Article 43 Tasks
1. The Board of Supervisors shall give guidance to the work of the Authority and shall be in charge of taking the decisions referred to in Chapter II. 2. The Board of Supervisors shall adopt the opinions, recommendations, and decisions, and issue the advice referred to in Chapter II. 3. The Board of Supervisors shall appoint the Chairperson. 4. The Board of Supervisors shall adopt, before 30 September of each year, on the basis of a proposal by the Management Board, the work programme of the Authority for the coming year, and shall transmit it for information to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission. The work programme shall be adopted without prejudice to the annual budgetary procedure and shall be made public. 5. The Board of Supervisors shall, on the basis of a proposal by the Management Board, adopt the annual report on the activities of the Authority, including on the performance of the Chairperson’s duties, on the basis of the draft report referred to in Article 53(7) and shall transmit that report to the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission, the Court of Auditors and the European Economic and Social Committee by 15 June each year. The report shall be made public. 6. The Board of Supervisors shall adopt the multi-annual work programme of the Authority, and shall transmit it for information to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission. The multi-annual work programme shall be adopted without prejudice to the annual budgetary procedure and shall be made public. 7. The Board of Supervisors shall adopt the budget in accordance with Article 63. 8. The Board of Supervisors shall exercise disciplinary authority over the Chairperson and the Executive Director and may remove them from office in accordance with Article 48(5) or Article 51(5) respectively.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Integrated financial markets bring significant benefits to the funding of the European economy and for promoting jobs and growth on a sound and sustainable basis. To promote financial integration and market integrity while safeguarding financial stability, the EU internal market for financial services requires common rules and strong supervisory coordination. When the EU overhauled its financial system in response to the financial crisis, and in line with global efforts, it therefore introduced a Single Rulebook for financial regulation in Europe and created the European Supervisory Authorities ("ESAs"). The ESAs constitute an institutional cornerstone of the comprehensive reform package and have played a key role in ensuring that the financial markets across the EU are well regulated, strong and stable. They contribute to the development and consistent application of the Single Rulebook, solve cross-border problems, and thereby promote both regulatory and supervisory convergence. Despite the post-crisis measures, there remains significant potential to enhance regulatory and supervisory convergence in the internal market. Integrated financial markets require more integrated supervisory arrangements to function effectively, while more centralised supervisory arrangements can, in turn, foster market integration. For this reason, the EU has engaged in further integration across the broader financial sector on a sound and stable basis. In particular, the Capital Markets Union ("CMU") has been launched so a s to lay the foundations for a fully functional internal market for capital markets. In this context, the Five Presidents' Report on Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union of June 2015 1 highlighted the need to strengthen the EU supervisory framew ork, leading ultimately to a single capital-markets supervisor. More recently, the Commission Reflection Paper on the deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union 2 suggests that a review of the EU supervisory framework – in particular of the European Secu rities and Markets Authority ("ESMA") - should deliver the first steps towards such a single supervisor by 2019. The Reflection Paper also called for completing the Financial Union - comprising both a Banking Union and a Capital Markets Union– by 2019 so a s to guarantee the integrity of the euro and improve the functioning of the euro area and the EU as a whole. Global financial markets are strongly interconnected, and the EU's regulatory framework is largely based on international standards agreed in the w ake of the financial crisis notably among G20 countries. As the EU is striving to accelerate the completion of the CMU, it is therefore essential that EU supervisory arrangements continue to develop in a manner which allows to reap the full potential of i nternationally integrated financial markets while ensuring that cross-border risks between the EU and the rest of the world can be monitored and managed effectively. The ESAs have a key role to play in this regard. Finally, the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the EU reinforces these challenges for supervisory arrangements within the remaining EU27. The future departure of the EU’s currently largest financial centre means that EU27 capital markets need to develop further and supervisory arrangements must be strengthened to ensure that financial markets continue to support the economy on an adequate and sound basis. The objective of the present proposal is to adjust and upgrade the ESAs framework to ensure they can assume an enhanced responsibility for financial market supervision. The ESAs must be adequately equipped in terms of powers, governance and funding. First, where existing powers of the ESAs have proven partially insufficient and unclearly defined, for example as regards the consistent application of EU law, the drafting of technical advice or the provision of ongoing support to equivalence decisions, they must be strengthened and improved. The current scope of the ESAs' mandate must also be reconsidered in light of the policy objectives of the CMU. More common direct supervision in targeted areas is necessary to ensure more consistent supervisory practices and implementation of EU financial services rules. The 2017 review of the ESA Regulations concluded that the supervision of certain activities and entities with particular importance for the Union as a whole or with a significant degree of cross-border business should be carried out by the ESAs instead of by national competent authorities. Similarly, the ESAs should be more involved in the authorisation and supervision of entities from non-EU countries that are active in the Union. Second, this proposal aims at establishing a more effective governance of the ESAs. The incentive structure in the decision-making process of the ESAs as it stands today leads to the absence of decisions in particular in the area of regulatory convergence and supervisory convergence, or promotes decisions that are predominantly oriented towards national instead of broader EU interests. This reflects, to so me extent, an inherent tension between the European mandate of the ESAs and the national mandate of the competent authorities that are members of the ESA Boards. 3 This position is not well aligned with the objective of supervisory convergence. A greater role for the ESAs in deepening financial integration or strengthening the stability of the internal market will also require more effective convergence powers. 4 Third, the ESAs need an appropriate funding base which allows them to allocate resources in relation to their needs to fulfil their objective. Current budget arrangements constrain and will continue to constrain the ESAs' activities, as Member States for different reasons might be unwilling to increase national contributions further. The present proposal sets out specific amendments to the ESA Regulations 5 and various sector acts 6 to reinforce the powers, governance and funding framework of the ESAs, as these are the areas which need to be reinforced to allow the ESAs to meet the challenges outlin ed above. The impact assessment report accompanying this proposal considers the costs and benefits of these amendments. It sets out a number of options of measures intended to enhance the powers of the ESAs at EU level, improve their governance (including decision- making), and to ensure that their funding framework is sustainable and commensurate with current and future tasks. The impact assessment provides comprehensive evidence that the proposed amendments contribute effectively to reinforcing the ESA framework and thereby to the overall stability of the EU financial system, while keeping costs to the EU General Budget and stakeholders at a minimum. The proposed amendments also contribute to the further development and deepening of the CMU, in line with the political priorities of the Commission. 
Revised version (Article 43 Tasks):
1. The Board of Supervisors shall give guidance to the work of the Authority and shall be in charge of taking the decisions referred to in Chapter II. The Board of Supervisors shall adopt the opinions, recommendations, guidelines and decisions of the Authority, and issue the advice referred to in Chapter II, based on a proposal of the relevant internal committee or panel, the Chairperson, or of the Management Board, as applicable. 4. The Board of Supervisors shall adopt, before 30 September of each year, on the basis of a proposal by the Management Board, the work programme of the Authority for the coming year, and shall transmit it for information to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission. The work programme shall be adopted without prejudice to the annual budgetary procedure and shall be made public. 5. The Board of Supervisors shall adopt, on the basis of a proposal by the Management Board, the annual report on the activities of the Authority, including on the performance of the Chairperson’s duties, and shall transmit that report to the European Parliament, to the Council, to the Commission, to the Court of Auditors and to the European Economic and Social Committee by 15 June each year. The report shall be made public. 6. The Board of Supervisors shall adopt the multi-annual work programme of the Authority, and shall transmit it for information to the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission. The multi-annual work programme shall be adopted without prejudice to the annual budgetary procedure and shall be made public. 7. The Board of Supervisors shall adopt the budget in accordance with Article 63. 8. The Board of Supervisors shall exercise disciplinary authority over the Chairperson and the Executive Director. It may remove the Executive Director from office in accordance with Article 51(5).
Article 44 Decision making
1. Decisions of the Board of Supervisors shall be taken by a simple majority of its members. Each member shall have one vote. With regard to the acts specified in Articles 10 to 16 and measures and decisions adopted under the third subparagraph of Article 9(5) and Chapter VI and by way of derogation from the first subparagraph of this paragraph, the Board of Supervisors shall take decisions on the basis of a qualified majority of its members, as defined in Article 16(4) of the Treaty on European Union and in Article 3 of the Protocol (No 36) on transitional provisions. With regard to decisions in accordance with Article 19(3), for decisions taken by the consolidating supervisor, the decision proposed by the panel shall be considered as adopted, if approved by a simple majority, unless it is rejected by members representing a blocking minority of the votes as defined in Article 16(4) of the Treaty on European Union and in Article 3 of the Protocol (No 36) on transitional provisions. For all other decisions in accordance with Article 19(3), the decision proposed by the panel shall be adopted by a simple majority of the members of the Board of Supervisors. Each member shall have one vote. 2. Meetings of the Board of Supervisors shall be convened by the Chairperson at his own initiative or at the request of one third of its members, and shall be chaired by the Chairperson. 3. The Board of Supervisors shall adopt and make public its rules of procedure. 4. The rules of procedure shall set out in detail the arrangements governing voting, including, where appropriate, the rules governing quorums. The non-voting members and the observers, with the exception of the Chairperson and the Executive Director, shall not attend any discussions within the Board of Supervisors relating to individual financial market participants, unless otherwise provided for in Article 75(3) or in the acts referred to in Article 1(2).
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Integrated financial markets bring significant benefits to the funding of the European economy and for promoting jobs and growth on a sound and sustainable basis. To promote financial integration and market integrity while safeguarding financial stability, the EU internal market for financial services requires common rules and strong supervisory coordination. When the EU overhauled its financial system in response to the financial crisis, and in line with global efforts, it therefore introduced a Single Rulebook for financial regulation in Europe and created the European Supervisory Authorities ("ESAs"). The ESAs constitute an institutional cornerstone of the comprehensive reform package and have played a key role in ensuring that the financial markets across the EU are well regulated, strong and stable. They contribute to the development and consistent application of the Single Rulebook, solve cross-border problems, and thereby promote both regulatory and supervisory convergence. Despite the post-crisis measures, there remains significant potential to enhance regulatory and supervisory convergence in the internal market. Integrated financial markets require more integrated supervisory arrangements to function effectively, while more centralised supervisory arrangements can, in turn, foster market integration. For this reason, the EU has engaged in further integration across the broader financial sector on a sound and stable basis. In particular, the Capital Markets Union ("CMU") has been launched so a s to lay the foundations for a fully functional internal market for capital markets. In this context, the Five Presidents' Report on Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union of June 2015 1 highlighted the need to strengthen the EU supervisory framew ork, leading ultimately to a single capital-markets supervisor. More recently, the Commission Reflection Paper on the deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union 2 suggests that a review of the EU supervisory framework – in particular of the European Secu rities and Markets Authority ("ESMA") - should deliver the first steps towards such a single supervisor by 2019. The Reflection Paper also called for completing the Financial Union - comprising both a Banking Union and a Capital Markets Union– by 2019 so a s to guarantee the integrity of the euro and improve the functioning of the euro area and the EU as a whole. Global financial markets are strongly interconnected, and the EU's regulatory framework is largely based on international standards agreed in the w ake of the financial crisis notably among G20 countries. As the EU is striving to accelerate the completion of the CMU, it is therefore essential that EU supervisory arrangements continue to develop in a manner which allows to reap the full potential of i nternationally integrated financial markets while ensuring that cross-border risks between the EU and the rest of the world can be monitored and managed effectively. The ESAs have a key role to play in this regard. Finally, the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the EU reinforces these challenges for supervisory arrangements within the remaining EU27. The future departure of the EU’s currently largest financial centre means that EU27 capital markets need to develop further and supervisory arrangements must be strengthened to ensure that financial markets continue to support the economy on an adequate and sound basis. The objective of the present proposal is to adjust and upgrade the ESAs framework to ensure they can assume an enhanced responsibility for financial market supervision. The ESAs must be adequately equipped in terms of powers, governance and funding. First, where existing powers of the ESAs have proven partially insufficient and unclearly defined, for example as regards the consistent application of EU law, the drafting of technical advice or the provision of ongoing support to equivalence decisions, they must be strengthened and improved. The current scope of the ESAs' mandate must also be reconsidered in light of the policy objectives of the CMU. More common direct supervision in targeted areas is necessary to ensure more consistent supervisory practices and implementation of EU financial services rules. The 2017 review of the ESA Regulations concluded that the supervision of certain activities and entities with particular importance for the Union as a whole or with a significant degree of cross-border business should be carried out by the ESAs instead of by national competent authorities. Similarly, the ESAs should be more involved in the authorisation and supervision of entities from non-EU countries that are active in the Union. Second, this proposal aims at establishing a more effective governance of the ESAs. The incentive structure in the decision-making process of the ESAs as it stands today leads to the absence of decisions in particular in the area of regulatory convergence and supervisory convergence, or promotes decisions that are predominantly oriented towards national instead of broader EU interests. This reflects, to so me extent, an inherent tension between the European mandate of the ESAs and the national mandate of the competent authorities that are members of the ESA Boards. 3 This position is not well aligned with the objective of supervisory convergence. A greater role for the ESAs in deepening financial integration or strengthening the stability of the internal market will also require more effective convergence powers. 4 Third, the ESAs need an appropriate funding base which allows them to allocate resources in relation to their needs to fulfil their objective. Current budget arrangements constrain and will continue to constrain the ESAs' activities, as Member States for different reasons might be unwilling to increase national contributions further. The present proposal sets out specific amendments to the ESA Regulations 5 and various sector acts 6 to reinforce the powers, governance and funding framework of the ESAs, as these are the areas which need to be reinforced to allow the ESAs to meet the challenges outlin ed above. The impact assessment report accompanying this proposal considers the costs and benefits of these amendments. It sets out a number of options of measures intended to enhance the powers of the ESAs at EU level, improve their governance (including decision- making), and to ensure that their funding framework is sustainable and commensurate with current and future tasks. The impact assessment provides comprehensive evidence that the proposed amendments contribute effectively to reinforcing the ESA framework and thereby to the overall stability of the EU financial system, while keeping costs to the EU General Budget and stakeholders at a minimum. The proposed amendments also contribute to the further development and deepening of the CMU, in line with the political priorities of the Commission. 
Revised version (Article 44 Decision making):
1. Decisions of the Board of Supervisors shall be taken by a simple majority of its members. Each voting member shall have one vote. With regard to the acts specified in Articles 10 to 16 of this Regulation and measures and decisions adopted under the third subparagraph of Article 9(5) of this Regulation, and Chapter VI of this Regulation and, by way of derogation from the first subparagraph of this paragraph, the Board of Supervisors shall take decisions on the basis of a qualified majority of its members, as defined in Article 16(4) TEU and in Article 3 of the Protocol No 36 on transitional provisions The Chairperson shall not vote on the decisions referred to in the second subparagraph. With regard to the composition of the panels in accordance with Article 41(2), (3) and (4), and the members of the peer review committee referred to in Article 30(2), the Board of Supervisors, when considering the proposals by the Chairperson, shall strive for consensus. In the absence of consensus, decisions of the Board of Supervisors shall be taken by a majority of three quarters of its voting members. Each voting member shall have one vote. With regard to decisions adopted under Article 18(3) and (4), and by way of derogation from the first subparagraph of this paragraph, the Board of Supervisors shall take decisions on the basis of a simple majority of its voting members. 2. Meetings of the Board of Supervisors shall be convened by the Chairperson at his own initiative or at the request of one third of its members, and shall be chaired by the Chairperson. 3. The Board of Supervisors shall adopt and make public its rules of procedure. 4. With regard to the decisions in accordance with Articles 17, 19 and 30, the Board of Supervisors shall vote on the proposed decisions using a written procedure. The voting members of the Board of Supervisors shall have eight working days to vote. Each voting member shall have one vote. The proposed decision shall be considered adopted unless a simple majority of voting members of the Board of Supervisors objects. Abstentions shall not be counted as approvals or as objections, and shall not be considered when calculating the number of votes cast. If three voting members of the Board of Supervisors object to the written procedure, the draft decision shall be discussed and decided on by the Board of Supervisors in accordance with the procedure set out in paragraph 1 of this Article. The non-voting members and the observers, with the exception of the Executive Director, shall not attend any discussions within the Board of Supervisors relating to individual financial market participants, unless otherwise provided for in Article 75(3) or in the legislative acts referred to in Article 1(2). 5. The Authority’s Chairperson shall have the prerogative to call a vote at any time. Without prejudice to that power and to the effectiveness of the Authority’s decision-making procedures, the Board of Supervisors of the Authority shall strive for consensus when taking its decisions.
Article 45 Composition
1. The Management Board shall be composed of the Chairperson and six other members of the Board of Supervisors, elected by and from the voting members of the Board of Supervisors. Other than the Chairperson, each member of the Management Board shall have an alternate, who may replace him if he is prevented from attending. The term of office of the members elected by the Board of Supervisors shall be two-and-a-half years. That term may be extended once. The composition of the Management Board shall be balanced and proportionate and shall reflect the Union as a whole. Mandates shall be overlapping and an appropriate rotating arrangement shall apply. 2. Decisions by the Management Board shall be adopted on the basis of a majority of the members present. Each member shall have one vote. The Executive Director and a representative of the Commission shall participate in meetings of the Management Board without the right to vote. The representative of the Commission shall have the right to vote on matters referred to in Article 63. The Management Board shall adopt and make public its rules of procedure. 3. Meetings of the Management Board shall be convened by the Chairperson at his own initiative or at the request of at least a third of its members, and shall be chaired by the Chairperson. The Management Board shall meet prior to every meeting of the Board of Supervisors and as often as the Management Board deems necessary. It shall meet at least five times a year. 4. The members of the Management Board may, subject to the rules of procedure, be assisted by advisers or experts. The non-voting members, with the exception of the Executive Director, shall not attend any discussions within the Management Board relating to individual financial market participants.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Integrated financial markets bring significant benefits to the funding of the European economy and for promoting jobs and growth on a sound and sustainable basis. To promote financial integration and market integrity while safeguarding financial stability, the EU internal market for financial services requires common rules and strong supervisory coordination. When the EU overhauled its financial system in response to the financial crisis, and in line with global efforts, it therefore introduced a Single Rulebook for financial regulation in Europe and created the European Supervisory Authorities ("ESAs"). The ESAs constitute an institutional cornerstone of the comprehensive reform package and have played a key role in ensuring that the financial markets across the EU are well regulated, strong and stable. They contribute to the development and consistent application of the Single Rulebook, solve cross-border problems, and thereby promote both regulatory and supervisory convergence. Despite the post-crisis measures, there remains significant potential to enhance regulatory and supervisory convergence in the internal market. Integrated financial markets require more integrated supervisory arrangements to function effectively, while more centralised supervisory arrangements can, in turn, foster market integration. For this reason, the EU has engaged in further integration across the broader financial sector on a sound and stable basis. In particular, the Capital Markets Union ("CMU") has been launched so a s to lay the foundations for a fully functional internal market for capital markets. In this context, the Five Presidents' Report on Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union of June 2015 1 highlighted the need to strengthen the EU supervisory framew ork, leading ultimately to a single capital-markets supervisor. More recently, the Commission Reflection Paper on the deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union 2 suggests that a review of the EU supervisory framework – in particular of the European Secu rities and Markets Authority ("ESMA") - should deliver the first steps towards such a single supervisor by 2019. The Reflection Paper also called for completing the Financial Union - comprising both a Banking Union and a Capital Markets Union– by 2019 so a s to guarantee the integrity of the euro and improve the functioning of the euro area and the EU as a whole. Global financial markets are strongly interconnected, and the EU's regulatory framework is largely based on international standards agreed in the w ake of the financial crisis notably among G20 countries. As the EU is striving to accelerate the completion of the CMU, it is therefore essential that EU supervisory arrangements continue to develop in a manner which allows to reap the full potential of i nternationally integrated financial markets while ensuring that cross-border risks between the EU and the rest of the world can be monitored and managed effectively. The ESAs have a key role to play in this regard. Finally, the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the EU reinforces these challenges for supervisory arrangements within the remaining EU27. The future departure of the EU’s currently largest financial centre means that EU27 capital markets need to develop further and supervisory arrangements must be strengthened to ensure that financial markets continue to support the economy on an adequate and sound basis. The objective of the present proposal is to adjust and upgrade the ESAs framework to ensure they can assume an enhanced responsibility for financial market supervision. The ESAs must be adequately equipped in terms of powers, governance and funding. First, where existing powers of the ESAs have proven partially insufficient and unclearly defined, for example as regards the consistent application of EU law, the drafting of technical advice or the provision of ongoing support to equivalence decisions, they must be strengthened and improved. The current scope of the ESAs' mandate must also be reconsidered in light of the policy objectives of the CMU. More common direct supervision in targeted areas is necessary to ensure more consistent supervisory practices and implementation of EU financial services rules. The 2017 review of the ESA Regulations concluded that the supervision of certain activities and entities with particular importance for the Union as a whole or with a significant degree of cross-border business should be carried out by the ESAs instead of by national competent authorities. Similarly, the ESAs should be more involved in the authorisation and supervision of entities from non-EU countries that are active in the Union. Second, this proposal aims at establishing a more effective governance of the ESAs. The incentive structure in the decision-making process of the ESAs as it stands today leads to the absence of decisions in particular in the area of regulatory convergence and supervisory convergence, or promotes decisions that are predominantly oriented towards national instead of broader EU interests. This reflects, to so me extent, an inherent tension between the European mandate of the ESAs and the national mandate of the competent authorities that are members of the ESA Boards. 3 This position is not well aligned with the objective of supervisory convergence. A greater role for the ESAs in deepening financial integration or strengthening the stability of the internal market will also require more effective convergence powers. 4 Third, the ESAs need an appropriate funding base which allows them to allocate resources in relation to their needs to fulfil their objective. Current budget arrangements constrain and will continue to constrain the ESAs' activities, as Member States for different reasons might be unwilling to increase national contributions further. The present proposal sets out specific amendments to the ESA Regulations 5 and various sector acts 6 to reinforce the powers, governance and funding framework of the ESAs, as these are the areas which need to be reinforced to allow the ESAs to meet the challenges outlin ed above. The impact assessment report accompanying this proposal considers the costs and benefits of these amendments. It sets out a number of options of measures intended to enhance the powers of the ESAs at EU level, improve their governance (including decision- making), and to ensure that their funding framework is sustainable and commensurate with current and future tasks. The impact assessment provides comprehensive evidence that the proposed amendments contribute effectively to reinforcing the ESA framework and thereby to the overall stability of the EU financial system, while keeping costs to the EU General Budget and stakeholders at a minimum. The proposed amendments also contribute to the further development and deepening of the CMU, in line with the political priorities of the Commission. 
Revised version (Article 45 Composition):
1. The Management Board shall be composed of the Chairperson and six members of the Board of Supervisors, elected by and from the voting members of the Board of Supervisors. Other than the Chairperson, each member of the Management Board shall have an alternate, who may replace him or her if he or she is prevented from attending. 2. The term of office of the members elected by the Board of Supervisors shall be two-and-a-half years. That term may be extended once. The composition of the Management Board shall be gender balanced and proportionate and shall reflect the Union as a whole. Mandates shall be overlapping and an appropriate rotating arrangement shall apply 3. Meetings of the Management Board shall be convened by the Chairperson at his or her own initiative or at the request of at least a third of its members, and shall be chaired by the Chairperson. The Management Board shall meet prior to every meeting of the Board of Supervisors and as often as the Management Board deems necessary. It shall meet at least five times a year. 4. The members of the Management Board may, subject to the rules of procedure, be assisted by advisers or experts. The non-voting members, with the exception of the Executive Director, shall not attend any discussions within the Management Board relating to individual financial market participants.
Article 46 Independence
The members of the Management Board shall act independently and objectively in the sole interest of the Union as a whole and shall neither seek nor take instructions from the Union institutions or bodies, from any government of a Member State or from any other public or private body. Neither Member States, the Union institutions or bodies, nor any other public or private body shall seek to influence the members of the Management Board in the performance of their tasks.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Integrated financial markets bring significant benefits to the funding of the European economy and for promoting jobs and growth on a sound and sustainable basis. To promote financial integration and market integrity while safeguarding financial stability, the EU internal market for financial services requires common rules and strong supervisory coordination. When the EU overhauled its financial system in response to the financial crisis, and in line with global efforts, it therefore introduced a Single Rulebook for financial regulation in Europe and created the European Supervisory Authorities ("ESAs"). The ESAs constitute an institutional cornerstone of the comprehensive reform package and have played a key role in ensuring that the financial markets across the EU are well regulated, strong and stable. They contribute to the development and consistent application of the Single Rulebook, solve cross-border problems, and thereby promote both regulatory and supervisory convergence. Despite the post-crisis measures, there remains significant potential to enhance regulatory and supervisory convergence in the internal market. Integrated financial markets require more integrated supervisory arrangements to function effectively, while more centralised supervisory arrangements can, in turn, foster market integration. For this reason, the EU has engaged in further integration across the broader financial sector on a sound and stable basis. In particular, the Capital Markets Union ("CMU") has been launched so a s to lay the foundations for a fully functional internal market for capital markets. In this context, the Five Presidents' Report on Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union of June 2015 1 highlighted the need to strengthen the EU supervisory framew ork, leading ultimately to a single capital-markets supervisor. More recently, the Commission Reflection Paper on the deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union 2 suggests that a review of the EU supervisory framework – in particular of the European Secu rities and Markets Authority ("ESMA") - should deliver the first steps towards such a single supervisor by 2019. The Reflection Paper also called for completing the Financial Union - comprising both a Banking Union and a Capital Markets Union– by 2019 so a s to guarantee the integrity of the euro and improve the functioning of the euro area and the EU as a whole. Global financial markets are strongly interconnected, and the EU's regulatory framework is largely based on international standards agreed in the w ake of the financial crisis notably among G20 countries. As the EU is striving to accelerate the completion of the CMU, it is therefore essential that EU supervisory arrangements continue to develop in a manner which allows to reap the full potential of i nternationally integrated financial markets while ensuring that cross-border risks between the EU and the rest of the world can be monitored and managed effectively. The ESAs have a key role to play in this regard. Finally, the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the EU reinforces these challenges for supervisory arrangements within the remaining EU27. The future departure of the EU’s currently largest financial centre means that EU27 capital markets need to develop further and supervisory arrangements must be strengthened to ensure that financial markets continue to support the economy on an adequate and sound basis. The objective of the present proposal is to adjust and upgrade the ESAs framework to ensure they can assume an enhanced responsibility for financial market supervision. The ESAs must be adequately equipped in terms of powers, governance and funding. First, where existing powers of the ESAs have proven partially insufficient and unclearly defined, for example as regards the consistent application of EU law, the drafting of technical advice or the provision of ongoing support to equivalence decisions, they must be strengthened and improved. The current scope of the ESAs' mandate must also be reconsidered in light of the policy objectives of the CMU. More common direct supervision in targeted areas is necessary to ensure more consistent supervisory practices and implementation of EU financial services rules. The 2017 review of the ESA Regulations concluded that the supervision of certain activities and entities with particular importance for the Union as a whole or with a significant degree of cross-border business should be carried out by the ESAs instead of by national competent authorities. Similarly, the ESAs should be more involved in the authorisation and supervision of entities from non-EU countries that are active in the Union. Second, this proposal aims at establishing a more effective governance of the ESAs. The incentive structure in the decision-making process of the ESAs as it stands today leads to the absence of decisions in particular in the area of regulatory convergence and supervisory convergence, or promotes decisions that are predominantly oriented towards national instead of broader EU interests. This reflects, to so me extent, an inherent tension between the European mandate of the ESAs and the national mandate of the competent authorities that are members of the ESA Boards. 3 This position is not well aligned with the objective of supervisory convergence. A greater role for the ESAs in deepening financial integration or strengthening the stability of the internal market will also require more effective convergence powers. 4 Third, the ESAs need an appropriate funding base which allows them to allocate resources in relation to their needs to fulfil their objective. Current budget arrangements constrain and will continue to constrain the ESAs' activities, as Member States for different reasons might be unwilling to increase national contributions further. The present proposal sets out specific amendments to the ESA Regulations 5 and various sector acts 6 to reinforce the powers, governance and funding framework of the ESAs, as these are the areas which need to be reinforced to allow the ESAs to meet the challenges outlin ed above. The impact assessment report accompanying this proposal considers the costs and benefits of these amendments. It sets out a number of options of measures intended to enhance the powers of the ESAs at EU level, improve their governance (including decision- making), and to ensure that their funding framework is sustainable and commensurate with current and future tasks. The impact assessment provides comprehensive evidence that the proposed amendments contribute effectively to reinforcing the ESA framework and thereby to the overall stability of the EU financial system, while keeping costs to the EU General Budget and stakeholders at a minimum. The proposed amendments also contribute to the further development and deepening of the CMU, in line with the political priorities of the Commission. 
Revised version (Article 46 Independence of the Management Board):
The members of the Management Board shall act independently and objectively in the sole interest of the Union as a whole and shall neither seek nor take instructions from the Union institutions or bodies, from any government or from any other public or private body. Member States, Union institutions or bodies and any other public or private body shall not seek to influence the members of the Management Board in the performance of their tasks.
Article 47 Tasks
1. The Management Board shall ensure that the Authority carries out its mission and performs the tasks assigned to it in accordance with this Regulation. 2. The Management Board shall propose, for adoption by the Board of Supervisors, an annual and multi-annual work programme. 3. The Management Board shall exercise its budgetary powers in accordance with Articles 63 and 64. 4. The Management Board shall adopt the Authority’s staff policy plan and, pursuant to Article 68(2), the necessary implementing measures of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities (hereinafter the Staff Regulations’). 5. The Management Board shall adopt the special provisions on right of access to the documents of the Authority, in accordance with Article 72. 6. The Management Board shall propose an annual report on the activities of the Authority, including on the Chairperson’s duties, on the basis of the draft report referred to in Article 53(7) to the Board of Supervisors for approval. 7. The Management Board shall adopt and make public its rules of procedure. 8. The Management Board shall appoint and remove the members of the Board of Appeal in accordance with Article 58(3) and (5).
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Integrated financial markets bring significant benefits to the funding of the European economy and for promoting jobs and growth on a sound and sustainable basis. To promote financial integration and market integrity while safeguarding financial stability, the EU internal market for financial services requires common rules and strong supervisory coordination. When the EU overhauled its financial system in response to the financial crisis, and in line with global efforts, it therefore introduced a Single Rulebook for financial regulation in Europe and created the European Supervisory Authorities ("ESAs"). The ESAs constitute an institutional cornerstone of the comprehensive reform package and have played a key role in ensuring that the financial markets across the EU are well regulated, strong and stable. They contribute to the development and consistent application of the Single Rulebook, solve cross-border problems, and thereby promote both regulatory and supervisory convergence. Despite the post-crisis measures, there remains significant potential to enhance regulatory and supervisory convergence in the internal market. Integrated financial markets require more integrated supervisory arrangements to function effectively, while more centralised supervisory arrangements can, in turn, foster market integration. For this reason, the EU has engaged in further integration across the broader financial sector on a sound and stable basis. In particular, the Capital Markets Union ("CMU") has been launched so a s to lay the foundations for a fully functional internal market for capital markets. In this context, the Five Presidents' Report on Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union of June 2015 1 highlighted the need to strengthen the EU supervisory framew ork, leading ultimately to a single capital-markets supervisor. More recently, the Commission Reflection Paper on the deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union 2 suggests that a review of the EU supervisory framework – in particular of the European Secu rities and Markets Authority ("ESMA") - should deliver the first steps towards such a single supervisor by 2019. The Reflection Paper also called for completing the Financial Union - comprising both a Banking Union and a Capital Markets Union– by 2019 so a s to guarantee the integrity of the euro and improve the functioning of the euro area and the EU as a whole. Global financial markets are strongly interconnected, and the EU's regulatory framework is largely based on international standards agreed in the w ake of the financial crisis notably among G20 countries. As the EU is striving to accelerate the completion of the CMU, it is therefore essential that EU supervisory arrangements continue to develop in a manner which allows to reap the full potential of i nternationally integrated financial markets while ensuring that cross-border risks between the EU and the rest of the world can be monitored and managed effectively. The ESAs have a key role to play in this regard. Finally, the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the EU reinforces these challenges for supervisory arrangements within the remaining EU27. The future departure of the EU’s currently largest financial centre means that EU27 capital markets need to develop further and supervisory arrangements must be strengthened to ensure that financial markets continue to support the economy on an adequate and sound basis. The objective of the present proposal is to adjust and upgrade the ESAs framework to ensure they can assume an enhanced responsibility for financial market supervision. The ESAs must be adequately equipped in terms of powers, governance and funding. First, where existing powers of the ESAs have proven partially insufficient and unclearly defined, for example as regards the consistent application of EU law, the drafting of technical advice or the provision of ongoing support to equivalence decisions, they must be strengthened and improved. The current scope of the ESAs' mandate must also be reconsidered in light of the policy objectives of the CMU. More common direct supervision in targeted areas is necessary to ensure more consistent supervisory practices and implementation of EU financial services rules. The 2017 review of the ESA Regulations concluded that the supervision of certain activities and entities with particular importance for the Union as a whole or with a significant degree of cross-border business should be carried out by the ESAs instead of by national competent authorities. Similarly, the ESAs should be more involved in the authorisation and supervision of entities from non-EU countries that are active in the Union. Second, this proposal aims at establishing a more effective governance of the ESAs. The incentive structure in the decision-making process of the ESAs as it stands today leads to the absence of decisions in particular in the area of regulatory convergence and supervisory convergence, or promotes decisions that are predominantly oriented towards national instead of broader EU interests. This reflects, to so me extent, an inherent tension between the European mandate of the ESAs and the national mandate of the competent authorities that are members of the ESA Boards. 3 This position is not well aligned with the objective of supervisory convergence. A greater role for the ESAs in deepening financial integration or strengthening the stability of the internal market will also require more effective convergence powers. 4 Third, the ESAs need an appropriate funding base which allows them to allocate resources in relation to their needs to fulfil their objective. Current budget arrangements constrain and will continue to constrain the ESAs' activities, as Member States for different reasons might be unwilling to increase national contributions further. The present proposal sets out specific amendments to the ESA Regulations 5 and various sector acts 6 to reinforce the powers, governance and funding framework of the ESAs, as these are the areas which need to be reinforced to allow the ESAs to meet the challenges outlin ed above. The impact assessment report accompanying this proposal considers the costs and benefits of these amendments. It sets out a number of options of measures intended to enhance the powers of the ESAs at EU level, improve their governance (including decision- making), and to ensure that their funding framework is sustainable and commensurate with current and future tasks. The impact assessment provides comprehensive evidence that the proposed amendments contribute effectively to reinforcing the ESA framework and thereby to the overall stability of the EU financial system, while keeping costs to the EU General Budget and stakeholders at a minimum. The proposed amendments also contribute to the further development and deepening of the CMU, in line with the political priorities of the Commission. 
Revised version (Article 47 Tasks):
1. The Management Board shall ensure that the Authority carries out its mission and performs the tasks assigned to it in accordance with this Regulation. 2. The Management Board shall propose, for adoption by the Board of Supervisors, an annual and multi-annual work programme. 3. The Management Board shall exercise its budgetary powers in accordance with Articles 63 and 64. 3a. The Management Board may examine, give an opinion on, and make proposals on all matters to be decided by the Board of Supervisors after discussion at the relevant internal committee, save for peer reviews according to Article 30. 4. The Management Board shall adopt the Authority’s staff policy plan and, pursuant to Article 68(2), the necessary implementing measures of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Communities (hereinafter the Staff Regulations’). 5. The Management Board shall adopt the special provisions on right of access to the documents of the Authority, in accordance with Article 72. 6. The Management Board shall propose an annual report on the activities of the Authority, including on the Chairperson’s duties, to the Board of Supervisors for approval. 7. The Management Board shall adopt and make public its rules of procedure. 8. The Management Board shall appoint and remove the members of the Board of Appeal in accordance with Article 58(3) and (5), taking duly into account a proposal by the Board of Supervisors. 9. The members of the Management Board shall make public all meetings held and any hospitality received. Expenses shall be recorded publicly in accordance with the Staff Regulations.
Article 48 Appointment and tasks
1. The Authority shall be represented by a Chairperson, who shall be a full-time independent professional. The Chairperson shall be responsible for preparing the work of the Board of Supervisors and shall chair the meetings of the Board of Supervisors and the Management Board. 2. The Chairperson shall be appointed by the Board of Supervisors on the basis of merit, skills, knowledge of financial market participants and markets, and of experience relevant to financial supervision and regulation, following an open selection procedure. Before taking up his duties, and up to 1 month after the selection by the Board of Supervisors, the European Parliament may, after having heard the candidate selected by the Board of Supervisors, object to the designation of the selected person. The Board of Supervisors shall also elect, from among its members, an alternate who shall carry out the functions of the Chairperson in his absence. That alternate shall not be elected from among the members of the Management Board. 3. The Chairperson’s term of office shall be 5 years and may be extended once. 4. In the course of the 9 months preceding the end of the five-year term of office of the Chairperson, the Board of Supervisors shall evaluate: (a) the results achieved in the first term of office and the way they were achieved; (b) the Authority’s duties and requirements in the coming years. The Board of Supervisors, taking into account the evaluation may extend the term of office of the Chairperson once subject to confirmation by the European Parliament. 5. The Chairperson may be removed from office only by the European Parliament following a decision of the Board of Supervisors. The Chairperson shall not prevent the Board of Supervisors from discussing matters relating to the Chairperson, in particular the need for his removal, and shall not be involved in deliberations concerning such a matter.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Integrated financial markets bring significant benefits to the funding of the European economy and for promoting jobs and growth on a sound and sustainable basis. To promote financial integration and market integrity while safeguarding financial stability, the EU internal market for financial services requires common rules and strong supervisory coordination. When the EU overhauled its financial system in response to the financial crisis, and in line with global efforts, it therefore introduced a Single Rulebook for financial regulation in Europe and created the European Supervisory Authorities ("ESAs"). The ESAs constitute an institutional cornerstone of the comprehensive reform package and have played a key role in ensuring that the financial markets across the EU are well regulated, strong and stable. They contribute to the development and consistent application of the Single Rulebook, solve cross-border problems, and thereby promote both regulatory and supervisory convergence. Despite the post-crisis measures, there remains significant potential to enhance regulatory and supervisory convergence in the internal market. Integrated financial markets require more integrated supervisory arrangements to function effectively, while more centralised supervisory arrangements can, in turn, foster market integration. For this reason, the EU has engaged in further integration across the broader financial sector on a sound and stable basis. In particular, the Capital Markets Union ("CMU") has been launched so a s to lay the foundations for a fully functional internal market for capital markets. In this context, the Five Presidents' Report on Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union of June 2015 1 highlighted the need to strengthen the EU supervisory framew ork, leading ultimately to a single capital-markets supervisor. More recently, the Commission Reflection Paper on the deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union 2 suggests that a review of the EU supervisory framework – in particular of the European Secu rities and Markets Authority ("ESMA") - should deliver the first steps towards such a single supervisor by 2019. The Reflection Paper also called for completing the Financial Union - comprising both a Banking Union and a Capital Markets Union– by 2019 so a s to guarantee the integrity of the euro and improve the functioning of the euro area and the EU as a whole. Global financial markets are strongly interconnected, and the EU's regulatory framework is largely based on international standards agreed in the w ake of the financial crisis notably among G20 countries. As the EU is striving to accelerate the completion of the CMU, it is therefore essential that EU supervisory arrangements continue to develop in a manner which allows to reap the full potential of i nternationally integrated financial markets while ensuring that cross-border risks between the EU and the rest of the world can be monitored and managed effectively. The ESAs have a key role to play in this regard. Finally, the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the EU reinforces these challenges for supervisory arrangements within the remaining EU27. The future departure of the EU’s currently largest financial centre means that EU27 capital markets need to develop further and supervisory arrangements must be strengthened to ensure that financial markets continue to support the economy on an adequate and sound basis. The objective of the present proposal is to adjust and upgrade the ESAs framework to ensure they can assume an enhanced responsibility for financial market supervision. The ESAs must be adequately equipped in terms of powers, governance and funding. First, where existing powers of the ESAs have proven partially insufficient and unclearly defined, for example as regards the consistent application of EU law, the drafting of technical advice or the provision of ongoing support to equivalence decisions, they must be strengthened and improved. The current scope of the ESAs' mandate must also be reconsidered in light of the policy objectives of the CMU. More common direct supervision in targeted areas is necessary to ensure more consistent supervisory practices and implementation of EU financial services rules. The 2017 review of the ESA Regulations concluded that the supervision of certain activities and entities with particular importance for the Union as a whole or with a significant degree of cross-border business should be carried out by the ESAs instead of by national competent authorities. Similarly, the ESAs should be more involved in the authorisation and supervision of entities from non-EU countries that are active in the Union. Second, this proposal aims at establishing a more effective governance of the ESAs. The incentive structure in the decision-making process of the ESAs as it stands today leads to the absence of decisions in particular in the area of regulatory convergence and supervisory convergence, or promotes decisions that are predominantly oriented towards national instead of broader EU interests. This reflects, to so me extent, an inherent tension between the European mandate of the ESAs and the national mandate of the competent authorities that are members of the ESA Boards. 3 This position is not well aligned with the objective of supervisory convergence. A greater role for the ESAs in deepening financial integration or strengthening the stability of the internal market will also require more effective convergence powers. 4 Third, the ESAs need an appropriate funding base which allows them to allocate resources in relation to their needs to fulfil their objective. Current budget arrangements constrain and will continue to constrain the ESAs' activities, as Member States for different reasons might be unwilling to increase national contributions further. The present proposal sets out specific amendments to the ESA Regulations 5 and various sector acts 6 to reinforce the powers, governance and funding framework of the ESAs, as these are the areas which need to be reinforced to allow the ESAs to meet the challenges outlin ed above. The impact assessment report accompanying this proposal considers the costs and benefits of these amendments. It sets out a number of options of measures intended to enhance the powers of the ESAs at EU level, improve their governance (including decision- making), and to ensure that their funding framework is sustainable and commensurate with current and future tasks. The impact assessment provides comprehensive evidence that the proposed amendments contribute effectively to reinforcing the ESA framework and thereby to the overall stability of the EU financial system, while keeping costs to the EU General Budget and stakeholders at a minimum. The proposed amendments also contribute to the further development and deepening of the CMU, in line with the political priorities of the Commission. 
Revised version (Article 48 Appointment and tasks):
1. The Authority shall be represented by a Chairperson, who shall be a full-time independent professional. The Chairperson shall be responsible for preparing the work of the Board of Supervisors, including setting the agenda to be adopted by the Board of Supervisors, convening the meetings and tabling items for decision, and shall chair the meetings of the Board of Supervisors. The Chairperson shall be responsible for setting the agenda of the Management Board, to be adopted by the Management Board, and shall chair the meetings of the Management Board. The Chairperson may invite the Management Board to consider setting up a coordination group in accordance with Article 45b. 2. The Chairperson shall be selected on the basis of merit, skills, knowledge of financial market participants and of markets, and of experience relevant to financial supervision and regulation, following an open selection procedure which shall respect the principle of gender balance and shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union . The Board of Supervisors shall draw up a shortlist of qualified candidates for the position of the Chairperson, with the assistance of the Commission. Based on the shortlist the Council shall adopt a decision to appoint the Chairperson, after confirmation by the European Parliament. Where the Chairperson no longer fulfils the conditions referred to in Article 49 or has been found guilty of serious misconduct, the Council may, acting on a proposal from the Commission which has been approved by the European Parliament, adopt a decision to remove him or her from office. The Board of Supervisors shall also elect, from among its members, a Vice-Chairperson who shall carry out the functions of the Chairperson in the absence of the Chairperson. That Vice-Chairperson shall not be elected from among the members of the Management Board. 3. The Chairperson’s term of office shall be 5 years and may be extended once. 4. In the course of the 9 months preceding the end of the five-year term of office of the Chairperson, the Board of Supervisors shall evaluate: (a) the results achieved in the first term of office and the way they were achieved; (b) the Authority’s duties and requirements in the coming years. For the purpose of the evaluation referred to in the first subparagraph, the tasks of the Chairperson shall be carried out by the Vice-Chairperson. The Council, acting on a proposal from the Board of Supervisors and with the assistance of the Commission, and taking into account the evaluation referred to in the first subparagraph, may extend the term of office of the Chairperson once. 5. The Chairperson may be removed from office only on serious grounds. He or she may only be removed by the European Parliament following a decision of the Council, adopted after consulting the Board of Supervisors.
Article 49 Independence
Without prejudice to the role of the Board of Supervisors in relation to the tasks of the Chairperson, the Chairperson shall neither seek nor take instructions from the Union institutions or bodies, from any government of a Member State or from any other public or private body. Neither Member States, the Union institutions or bodies, nor any other public or private body shall seek to influence the Chairperson in the performance of his tasks. In accordance with the Staff Regulations referred to in Article 68, the Chairperson shall, after leaving service, continue to be bound by the duty to behave with integrity and discretion as regards the acceptance of certain appointments or benefits.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Integrated financial markets bring significant benefits to the funding of the European economy and for promoting jobs and growth on a sound and sustainable basis. To promote financial integration and market integrity while safeguarding financial stability, the EU internal market for financial services requires common rules and strong supervisory coordination. When the EU overhauled its financial system in response to the financial crisis, and in line with global efforts, it therefore introduced a Single Rulebook for financial regulation in Europe and created the European Supervisory Authorities ("ESAs"). The ESAs constitute an institutional cornerstone of the comprehensive reform package and have played a key role in ensuring that the financial markets across the EU are well regulated, strong and stable. They contribute to the development and consistent application of the Single Rulebook, solve cross-border problems, and thereby promote both regulatory and supervisory convergence. Despite the post-crisis measures, there remains significant potential to enhance regulatory and supervisory convergence in the internal market. Integrated financial markets require more integrated supervisory arrangements to function effectively, while more centralised supervisory arrangements can, in turn, foster market integration. For this reason, the EU has engaged in further integration across the broader financial sector on a sound and stable basis. In particular, the Capital Markets Union ("CMU") has been launched so a s to lay the foundations for a fully functional internal market for capital markets. In this context, the Five Presidents' Report on Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union of June 2015 1 highlighted the need to strengthen the EU supervisory framew ork, leading ultimately to a single capital-markets supervisor. More recently, the Commission Reflection Paper on the deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union 2 suggests that a review of the EU supervisory framework – in particular of the European Secu rities and Markets Authority ("ESMA") - should deliver the first steps towards such a single supervisor by 2019. The Reflection Paper also called for completing the Financial Union - comprising both a Banking Union and a Capital Markets Union– by 2019 so a s to guarantee the integrity of the euro and improve the functioning of the euro area and the EU as a whole. Global financial markets are strongly interconnected, and the EU's regulatory framework is largely based on international standards agreed in the w ake of the financial crisis notably among G20 countries. As the EU is striving to accelerate the completion of the CMU, it is therefore essential that EU supervisory arrangements continue to develop in a manner which allows to reap the full potential of i nternationally integrated financial markets while ensuring that cross-border risks between the EU and the rest of the world can be monitored and managed effectively. The ESAs have a key role to play in this regard. Finally, the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the EU reinforces these challenges for supervisory arrangements within the remaining EU27. The future departure of the EU’s currently largest financial centre means that EU27 capital markets need to develop further and supervisory arrangements must be strengthened to ensure that financial markets continue to support the economy on an adequate and sound basis. The objective of the present proposal is to adjust and upgrade the ESAs framework to ensure they can assume an enhanced responsibility for financial market supervision. The ESAs must be adequately equipped in terms of powers, governance and funding. First, where existing powers of the ESAs have proven partially insufficient and unclearly defined, for example as regards the consistent application of EU law, the drafting of technical advice or the provision of ongoing support to equivalence decisions, they must be strengthened and improved. The current scope of the ESAs' mandate must also be reconsidered in light of the policy objectives of the CMU. More common direct supervision in targeted areas is necessary to ensure more consistent supervisory practices and implementation of EU financial services rules. The 2017 review of the ESA Regulations concluded that the supervision of certain activities and entities with particular importance for the Union as a whole or with a significant degree of cross-border business should be carried out by the ESAs instead of by national competent authorities. Similarly, the ESAs should be more involved in the authorisation and supervision of entities from non-EU countries that are active in the Union. Second, this proposal aims at establishing a more effective governance of the ESAs. The incentive structure in the decision-making process of the ESAs as it stands today leads to the absence of decisions in particular in the area of regulatory convergence and supervisory convergence, or promotes decisions that are predominantly oriented towards national instead of broader EU interests. This reflects, to so me extent, an inherent tension between the European mandate of the ESAs and the national mandate of the competent authorities that are members of the ESA Boards. 3 This position is not well aligned with the objective of supervisory convergence. A greater role for the ESAs in deepening financial integration or strengthening the stability of the internal market will also require more effective convergence powers. 4 Third, the ESAs need an appropriate funding base which allows them to allocate resources in relation to their needs to fulfil their objective. Current budget arrangements constrain and will continue to constrain the ESAs' activities, as Member States for different reasons might be unwilling to increase national contributions further. The present proposal sets out specific amendments to the ESA Regulations 5 and various sector acts 6 to reinforce the powers, governance and funding framework of the ESAs, as these are the areas which need to be reinforced to allow the ESAs to meet the challenges outlin ed above. The impact assessment report accompanying this proposal considers the costs and benefits of these amendments. It sets out a number of options of measures intended to enhance the powers of the ESAs at EU level, improve their governance (including decision- making), and to ensure that their funding framework is sustainable and commensurate with current and future tasks. The impact assessment provides comprehensive evidence that the proposed amendments contribute effectively to reinforcing the ESA framework and thereby to the overall stability of the EU financial system, while keeping costs to the EU General Budget and stakeholders at a minimum. The proposed amendments also contribute to the further development and deepening of the CMU, in line with the political priorities of the Commission. 
Revised version (Article 49 Independence of the Chairperson):
Without prejudice to the role of the Board of Supervisors in relation to the tasks of the Chairperson, the Chairperson shall neither seek nor take instructions from the Union institutions or bodies, from any government or from any other public or private body. Neither Member States, the Union institutions or bodies, nor any other public or private body shall seek to influence the Chairperson in the performance of his tasks. In accordance with the Staff Regulations referred to in Article 68, the Chairperson shall, after leaving service, continue to be bound by the duty to behave with integrity and discretion as regards the acceptance of certain appointments or benefits.
Article 50 Report
1. The European Parliament and the Council may invite the Chairperson or his alternate to make a statement, while fully respecting his independence. The Chairperson shall, make a statement before the European Parliament and answer any questions put by its members, whenever so requested. 2. The Chairperson shall report in writing on the main activities of the Authority to the European Parliament when requested and at least 15 days before making the statement referred to in paragraph 1. 3. In addition to the information referred to in Articles 11 to 18 and Articles 20 and 33, the report shall also include any relevant information requested by the European Parliament on an ad-hoc basis.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Integrated financial markets bring significant benefits to the funding of the European economy and for promoting jobs and growth on a sound and sustainable basis. To promote financial integration and market integrity while safeguarding financial stability, the EU internal market for financial services requires common rules and strong supervisory coordination. When the EU overhauled its financial system in response to the financial crisis, and in line with global efforts, it therefore introduced a Single Rulebook for financial regulation in Europe and created the European Supervisory Authorities ("ESAs"). The ESAs constitute an institutional cornerstone of the comprehensive reform package and have played a key role in ensuring that the financial markets across the EU are well regulated, strong and stable. They contribute to the development and consistent application of the Single Rulebook, solve cross-border problems, and thereby promote both regulatory and supervisory convergence. Despite the post-crisis measures, there remains significant potential to enhance regulatory and supervisory convergence in the internal market. Integrated financial markets require more integrated supervisory arrangements to function effectively, while more centralised supervisory arrangements can, in turn, foster market integration. For this reason, the EU has engaged in further integration across the broader financial sector on a sound and stable basis. In particular, the Capital Markets Union ("CMU") has been launched so a s to lay the foundations for a fully functional internal market for capital markets. In this context, the Five Presidents' Report on Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union of June 2015 1 highlighted the need to strengthen the EU supervisory framew ork, leading ultimately to a single capital-markets supervisor. More recently, the Commission Reflection Paper on the deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union 2 suggests that a review of the EU supervisory framework – in particular of the European Secu rities and Markets Authority ("ESMA") - should deliver the first steps towards such a single supervisor by 2019. The Reflection Paper also called for completing the Financial Union - comprising both a Banking Union and a Capital Markets Union– by 2019 so a s to guarantee the integrity of the euro and improve the functioning of the euro area and the EU as a whole. Global financial markets are strongly interconnected, and the EU's regulatory framework is largely based on international standards agreed in the w ake of the financial crisis notably among G20 countries. As the EU is striving to accelerate the completion of the CMU, it is therefore essential that EU supervisory arrangements continue to develop in a manner which allows to reap the full potential of i nternationally integrated financial markets while ensuring that cross-border risks between the EU and the rest of the world can be monitored and managed effectively. The ESAs have a key role to play in this regard. Finally, the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the EU reinforces these challenges for supervisory arrangements within the remaining EU27. The future departure of the EU’s currently largest financial centre means that EU27 capital markets need to develop further and supervisory arrangements must be strengthened to ensure that financial markets continue to support the economy on an adequate and sound basis. The objective of the present proposal is to adjust and upgrade the ESAs framework to ensure they can assume an enhanced responsibility for financial market supervision. The ESAs must be adequately equipped in terms of powers, governance and funding. First, where existing powers of the ESAs have proven partially insufficient and unclearly defined, for example as regards the consistent application of EU law, the drafting of technical advice or the provision of ongoing support to equivalence decisions, they must be strengthened and improved. The current scope of the ESAs' mandate must also be reconsidered in light of the policy objectives of the CMU. More common direct supervision in targeted areas is necessary to ensure more consistent supervisory practices and implementation of EU financial services rules. The 2017 review of the ESA Regulations concluded that the supervision of certain activities and entities with particular importance for the Union as a whole or with a significant degree of cross-border business should be carried out by the ESAs instead of by national competent authorities. Similarly, the ESAs should be more involved in the authorisation and supervision of entities from non-EU countries that are active in the Union. Second, this proposal aims at establishing a more effective governance of the ESAs. The incentive structure in the decision-making process of the ESAs as it stands today leads to the absence of decisions in particular in the area of regulatory convergence and supervisory convergence, or promotes decisions that are predominantly oriented towards national instead of broader EU interests. This reflects, to so me extent, an inherent tension between the European mandate of the ESAs and the national mandate of the competent authorities that are members of the ESA Boards. 3 This position is not well aligned with the objective of supervisory convergence. A greater role for the ESAs in deepening financial integration or strengthening the stability of the internal market will also require more effective convergence powers. 4 Third, the ESAs need an appropriate funding base which allows them to allocate resources in relation to their needs to fulfil their objective. Current budget arrangements constrain and will continue to constrain the ESAs' activities, as Member States for different reasons might be unwilling to increase national contributions further. The present proposal sets out specific amendments to the ESA Regulations 5 and various sector acts 6 to reinforce the powers, governance and funding framework of the ESAs, as these are the areas which need to be reinforced to allow the ESAs to meet the challenges outlin ed above. The impact assessment report accompanying this proposal considers the costs and benefits of these amendments. It sets out a number of options of measures intended to enhance the powers of the ESAs at EU level, improve their governance (including decision- making), and to ensure that their funding framework is sustainable and commensurate with current and future tasks. The impact assessment provides comprehensive evidence that the proposed amendments contribute effectively to reinforcing the ESA framework and thereby to the overall stability of the EU financial system, while keeping costs to the EU General Budget and stakeholders at a minimum. The proposed amendments also contribute to the further development and deepening of the CMU, in line with the political priorities of the Commission.
Article 51 Appointment
1. The Authority shall be managed by an Executive Director, who shall be a full-time independent professional. 2. The Executive Director shall be appointed by the Board of Supervisors, after confirmation by the European Parliament, on the basis of merit, skills, knowledge of financial market participants and markets, and experience relevant to financial supervision and regulation and managerial experience, following an open selection procedure. 3. The Executive Director’s term of office shall be 5 years and may be extended once. 4. In the course of the 9 months preceding the end of the Executive Director’s term of office, the Board of Supervisors shall evaluate in particular: (a) the results achieved in the first term of office and the way they were achieved; (b) the Authority’s duties and requirements in the coming years. The Board of Supervisors, taking into account the evaluation referred to in the first subparagraph, may extend the term of office of the Executive Director once. 5. The Executive Director may be removed from office only upon a decision of the Board of Supervisors.
Article 52 Independence
Without prejudice to the respective roles of the Management Board and the Board of Supervisors in relation to the tasks of the Executive Director, the Executive Director shall neither seek nor take instructions from the Union institutions or bodies, from any government of a Member State or from any other public or private body. Neither Member States, the Union institutions or bodies, nor any other public or private body shall seek to influence the Executive Director in the performance of his tasks. In accordance with the Staff Regulations referred to in Article 68, the Executive Director shall, after leaving service, continue to be bound by the duty to behave with integrity and discretion as regards the acceptance of certain appointments or benefits.
Article 53 Tasks
1. The Executive Director shall be in charge of the management of the Authority and shall prepare the work of the Management Board. 2. The Executive Director shall be responsible for implementing the annual work programme of the Authority under the guidance of the Board of Supervisors and under the control of the Management Board. 3. The Executive Director shall take the necessary measures, notably the adoption of internal administrative instructions and the publication of notices, to ensure the functioning of the Authority, in accordance with this Regulation. 4. The Executive Director shall prepare a multi-annual work programme, as referred to in Article 47(2). 5. Each year by 30 June, the Executive Director shall prepare a work programme for the following year, as referred to in Article 47(2). 6. The Executive Director shall draw up a preliminary draft budget of the Authority pursuant to Article 63 and shall implement the budget of the Authority pursuant to Article 64. 7. Each year the Executive Director shall prepare a draft report with a section on the regulatory and supervisory activities of the Authority and a section on financial and administrative matters. 8. The Executive Director shall exercise in respect to the Authority’s staff the powers laid down in Article 68 and manage staff matters.
Article 54 Establishment
1. The Joint Committee of the European Supervisory Authorities is hereby established. 2. The Joint Committee shall serve as a forum in which the Authority shall cooperate regularly and closely and ensure cross-sectoral consistency with the European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority) and the European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority), in particular regarding: — financial conglomerates, — accounting and auditing, — micro-prudential analyses of cross-sectoral developments, risks and vulnerabilities for financial stability, — retail investment products, — measures combating money laundering; and, — information exchange with the ESRB and developing the relationship between the ESRB and the ESAs, 3. The Joint Committee shall have a dedicated staff provided by the ESAs that shall act as a secretariat. The Authority shall contribute adequate resources to administrative, infrastructure and operational expenses. 4. In the event that a financial market participant reaches across different sectors, the Joint Committee shall resolve disagreements in accordance with Article 56.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Integrated financial markets bring significant benefits to the funding of the European economy and for promoting jobs and growth on a sound and sustainable basis. To promote financial integration and market integrity while safeguarding financial stability, the EU internal market for financial services requires common rules and strong supervisory coordination. When the EU overhauled its financial system in response to the financial crisis, and in line with global efforts, it therefore introduced a Single Rulebook for financial regulation in Europe and created the European Supervisory Authorities ("ESAs"). The ESAs constitute an institutional cornerstone of the comprehensive reform package and have played a key role in ensuring that the financial markets across the EU are well regulated, strong and stable. They contribute to the development and consistent application of the Single Rulebook, solve cross-border problems, and thereby promote both regulatory and supervisory convergence. Despite the post-crisis measures, there remains significant potential to enhance regulatory and supervisory convergence in the internal market. Integrated financial markets require more integrated supervisory arrangements to function effectively, while more centralised supervisory arrangements can, in turn, foster market integration. For this reason, the EU has engaged in further integration across the broader financial sector on a sound and stable basis. In particular, the Capital Markets Union ("CMU") has been launched so a s to lay the foundations for a fully functional internal market for capital markets. In this context, the Five Presidents' Report on Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union of June 2015 1 highlighted the need to strengthen the EU supervisory framew ork, leading ultimately to a single capital-markets supervisor. More recently, the Commission Reflection Paper on the deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union 2 suggests that a review of the EU supervisory framework – in particular of the European Secu rities and Markets Authority ("ESMA") - should deliver the first steps towards such a single supervisor by 2019. The Reflection Paper also called for completing the Financial Union - comprising both a Banking Union and a Capital Markets Union– by 2019 so a s to guarantee the integrity of the euro and improve the functioning of the euro area and the EU as a whole. Global financial markets are strongly interconnected, and the EU's regulatory framework is largely based on international standards agreed in the w ake of the financial crisis notably among G20 countries. As the EU is striving to accelerate the completion of the CMU, it is therefore essential that EU supervisory arrangements continue to develop in a manner which allows to reap the full potential of i nternationally integrated financial markets while ensuring that cross-border risks between the EU and the rest of the world can be monitored and managed effectively. The ESAs have a key role to play in this regard. Finally, the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the EU reinforces these challenges for supervisory arrangements within the remaining EU27. The future departure of the EU’s currently largest financial centre means that EU27 capital markets need to develop further and supervisory arrangements must be strengthened to ensure that financial markets continue to support the economy on an adequate and sound basis. The objective of the present proposal is to adjust and upgrade the ESAs framework to ensure they can assume an enhanced responsibility for financial market supervision. The ESAs must be adequately equipped in terms of powers, governance and funding. First, where existing powers of the ESAs have proven partially insufficient and unclearly defined, for example as regards the consistent application of EU law, the drafting of technical advice or the provision of ongoing support to equivalence decisions, they must be strengthened and improved. The current scope of the ESAs' mandate must also be reconsidered in light of the policy objectives of the CMU. More common direct supervision in targeted areas is necessary to ensure more consistent supervisory practices and implementation of EU financial services rules. The 2017 review of the ESA Regulations concluded that the supervision of certain activities and entities with particular importance for the Union as a whole or with a significant degree of cross-border business should be carried out by the ESAs instead of by national competent authorities. Similarly, the ESAs should be more involved in the authorisation and supervision of entities from non-EU countries that are active in the Union. Second, this proposal aims at establishing a more effective governance of the ESAs. The incentive structure in the decision-making process of the ESAs as it stands today leads to the absence of decisions in particular in the area of regulatory convergence and supervisory convergence, or promotes decisions that are predominantly oriented towards national instead of broader EU interests. This reflects, to so me extent, an inherent tension between the European mandate of the ESAs and the national mandate of the competent authorities that are members of the ESA Boards. 3 This position is not well aligned with the objective of supervisory convergence. A greater role for the ESAs in deepening financial integration or strengthening the stability of the internal market will also require more effective convergence powers. 4 Third, the ESAs need an appropriate funding base which allows them to allocate resources in relation to their needs to fulfil their objective. Current budget arrangements constrain and will continue to constrain the ESAs' activities, as Member States for different reasons might be unwilling to increase national contributions further. The present proposal sets out specific amendments to the ESA Regulations 5 and various sector acts 6 to reinforce the powers, governance and funding framework of the ESAs, as these are the areas which need to be reinforced to allow the ESAs to meet the challenges outlin ed above. The impact assessment report accompanying this proposal considers the costs and benefits of these amendments. It sets out a number of options of measures intended to enhance the powers of the ESAs at EU level, improve their governance (including decision- making), and to ensure that their funding framework is sustainable and commensurate with current and future tasks. The impact assessment provides comprehensive evidence that the proposed amendments contribute effectively to reinforcing the ESA framework and thereby to the overall stability of the EU financial system, while keeping costs to the EU General Budget and stakeholders at a minimum. The proposed amendments also contribute to the further development and deepening of the CMU, in line with the political priorities of the Commission. 
Revised version (Article 54 Establishment):
1. The Joint Committee of the European Supervisory Authorities is hereby established. 2. The Joint Committee shall serve as a forum in which the Authority shall cooperate regularly and closely to ensure cross-sectoral consistency, while considering sectoral specificities, with the European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority) and the European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority), in particular regarding: — financial conglomerates and, where required by Union law, prudential consolidation, — accounting and auditing, — micro-prudential analyses of cross-sectoral developments, risks and vulnerabilities for financial stability, — retail investment products, — cybersecurity, — information and best practice exchange with the ESRB and the other ESAs, — retail financial services and consumer and investor protection issues, — advice by the Committee established in accordance with Article 1(6). 2a. The Joint Committee may assist the Commission in assessing the conditions and the technical specifications and procedures for ensuring secure and efficient inter-connection of the centralised automated mechanisms pursuant to the report referred in Article 32a(5) of Directive (EU) 2015/849 as well as in the effective interconnection of the national registers under that Directive. 3. The Joint Committee shall have a dedicated staff provided by the ESAs that shall act as a permanent secretariat. The Authority shall contribute adequate resources to administrative, infrastructure and operational expenses. 4. In the event that a financial market participant reaches across different sectors, the Joint Committee shall resolve disagreements in accordance with Article 56.
Article 55 Composition
1. The Joint Committee shall be composed of the Chairpersons of the ESAs, and, where applicable, the Chairperson of any Sub-Committee established under Article 57. 2. The Executive Director, a representative of the Commission and the ESRB shall be invited to the meetings of the Joint Committee, as well as of any Sub-Committees referred to in Article 57, as observers. 3. The Chairperson of the Joint Committee shall be appointed on an annual rotational basis from among the Chairpersons of the ESAs. The Chairperson of the Joint Committee shall be a Vice-Chair of the ESRB. 4. The Joint Committee shall adopt and publish its own rules of procedure. The rules may specify further participants in the meetings of the Joint Committee. The Joint Committee shall meet at least once every 2 months.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Integrated financial markets bring significant benefits to the funding of the European economy and for promoting jobs and growth on a sound and sustainable basis. To promote financial integration and market integrity while safeguarding financial stability, the EU internal market for financial services requires common rules and strong supervisory coordination. When the EU overhauled its financial system in response to the financial crisis, and in line with global efforts, it therefore introduced a Single Rulebook for financial regulation in Europe and created the European Supervisory Authorities ("ESAs"). The ESAs constitute an institutional cornerstone of the comprehensive reform package and have played a key role in ensuring that the financial markets across the EU are well regulated, strong and stable. They contribute to the development and consistent application of the Single Rulebook, solve cross-border problems, and thereby promote both regulatory and supervisory convergence. Despite the post-crisis measures, there remains significant potential to enhance regulatory and supervisory convergence in the internal market. Integrated financial markets require more integrated supervisory arrangements to function effectively, while more centralised supervisory arrangements can, in turn, foster market integration. For this reason, the EU has engaged in further integration across the broader financial sector on a sound and stable basis. In particular, the Capital Markets Union ("CMU") has been launched so a s to lay the foundations for a fully functional internal market for capital markets. In this context, the Five Presidents' Report on Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union of June 2015 1 highlighted the need to strengthen the EU supervisory framew ork, leading ultimately to a single capital-markets supervisor. More recently, the Commission Reflection Paper on the deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union 2 suggests that a review of the EU supervisory framework – in particular of the European Secu rities and Markets Authority ("ESMA") - should deliver the first steps towards such a single supervisor by 2019. The Reflection Paper also called for completing the Financial Union - comprising both a Banking Union and a Capital Markets Union– by 2019 so a s to guarantee the integrity of the euro and improve the functioning of the euro area and the EU as a whole. Global financial markets are strongly interconnected, and the EU's regulatory framework is largely based on international standards agreed in the w ake of the financial crisis notably among G20 countries. As the EU is striving to accelerate the completion of the CMU, it is therefore essential that EU supervisory arrangements continue to develop in a manner which allows to reap the full potential of i nternationally integrated financial markets while ensuring that cross-border risks between the EU and the rest of the world can be monitored and managed effectively. The ESAs have a key role to play in this regard. Finally, the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the EU reinforces these challenges for supervisory arrangements within the remaining EU27. The future departure of the EU’s currently largest financial centre means that EU27 capital markets need to develop further and supervisory arrangements must be strengthened to ensure that financial markets continue to support the economy on an adequate and sound basis. The objective of the present proposal is to adjust and upgrade the ESAs framework to ensure they can assume an enhanced responsibility for financial market supervision. The ESAs must be adequately equipped in terms of powers, governance and funding. First, where existing powers of the ESAs have proven partially insufficient and unclearly defined, for example as regards the consistent application of EU law, the drafting of technical advice or the provision of ongoing support to equivalence decisions, they must be strengthened and improved. The current scope of the ESAs' mandate must also be reconsidered in light of the policy objectives of the CMU. More common direct supervision in targeted areas is necessary to ensure more consistent supervisory practices and implementation of EU financial services rules. The 2017 review of the ESA Regulations concluded that the supervision of certain activities and entities with particular importance for the Union as a whole or with a significant degree of cross-border business should be carried out by the ESAs instead of by national competent authorities. Similarly, the ESAs should be more involved in the authorisation and supervision of entities from non-EU countries that are active in the Union. Second, this proposal aims at establishing a more effective governance of the ESAs. The incentive structure in the decision-making process of the ESAs as it stands today leads to the absence of decisions in particular in the area of regulatory convergence and supervisory convergence, or promotes decisions that are predominantly oriented towards national instead of broader EU interests. This reflects, to so me extent, an inherent tension between the European mandate of the ESAs and the national mandate of the competent authorities that are members of the ESA Boards. 3 This position is not well aligned with the objective of supervisory convergence. A greater role for the ESAs in deepening financial integration or strengthening the stability of the internal market will also require more effective convergence powers. 4 Third, the ESAs need an appropriate funding base which allows them to allocate resources in relation to their needs to fulfil their objective. Current budget arrangements constrain and will continue to constrain the ESAs' activities, as Member States for different reasons might be unwilling to increase national contributions further. The present proposal sets out specific amendments to the ESA Regulations 5 and various sector acts 6 to reinforce the powers, governance and funding framework of the ESAs, as these are the areas which need to be reinforced to allow the ESAs to meet the challenges outlin ed above. The impact assessment report accompanying this proposal considers the costs and benefits of these amendments. It sets out a number of options of measures intended to enhance the powers of the ESAs at EU level, improve their governance (including decision- making), and to ensure that their funding framework is sustainable and commensurate with current and future tasks. The impact assessment provides comprehensive evidence that the proposed amendments contribute effectively to reinforcing the ESA framework and thereby to the overall stability of the EU financial system, while keeping costs to the EU General Budget and stakeholders at a minimum. The proposed amendments also contribute to the further development and deepening of the CMU, in line with the political priorities of the Commission. 
Revised version (Article 55 Composition):
1. The Joint Committee shall be composed of the Chairpersons of the ESAs, and, where applicable, the Chairperson of any Sub-Committee established under Article 57. 2. The Executive Director, a representative of the Commission and the ESRB shall be invited to the meetings of the Joint Committee, as well as of any Sub-Committees referred to in Article 57, as observers. 3. The Chairperson of the Joint Committee shall be appointed on an annual rotational basis from among the Chairpersons of the ESAs. The Chairperson of the Joint Committee shall be the second Vice-Chair of the ESRB. 4. The Joint Committee shall adopt and publish its own rules of procedure. The rules may specify further participants in the meetings of the Joint Committee. The Joint Committee shall meet at least once every three months. 5. The Chairperson of the Authority shall regularly inform the Board of Supervisors on positions taken in the meetings of the Joint Committee.
Article 56 Joint positions and common acts
Within the scope of its tasks in Chapter II, and, in particular with respect to the implementation of Directive 2002/87/EC, where relevant, the Authority shall reach joint positions with the European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority) and with the European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority), as appropriate. Acts under Articles 10 to 15, 17, 18 or 19 of this Regulation in relation to the application of Directive 2002/87/EC and of any other Union acts referred to in Article 1(2) that also fall within the area of competence of the European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority) or the European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority) shall be adopted, in parallel, by the Authority, the European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority) and the European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority), as appropriate.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Integrated financial markets bring significant benefits to the funding of the European economy and for promoting jobs and growth on a sound and sustainable basis. To promote financial integration and market integrity while safeguarding financial stability, the EU internal market for financial services requires common rules and strong supervisory coordination. When the EU overhauled its financial system in response to the financial crisis, and in line with global efforts, it therefore introduced a Single Rulebook for financial regulation in Europe and created the European Supervisory Authorities ("ESAs"). The ESAs constitute an institutional cornerstone of the comprehensive reform package and have played a key role in ensuring that the financial markets across the EU are well regulated, strong and stable. They contribute to the development and consistent application of the Single Rulebook, solve cross-border problems, and thereby promote both regulatory and supervisory convergence. Despite the post-crisis measures, there remains significant potential to enhance regulatory and supervisory convergence in the internal market. Integrated financial markets require more integrated supervisory arrangements to function effectively, while more centralised supervisory arrangements can, in turn, foster market integration. For this reason, the EU has engaged in further integration across the broader financial sector on a sound and stable basis. In particular, the Capital Markets Union ("CMU") has been launched so a s to lay the foundations for a fully functional internal market for capital markets. In this context, the Five Presidents' Report on Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union of June 2015 1 highlighted the need to strengthen the EU supervisory framew ork, leading ultimately to a single capital-markets supervisor. More recently, the Commission Reflection Paper on the deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union 2 suggests that a review of the EU supervisory framework – in particular of the European Secu rities and Markets Authority ("ESMA") - should deliver the first steps towards such a single supervisor by 2019. The Reflection Paper also called for completing the Financial Union - comprising both a Banking Union and a Capital Markets Union– by 2019 so a s to guarantee the integrity of the euro and improve the functioning of the euro area and the EU as a whole. Global financial markets are strongly interconnected, and the EU's regulatory framework is largely based on international standards agreed in the w ake of the financial crisis notably among G20 countries. As the EU is striving to accelerate the completion of the CMU, it is therefore essential that EU supervisory arrangements continue to develop in a manner which allows to reap the full potential of i nternationally integrated financial markets while ensuring that cross-border risks between the EU and the rest of the world can be monitored and managed effectively. The ESAs have a key role to play in this regard. Finally, the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the EU reinforces these challenges for supervisory arrangements within the remaining EU27. The future departure of the EU’s currently largest financial centre means that EU27 capital markets need to develop further and supervisory arrangements must be strengthened to ensure that financial markets continue to support the economy on an adequate and sound basis. The objective of the present proposal is to adjust and upgrade the ESAs framework to ensure they can assume an enhanced responsibility for financial market supervision. The ESAs must be adequately equipped in terms of powers, governance and funding. First, where existing powers of the ESAs have proven partially insufficient and unclearly defined, for example as regards the consistent application of EU law, the drafting of technical advice or the provision of ongoing support to equivalence decisions, they must be strengthened and improved. The current scope of the ESAs' mandate must also be reconsidered in light of the policy objectives of the CMU. More common direct supervision in targeted areas is necessary to ensure more consistent supervisory practices and implementation of EU financial services rules. The 2017 review of the ESA Regulations concluded that the supervision of certain activities and entities with particular importance for the Union as a whole or with a significant degree of cross-border business should be carried out by the ESAs instead of by national competent authorities. Similarly, the ESAs should be more involved in the authorisation and supervision of entities from non-EU countries that are active in the Union. Second, this proposal aims at establishing a more effective governance of the ESAs. The incentive structure in the decision-making process of the ESAs as it stands today leads to the absence of decisions in particular in the area of regulatory convergence and supervisory convergence, or promotes decisions that are predominantly oriented towards national instead of broader EU interests. This reflects, to so me extent, an inherent tension between the European mandate of the ESAs and the national mandate of the competent authorities that are members of the ESA Boards. 3 This position is not well aligned with the objective of supervisory convergence. A greater role for the ESAs in deepening financial integration or strengthening the stability of the internal market will also require more effective convergence powers. 4 Third, the ESAs need an appropriate funding base which allows them to allocate resources in relation to their needs to fulfil their objective. Current budget arrangements constrain and will continue to constrain the ESAs' activities, as Member States for different reasons might be unwilling to increase national contributions further. The present proposal sets out specific amendments to the ESA Regulations 5 and various sector acts 6 to reinforce the powers, governance and funding framework of the ESAs, as these are the areas which need to be reinforced to allow the ESAs to meet the challenges outlin ed above. The impact assessment report accompanying this proposal considers the costs and benefits of these amendments. It sets out a number of options of measures intended to enhance the powers of the ESAs at EU level, improve their governance (including decision- making), and to ensure that their funding framework is sustainable and commensurate with current and future tasks. The impact assessment provides comprehensive evidence that the proposed amendments contribute effectively to reinforcing the ESA framework and thereby to the overall stability of the EU financial system, while keeping costs to the EU General Budget and stakeholders at a minimum. The proposed amendments also contribute to the further development and deepening of the CMU, in line with the political priorities of the Commission. 
Revised version (Article 56 Joint positions and common acts):
Within the scope of its tasks set out in Chapter II of this Regulation, and, in particular with respect to the implementation of Directive 2002/87/EC, where relevant, the Authority shall reach joint positions by consensus with, as appropriate, the European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority) and with the European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority). Where required by Union law, measures pursuant to Articles 10 to 16, and decisions pursuant to Articles 17, 18 and 19, of this Regulation in relation to the application of Directive 2002/87/EC and of any other legislative acts referred to in Article 1(2) of this Regulation that also fall within the area of competence of the European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority) or the European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority) shall be adopted, in parallel, by, as appropriate, the Authority, the European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority) and the European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority),.
Article 57 Sub-Committees
1. For the purposes of Article 56, a Sub-Committee on Financial Conglomerates to the Joint Committee shall be established. 2. The Sub-Committee shall be composed of the individuals referred to in Article 55(1), and one high-level representative from the current staff of the relevant competent authority from each Member State. 3. The Sub-Committee shall elect a Chairperson from among its members, who shall also be a member of the Joint Committee. 4. The Joint Committee may establish further Sub Committees.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Integrated financial markets bring significant benefits to the funding of the European economy and for promoting jobs and growth on a sound and sustainable basis. To promote financial integration and market integrity while safeguarding financial stability, the EU internal market for financial services requires common rules and strong supervisory coordination. When the EU overhauled its financial system in response to the financial crisis, and in line with global efforts, it therefore introduced a Single Rulebook for financial regulation in Europe and created the European Supervisory Authorities ("ESAs"). The ESAs constitute an institutional cornerstone of the comprehensive reform package and have played a key role in ensuring that the financial markets across the EU are well regulated, strong and stable. They contribute to the development and consistent application of the Single Rulebook, solve cross-border problems, and thereby promote both regulatory and supervisory convergence. Despite the post-crisis measures, there remains significant potential to enhance regulatory and supervisory convergence in the internal market. Integrated financial markets require more integrated supervisory arrangements to function effectively, while more centralised supervisory arrangements can, in turn, foster market integration. For this reason, the EU has engaged in further integration across the broader financial sector on a sound and stable basis. In particular, the Capital Markets Union ("CMU") has been launched so a s to lay the foundations for a fully functional internal market for capital markets. In this context, the Five Presidents' Report on Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union of June 2015 1 highlighted the need to strengthen the EU supervisory framew ork, leading ultimately to a single capital-markets supervisor. More recently, the Commission Reflection Paper on the deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union 2 suggests that a review of the EU supervisory framework – in particular of the European Secu rities and Markets Authority ("ESMA") - should deliver the first steps towards such a single supervisor by 2019. The Reflection Paper also called for completing the Financial Union - comprising both a Banking Union and a Capital Markets Union– by 2019 so a s to guarantee the integrity of the euro and improve the functioning of the euro area and the EU as a whole. Global financial markets are strongly interconnected, and the EU's regulatory framework is largely based on international standards agreed in the w ake of the financial crisis notably among G20 countries. As the EU is striving to accelerate the completion of the CMU, it is therefore essential that EU supervisory arrangements continue to develop in a manner which allows to reap the full potential of i nternationally integrated financial markets while ensuring that cross-border risks between the EU and the rest of the world can be monitored and managed effectively. The ESAs have a key role to play in this regard. Finally, the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the EU reinforces these challenges for supervisory arrangements within the remaining EU27. The future departure of the EU’s currently largest financial centre means that EU27 capital markets need to develop further and supervisory arrangements must be strengthened to ensure that financial markets continue to support the economy on an adequate and sound basis. The objective of the present proposal is to adjust and upgrade the ESAs framework to ensure they can assume an enhanced responsibility for financial market supervision. The ESAs must be adequately equipped in terms of powers, governance and funding. First, where existing powers of the ESAs have proven partially insufficient and unclearly defined, for example as regards the consistent application of EU law, the drafting of technical advice or the provision of ongoing support to equivalence decisions, they must be strengthened and improved. The current scope of the ESAs' mandate must also be reconsidered in light of the policy objectives of the CMU. More common direct supervision in targeted areas is necessary to ensure more consistent supervisory practices and implementation of EU financial services rules. The 2017 review of the ESA Regulations concluded that the supervision of certain activities and entities with particular importance for the Union as a whole or with a significant degree of cross-border business should be carried out by the ESAs instead of by national competent authorities. Similarly, the ESAs should be more involved in the authorisation and supervision of entities from non-EU countries that are active in the Union. Second, this proposal aims at establishing a more effective governance of the ESAs. The incentive structure in the decision-making process of the ESAs as it stands today leads to the absence of decisions in particular in the area of regulatory convergence and supervisory convergence, or promotes decisions that are predominantly oriented towards national instead of broader EU interests. This reflects, to so me extent, an inherent tension between the European mandate of the ESAs and the national mandate of the competent authorities that are members of the ESA Boards. 3 This position is not well aligned with the objective of supervisory convergence. A greater role for the ESAs in deepening financial integration or strengthening the stability of the internal market will also require more effective convergence powers. 4 Third, the ESAs need an appropriate funding base which allows them to allocate resources in relation to their needs to fulfil their objective. Current budget arrangements constrain and will continue to constrain the ESAs' activities, as Member States for different reasons might be unwilling to increase national contributions further. The present proposal sets out specific amendments to the ESA Regulations 5 and various sector acts 6 to reinforce the powers, governance and funding framework of the ESAs, as these are the areas which need to be reinforced to allow the ESAs to meet the challenges outlin ed above. The impact assessment report accompanying this proposal considers the costs and benefits of these amendments. It sets out a number of options of measures intended to enhance the powers of the ESAs at EU level, improve their governance (including decision- making), and to ensure that their funding framework is sustainable and commensurate with current and future tasks. The impact assessment provides comprehensive evidence that the proposed amendments contribute effectively to reinforcing the ESA framework and thereby to the overall stability of the EU financial system, while keeping costs to the EU General Budget and stakeholders at a minimum. The proposed amendments also contribute to the further development and deepening of the CMU, in line with the political priorities of the Commission. 
Revised version (Article 57 Sub-Committees):
1. The Joint Committee may establish sub-committees for the purposes of preparing draft joint positions and common acts for the Joint Committee. 2. Each sub-committee shall be composed of the individuals referred to in Article 55(1), and one high-level representative from the current staff of the relevant competent authority from each Member State. 3. Each sub-committee shall elect a chairperson from among the representatives of the relevant competent authorities, who shall also be an observer in the Joint Committee. 4. For the purposes of Article 56, a sub-committee on financial conglomerates to the Joint Committee shall be established. 5. The Joint Committee shall make public on its website all established sub-committees including their mandates and a list of their members with their respective functions in the sub-committee.
Article 58 Composition and operation
1. The Board of Appeal shall be a joint body of the ESAs. 2. The Board of Appeal shall be composed of six members and six alternates, who shall be individuals of a high repute with a proven record of relevant knowledge and professional experience, including supervisory, experience to a sufficiently high level in the fields of banking, insurance, occupational pensions, securities markets or other financial services, excluding current staff of the competent authorities or other national or Union institutions involved in the activities of the Authority. The Board of Appeal shall have sufficient legal expertise to provide expert legal advice on the legality of the Authority’s exercise of its powers. The Board of Appeal shall designate its President. 3. Two members of the Board of Appeal and two alternates shall be appointed by the Management Board of the Authority from a short-list proposed by the Commission, following a public call for expressions of interest published in the Official Journal of the European Union , and after consultation of the Board of Supervisors. The other members shall be appointed in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 and Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010. 4. The term of office of the members of the Board of Appeal shall be 5 years. That term may be extended once. 5. A member of the Board of Appeal appointed by the Management Board of the Authority shall not be removed during his term of office, unless he has been found guilty of serious misconduct and the Management Board takes a decision to that effect after consulting the Board of Supervisors. 6. The decisions of the Board of Appeal shall be adopted on the basis of a majority of at least four of its six members. Where the appealed decision falls within the scope of this Regulation, the deciding majority shall include at least one of the two members of the Board of Appeal appointed by the Authority. 7. The Board of Appeal shall be convened by its President when necessary. 8. The ESAs shall ensure adequate operational and secretarial support for the Board of Appeal through the Joint Committee.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Integrated financial markets bring significant benefits to the funding of the European economy and for promoting jobs and growth on a sound and sustainable basis. To promote financial integration and market integrity while safeguarding financial stability, the EU internal market for financial services requires common rules and strong supervisory coordination. When the EU overhauled its financial system in response to the financial crisis, and in line with global efforts, it therefore introduced a Single Rulebook for financial regulation in Europe and created the European Supervisory Authorities ("ESAs"). The ESAs constitute an institutional cornerstone of the comprehensive reform package and have played a key role in ensuring that the financial markets across the EU are well regulated, strong and stable. They contribute to the development and consistent application of the Single Rulebook, solve cross-border problems, and thereby promote both regulatory and supervisory convergence. Despite the post-crisis measures, there remains significant potential to enhance regulatory and supervisory convergence in the internal market. Integrated financial markets require more integrated supervisory arrangements to function effectively, while more centralised supervisory arrangements can, in turn, foster market integration. For this reason, the EU has engaged in further integration across the broader financial sector on a sound and stable basis. In particular, the Capital Markets Union ("CMU") has been launched so a s to lay the foundations for a fully functional internal market for capital markets. In this context, the Five Presidents' Report on Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union of June 2015 1 highlighted the need to strengthen the EU supervisory framew ork, leading ultimately to a single capital-markets supervisor. More recently, the Commission Reflection Paper on the deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union 2 suggests that a review of the EU supervisory framework – in particular of the European Secu rities and Markets Authority ("ESMA") - should deliver the first steps towards such a single supervisor by 2019. The Reflection Paper also called for completing the Financial Union - comprising both a Banking Union and a Capital Markets Union– by 2019 so a s to guarantee the integrity of the euro and improve the functioning of the euro area and the EU as a whole. Global financial markets are strongly interconnected, and the EU's regulatory framework is largely based on international standards agreed in the w ake of the financial crisis notably among G20 countries. As the EU is striving to accelerate the completion of the CMU, it is therefore essential that EU supervisory arrangements continue to develop in a manner which allows to reap the full potential of i nternationally integrated financial markets while ensuring that cross-border risks between the EU and the rest of the world can be monitored and managed effectively. The ESAs have a key role to play in this regard. Finally, the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the EU reinforces these challenges for supervisory arrangements within the remaining EU27. The future departure of the EU’s currently largest financial centre means that EU27 capital markets need to develop further and supervisory arrangements must be strengthened to ensure that financial markets continue to support the economy on an adequate and sound basis. The objective of the present proposal is to adjust and upgrade the ESAs framework to ensure they can assume an enhanced responsibility for financial market supervision. The ESAs must be adequately equipped in terms of powers, governance and funding. First, where existing powers of the ESAs have proven partially insufficient and unclearly defined, for example as regards the consistent application of EU law, the drafting of technical advice or the provision of ongoing support to equivalence decisions, they must be strengthened and improved. The current scope of the ESAs' mandate must also be reconsidered in light of the policy objectives of the CMU. More common direct supervision in targeted areas is necessary to ensure more consistent supervisory practices and implementation of EU financial services rules. The 2017 review of the ESA Regulations concluded that the supervision of certain activities and entities with particular importance for the Union as a whole or with a significant degree of cross-border business should be carried out by the ESAs instead of by national competent authorities. Similarly, the ESAs should be more involved in the authorisation and supervision of entities from non-EU countries that are active in the Union. Second, this proposal aims at establishing a more effective governance of the ESAs. The incentive structure in the decision-making process of the ESAs as it stands today leads to the absence of decisions in particular in the area of regulatory convergence and supervisory convergence, or promotes decisions that are predominantly oriented towards national instead of broader EU interests. This reflects, to so me extent, an inherent tension between the European mandate of the ESAs and the national mandate of the competent authorities that are members of the ESA Boards. 3 This position is not well aligned with the objective of supervisory convergence. A greater role for the ESAs in deepening financial integration or strengthening the stability of the internal market will also require more effective convergence powers. 4 Third, the ESAs need an appropriate funding base which allows them to allocate resources in relation to their needs to fulfil their objective. Current budget arrangements constrain and will continue to constrain the ESAs' activities, as Member States for different reasons might be unwilling to increase national contributions further. The present proposal sets out specific amendments to the ESA Regulations 5 and various sector acts 6 to reinforce the powers, governance and funding framework of the ESAs, as these are the areas which need to be reinforced to allow the ESAs to meet the challenges outlin ed above. The impact assessment report accompanying this proposal considers the costs and benefits of these amendments. It sets out a number of options of measures intended to enhance the powers of the ESAs at EU level, improve their governance (including decision- making), and to ensure that their funding framework is sustainable and commensurate with current and future tasks. The impact assessment provides comprehensive evidence that the proposed amendments contribute effectively to reinforcing the ESA framework and thereby to the overall stability of the EU financial system, while keeping costs to the EU General Budget and stakeholders at a minimum. The proposed amendments also contribute to the further development and deepening of the CMU, in line with the political priorities of the Commission. 
Revised version (Article 58 Composition and operation):
1. The Board of Appeal of the European Supervisory Authorities is hereby established. 2. The Board of Appeal shall be composed of six members and six alternates, who shall be individuals of high repute with a proven record of relevant knowledge of Union law and of having international professional experience, to a sufficiently high level in the fields of banking, insurance, occupational pensions, securities markets or other financial services, excluding current staff of the competent authorities or other national or Union institutions or bodies involved in the activities of the Authority and members of the Securities and Markets Stakeholder Group. Members and alternates shall be nationals of a Member State and shall have a thorough knowledge of at least two official languages of the Union. The Board of Appeal shall have sufficient legal expertise to provide expert legal advice on the legality, including proportionality, of the Authority’s exercise of its powers. The Board of Appeal shall designate its President. 3. Two members of the Board of Appeal and two alternates shall be appointed by the Management Board of the Authority from a shortlist proposed by the Commission, following a public call for expressions of interest published in the Official Journal of the European Union , and after consultation of the Board of Supervisors. After having received the shortlist, the European Parliament may invite candidates for members and alternates to make a statement before it and answer any questions from its Members. The European Parliament may invite the members of the Board of Appeal to make a statement before it and answer any questions from its Members whenever so requested, to the exclusion of statements, questions or answers pertaining to individual cases decided by, or pending before, the Board of Appeal. 4. The term of office of the members of the Board of Appeal shall be 5 years. That term may be extended once. 5. A member of the Board of Appeal appointed by the Management Board of the Authority shall not be removed during his term of office, unless he has been found guilty of serious misconduct and the Management Board takes a decision to that effect after consulting the Board of Supervisors. 6. The decisions of the Board of Appeal shall be adopted on the basis of a majority of at least four of its six members. Where the appealed decision falls within the scope of this Regulation, the deciding majority shall include at least one of the two members of the Board of Appeal appointed by the Authority. 7. The Board of Appeal shall be convened by its President when necessary. 8. The ESAs shall ensure adequate operational and secretarial support for the Board of Appeal through the Joint Committee.
Article 59 Independence and impartiality
1. The members of the Board of Appeal shall be independent in making their decisions. They shall not be bound by any instructions. They shall not perform any other duties in relation to the Authority, its Management Board or its Board of Supervisors. 2. Members of the Board of Appeal shall not take part in any appeal proceedings in which they have any personal interest, if they have previously been involved as representatives of one of the parties to the proceedings, or if they have participated in the decision under appeal. 3. If, for one of the reasons referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 or for any other reason, a member of a Board of Appeal considers that another member should not take part in any appeal proceedings, he shall inform the Board of Appeal accordingly. 4. Any party to the appeal proceedings may object to the participation of a member of the Board of Appeal on any of the grounds referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, or if suspected of bias. No objection may be based on the nationality of members nor shall it be admissible if, while being aware of a reason for objecting, the party to the appeal proceedings has nonetheless taken a procedural step other than objecting to the composition of the Board of Appeal. 5. The Board of Appeal shall decide on the action to be taken in the cases specified in paragraphs 1 and 2 without the participation of the member concerned. For the purpose of taking that decision, the member concerned shall be replaced on the Board of Appeal by his alternate. Where the alternate is in a similar situation, the Chairperson shall designate a replacement from among the available alternates. 6. The members of the Board of Appeal shall undertake to act independently and in the public interest. For that purpose, they shall make a declaration of commitments and a declaration of interests indicating either the absence of any interest which may be considered prejudicial to their independence or any direct or indirect interest which might be considered prejudicial to their independence. Those declarations shall be made public, annually and in writing.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Integrated financial markets bring significant benefits to the funding of the European economy and for promoting jobs and growth on a sound and sustainable basis. To promote financial integration and market integrity while safeguarding financial stability, the EU internal market for financial services requires common rules and strong supervisory coordination. When the EU overhauled its financial system in response to the financial crisis, and in line with global efforts, it therefore introduced a Single Rulebook for financial regulation in Europe and created the European Supervisory Authorities ("ESAs"). The ESAs constitute an institutional cornerstone of the comprehensive reform package and have played a key role in ensuring that the financial markets across the EU are well regulated, strong and stable. They contribute to the development and consistent application of the Single Rulebook, solve cross-border problems, and thereby promote both regulatory and supervisory convergence. Despite the post-crisis measures, there remains significant potential to enhance regulatory and supervisory convergence in the internal market. Integrated financial markets require more integrated supervisory arrangements to function effectively, while more centralised supervisory arrangements can, in turn, foster market integration. For this reason, the EU has engaged in further integration across the broader financial sector on a sound and stable basis. In particular, the Capital Markets Union ("CMU") has been launched so a s to lay the foundations for a fully functional internal market for capital markets. In this context, the Five Presidents' Report on Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union of June 2015 1 highlighted the need to strengthen the EU supervisory framew ork, leading ultimately to a single capital-markets supervisor. More recently, the Commission Reflection Paper on the deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union 2 suggests that a review of the EU supervisory framework – in particular of the European Secu rities and Markets Authority ("ESMA") - should deliver the first steps towards such a single supervisor by 2019. The Reflection Paper also called for completing the Financial Union - comprising both a Banking Union and a Capital Markets Union– by 2019 so a s to guarantee the integrity of the euro and improve the functioning of the euro area and the EU as a whole. Global financial markets are strongly interconnected, and the EU's regulatory framework is largely based on international standards agreed in the w ake of the financial crisis notably among G20 countries. As the EU is striving to accelerate the completion of the CMU, it is therefore essential that EU supervisory arrangements continue to develop in a manner which allows to reap the full potential of i nternationally integrated financial markets while ensuring that cross-border risks between the EU and the rest of the world can be monitored and managed effectively. The ESAs have a key role to play in this regard. Finally, the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the EU reinforces these challenges for supervisory arrangements within the remaining EU27. The future departure of the EU’s currently largest financial centre means that EU27 capital markets need to develop further and supervisory arrangements must be strengthened to ensure that financial markets continue to support the economy on an adequate and sound basis. The objective of the present proposal is to adjust and upgrade the ESAs framework to ensure they can assume an enhanced responsibility for financial market supervision. The ESAs must be adequately equipped in terms of powers, governance and funding. First, where existing powers of the ESAs have proven partially insufficient and unclearly defined, for example as regards the consistent application of EU law, the drafting of technical advice or the provision of ongoing support to equivalence decisions, they must be strengthened and improved. The current scope of the ESAs' mandate must also be reconsidered in light of the policy objectives of the CMU. More common direct supervision in targeted areas is necessary to ensure more consistent supervisory practices and implementation of EU financial services rules. The 2017 review of the ESA Regulations concluded that the supervision of certain activities and entities with particular importance for the Union as a whole or with a significant degree of cross-border business should be carried out by the ESAs instead of by national competent authorities. Similarly, the ESAs should be more involved in the authorisation and supervision of entities from non-EU countries that are active in the Union. Second, this proposal aims at establishing a more effective governance of the ESAs. The incentive structure in the decision-making process of the ESAs as it stands today leads to the absence of decisions in particular in the area of regulatory convergence and supervisory convergence, or promotes decisions that are predominantly oriented towards national instead of broader EU interests. This reflects, to so me extent, an inherent tension between the European mandate of the ESAs and the national mandate of the competent authorities that are members of the ESA Boards. 3 This position is not well aligned with the objective of supervisory convergence. A greater role for the ESAs in deepening financial integration or strengthening the stability of the internal market will also require more effective convergence powers. 4 Third, the ESAs need an appropriate funding base which allows them to allocate resources in relation to their needs to fulfil their objective. Current budget arrangements constrain and will continue to constrain the ESAs' activities, as Member States for different reasons might be unwilling to increase national contributions further. The present proposal sets out specific amendments to the ESA Regulations 5 and various sector acts 6 to reinforce the powers, governance and funding framework of the ESAs, as these are the areas which need to be reinforced to allow the ESAs to meet the challenges outlin ed above. The impact assessment report accompanying this proposal considers the costs and benefits of these amendments. It sets out a number of options of measures intended to enhance the powers of the ESAs at EU level, improve their governance (including decision- making), and to ensure that their funding framework is sustainable and commensurate with current and future tasks. The impact assessment provides comprehensive evidence that the proposed amendments contribute effectively to reinforcing the ESA framework and thereby to the overall stability of the EU financial system, while keeping costs to the EU General Budget and stakeholders at a minimum. The proposed amendments also contribute to the further development and deepening of the CMU, in line with the political priorities of the Commission. 
Revised version (Article 59 Independence and impartiality):
1. The members of the Board of Appeal shall be independent in making their decisions. They shall not be bound by any instructions. They shall not perform any other duties in relation to the Authority, its Management Board or its Board of Supervisors. 2. Members of the Board of Appeal, and staff of the Authority providing operational and secretariat support, shall not take part in any appeal proceedings in which they have any personal interest, if they have previously been involved as representatives of one of the parties to the proceedings, or if they have participated in the decision under appeal. 3. If, for one of the reasons referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 or for any other reason, a member of a Board of Appeal considers that another member should not take part in any appeal proceedings, he shall inform the Board of Appeal accordingly. 4. Any party to the appeal proceedings may object to the participation of a member of the Board of Appeal on any of the grounds referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2, or if suspected of bias. No objection may be based on the nationality of members nor shall it be admissible if, while being aware of a reason for objecting, the party to the appeal proceedings has nonetheless taken a procedural step other than objecting to the composition of the Board of Appeal. 5. The Board of Appeal shall decide on the action to be taken in the cases specified in paragraphs 1 and 2 without the participation of the member concerned. For the purpose of taking that decision, the member concerned shall be replaced on the Board of Appeal by his alternate. Where the alternate is in a similar situation, the Chairperson shall designate a replacement from among the available alternates. 6. The members of the Board of Appeal shall undertake to act independently and in the public interest. For that purpose, they shall make a declaration of commitments and a declaration of interests indicating either the absence of any interest which may be considered prejudicial to their independence or any direct or indirect interest which might be considered prejudicial to their independence. Those declarations shall be made public, annually and in writing.
Article 60 Appeals
1. Any natural or legal person, including competent authorities, may appeal against a decision of the Authority referred to in Articles 17, 18 and 19 and any other decision taken by the Authority in accordance with the Union acts referred to in Article 1(2) which is addressed to that person, or against a decision which, although in the form of a decision addressed to another person, is of direct and individual concern to that person. 2. The appeal, together with a statement of grounds, shall be filed in writing at the Authority within 2 months of the date of notification of the decision to the person concerned, or, in the absence of a notification, of the day on which the Authority published its decision. The Board of Appeal shall decide upon the appeal within 2 months after the appeal has been lodged. 3. An appeal lodged pursuant to paragraph 1 shall not have suspensive effect. However, the Board of Appeal may, if it considers that circumstances so require, suspend the application of the contested decision. 4. If the appeal is admissible, the Board of Appeal shall examine whether it is well-founded. It shall invite the parties to the appeal proceedings to file observations on its own notifications or on communications from the other parties to the appeal proceedings, within specified time limits. Parties to the appeal proceedings shall be entitled to make oral representations. 5. The Board of Appeal may confirm the decision taken by the competent body of the Authority, or remit the case to the competent body of the Authority. That body shall be bound by the decision of the Board of Appeal and that body shall adopt an amended decision regarding the case concerned. 6. The Board of Appeal shall adopt and make public its rules of procedure. 7. The decisions taken by the Board of Appeal shall be reasoned and shall be made public by the Authority.
Article 61 Actions before the Court of Justice of the European Union
1. Proceedings may be brought before the Court of Justice of the European Union, in accordance with Article 263 TFEU, contesting a decision taken by the Board of Appeal or, in cases where there is no right of appeal before the Board of Appeal, by the Authority. 2. Member States and the Union institutions, as well as any natural or legal person, may institute proceedings before the Court of Justice of the European Union against decisions of the Authority, in accordance with Article 263 TFEU. 3. In the event that the Authority has an obligation to act and fails to take a decision, proceedings for failure to act may be brought before the Court of Justice of the European Union in accordance with Article 265 TFEU. 4. The Authority shall be required to take the necessary measures to comply with the judgment of the Court of Justice of the European Union.
Article 62 Budget of the Authority
1. The revenues of the Authority, a European body in accordance with Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities ( 48 ) (hereinafter the ‘Financial Regulation’), shall consist, in particular, of any combination of the following: (a) obligatory contributions from the national public authorities competent for the supervision of financial market participants which shall be made in accordance with a formula based on the weighting of votes set out in Article 3(3) of Protocol (No 36) on transitional provisions. For the purposes of this Article, Article 3(3) of Protocol (No 36) on transitional provisions shall continue to apply beyond the deadline of 31 October 2014 therein established; (b) a subsidy from the Union, entered in the General Budget of the European Union (Commission Section); (c) any fees paid to the Authority in the cases specified in the relevant instruments of Union law. 2. The expenditure of the Authority shall include, at least, staff, remuneration, administrative, infrastructure professional training and operational expenses. 3. Revenue and expenditure shall be in balance. 4. Estimates of all Authority revenue and expenditure shall be prepared for each financial year, corresponding to the calendar year, and shall be presented in the budget of the Authority.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Integrated financial markets bring significant benefits to the funding of the European economy and for promoting jobs and growth on a sound and sustainable basis. To promote financial integration and market integrity while safeguarding financial stability, the EU internal market for financial services requires common rules and strong supervisory coordination. When the EU overhauled its financial system in response to the financial crisis, and in line with global efforts, it therefore introduced a Single Rulebook for financial regulation in Europe and created the European Supervisory Authorities ("ESAs"). The ESAs constitute an institutional cornerstone of the comprehensive reform package and have played a key role in ensuring that the financial markets across the EU are well regulated, strong and stable. They contribute to the development and consistent application of the Single Rulebook, solve cross-border problems, and thereby promote both regulatory and supervisory convergence. Despite the post-crisis measures, there remains significant potential to enhance regulatory and supervisory convergence in the internal market. Integrated financial markets require more integrated supervisory arrangements to function effectively, while more centralised supervisory arrangements can, in turn, foster market integration. For this reason, the EU has engaged in further integration across the broader financial sector on a sound and stable basis. In particular, the Capital Markets Union ("CMU") has been launched so a s to lay the foundations for a fully functional internal market for capital markets. In this context, the Five Presidents' Report on Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union of June 2015 1 highlighted the need to strengthen the EU supervisory framew ork, leading ultimately to a single capital-markets supervisor. More recently, the Commission Reflection Paper on the deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union 2 suggests that a review of the EU supervisory framework – in particular of the European Secu rities and Markets Authority ("ESMA") - should deliver the first steps towards such a single supervisor by 2019. The Reflection Paper also called for completing the Financial Union - comprising both a Banking Union and a Capital Markets Union– by 2019 so a s to guarantee the integrity of the euro and improve the functioning of the euro area and the EU as a whole. Global financial markets are strongly interconnected, and the EU's regulatory framework is largely based on international standards agreed in the w ake of the financial crisis notably among G20 countries. As the EU is striving to accelerate the completion of the CMU, it is therefore essential that EU supervisory arrangements continue to develop in a manner which allows to reap the full potential of i nternationally integrated financial markets while ensuring that cross-border risks between the EU and the rest of the world can be monitored and managed effectively. The ESAs have a key role to play in this regard. Finally, the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the EU reinforces these challenges for supervisory arrangements within the remaining EU27. The future departure of the EU’s currently largest financial centre means that EU27 capital markets need to develop further and supervisory arrangements must be strengthened to ensure that financial markets continue to support the economy on an adequate and sound basis. The objective of the present proposal is to adjust and upgrade the ESAs framework to ensure they can assume an enhanced responsibility for financial market supervision. The ESAs must be adequately equipped in terms of powers, governance and funding. First, where existing powers of the ESAs have proven partially insufficient and unclearly defined, for example as regards the consistent application of EU law, the drafting of technical advice or the provision of ongoing support to equivalence decisions, they must be strengthened and improved. The current scope of the ESAs' mandate must also be reconsidered in light of the policy objectives of the CMU. More common direct supervision in targeted areas is necessary to ensure more consistent supervisory practices and implementation of EU financial services rules. The 2017 review of the ESA Regulations concluded that the supervision of certain activities and entities with particular importance for the Union as a whole or with a significant degree of cross-border business should be carried out by the ESAs instead of by national competent authorities. Similarly, the ESAs should be more involved in the authorisation and supervision of entities from non-EU countries that are active in the Union. Second, this proposal aims at establishing a more effective governance of the ESAs. The incentive structure in the decision-making process of the ESAs as it stands today leads to the absence of decisions in particular in the area of regulatory convergence and supervisory convergence, or promotes decisions that are predominantly oriented towards national instead of broader EU interests. This reflects, to so me extent, an inherent tension between the European mandate of the ESAs and the national mandate of the competent authorities that are members of the ESA Boards. 3 This position is not well aligned with the objective of supervisory convergence. A greater role for the ESAs in deepening financial integration or strengthening the stability of the internal market will also require more effective convergence powers. 4 Third, the ESAs need an appropriate funding base which allows them to allocate resources in relation to their needs to fulfil their objective. Current budget arrangements constrain and will continue to constrain the ESAs' activities, as Member States for different reasons might be unwilling to increase national contributions further. The present proposal sets out specific amendments to the ESA Regulations 5 and various sector acts 6 to reinforce the powers, governance and funding framework of the ESAs, as these are the areas which need to be reinforced to allow the ESAs to meet the challenges outlin ed above. The impact assessment report accompanying this proposal considers the costs and benefits of these amendments. It sets out a number of options of measures intended to enhance the powers of the ESAs at EU level, improve their governance (including decision- making), and to ensure that their funding framework is sustainable and commensurate with current and future tasks. The impact assessment provides comprehensive evidence that the proposed amendments contribute effectively to reinforcing the ESA framework and thereby to the overall stability of the EU financial system, while keeping costs to the EU General Budget and stakeholders at a minimum. The proposed amendments also contribute to the further development and deepening of the CMU, in line with the political priorities of the Commission. 
Revised version (Article 62 Budget of the Authority):
1. The revenues of the Authority, a European body in accordance with Article 70 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2018/1046 of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 12 ) (‘the Financial Regulation’), shall consist, in particular, of any combination of the following: obligatory contributions from the national public authorities competent for the supervision of financial market participants which shall be made in accordance with a formula based on the weighting of votes set out in Article 3(3) of Protocol (No 36) on transitional provisions. For the purposes of this Article, Article 3(3) of Protocol (No 36) on transitional provisions shall continue to apply beyond the deadline of 31 October 2014 therein established; (b) a subsidy from the Union, entered in the General Budget of the European Union (Commission Section); (c) any fees paid to the Authority in the cases specified in the relevant instruments of Union law; (d) any voluntary contribution from Member States or observers; (e) agreed charges for publications, training and for any other services provided by the Authority where they have been specifically requested by one or more competent authorities. Any voluntary contribution from Member States or observers referred to in point d of the first sub-paragraph shall not be accepted if such acceptance would cast doubt on the independence and impartiality of the Authority. Voluntary contributions that constitute compensation for the cost of tasks delegated by a competent authority to the Authority shall not be considered to cast doubt on the independence of the latter. 2. The expenditure of the Authority shall include, at least, staff, remuneration, administrative, infrastructure professional training and operational expenses. 3. Revenue and expenditure shall be in balance. 4. Estimates of all Authority revenue and expenditure shall be prepared for each financial year, corresponding to the calendar year, and shall be presented in the budget of the Authority.
Article 63 Establishment of the budget
1. By 15 February each year, the Executive Director shall draw up a draft statement of estimates of revenue and expenditure for the following financial year, and shall forward it to the Management Board and the Board of Supervisors, together with the establishment plan. Each year, the Board of Supervisors shall, on the basis of the draft statement drawn up by the Executive Director and approved by the Management Board, produce a statement of estimates of revenue and expenditure of the Authority for the following financial year. That statement of estimates, including a draft establishment plan, shall be transmitted by the Board of Supervisors to the Commission by 31 March. Prior to adoption of the statement of estimates, the draft prepared by the Executive Director shall be approved by the Management Board. 2. The statement of estimates shall be transmitted by the Commission to the European Parliament and to the Council (hereinafter referred to together as the ‘budgetary authority’), together with the draft budget of the European Union. 3. On the basis of the statement of estimates, the Commission shall enter in the draft budget of the European Union the estimates it deems necessary in respect of the establishment plan and the amount of the subsidy to be charged to the General Budget of the European Union in accordance with Articles 313 and 314 TFEU. 4. The budgetary authority shall adopt the establishment plan for the Authority. The budgetary authority shall authorise the appropriations for the subsidy to the Authority. 5. The budget of the Authority shall be adopted by the Board of Supervisors. It shall become final after the final adoption of the General Budget of the European Union. Where necessary, it shall be adjusted accordingly. 6. The Management Board shall, without delay, notify the budgetary authority of its intention to implement any project which may have significant financial implications for the funding of its budget, in particular any project relating to property, such as the rental or purchase of buildings. It shall inform the Commission thereof. If either branch of the budgetary authority intends to issue an opinion, it shall, within 2 weeks of receipt of the information on the project, notify the Authority of its intention to issue such an opinion. In the absence of a reply, the Authority may proceed with the planned operation. 7. For the first year of operation of the Authority, ending on 31 December 2011, the financing of the Authority by the Union is subject to an agreement by the budgetary authority as provided for in Point 47 of the Interinstitutional Agreement on budgetary discipline and sound financial management.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Integrated financial markets bring significant benefits to the funding of the European economy and for promoting jobs and growth on a sound and sustainable basis. To promote financial integration and market integrity while safeguarding financial stability, the EU internal market for financial services requires common rules and strong supervisory coordination. When the EU overhauled its financial system in response to the financial crisis, and in line with global efforts, it therefore introduced a Single Rulebook for financial regulation in Europe and created the European Supervisory Authorities ("ESAs"). The ESAs constitute an institutional cornerstone of the comprehensive reform package and have played a key role in ensuring that the financial markets across the EU are well regulated, strong and stable. They contribute to the development and consistent application of the Single Rulebook, solve cross-border problems, and thereby promote both regulatory and supervisory convergence. Despite the post-crisis measures, there remains significant potential to enhance regulatory and supervisory convergence in the internal market. Integrated financial markets require more integrated supervisory arrangements to function effectively, while more centralised supervisory arrangements can, in turn, foster market integration. For this reason, the EU has engaged in further integration across the broader financial sector on a sound and stable basis. In particular, the Capital Markets Union ("CMU") has been launched so a s to lay the foundations for a fully functional internal market for capital markets. In this context, the Five Presidents' Report on Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union of June 2015 1 highlighted the need to strengthen the EU supervisory framew ork, leading ultimately to a single capital-markets supervisor. More recently, the Commission Reflection Paper on the deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union 2 suggests that a review of the EU supervisory framework – in particular of the European Secu rities and Markets Authority ("ESMA") - should deliver the first steps towards such a single supervisor by 2019. The Reflection Paper also called for completing the Financial Union - comprising both a Banking Union and a Capital Markets Union– by 2019 so a s to guarantee the integrity of the euro and improve the functioning of the euro area and the EU as a whole. Global financial markets are strongly interconnected, and the EU's regulatory framework is largely based on international standards agreed in the w ake of the financial crisis notably among G20 countries. As the EU is striving to accelerate the completion of the CMU, it is therefore essential that EU supervisory arrangements continue to develop in a manner which allows to reap the full potential of i nternationally integrated financial markets while ensuring that cross-border risks between the EU and the rest of the world can be monitored and managed effectively. The ESAs have a key role to play in this regard. Finally, the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the EU reinforces these challenges for supervisory arrangements within the remaining EU27. The future departure of the EU’s currently largest financial centre means that EU27 capital markets need to develop further and supervisory arrangements must be strengthened to ensure that financial markets continue to support the economy on an adequate and sound basis. The objective of the present proposal is to adjust and upgrade the ESAs framework to ensure they can assume an enhanced responsibility for financial market supervision. The ESAs must be adequately equipped in terms of powers, governance and funding. First, where existing powers of the ESAs have proven partially insufficient and unclearly defined, for example as regards the consistent application of EU law, the drafting of technical advice or the provision of ongoing support to equivalence decisions, they must be strengthened and improved. The current scope of the ESAs' mandate must also be reconsidered in light of the policy objectives of the CMU. More common direct supervision in targeted areas is necessary to ensure more consistent supervisory practices and implementation of EU financial services rules. The 2017 review of the ESA Regulations concluded that the supervision of certain activities and entities with particular importance for the Union as a whole or with a significant degree of cross-border business should be carried out by the ESAs instead of by national competent authorities. Similarly, the ESAs should be more involved in the authorisation and supervision of entities from non-EU countries that are active in the Union. Second, this proposal aims at establishing a more effective governance of the ESAs. The incentive structure in the decision-making process of the ESAs as it stands today leads to the absence of decisions in particular in the area of regulatory convergence and supervisory convergence, or promotes decisions that are predominantly oriented towards national instead of broader EU interests. This reflects, to so me extent, an inherent tension between the European mandate of the ESAs and the national mandate of the competent authorities that are members of the ESA Boards. 3 This position is not well aligned with the objective of supervisory convergence. A greater role for the ESAs in deepening financial integration or strengthening the stability of the internal market will also require more effective convergence powers. 4 Third, the ESAs need an appropriate funding base which allows them to allocate resources in relation to their needs to fulfil their objective. Current budget arrangements constrain and will continue to constrain the ESAs' activities, as Member States for different reasons might be unwilling to increase national contributions further. The present proposal sets out specific amendments to the ESA Regulations 5 and various sector acts 6 to reinforce the powers, governance and funding framework of the ESAs, as these are the areas which need to be reinforced to allow the ESAs to meet the challenges outlin ed above. The impact assessment report accompanying this proposal considers the costs and benefits of these amendments. It sets out a number of options of measures intended to enhance the powers of the ESAs at EU level, improve their governance (including decision- making), and to ensure that their funding framework is sustainable and commensurate with current and future tasks. The impact assessment provides comprehensive evidence that the proposed amendments contribute effectively to reinforcing the ESA framework and thereby to the overall stability of the EU financial system, while keeping costs to the EU General Budget and stakeholders at a minimum. The proposed amendments also contribute to the further development and deepening of the CMU, in line with the political priorities of the Commission. 
Revised version (Article 63 Establishment of the budget):
1. Each year, the Executive Director shall draw up a provisional draft single programming document of the Authority for the three following financial years setting out the estimated revenue and expenditure, as well as information on staff, from its annual and multi-annual programming and shall forward it to the Management Board and the Board of Supervisors, together with the establishment plan. 2. The Board of Supervisors shall, on the basis of the draft which has been approved by the Management Board, adopt the draft single programming document for the three following financial years. 3. The single programming document shall be transmitted by the Management Board to the Commission, the European Parliament and the Council and to the European Court of Auditors by 31 January. 4. Taking account of the single programming document, the Commission shall enter in the draft budget of the Union the estimates it deems necessary in respect of the establishment plan and the amount of the balancing contribution to be charged to the general budget of the Union in accordance with Articles 313 and 314 TFEU. 5. The European Parliament and the Council shall adopt the establishment plan for the Authority. The European Parliament and the Council shall authorise the appropriations for the balancing contribution to the Authority. 6. The budget of the Authority shall be adopted by the Board of Supervisors. It shall become final after the final adoption of the general budget of the Union. Where necessary, it shall be adjusted accordingly. 7. The Management Board shall, without undue delay, notify the European Parliament and the Council of its intention to implement any project which may have significant financial implications for the funding of its budget, in particular any project relating to property, such as the rental or purchase of buildings. 8. Without prejudice to Articles 266 and 267 of the Financial Regulation, authorisation from the European Parliament and the Council shall be required for any project which may have significant financial or long- term implications for the funding of the Authority’s budget, in particular any project relating to property, such as the rental or purchase of buildings, including break clauses.
Article 64 Implementation and control of the budget
1. The Executive Director shall act as authorising officer and shall implement the Authority’s budget. 2. By 1 March following the completion of each financial year, the Authority’s accounting officer shall forward to the Commission’s accounting officer and to the Court of Auditors the provisional accounts, accompanied by the report on budgetary and financial management during the financial year. The Authority’s accounting officer shall also send the report on budgetary and financial management to the members of the Board of Supervisors, the European Parliament and the Council by 31 March of the following year. The Commission’s accounting officer shall then consolidate the provisional accounts of the institutions and decentralised bodies in accordance with Article 128 of the Financial Regulation. 3. After receiving the observations of the Court of Auditors on the provisional accounts of the Authority in accordance with Article 129 of the Financial Regulation, the Executive Director, acting on his own responsibility, shall draw up the final accounts of the Authority and transmit them, for opinion, to the Management Board. 4. The Management Board shall deliver an opinion on the final accounts of the Authority. 5. The Executive Director shall transmit those final accounts, accompanied by the opinion of the Management Board, by 1 July following the completion of the financial year, to the Members of the Board of Supervisors, the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission and the Court of Auditors. 6. The final accounts shall be published. 7. The Executive Director shall send the Court of Auditors a reply to the latter’s observations by 30 September. He shall also send a copy of that reply to the Management Board and the Commission. 8. The Executive Director shall submit to the European Parliament, at the latter’s request and as provided for in Article 146(3) of the Financial Regulation, any information necessary for the smooth application of the discharge procedure for the financial year in question. 9. The European Parliament, following a recommendation from the Council acting by qualified majority, shall, before 15 May of the year N +2, grant a discharge to the Authority for the implementation of the budget comprising revenue from the General Budget of the European Union and competent authorities for the financial year N.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Integrated financial markets bring significant benefits to the funding of the European economy and for promoting jobs and growth on a sound and sustainable basis. To promote financial integration and market integrity while safeguarding financial stability, the EU internal market for financial services requires common rules and strong supervisory coordination. When the EU overhauled its financial system in response to the financial crisis, and in line with global efforts, it therefore introduced a Single Rulebook for financial regulation in Europe and created the European Supervisory Authorities ("ESAs"). The ESAs constitute an institutional cornerstone of the comprehensive reform package and have played a key role in ensuring that the financial markets across the EU are well regulated, strong and stable. They contribute to the development and consistent application of the Single Rulebook, solve cross-border problems, and thereby promote both regulatory and supervisory convergence. Despite the post-crisis measures, there remains significant potential to enhance regulatory and supervisory convergence in the internal market. Integrated financial markets require more integrated supervisory arrangements to function effectively, while more centralised supervisory arrangements can, in turn, foster market integration. For this reason, the EU has engaged in further integration across the broader financial sector on a sound and stable basis. In particular, the Capital Markets Union ("CMU") has been launched so a s to lay the foundations for a fully functional internal market for capital markets. In this context, the Five Presidents' Report on Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union of June 2015 1 highlighted the need to strengthen the EU supervisory framew ork, leading ultimately to a single capital-markets supervisor. More recently, the Commission Reflection Paper on the deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union 2 suggests that a review of the EU supervisory framework – in particular of the European Secu rities and Markets Authority ("ESMA") - should deliver the first steps towards such a single supervisor by 2019. The Reflection Paper also called for completing the Financial Union - comprising both a Banking Union and a Capital Markets Union– by 2019 so a s to guarantee the integrity of the euro and improve the functioning of the euro area and the EU as a whole. Global financial markets are strongly interconnected, and the EU's regulatory framework is largely based on international standards agreed in the w ake of the financial crisis notably among G20 countries. As the EU is striving to accelerate the completion of the CMU, it is therefore essential that EU supervisory arrangements continue to develop in a manner which allows to reap the full potential of i nternationally integrated financial markets while ensuring that cross-border risks between the EU and the rest of the world can be monitored and managed effectively. The ESAs have a key role to play in this regard. Finally, the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the EU reinforces these challenges for supervisory arrangements within the remaining EU27. The future departure of the EU’s currently largest financial centre means that EU27 capital markets need to develop further and supervisory arrangements must be strengthened to ensure that financial markets continue to support the economy on an adequate and sound basis. The objective of the present proposal is to adjust and upgrade the ESAs framework to ensure they can assume an enhanced responsibility for financial market supervision. The ESAs must be adequately equipped in terms of powers, governance and funding. First, where existing powers of the ESAs have proven partially insufficient and unclearly defined, for example as regards the consistent application of EU law, the drafting of technical advice or the provision of ongoing support to equivalence decisions, they must be strengthened and improved. The current scope of the ESAs' mandate must also be reconsidered in light of the policy objectives of the CMU. More common direct supervision in targeted areas is necessary to ensure more consistent supervisory practices and implementation of EU financial services rules. The 2017 review of the ESA Regulations concluded that the supervision of certain activities and entities with particular importance for the Union as a whole or with a significant degree of cross-border business should be carried out by the ESAs instead of by national competent authorities. Similarly, the ESAs should be more involved in the authorisation and supervision of entities from non-EU countries that are active in the Union. Second, this proposal aims at establishing a more effective governance of the ESAs. The incentive structure in the decision-making process of the ESAs as it stands today leads to the absence of decisions in particular in the area of regulatory convergence and supervisory convergence, or promotes decisions that are predominantly oriented towards national instead of broader EU interests. This reflects, to so me extent, an inherent tension between the European mandate of the ESAs and the national mandate of the competent authorities that are members of the ESA Boards. 3 This position is not well aligned with the objective of supervisory convergence. A greater role for the ESAs in deepening financial integration or strengthening the stability of the internal market will also require more effective convergence powers. 4 Third, the ESAs need an appropriate funding base which allows them to allocate resources in relation to their needs to fulfil their objective. Current budget arrangements constrain and will continue to constrain the ESAs' activities, as Member States for different reasons might be unwilling to increase national contributions further. The present proposal sets out specific amendments to the ESA Regulations 5 and various sector acts 6 to reinforce the powers, governance and funding framework of the ESAs, as these are the areas which need to be reinforced to allow the ESAs to meet the challenges outlin ed above. The impact assessment report accompanying this proposal considers the costs and benefits of these amendments. It sets out a number of options of measures intended to enhance the powers of the ESAs at EU level, improve their governance (including decision- making), and to ensure that their funding framework is sustainable and commensurate with current and future tasks. The impact assessment provides comprehensive evidence that the proposed amendments contribute effectively to reinforcing the ESA framework and thereby to the overall stability of the EU financial system, while keeping costs to the EU General Budget and stakeholders at a minimum. The proposed amendments also contribute to the further development and deepening of the CMU, in line with the political priorities of the Commission. 
Revised version (Article 64 Implementation and control of the budget):
1. The Executive Director shall act as authorising officer and shall implement the Authority’s annual budget. 2. The Authority’s accounting officer shall send the provisional accounts to the Commission’s accounting officer and to the Court of Auditors by 1 March of the following year. Article 70 shall not preclude the Authority from providing to the Court of Auditors any information requested by the Court that is within its competence. 3. The Authority’s accounting officer shall send, by 1 March of the following year, the required accounting information for consolidation purposes to the accounting officer of the Commission, in the manner and format laid down by that accounting officer. 4. The Authority’s accounting officer shall also send, by 31 March of the following year, the report on budgetary and financial management to the members of the Board of Supervisors, to the European Parliament, to the Council and to the Court of Auditors. 5. After receiving the observations of the Court of Auditors on the provisional accounts of the Authority in accordance with Article 246 of the Financial Regulation, the Authority’s accounting officer shall draw up the Authority’s final accounts. The Executive Director shall send them to the Board of Supervisors, which shall deliver an opinion on those accounts. 6. The Authority’s accounting officer shall, by 1 July of the following year, send the final accounts, accompanied by the opinion of the Board of Supervisors, to the accounting officer of the Commission, the European Parliament, the Council and the Court of Auditors. The Authority’s accounting officer shall also send, by 15 June each year, a reporting package to the Commission’s accounting officer, in a standardised format as laid down by the Commission’s accounting officer for consolidation purposes. 7. The final accounts shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Union by 15 November of the following year. 8. The Executive Director shall send the Court of Auditors a reply to the latter’s observations by 30 September and shall also send a copy of that reply to the Management Board and to the Commission. 9. The Executive Director shall submit to the European Parliament, at the latter’s request and as provided for in Article 261(3) of the Financial Regulation, any information necessary for the smooth application of the discharge procedure for the financial year in question. 10. The European Parliament, following a recommendation from the Council acting by qualified majority, shall, before 15 May of the year N + 2, grant a discharge to the Authority for the implementation of the budget for the financial year N. 11. The Authority shall provide a reasoned opinion on the position of the European Parliament and on any other observations made by the European Parliament provided in the discharge procedure.
Article 65 Financial rules
The financial rules applicable to the Authority shall be adopted by the Management Board after consulting the Commission. Those rules may not depart from Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2343/2002 of 19 November 2002 on the framework Financial Regulation for the bodies referred to in Article 185 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities ( 49 ) unless the specific operational needs for the functioning of the Authority so require and only with the prior agreement of the Commission.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Integrated financial markets bring significant benefits to the funding of the European economy and for promoting jobs and growth on a sound and sustainable basis. To promote financial integration and market integrity while safeguarding financial stability, the EU internal market for financial services requires common rules and strong supervisory coordination. When the EU overhauled its financial system in response to the financial crisis, and in line with global efforts, it therefore introduced a Single Rulebook for financial regulation in Europe and created the European Supervisory Authorities ("ESAs"). The ESAs constitute an institutional cornerstone of the comprehensive reform package and have played a key role in ensuring that the financial markets across the EU are well regulated, strong and stable. They contribute to the development and consistent application of the Single Rulebook, solve cross-border problems, and thereby promote both regulatory and supervisory convergence. Despite the post-crisis measures, there remains significant potential to enhance regulatory and supervisory convergence in the internal market. Integrated financial markets require more integrated supervisory arrangements to function effectively, while more centralised supervisory arrangements can, in turn, foster market integration. For this reason, the EU has engaged in further integration across the broader financial sector on a sound and stable basis. In particular, the Capital Markets Union ("CMU") has been launched so a s to lay the foundations for a fully functional internal market for capital markets. In this context, the Five Presidents' Report on Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union of June 2015 1 highlighted the need to strengthen the EU supervisory framew ork, leading ultimately to a single capital-markets supervisor. More recently, the Commission Reflection Paper on the deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union 2 suggests that a review of the EU supervisory framework – in particular of the European Secu rities and Markets Authority ("ESMA") - should deliver the first steps towards such a single supervisor by 2019. The Reflection Paper also called for completing the Financial Union - comprising both a Banking Union and a Capital Markets Union– by 2019 so a s to guarantee the integrity of the euro and improve the functioning of the euro area and the EU as a whole. Global financial markets are strongly interconnected, and the EU's regulatory framework is largely based on international standards agreed in the w ake of the financial crisis notably among G20 countries. As the EU is striving to accelerate the completion of the CMU, it is therefore essential that EU supervisory arrangements continue to develop in a manner which allows to reap the full potential of i nternationally integrated financial markets while ensuring that cross-border risks between the EU and the rest of the world can be monitored and managed effectively. The ESAs have a key role to play in this regard. Finally, the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the EU reinforces these challenges for supervisory arrangements within the remaining EU27. The future departure of the EU’s currently largest financial centre means that EU27 capital markets need to develop further and supervisory arrangements must be strengthened to ensure that financial markets continue to support the economy on an adequate and sound basis. The objective of the present proposal is to adjust and upgrade the ESAs framework to ensure they can assume an enhanced responsibility for financial market supervision. The ESAs must be adequately equipped in terms of powers, governance and funding. First, where existing powers of the ESAs have proven partially insufficient and unclearly defined, for example as regards the consistent application of EU law, the drafting of technical advice or the provision of ongoing support to equivalence decisions, they must be strengthened and improved. The current scope of the ESAs' mandate must also be reconsidered in light of the policy objectives of the CMU. More common direct supervision in targeted areas is necessary to ensure more consistent supervisory practices and implementation of EU financial services rules. The 2017 review of the ESA Regulations concluded that the supervision of certain activities and entities with particular importance for the Union as a whole or with a significant degree of cross-border business should be carried out by the ESAs instead of by national competent authorities. Similarly, the ESAs should be more involved in the authorisation and supervision of entities from non-EU countries that are active in the Union. Second, this proposal aims at establishing a more effective governance of the ESAs. The incentive structure in the decision-making process of the ESAs as it stands today leads to the absence of decisions in particular in the area of regulatory convergence and supervisory convergence, or promotes decisions that are predominantly oriented towards national instead of broader EU interests. This reflects, to so me extent, an inherent tension between the European mandate of the ESAs and the national mandate of the competent authorities that are members of the ESA Boards. 3 This position is not well aligned with the objective of supervisory convergence. A greater role for the ESAs in deepening financial integration or strengthening the stability of the internal market will also require more effective convergence powers. 4 Third, the ESAs need an appropriate funding base which allows them to allocate resources in relation to their needs to fulfil their objective. Current budget arrangements constrain and will continue to constrain the ESAs' activities, as Member States for different reasons might be unwilling to increase national contributions further. The present proposal sets out specific amendments to the ESA Regulations 5 and various sector acts 6 to reinforce the powers, governance and funding framework of the ESAs, as these are the areas which need to be reinforced to allow the ESAs to meet the challenges outlin ed above. The impact assessment report accompanying this proposal considers the costs and benefits of these amendments. It sets out a number of options of measures intended to enhance the powers of the ESAs at EU level, improve their governance (including decision- making), and to ensure that their funding framework is sustainable and commensurate with current and future tasks. The impact assessment provides comprehensive evidence that the proposed amendments contribute effectively to reinforcing the ESA framework and thereby to the overall stability of the EU financial system, while keeping costs to the EU General Budget and stakeholders at a minimum. The proposed amendments also contribute to the further development and deepening of the CMU, in line with the political priorities of the Commission. 
Revised version (Article 65 Financial rules):
The financial rules applicable to the Authority shall be adopted by the Management Board after consulting the Commission. Those rules may not depart from Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/715 ( 13 ) unless the specific operational needs for the functioning of the Authority so require and only with the prior agreement of the Commission.
Article 66 Anti-fraud measures
1. For the purposes of combating fraud, corruption and any other illegal activity, Regulation (EC) No 1073/1999 shall apply to the Authority without any restriction. 2. The Authority shall accede to the Interinstitutional Agreement concerning internal investigations by OLAF and shall immediately adopt appropriate provisions for all staff of the Authority. 3. The funding decisions and the agreements and the implementing instruments resulting from them shall explicitly stipulate that the Court of Auditors and OLAF may, if need be, carry out on-the-spot checks on the beneficiaries of monies disbursed by the Authority as well as on the staff responsible for allocating these monies.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Integrated financial markets bring significant benefits to the funding of the European economy and for promoting jobs and growth on a sound and sustainable basis. To promote financial integration and market integrity while safeguarding financial stability, the EU internal market for financial services requires common rules and strong supervisory coordination. When the EU overhauled its financial system in response to the financial crisis, and in line with global efforts, it therefore introduced a Single Rulebook for financial regulation in Europe and created the European Supervisory Authorities ("ESAs"). The ESAs constitute an institutional cornerstone of the comprehensive reform package and have played a key role in ensuring that the financial markets across the EU are well regulated, strong and stable. They contribute to the development and consistent application of the Single Rulebook, solve cross-border problems, and thereby promote both regulatory and supervisory convergence. Despite the post-crisis measures, there remains significant potential to enhance regulatory and supervisory convergence in the internal market. Integrated financial markets require more integrated supervisory arrangements to function effectively, while more centralised supervisory arrangements can, in turn, foster market integration. For this reason, the EU has engaged in further integration across the broader financial sector on a sound and stable basis. In particular, the Capital Markets Union ("CMU") has been launched so a s to lay the foundations for a fully functional internal market for capital markets. In this context, the Five Presidents' Report on Completing Europe's Economic and Monetary Union of June 2015 1 highlighted the need to strengthen the EU supervisory framew ork, leading ultimately to a single capital-markets supervisor. More recently, the Commission Reflection Paper on the deepening of the Economic and Monetary Union 2 suggests that a review of the EU supervisory framework – in particular of the European Secu rities and Markets Authority ("ESMA") - should deliver the first steps towards such a single supervisor by 2019. The Reflection Paper also called for completing the Financial Union - comprising both a Banking Union and a Capital Markets Union– by 2019 so a s to guarantee the integrity of the euro and improve the functioning of the euro area and the EU as a whole. Global financial markets are strongly interconnected, and the EU's regulatory framework is largely based on international standards agreed in the w ake of the financial crisis notably among G20 countries. As the EU is striving to accelerate the completion of the CMU, it is therefore essential that EU supervisory arrangements continue to develop in a manner which allows to reap the full potential of i nternationally integrated financial markets while ensuring that cross-border risks between the EU and the rest of the world can be monitored and managed effectively. The ESAs have a key role to play in this regard. Finally, the decision of the United Kingdom to leave the EU reinforces these challenges for supervisory arrangements within the remaining EU27. The future departure of the EU’s currently largest financial centre means that EU27 capital markets need to develop further and supervisory arrangements must be strengthened to ensure that financial markets continue to support the economy on an adequate and sound basis. The objective of the present proposal is to adjust and upgrade the ESAs framework to ensure they can assume an enhanced responsibility for financial market supervision. The ESAs must be adequately equipped in terms of powers, governance and funding. First, where existing powers of the ESAs have proven partially insufficient and unclearly defined, for example as regards the consistent application of EU law, the drafting of technical advice or the provision of ongoing support to equivalence decisions, they must be strengthened and improved. The current scope of the ESAs' mandate must also be reconsidered in light of the policy objectives of the CMU. More common direct supervision in targeted areas is necessary to ensure more consistent supervisory practices and implementation of EU financial services rules. The 2017 review of the ESA Regulations concluded that the supervision of certain activities and entities with particular importance for the Union as a whole or with a significant degree of cross-border business should be carried out by the ESAs instead of by national competent authorities. Similarly, the ESAs should be more involved in the authorisation and supervision of entities from non-EU countries that are active in the Union. Second, this proposal aims at establishing a more effective governance of the ESAs. The incentive structure in the decision-making process of the ESAs as it stands today leads to the absence of decisions in particular in the area of regulatory convergence and supervisory convergence, or promotes decisions that are predominantly oriented towards national instead of broader EU interests. This reflects, to so me extent, an inherent tension between the European mandate of the ESAs and the national mandate of the competent authorities that are members of the ESA Boards. 3 This position is not well aligned with the objective of supervisory convergence. A greater role for the ESAs in deepening financial integration or strengthening the stability of the internal market will also require more effective convergence powers. 4 Third, the ESAs need an appropriate funding base which allows them to allocate resources in relation to their needs to fulfil their objective. Current budget arrangements constrain and will continue to constrain the ESAs' activities, as Member States for different reasons might be unwilling to increase national contributions further. The present proposal sets out specific amendments to the ESA Regulations 5 and various sector acts 6 to reinforce the powers, governance and funding framework of the ESAs, as these are the areas which need to be reinforced to allow the ESAs to meet the challenges outlin ed above. The impact assessment report accompanying this proposal considers the costs and benefits of these amendments. It sets out a number of options of measures intended to enhance the powers of the ESAs at EU level, improve their governance (including decision- making), and to ensure that their funding framework is sustainable and commensurate with current and future tasks. The impact assessment provides comprehensive evidence that the proposed amendments contribute effectively to reinforcing the ESA framework and thereby to the overall stability of the EU financial system, while keeping costs to the EU General Budget and stakeholders at a minimum. The proposed amendments also contribute to the further development and deepening of the CMU, in line with the political priorities of the Commission. 
Revised version (Article 66 Anti-fraud measures):
1. For the purposes of combating fraud, corruption and any other illegal activity, Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 14 ) shall apply to the Authority without any restriction. 2. The Authority shall accede to the Interinstitutional Agreement concerning internal investigations by OLAF and shall immediately adopt appropriate provisions for all staff of the Authority. 3. The funding decisions and the agreements and the implementing instruments resulting from them shall explicitly stipulate that the Court of Auditors and OLAF may, if need be, carry out on-the-spot checks on the beneficiaries of monies disbursed by the Authority as well as on the staff responsible for allocating these monies.
Article 67 Privileges and immunities
The Protocol (No 7) on the privileges and immunities of the European Union annexed to the Treaty on European Union and to the TFEU shall apply to the Authority and its staff.
Article 68 Staff
1. The Staff Regulations, the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants and the rules adopted jointly by the Union institutions for the purpose of applying them shall apply to the staff of the Authority, including its Executive Director and its Chairperson. 2. The Management Board, in agreement with the Commission, shall adopt the necessary implementing measures, in accordance with the arrangements provided for in Article 110 of the Staff Regulations. 3. In respect of its staff, the Authority shall exercise the powers conferred on the appointing authority by the Staff Regulations and on the authority entitled to conclude contracts by the Conditions of Employment of Other Servants. 4. The Management Board shall adopt provisions to allow national experts from Member States to be seconded to the Authority.
Article 69 Liability of the Authority
1. In the case of non-contractual liability, the Authority shall, in accordance with the general principles common to the laws of the Member States, make good any damage caused by it or by its staff in the performance of their duties. The Court of Justice of the European Union shall have jurisdiction in any dispute over the remedying of such damage. 2. The personal financial liability and disciplinary liability of Authority staff towards the Authority shall be governed by the relevant provisions applying to the staff of the Authority.