements to those established under Title III. The Commission shall publish a list of those markets that are to be considered as equivalent. This list shall be updated periodically. Since this list has not yet been published, there are no formal equivalent third country markets and there are two possible approaches to shares that radmitted to trading on a third country market: (i) either firms should assess such shares against the criteria in Art. 38 of the Level 2 Directive; or (ii) in the absence of a list, all such shares would have to be treated as complex instruments. 9. Since one can assume that under the list, once published, some of these shares will be regarded as automatically non-complex and the others will need to be assessed against the Art. 38 criteria, CESR is inclined to the view that option (i) above is a more risk-based and proportionate approach until the list is published. What types of shares are specifically covered under Art. 19(6) as being non-complex? 10. MiFID does not define the specific term shares, either for the purpose of Art. 19(6) or elsewhere. Furthermore, this element of company law is not harmonised at the EU level. However, in the definition of transferable securities in MiFID Level 1 Directive Art. 4(1)(18)(a), a distinction is made between shares in companies and other securities equivalent to shares in companies, partnerships or other entities, and depositary receipts in respect of shares. 11. CESR thus interprets the reference to shares in Art. 19(6) as capturing shares in companies where those shares are admitted to trading on a regulated market or an equivalent third country market, but excluding other securities equivalent to shares in companies, partnerships or other entities, and depositary receipts in respect of shares. This means that shares in companies (when they are admitted to trading) will be automatically non-complex. Instruments other than such shares in companies admitted to trading will need to be assessed against the criteria in Art. 38 of the Level 2 Directive to determine whether they need to be treated as non-complex or complex instruments for the purposes of the appropriateness requirements. 5
15 12. It is important to note that where a share is admitted to trading on a regulated market, it is automatically non-complex, no matter where else it may be traded. 13. However, CESR believes that shares in a non-ucits collective investment undertaking are first and foremost investments in a collective investment undertaking and that (for the purposes of the appropriateness requirements) this should prevail over the legal form they take (whether units or shares) in the interests of a consistent regulatory treatment of such investments for the purposes of the appropriateness requirements. CESR believes that shares in a non-ucits undertaking should therefore be assessed against the Art. 38 criteria, unless the final Directive on Alternative Investment Fund Managers (AIFMD) prescribes a different treatment. Since UCITS are separately mentioned in Art. 19(6) as automatically non-complex, this is not an issue for shares in an UCITS. 14. Furthermore, CESR s view is that preference shares that do not embed a derivative should be considered as automatically non-complex for the purposes of the appropriateness requirements. Preference shares that embed a derivative should be considered as complex (for convertible preference shares, please see below). How should other types of equity securities be treated? 15. All other types of equity securities that are not expressly mentioned in Art. 19(6) of the Level 1 Directive should be assessed against the criteria in Art. 38 of the Level 2 Directive. This includes: Shares that are not admitted to trading on a regulated market or in an equivalent third country market. This category would include unlisted or unquoted shares that are not admitted to trading on any public market, as well as shares admitted to trading on a market which is not a regulated market (or equivalent third country market). Depositary receipts for shares: as noted above, the MiFID definition of transferable securities 3 distinguishes depositary receipts in respect of shares (and bonds) from shares (and bonds) themselves. 4 This means that depositary receipts admitted to trading on a regulated market are not identical to shares (or bonds) for these purposes and are therefore not automatically non-complex for the purposes of the appropriateness requirements 5. Stapled securities that comprise different types of security (one of which is a share) which are stapled i.e. are contractually bound to form a single unit so that they cannot be bought or sold separately. For example, CESR is aware that in some financial markets (e.g. Australia), it is common for property trusts to have their units stapled to the shares of companies with which they are closely associated. This may be less common in European markets, certainly involving retail clients, though CESR is aware of at least one issue within the EU involving ordinary shares and warrants being stapled. 3 Art. 4(1)(18) of the Level 1 Directive 4 At a simple level, a depositary receipt can be defined as a type of transferable security representing another security (generally equity or debt) issued by a foreign listed company. The most common types of depositary receipt are American Depositary Receipts (ADRs) and Global Depositary Receipts (GDRs)/European Depositary Receipts (EDRs). 5 This does not mean that these instruments cannot be treated as equivalent to shares for other regulatory purposes. 6
16 Do listed convertible shares fulfil the Art. 38 criteria for being non-complex? 16. CESR believes that convertible shares (i.e. convertible preference shares or convertible preferred stock) fall within the type of transferable securities described in Art. 4(1)(18)(c) of MiFID Level 1 Directive, as other securities giving the right to acquire or sell any such transferable securities or giving rise to a cash settlement determined by reference to transferable securities, currencies, interest rates or yields, commodities or other indices or measures. The types of securities covered by Art. 4(1)(18)(c) are expressly excluded from eligibility as other non-complex financial instruments under the Art. 38 criteria 6. This means that convertible shares should be treated as complex products for the purposes of the appropriateness test. This outcome would be logically consistent with the Directive s treatment of convertible bonds (see below). Do subscription rights/nil-paid rights fulfill the Art. 38 criteria for being non-complex? 17. These are rights that give shareholders an opportunity to purchase more shares, usually at discount. They are usually given by the issuer of the original shares. The shareholders receive these rights at no cost, and if the rights are renounceable, the shareholders can choose to sell them on the market. The issuance of these rights is not a MiFID activity, but the appropriateness requirements can apply to MiFID activities such as the secondary trading of these instruments (i.e. when the shareholders choose to sell them). 18. The starting point is that subscription rights/nil paid rights fall within the type of transferable securities described in Art. 4(1)(18)(c) of MiFID Level 1 Directive, as other securities giving the right to acquire or sell any such transferable securities or giving rise to a cash settlement determined by reference to transferable securities, currencies, interest rates or yields, commodities or other indices or measures. Since securities covered by Art. 4(1)(18)(c) are expressly excluded from eligibility as other non-complex financial instruments under the Art. 38 criteria, this means that subscription rights/nil-paid rights should be treated as complex products for the purposes of the appropriateness test. 19. However, for the purposes of the exercise and sale of these rights by shareholders to whom they have been granted, they should not be seen as financial instruments in themselves. They should be considered as a component of the share itself (the right is separated from the share only to facilitate the trading of the rights). It would be reasonable therefore for these rights to be categorised in the same way as the share itself, but only where the instrument that they give right to subscribe is the same financial instrument that gave rise to the subscription right. This interpretation could also cover the strictly necessary acquisition in the secondary market of subscription rights to round up the numbers of rights necessary to acquire the relevant share. 20. Where the exercise of the subscription rights involves the purchase of financial instruments which are different to the shares which gave rise to the subscription rights, then the exercise of such subscription rights should be regarded as complex or non-complex depending on the classification of the financial instrument being offered for purchase. 21. CESR therefore concludes that if the type of share itself is non-complex, the primary market acquisition and exercise of subscription rights/nil paid rights (including the strictly necessary acquisitions in the secondary market of subscription rights to round up the numbers) should also be classified as non-complex for the purposes of the appropriateness test. If, on the other hand, the share is classified as complex, then the primary market acquisition and exercise of subscription rights/nil paid rights should also be classified as complex for the purposes of the appropriateness test. 6 Art. 38(a) of the Level 2 Directive. 7
17 22. For the purposes of secondary market acquisitions of subscription rights/nil paid rights these instruments ought to be classified as falling within Art. 4(1)(18)(c) of MiFID Level 1 Directive, and therefore are complex products for the purposes of the appropriateness test. 23. Secondary market disposals of subscription rights/nil paid rights by shareholders to whom these instruments have been granted can be regarded as necessary actions to obtain monies equivalent to dividends. Therefore the application of the appropriateness test to such transactions would be unnecessary in these circumstances. Section 2 Money market instruments, bonds and other forms of securitised debt 24. MiFID Level 1 Directive Art. 19(6) suggests that money market instruments, bonds and other forms of securitised debt are non-complex instruments for the purposes of the appropriateness requirements, unless they embed a derivative. CESR sees the exception for instruments that embed a derivative as applying to all of these instruments, since all are forms of securitised debt. What does the category of money market instruments cover? 25. Money market instruments are defined in MiFID Level 1 Directive Art 4(1)(19) as those classes of instruments which are normally dealt in on the money market, such as: o o o Treasury bills; certificates of deposits; and commercial paper. 26. Q&A 167 in the European Commission s MiFID Q&A database 7 expands on the Directive s definition in commenting that it is commonly understood that money-market instruments are liquid debt instruments that are capable of being traded (although in practice most are held until maturity). They usually mature in less than one year. The list of examples referred to in MiFID is not exhaustive (Art. 4(1)(19) of Directive 2004/39/EC). Several EC Directives define "money market instruments". Please see: Art. 1(1) of Directive 85/611/EEC; Recital 4 of Directive 2001/108/EC; Recital 9 of Directive 2007/16/EC. The Commission answer also references the ECB statistical framework which defines money market instruments as "those classes of transferable debt instruments which are normally traded on the money market (for example, certificates of deposit, commercial paper and banker's acceptances, treasury and local authority bills) and which may be issued by: a central, regional or local authority, a central bank of a Member State, the European Union, the ECB, the European Investment Bank, a non-member State or, if the latter is a federal State, by one of the members making up the federation, or by a public international body to which one or more Member States belong; or an establishment subject to prudential supervision, in accordance with criteria defined by Community law or by an establishment which is subject to and complies with prudential rules considered by the competent authorities to be at least as stringent as those laid down by Community law, or guaranteed by any such establishment; or an undertaking the securities of which have been admitted to an official listing on a stock exchange or are traded on other regulated markets which operate regularly, are recognised and are open to the public. 7 8
18 What does the category of Treasury bills cover? 27. Treasury bills are traditionally short-term debt securities (with a maturity of less than one year) backed primarily by the U.S. government. However, it is clear from the context of MiFID and from the ECB discussion above that the reference to Treasury bills should be read more widely than this, as covering securities issued or backed by any central, regional or local authority, a central bank of a Member State, the European Union, the ECB, the European Investment Bank, a non-member State or, if the latter is a federal State, by one of the members making up the federation. 28. It is not clear whether a distinction is intended between short term securities (bills) and longer term securities (with maturities of greater than one year) which might better be regarded as government/public bonds. In practice, this question should not matter since both Treasury bills and government/public bonds would be covered by the references in Art. 19(6) to money market instruments and bonds. What does the category of certificates of deposits cover? 29. A certificate of deposit would be covered by MiFID where it is a transferable security, negotiable on the capital market. If it is not negotiable, then it would be excluded from MiFID as an instrument of payment. What does the category of commercial paper cover? 30. Commercial paper has a common interpretation in the global money markets, basically as an unsecured promissory note with a fixed maturity of up to 270 days and variable interest rates, generally issued by credit institutions or large corporates. Regardless of the credit rating of the issuer (which will obviously determine the price and value of the instrument), MiFID would treat most commercial paper as automatically non-complex for the purposes of the appropriateness requirement. The exceptions to this would, in CESR s view, be commercial paper that embeds a derivative, and asset-backed commercial paper (see below), which CESR believes should not be treated as automatically non-complex instruments for the purposes of the appropriateness requirements. CESR does not believe that direct retail client investment in commercial paper is significant in Europe. What types of money market instruments would be regarded as embedding a derivative and would therefore be complex instruments for the purposes of the appropriateness requirements? 31. CESR considers the concept of instruments that embed a derivative below. Examples of common money market instruments that embed a derivative would include certain certificates of deposits or Medium Term Notes. Which types of instruments are included in this category as bonds and other forms of securitised debt? 32. In CESR s view, the reference to bonds in Art. 19(6) covers traditional bonds, where the bond holder is in effect lender to the issuer and the issuer has to pay back the totality of the nominal value of the bond to the bond holder at maturity. Such bonds usually have a defined term or maturity, after which the bonds are redeemed. Traditional bonds are in general issued by corporate bodies or public authorities. 33. For the purpose of Art. 19(6) CESR reads the term securitised debt as meaning debt that is incorporated in a security. It then follows that the term other forms of securitised debt means debt securities other than bonds or money market instruments. 9
19 Does this mean that all debt securities (bonds, money market instruments and other debt securities) are non-complex financial instruments? 34. No. CESR rejects the interpretation that reads the term other forms of securitised debt as meaning debt that has undergone a securitisation process. Such an interpretation would reach a conclusion that makes instruments such as Mortgage Backed Securities (residential or commercial), Collateralised Debt Obligations, or other Asset Backed Securities (including those backed by e.g. auto-loans, credit card loans or equipment lease receivables) noncomplex financial instruments CESR takes the view that a number of types of securitised debt structures cannot accurately be described as non-complex. Some of the examples of structures of Mortgage Backed Securities, Collateralised Debt Obligations, Asset Backed Commercial Paper and other Asset Backed Securities that are covered in the CESR Report on Transparency of corporate bond, structured finance product and credit derivatives markets 9 are good illustrations of complex structures, which will affect the ease with which the risk attached to the product may be understood. Cash-flows and the ultimate cash settlement will also be determined by reference to the underlying assets, similarly to those types of transferable securities that are automatically complex for the purposes of the appropriateness requirements because they fall within MiFID Art. 4(1)(18)(c). There are also similarities with instruments that embed a derivative. 36. Most retail clients will not be investing directly in most types of Asset Backed Securities (and certainly not without investment advice). However, given the structures of these instruments, the issues that have emerged in the financial markets involving Asset Backed Securities, and the involvement of some retail investors, CESR is of the view that Asset Backed Securities should not be regarded as automatically non-complex instruments for the purposes of MiFID Art. 19(6) and should not be transacted for retail clients on a non-advised basis without the appropriateness test being carried out i.e. without a firm asking retail clients about their knowledge/experience to understand the risks and, if necessary, giving the clients a warning. 37. Amongst the population of financial instruments falling within other forms of securitised debt, those that embed a derivative and those that incorporate structures which make it difficult for the investor to understand the risk attached to the product should be considered as complex products for the purposes of the appropriateness requirements. However, pending further review by the EU institutions of the drafting of MiFID Art. 19(6), CESR believes that at least some products considered as other forms of securitised debt will need to be assessed against the criteria in Art. 38 of the MiFID Level 2 Directive. The likely result of such an assessment is that almost all, if not all, such products will be considered complex, 38. CESR would also stress that where firms are marketing debt instruments to retail clients they are under a MiFID obligation to provide appropriate information, in a comprehensible form, about these financial instruments and proposed investment strategies. This includes appropriate guidance on and warnings of the risks associated with investments in those instruments or in respect of particular investment strategies, so that clients are reasonably able to understand the nature and risks of the investment service and of the specific type of financial instrument that is being offered and, consequently, to take investment decisions on an informed basis CESR recognises that not all of these instruments are likely to be transacted by retail clients directly (as opposed to investment by funds in which retail clients may invest). 9 Ref: CESR/09-348, July Art. 31 of the Level 2 Directive is particularly relevant in the context of debt instruments. For example, it includes the requirement that in the case of financial instruments that incorporate a guarantee by a third party, the information about the guarantee shall include sufficient detail about the guarantor and the guarantee to enable the retail client or potential retail client to make a fair assessment of the guarantee. 10
20 Is there a definition for bonds and other forms of securitised debt that embed a derivative? 39. MiFID does not include a definition of bonds and other forms of securitised debt that embed a derivative, either at Level 1 or Level 2. However, the concept of an instrument embedding a derivative is being increasingly used and discussed by bodies and groups that are active in the capital markets notably those bodies involved in the development and setting of appropriate accounting standards. 40. CESR itself considered the concept in its Advice to the European Commission on Clarification of Definitions concerning Eligible Assets for Investments of UCITS (January 2006, Ref. CESR/06-005). In formulating this advice, CESR took account of IAS 39 11, noting that paragraph 10 of the IAS 39 defines an embedded derivative as "a component of a hybrid (combined) instrument that also includes a non-derivative host contract with the effect that some of the cash flows of the combined instrument vary in a way similar to a standalone derivative. An embedded derivative causes some or all of the cash flows that otherwise would be required by the contract to be modified according to a specified interest rate, financial instrument price, commodity price, foreign exchange rate, index of prices or rates, credit rating or credit index, or other variable. A derivative that is attached to a financial instrument, but is contractually transferable independently of that instrument, or has a different counterparty from that instrument, is not an embedded derivative, but a separate financial instrument ". What types of instruments are included in this category? 41. CESR s advice on eligible assets for investments of UCITS referred to above also includes an illustrative and non-exhaustive list of financial instruments that CESR believes could be assumed to embed a derivative. This list comprises the following, all of which could be examples of money market instruments, bonds and other forms of securitised debt embedding a derivative: - credit linked notes; 12 - structured instruments whose performance is linked to the performance of a bond index; - structured instruments whose performance is linked to the performance of a basket of shares with or without active management; - structured instruments with a nominal fully guaranteed whose performance is linked to the performance of a basket of shares, with or without active management; - convertible bonds; and - exchangeable bonds. 42. Structured instruments whose performance is linked to the performance of another underlying such as a commodity or a commodity basket should also be added to this list. 11 The objective of International Accounting Standard 39 is to establish principles for recognising and measuring financial assets, financial liabilities and some contracts to buy or sell non-financial items. 12 Essentially a security with an embedded credit default swap, allowing the issuer to transfer a specific credit risk to investors. 11
Transacciones de Financiación de Valores Transparencia en las operaciones. JOSÉ MANUEL PORTERO portero@cnmv.es
JORNADAS SOBRE SHADOW BANKING Y TITULIZACIÓN INSTITUTO IBEROAMERICANO DE MERCADOS DE VALORES 16-18 MARZO 2015 Transacciones de Financiación de Valores Transparencia en las operaciones JOSÉ MANUEL PORTERO
Aviso de Advertencia de Riesgo Risk Warning Notice
Aviso de Advertencia de Riesgo Risk Warning Notice 386.RWN.EN.ES.V2.23.06.2015 One Financial Markets is the trading name of C B Financial Services Ltd, a company registered in England with company number
GUIA DE REFERENCIA PARA LA NEGOCIACIÓN DE ESTRATEGIAS. inicio. STRATEGY TRADING REFERENCE GUIDE start
inicio STRATEGY TRADING REFERENCE GUIDE start 01 Introducción MEFF introduce en su sistema de negociación una nueva funcionalidad de Negociación de Estrategias. Todo operador tendrá la capacidad de generar