Article 1 Subject matter
This Directive lays down rules concerning: (a) access to the activity of credit institutions and investment firms (collectively referred to as "institutions"); (b) supervisory powers and tools for the prudential supervision of institutions by competent authorities; (c) the prudential supervision of institutions by competent authorities in a manner that is consistent with the rules set out in Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (d) publication requirements for competent authorities in the field of prudential regulation and supervision of institutions.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 1.1. Reasons for and objectives of the proposal EU Member States have been severely affected by the economic crisis resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. This calls for a quick reaction to support capital markets participants. In the Communication of the Commission of 13 March 2020, entitled ‘Coordinated economic response to the COVID-19 outbreak’, the Commission highlighted the importance of ensuring the liquidity of the EU financial sector and countering a threatening recession through actions at all levels. Furthermore, on 27 May 2020, in its Communication entitled ‘Europe’s moment: Repair and Prepare for the Next Generation’ , the Commission presented key instruments supporting the recovery plan for Europe, including measures that aim at kick-starting the economy and helping private investment. This Communication also stressed that liquidity and access to finance will be a continued challenge for companies. The objective of this targeted amendment is to provide for the best possible conditions for European economies to emerge from the current COVID-19 pandemic. The rules on investments services can play a key role in promoting the recapitalisation of European companies as they emerge from the crisis. The modified commodities regime will allow companies in the real economy to react to market volatility while also enabling nascent commodity contracts, which is also important to promote the international role of the Euro. The present review is driven by two key objectives: · Facilitating investments in the real economy and · Allowing for a rapid recapit alisation of European companies. To ensure that financial institutions and intermediaries can fulfil their essential function in financing the real economy, targeted adjustments of certain requirements of Directive 2014/65/EU (‘MiFID II’) are appropriate. Already in 2019, stakeholders had warned the Commission that several aspects of the MiFID II distribution rules were either unnecessary or perceived as overly burdensome. The current COVID-19 pandemic makes it even more important to remove formal burdens where they are not strictly necessary. A more finely calibrated view of investor requirements would also leave more resources for dealing with the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Commission therefore strives to recalibrate those areas to strike the right balance between a sufficient level of transparency towards the client, the highest standards of protection and acceptable compliance costs for firms. In that context, this amendment to MiFID II applying to investments in financial instrument has the aim of removing administrative burdens that result from documentation and disclosure rules that are not counterbalanced by corresponding increases in investor protection. It also recalibrates the position limit and corresponding hedging exemption regime to foster nascent euro denominated markets. 
Revised version (Article 1 Subject matter):
This Directive lays down rules concerning: (a) access to the activity of credit institutions; (b) supervisory powers and tools for the prudential supervision of credit institutions by competent authorities; (c) the prudential supervision of credit institutions by competent authorities in a manner that is consistent with the rules set out in Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (d) publication requirements for competent authorities in the field of prudential regulation and supervision of credit institutions.
Article 2 Scope
1. This Directive shall apply to institutions. 2. Article 30 shall apply to local firms. 3. Article 31 shall apply to the firms referred to in point (2)(c) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. 4. Article 34 and Title VII, Chapter 3 shall apply to financial holding companies, mixed financial holding companies and mixed-activity holding companies which have their head offices in the Union; 5. This Directive shall not apply to the following: (1) access to the activity of investment firms in so far as it is regulated by Directive 2004/39/EC; (2) central banks; (3) post office giro institutions; (4) in Belgium, the 'Institut de Réescompte et de Garantie/Herdiscontering- en Waarborginstituut'; (5) in Denmark, the 'Eksport Kredit Fonden', the 'Eksport Kredit Fonden A/S', the 'Danmarks Skibskredit A/S' and the 'KommuneKredit'; (6) in Germany, the 'Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau', undertakings which are recognised under the 'Wohnungsgemeinnützigkeitsgesetz' as bodies of State housing policy and are not mainly engaged in banking transactions, and undertakings recognised under that law as non-profit housing undertakings; (7) in Estonia, the 'hoiu-laenuühistud', as cooperative undertakings that are recognised under the 'hoiu-laenuühistu seadus'; (8) in Ireland, credit unions and the friendly societies; (9) in Greece, the 'Ταμείο Παρακαταθηκών και Δανείων' (Tamio Parakatathikon kai Danion); (10) in Spain, the 'Instituto de Crédito Oficial'; (11) in France, the 'Caisse des dépôts et consignations'; (12) in Italy, the 'Cassa depositi e prestiti'; (13) in Latvia, the 'krājaizdevu sabiedrības', undertakings that are recognised under the 'krājaizdevu sabiedrību likums' as cooperative undertakings rendering financial services solely to their members; (14) in Lithuania, the 'kredito unijos' other than the 'Centrinė kredito unija'; (15) in Hungary, the 'MFB Magyar Fejlesztési Bank Zártkörűen Működő Részvénytársaság' and the 'Magyar Export-Import Bank Zártkörűen Működő Részvénytársaság'; (16) in the Netherlands, the 'Nederlandse Investeringsbank voor Ontwikkelingslanden NV', the 'NV Noordelijke Ontwikkelingsmaatschappij', the 'NV Industriebank Limburgs Instituut voor Ontwikkeling en Financiering' and the 'Overijsselse Ontwikkelingsmaatschappij NV'; (17) in Austria, undertakings recognised as housing associations in the public interest and the 'Österreichische Kontrollbank AG'; (18) in Poland, the 'Spółdzielcze Kasy Oszczędnościowo — Kredytowe' and the 'Bank Gospodarstwa Krajowego'; (19) in Portugal, the 'Caixas Económicas' existing on 1 January 1986 with the exception of those incorporated as limited companies and of the 'Caixa Económica Montepio Geral'; (20) in Slovenia, the 'SID-Slovenska izvozna in razvojna banka, d.d. Ljubljana'; (21) in Finland, the 'Teollisen yhteistyön rahasto Oy/Fonden för industriellt samarbete AB', and the 'Finnvera Oyj/Finnvera Abp'; (22) in Sweden, the 'Svenska Skeppshypotekskassan'; (23) in the United Kingdom, the National Savings Bank, the Commonwealth Development Finance Company Ltd, the Agricultural Mortgage Corporation Ltd, the Scottish Agricultural Securities Corporation Ltd, the Crown Agents for overseas governments and administrations, credit unions and municipal banks. 6. The entities referred to in point (1) and points (3) to (23) of paragraph 5 of this Article shall be treated as financial institutions for the purposes of Article 34 and Title VII, Chapter 3.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal This proposal sets out a series of measures to better counter the financing of terrorism and to ensure increased transparency of financial transactions and of corporate entities under the preventive legal framework in place in the Union, namely Directive (EU) 2015/849 (the "4AMLD") 1 . It also sets out certain consequential changes to the relevant company law rules under Directive 2009/101/EC 2 . The adoption of the updated Anti-Money Laundering rules in May 2015 represented a significant step in improving the effectiveness of the EU's efforts to combat the laundering of money from criminal activities and to counter the financing of terrorist activities. But the terrorist threat has grown and evolved recently. At the same time, fuelled by advances in technology and communications, the globally interconnected financial system makes it simple to hide and move funds around the world, by quickly and easily setting up layer upon layer of paper companies, crossing borders and jurisdictions and making it increasingly difficult to track down the money. Money launderers, tax evaders, terrorists, fraudsters and other criminals are all able to cover their tracks in this way. A sound financial system, with proper scrutiny and analytical tools in place, may, by helping to uncover anomalous transaction patterns, contribute to a better understanding of terrorist and criminal connections, networks and threats, and lead to relevant preventive actions by all competent authorities involved. However, gaps still exist in the oversight of the many financial means used by terrorists, from cash and trade in cultural artefacts to virtual currencies and anonymous pre-paid cards. This proposal seeks to address those gaps while avoiding unnecessary obstacles to the functioning of payments and financial markets for ordinary, lawabiding citizens and businesses, so balancing the need to increase security with the need to protect fundamental rights, including data protection, and economic freedoms. At the same time and in addition to terrorist financing issues, significant gaps in the transparency of financial transactions around the world have been revealed which indicate that offshore jurisdictions are often used as locations of intermediary entities that distance the real owner from the assets owned, often to avoid or evade tax. This proposal seeks to prevent the large-scale concealment of funds which can hinder the effective fight against financial crime, and to ensure enhanced corporate transparency so that true beneficial owners of companies or other legal arrangements cannot hide behind undisclosed identities. In the European Agenda on Security 3 the Commission identified as a priority the upgrading of the EU legal framework to address terrorism. The conclusions of the Justice and Home Affairs Council on 20 November 2015 4 , the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 8 December 2015 5 , as well as of the European Council of 18 December 2015 6 all stressed the need to further intensify the work in this field, building on the improvements made in the 4AMLD. On 2 February 2016, the Commission presented an Action Plan for strengthening the fight against terrorist financing 7 that focuses on two main strands of action: tracing terrorists through financial movements and preventing them from moving funds or other assets; and disrupting the sources of revenue used by terrorist organisations, by targeting their capacity to raise funds. The Action Plan announced a number of targeted operational and legislative measures, including the present proposal, to be put in place rapidly. On 12 February 2016, the Economic and Financial Affairs Ministers Council called on the Commission to submit its proposal to amend the 4AMLD as soon as possible and no later than the second quarter of 2016. On 22 April 2016 the informal ECOFIN Council also called for action in particular to enhance the accessibility of beneficial ownership registers, to clarify the registration requirements for trusts, to speed up the interconnection of national beneficial ownership registers, promote automatic exchange of information on beneficial ownership, and strengthen customer due diligence rules 8 . In its Resolution of 16 December 2015 9 , the European Parliament had already stressed that improved transparency, coordination and convergence in relation to corporate tax policies provides an effective framework to guarantee fair competition between firms in the Union and protect state budgets from adverse outcomes. The proposed revision of the 4AMLD is also consistent with global developments. At international level, the UN Security Council Resolutions 2199(2015) and 2253(2015) called for measures to prevent terrorist groups from gaining access to international financial institutions. In addition, the G20 statement of 18 April 2016 calls on the Financial Action Task Force ('FATF') and the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes to make initial proposals to improve the implementation of the international standards on transparency, including on the availability of beneficial ownership information, and its international exchange. Effective supervision and enforcement are crucial to prevent money laundering, the financing of terrorism and crime in general. The Commission will be monitoring the correct transposition of the Union requirements in national law, as well as their effective implementation by Member States in practice. 
Revised version (Article 2 Scope):
1. This Directive shall apply to institutions. 2. Article 30 shall apply to local firms. 4. Article 34 and Title VII, Chapter 3 shall apply to financial holding companies, mixed financial holding companies and mixed-activity holding companies which have their head offices in the Union; 5. This Directive shall not apply to the following: (1) access to the activity of investment firms in so far as it is regulated by Directive 2004/39/EC; (2) central banks; (3) post office giro institutions; (4) in Belgium, the 'Institut de Réescompte et de Garantie/Herdiscontering- en Waarborginstituut'; (5) in Denmark, the 'Eksport Kredit Fonden', the 'Eksport Kredit Fonden A/S', the 'Danmarks Skibskredit A/S' and the 'KommuneKredit'; (6) in Germany, the 'Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau', undertakings which are recognised under the 'Wohnungsgemeinnützigkeitsgesetz' as bodies of State housing policy and are not mainly engaged in banking transactions, and undertakings recognised under that law as non-profit housing undertakings; (7) in Estonia, the 'hoiu-laenuühistud', as cooperative undertakings that are recognised under the 'hoiu-laenuühistu seadus'; (8) in Ireland, credit unions and the friendly societies; (9) in Greece, the 'Ταμείο Παρακαταθηκών και Δανείων' (Tamio Parakatathikon kai Danion); (10) in Spain, the 'Instituto de Crédito Oficial'; (11) in France, the 'Caisse des dépôts et consignations'; (12) in Italy, the 'Cassa depositi e prestiti'; (13) in Latvia, the 'krājaizdevu sabiedrības', undertakings that are recognised under the 'krājaizdevu sabiedrību likums' as cooperative undertakings rendering financial services solely to their members; (14) in Lithuania, the 'kredito unijos' other than the 'Centrinė kredito unija'; (15) in Hungary, the 'MFB Magyar Fejlesztési Bank Zártkörűen Működő Részvénytársaság' and the 'Magyar Export-Import Bank Zártkörűen Működő Részvénytársaság'; (16) in the Netherlands, the 'Nederlandse Investeringsbank voor Ontwikkelingslanden NV', the 'NV Noordelijke Ontwikkelingsmaatschappij', the 'NV Industriebank Limburgs Instituut voor Ontwikkeling en Financiering' and the 'Overijsselse Ontwikkelingsmaatschappij NV'; (17) in Austria, undertakings recognised as housing associations in the public interest and the 'Österreichische Kontrollbank AG'; (18) in Poland, the 'Spółdzielcze Kasy Oszczędnościowo — Kredytowe' and the 'Bank Gospodarstwa Krajowego'; (19) in Portugal, the 'Caixas Económicas' existing on 1 January 1986 with the exception of those incorporated as limited companies and of the 'Caixa Económica Montepio Geral'; (20) in Slovenia, the 'SID-Slovenska izvozna in razvojna banka, d.d. Ljubljana'; (21) in Finland, the 'Teollisen yhteistyön rahasto Oy/Fonden för industriellt samarbete AB', and the 'Finnvera Oyj/Finnvera Abp'; (22) in Sweden, the 'Svenska Skeppshypotekskassan'; (23) in the United Kingdom, the National Savings Bank, the Commonwealth Development Finance Company Ltd, the Agricultural Mortgage Corporation Ltd, the Scottish Agricultural Securities Corporation Ltd, the Crown Agents for overseas governments and administrations, credit unions and municipal banks. 6. The entities referred to in point (1) and points (3) to (23) of paragraph 5 of this Article shall be treated as financial institutions for the purposes of Article 34 and Title VII, Chapter 3.
Article 3 Definitions
1. For the purposes of this Directive, the following definitions shall apply: (1) 'credit institution' means credit institution as defined in point (1) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (2) 'investment firm' means investment firm as defined in point (2) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (3) 'institution' means institution as defined in point (3) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (4) 'local firm' means local firm as defined in point (4) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (5) 'insurance undertaking' means insurance undertaking as defined in point (5) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (6) 'reinsurance undertaking' means reinsurance undertaking as defined in point (6) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (7) 'management body' means an institution's body or bodies, which are appointed in accordance with national law, which are empowered to set the institution's strategy, objectives and overall direction, and which oversee and monitor management decision-making, and include the persons who effectively direct the business of the institution; (8) 'management body in its supervisory function' means the management body acting in its role of overseeing and monitoring management decision-making; (9) 'senior management' means those natural persons who exercise executive functions within an institution and who are responsible, and accountable to the management body, for the day-to-day management of the institution; (10) 'systemic risk' means a risk of disruption in the financial system with the potential to have serious negative consequences for the financial system and the real economy; (11) 'model risk' means the potential loss an institution may incur, as a consequence of decisions that could be principally based on the output of internal models, due to errors in the development, implementation or use of such models; (12) 'originator' means originator as defined in point (13) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (13) 'sponsor' means sponsor as defined in point (14) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (14) 'parent undertaking' means parent undertaking as defined in point (15) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (15) 'subsidiary' means subsidiary as defined in point (16) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (16) 'branch' means branch as defined in point (17) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (17) 'ancillary services undertaking' means ancillary services undertaking as defined in point (18) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (18) 'asset management company' means asset management company as defined in point (19) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (19) 'financial holding company' means financial holding company as defined in point (20) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (20) 'mixed financial holding company' means mixed financial holding company as defined in point (21) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (21) 'mixed activity holding company' means mixed activity holding company as defined in point (22) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (22) 'financial institution' means financial institution as defined in point (26) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (23) 'financial sector entity' means financial sector entity as defined in point (27) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (24) 'parent institution in a Member State' means parent institution in a Member State as defined in point (28) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (25) 'EU parent institution' means EU parent institution as defined in point (29) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (26) 'parent financial holding company in a Member State' means parent financial holding company in a Member State as defined in point (30) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (27) 'EU parent financial holding company' means EU parent financial holding company as defined in point (31) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (28) 'parent mixed financial holding company in a Member State' means parent mixed financial holding company in a Member State as defined in point (32) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (29) 'EU parent mixed financial holding company' means EU parent mixed financial holding company as defined in point (33) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (30) 'systemically important institution' means an EU parent institution, an EU parent financial holding company, an EU parent mixed financial holding company or an institution the failure or malfunction of which could lead to systemic risk; (31) 'central counterparty' means central counterparty as defined in point (34) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (32) 'participation' means participation as defined in point (35) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (33) 'qualifying holding' means qualifying holding as defined in point (36) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (34) 'control' means control as defined in point (37) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (35) 'close links' means close links as defined in point (38) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (36) 'competent authority' means competent authority as defined in point (40) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (37) 'consolidating supervisor' means consolidating supervisor as defined in point (41) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (38) 'authorisation' means authorisation as defined in point (42) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (39) 'home Member State' means home Member State as defined in point (43) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (40) 'host Member State' means host Member State as defined in point (44) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (41) 'ESCB central banks' means ESCB central banks as defined in point (45) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (42) 'central banks' means central banks as defined in point (46) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (43) 'consolidated situation' means consolidated situation as defined in point (47) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (44) 'consolidated basis' means consolidated basis as defined in point (48) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (45) 'sub-consolidated basis' means sub-consolidated basis as defined in point (49) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (46) 'financial instrument' means financial instrument as defined in point (50) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (47) 'own funds' means own funds as defined in point (118) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (48) 'operational risk' means operational risk as defined in point (52) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (49) 'credit risk mitigation' means credit risk mitigation as defined in point (57) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (50) 'securitisation' means securitisation as defined in point (61) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (51) 'securitisation position' means securitisation position as defined in point (62) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (52) 'securitisation special purpose entity' means securitisation special purpose entity as defined in point (66) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (53) 'discretionary pension benefits' means discretionary pension benefits as defined in point (73) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (54) 'trading book' means trading as defined in point (86) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (55) 'regulated market' means regulated market as defined in point (92) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (56) 'leverage' means leverage as defined in point (93) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (57) 'risk of excessive leverage' means risk of excessive leverage as defined in point (94) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (58) 'external credit assessment institution' means external credit assessment institution as defined in point (98) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (59) 'internal approaches' means the internal ratings based approach referred to in Article 143(1), the internal models approach referred to in Article 221, the own estimates approach referred to in Article 225, the advanced measurement approaches referred to in Article 312(2), the internal models method referred to in Articles 283 and 363, and the internal assessment approach referred to in Article 259(3) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. 2. Where this Directive refers to the management body and, pursuant to national law, the managerial and supervisory functions of the management body are assigned to different bodies or different members within one body, the Member State shall identify the bodies or members of the management body responsible in accordance with its national law, unless otherwise specified by this Directive.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal This proposal sets out a series of measures to better counter the financing of terrorism and to ensure increased transparency of financial transactions and of corporate entities under the preventive legal framework in place in the Union, namely Directive (EU) 2015/849 (the "4AMLD") 1 . It also sets out certain consequential changes to the relevant company law rules under Directive 2009/101/EC 2 . The adoption of the updated Anti-Money Laundering rules in May 2015 represented a significant step in improving the effectiveness of the EU's efforts to combat the laundering of money from criminal activities and to counter the financing of terrorist activities. But the terrorist threat has grown and evolved recently. At the same time, fuelled by advances in technology and communications, the globally interconnected financial system makes it simple to hide and move funds around the world, by quickly and easily setting up layer upon layer of paper companies, crossing borders and jurisdictions and making it increasingly difficult to track down the money. Money launderers, tax evaders, terrorists, fraudsters and other criminals are all able to cover their tracks in this way. A sound financial system, with proper scrutiny and analytical tools in place, may, by helping to uncover anomalous transaction patterns, contribute to a better understanding of terrorist and criminal connections, networks and threats, and lead to relevant preventive actions by all competent authorities involved. However, gaps still exist in the oversight of the many financial means used by terrorists, from cash and trade in cultural artefacts to virtual currencies and anonymous pre-paid cards. This proposal seeks to address those gaps while avoiding unnecessary obstacles to the functioning of payments and financial markets for ordinary, lawabiding citizens and businesses, so balancing the need to increase security with the need to protect fundamental rights, including data protection, and economic freedoms. At the same time and in addition to terrorist financing issues, significant gaps in the transparency of financial transactions around the world have been revealed which indicate that offshore jurisdictions are often used as locations of intermediary entities that distance the real owner from the assets owned, often to avoid or evade tax. This proposal seeks to prevent the large-scale concealment of funds which can hinder the effective fight against financial crime, and to ensure enhanced corporate transparency so that true beneficial owners of companies or other legal arrangements cannot hide behind undisclosed identities. In the European Agenda on Security 3 the Commission identified as a priority the upgrading of the EU legal framework to address terrorism. The conclusions of the Justice and Home Affairs Council on 20 November 2015 4 , the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 8 December 2015 5 , as well as of the European Council of 18 December 2015 6 all stressed the need to further intensify the work in this field, building on the improvements made in the 4AMLD. On 2 February 2016, the Commission presented an Action Plan for strengthening the fight against terrorist financing 7 that focuses on two main strands of action: tracing terrorists through financial movements and preventing them from moving funds or other assets; and disrupting the sources of revenue used by terrorist organisations, by targeting their capacity to raise funds. The Action Plan announced a number of targeted operational and legislative measures, including the present proposal, to be put in place rapidly. On 12 February 2016, the Economic and Financial Affairs Ministers Council called on the Commission to submit its proposal to amend the 4AMLD as soon as possible and no later than the second quarter of 2016. On 22 April 2016 the informal ECOFIN Council also called for action in particular to enhance the accessibility of beneficial ownership registers, to clarify the registration requirements for trusts, to speed up the interconnection of national beneficial ownership registers, promote automatic exchange of information on beneficial ownership, and strengthen customer due diligence rules 8 . In its Resolution of 16 December 2015 9 , the European Parliament had already stressed that improved transparency, coordination and convergence in relation to corporate tax policies provides an effective framework to guarantee fair competition between firms in the Union and protect state budgets from adverse outcomes. The proposed revision of the 4AMLD is also consistent with global developments. At international level, the UN Security Council Resolutions 2199(2015) and 2253(2015) called for measures to prevent terrorist groups from gaining access to international financial institutions. In addition, the G20 statement of 18 April 2016 calls on the Financial Action Task Force ('FATF') and the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes to make initial proposals to improve the implementation of the international standards on transparency, including on the availability of beneficial ownership information, and its international exchange. Effective supervision and enforcement are crucial to prevent money laundering, the financing of terrorism and crime in general. The Commission will be monitoring the correct transposition of the Union requirements in national law, as well as their effective implementation by Member States in practice. 
Revised version (Article 3 Definitions):
1. For the purposes of this Directive, the following definitions shall apply: (7) 'management body' means an institution's body or bodies, which are appointed in accordance with national law, which are empowered to set the institution's strategy, objectives and overall direction, and which oversee and monitor management decision-making, and include the persons who effectively direct the business of the institution; (8) 'management body in its supervisory function' means the management body acting in its role of overseeing and monitoring management decision-making; (9) 'senior management' means those natural persons who exercise executive functions within an institution and who are responsible, and accountable to the management body, for the day-to-day management of the institution; (10) 'systemic risk' means a risk of disruption in the financial system with the potential to have serious negative consequences for the financial system and the real economy; (11) 'model risk' means the potential loss an institution may incur, as a consequence of decisions that could be principally based on the output of internal models, due to errors in the development, implementation or use of such models; (30) 'systemically important institution' means an EU parent institution, an EU parent financial holding company, an EU parent mixed financial holding company or an institution the failure or malfunction of which could lead to systemic risk; (59) 'internal approaches' means the internal ratings based approach referred to in Article 143(1), the internal models approach referred to in Article 221, the own estimates approach referred to in Article 225, the advanced measurement approaches referred to in Article 312(2), the internal models method referred to in Articles 283 and 363, and the internal assessment approach referred to in Article 259(3) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. 2. Where this Directive refers to the management body and, pursuant to national law, the managerial and supervisory functions of the management body are assigned to different bodies or different members within one body, the Member State shall identify the bodies or members of the management body responsible in accordance with its national law, unless otherwise specified by this Directive.
Article 4 Designation and powers of the competent authorities
1. Member States shall designate competent authorities that carry out the functions and duties provided for in this Directive and in Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. They shall inform the Commission and EBA thereof, indicating any division of functions and duties. 2. Member States shall ensure that the competent authorities monitor the activities of institutions, and where applicable, of financial holding companies and mixed financial holding companies, so as to assess compliance with the requirements of this Directive and Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. 3. Member States shall ensure that appropriate measures are in place to enable the competent authorities to obtain the information needed to assess the compliance of institutions and, where applicable, of financial holding companies and mixed financial holding companies, with the requirements referred to in paragraph 2 and to investigate possible breaches of those requirements. 4. Member States shall ensure that the competent authorities have the expertise, resources, operational capacity, powers and independence necessary to carry out the functions relating to prudential supervision, investigations and penalties set out in this Directive and in Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. 5. Member States shall require that institutions provide the competent authorities of their home Member States with all the information necessary for the assessment of their compliance with the rules adopted in accordance with this Directive and Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. Member States shall also ensure that internal control mechanisms and administrative and accounting procedures of the institutions permit the checking of their compliance with such rules at all times. 6. Member States shall ensure that institutions register all their transactions and document systems and processes, which are subject to this Directive and Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 in such a manner that the competent authorities are able to check compliance with this Directive and Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 at all times. 7. Member States shall ensure that the functions of supervision pursuant to this Directive and to Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 and any other functions of the competent authorities are separate and independent from the functions relating to resolution. Member States shall inform the Commission and EBA thereof, indicating any division of duties. 8. Member States shall ensure that where authorities other than the competent authorities have the power of resolution, those other authorities cooperate closely and consult the competent authorities with regard to the preparation of resolution plans.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The proposed amendment to Directive 2013/36/EU (the Capital Requirements Directive or CRD) is part of a legislative package that includes also amendments to Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (the Capital Requirements Regulation or CRR), to Directive 2014/59/EU (the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive or BRRD), and to Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 (the Single Resolution Mechanism Regulation or SRMR). Over the past years the EU implemented a substantial reform of the financial services regulatory framework to enhance the resilience of institutions (i.e. credit institutions and investment firms) operating in the EU financial sector, largely based on global standards agreed with the EU’s international partners. In particular, the reform package included Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (the Capital Requirements Regulation or CRR) and Directive 2013/36/EU (the Capital Requirements Directive or CRD), on prudential requirements for and supervision of institutions, Directive 2014/59/EU (the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive or BRRD), on recovery and resolution of institutions and Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 on the Single Resolution Mechanism (SRM). These measures were taken in response to the financial crisis that unfolded in 2007-2008 and reflect internationally agreed standards. While the reforms have rendered the financial system more stable and resilient against many types of possible future shocks and crises, they do not yet comprehensively address all identified problems. The present proposals therefore aim to complete the reform agenda by tackling remaining weaknesses and implementing some outstanding elements of the reform that are essential to ensure the institutions' resilience but have only recently been finalised by global standard setters (i.e. the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) and the Financial Stability Board (FSB)):  a binding leverage ratio which will prevent institutions from excessively increasing leverage, e.g. to compensate for low profitability;  a binding net stable funding ratio (NSFR) which will build on institutions’ improved funding profiles and establish a harmonised standard for how much stable, long-term sources of funding an institution needs to weather periods of market and funding stress;  more risk sensitive own funds (i.e. capital) requirements for institutions that trade to an important extent in securities and derivatives which will prevent too much divergence in those requirements that is not based on the institutions' risk profiles;  last but not least, new standards on the total loss-absorbing capacity (TLAC) of global systemically important institutions (G-SIIs) which will require those institutions to have more loss-absorbing and recapitalisation capacity, tackle interconnections in the global financial markets and further strengthen the EU’s ability to resolve failing G-SIIs while minimising risks for taxpayers. The Commission recognised the need for further risk reduction in its Communication of 24 November 2015 and committed to bring forward a legislative proposal that builds on the international agreements listed above. Such risk reduction measures will not only further strengthen the resilience of the European banking system and the markets' confidence in it, but will also provide the basis for further progress in completing the Banking Union. The need for further concrete legislative steps to be taken in terms of reducing risks in the financial sector has been recognised also by the Ecofin Council Conclusions from 17 June 2016. The European Parliament resolution of 10 March 2016 on the Banking Union – Annual Report 2015 also indicates some areas in the current regulatory framework that could be further addressed. At the same time, the Commission needed to take account of the existing regulatory framework and the new regulatory developments at international level and respond to challenges affecting the EU economy, especially the need to promote growth and jobs at times of uncertain economic outlook. Various major policy initiatives, such as the Investment Plan for Europe (EFSI) and the Capital Markets Union have been launched in order to strengthen the economy of the Union. The ability of institutions to contribute to financing the economy needs to be enhanced without impinging on the stability of the regulatory framework. In order to ensure that recent reforms in the financial sector interact smoothly with each other and with new policy initiatives, but also with broader recent reforms in the financial sector, the Commission carried out, on the basis of a call for evidence, a thorough holistic assessment of the existing financial services framework (including the CRR, CRD, BRRD and SRMR). The upcoming review of global standards was also assessed from a wider economic impact perspective. Amendments based on international developments represent a faithful implementation of international standards into Union law, subject to targeted adjustments in order to reflect EU specificities and broader policy considerations. For instance, the predominant reliance on bank financing by EU small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) or for infrastructure projects prompts specific regulatory adjustments that ensure institutions remain capable of funding them as they constitute the backbone of the single market. A smooth interaction with existing requirements, such as for central clearing and collateralisation of derivatives exposures, or a gradual transition to some of the new requirements are necessary. Such adjustments, limited in terms of scope or time, do therefore not impinge on the overall soundness of the proposals, which are aligned with the basic level of ambition of the international standards. Moreover, based on the call for evidence, the proposals aim at improving existing rules. The analysis of the Commission showed that the present framework can be applied in a more proportionate way, taking into account in particular the situation of smaller and less complex institutions where some of the current disclosure, reporting and complex trading book-related requirements appear not to be justified by prudential considerations. Furthermore, the Commission has considered the risk attached to loans to SMEs and for funding infrastructure projects and found that for some of those loans, it would be justified to apply lower own funds requirements than are applied at present. Accordingly, the present proposals will bring corrections to these requirements and will enhance the proportionality of the prudential framework for institutions. Thereby, the ability of institutions to finance the economy will be enhanced without impinging on the stability of the regulatory framework. Finally, the Commission, in close cooperation with the Expert Group on Banking, Payments and Insurance has assessed the application of options and discretions set out in the CRD and the CRR. Based on this analysis, the present proposal is intending to eliminate some options and discretions concerning the provisions on the leverage ratio, on large exposures and on own funds. It is proposed to end to the possibility to create new State guaranteed deferred tax assets not relying on future profitability that would be exempted from deduction from regulatory capital. 
Revised version (Article 4 Designation and powers of the competent authorities):
1. Member States shall designate competent authorities that carry out the functions and duties provided for in this Directive and in Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. They shall inform the Commission and EBA thereof, indicating any division of functions and duties. 2. Member States shall ensure that the competent authorities monitor the activities of institutions, and where applicable, of financial holding companies and mixed financial holding companies, so as to assess compliance with the requirements of this Directive and Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. 3. Member States shall ensure that appropriate measures are in place to enable the competent authorities to obtain the information needed to assess the compliance of institutions and, where applicable, of financial holding companies and mixed financial holding companies, with the requirements referred to in paragraph 2 and to investigate possible breaches of those requirements. 4. Member States shall ensure that the competent authorities have the expertise, resources, operational capacity, powers and independence necessary to carry out the functions relating to prudential supervision, investigations and penalties set out in this Directive and in Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. 5. Member States shall require that institutions provide the competent authorities of their home Member States with all the information necessary for the assessment of their compliance with the rules adopted in accordance with this Directive and Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. Member States shall also ensure that internal control mechanisms and administrative and accounting procedures of the institutions permit the checking of their compliance with such rules at all times. 6. Member States shall ensure that institutions register all their transactions and document systems and processes, which are subject to this Directive and Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 in such a manner that the competent authorities are able to check compliance with this Directive and Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 at all times. 7. Member States shall ensure that the functions of supervision pursuant to this Directive and to Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 and any other functions of the competent authorities are separate and independent from the functions relating to resolution. Member States shall inform the Commission and EBA thereof, indicating any division of duties. 8. Member States shall ensure that where authorities other than competent authorities have the power of resolution, those other authorities cooperate closely and consult the competent authorities with regard to the preparation of resolution plans and in all other instances where such cooperation and consultation is required by this Directive, by Directive 2014/59/EU or by Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.
Article 5 Coordination within Member States
Where Member States have more than one competent authority for the prudential supervision of credit institutions, investment firms and financial institutions, Member States shall take the requisite measures to organise coordination between such authorities.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 1.1. Reasons for and objectives of the proposal EU Member States have been severely affected by the economic crisis resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. This calls for a quick reaction to support capital markets participants. In the Communication of the Commission of 13 March 2020, entitled ‘Coordinated economic response to the COVID-19 outbreak’, the Commission highlighted the importance of ensuring the liquidity of the EU financial sector and countering a threatening recession through actions at all levels. Furthermore, on 27 May 2020, in its Communication entitled ‘Europe’s moment: Repair and Prepare for the Next Generation’ , the Commission presented key instruments supporting the recovery plan for Europe, including measures that aim at kick-starting the economy and helping private investment. This Communication also stressed that liquidity and access to finance will be a continued challenge for companies. The objective of this targeted amendment is to provide for the best possible conditions for European economies to emerge from the current COVID-19 pandemic. The rules on investments services can play a key role in promoting the recapitalisation of European companies as they emerge from the crisis. The modified commodities regime will allow companies in the real economy to react to market volatility while also enabling nascent commodity contracts, which is also important to promote the international role of the Euro. The present review is driven by two key objectives: · Facilitating investments in the real economy and · Allowing for a rapid recapit alisation of European companies. To ensure that financial institutions and intermediaries can fulfil their essential function in financing the real economy, targeted adjustments of certain requirements of Directive 2014/65/EU (‘MiFID II’) are appropriate. Already in 2019, stakeholders had warned the Commission that several aspects of the MiFID II distribution rules were either unnecessary or perceived as overly burdensome. The current COVID-19 pandemic makes it even more important to remove formal burdens where they are not strictly necessary. A more finely calibrated view of investor requirements would also leave more resources for dealing with the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Commission therefore strives to recalibrate those areas to strike the right balance between a sufficient level of transparency towards the client, the highest standards of protection and acceptable compliance costs for firms. In that context, this amendment to MiFID II applying to investments in financial instrument has the aim of removing administrative burdens that result from documentation and disclosure rules that are not counterbalanced by corresponding increases in investor protection. It also recalibrates the position limit and corresponding hedging exemption regime to foster nascent euro denominated markets. 
Revised version (Article 5 Coordination within Member States):
Member States that have more than one competent authority for the prudential supervision of credit institutions and financial institutions shall take the requisite measures to organise coordination between such authorities.
Article 6 Cooperation within the European System of Financial Supervision
In the exercise of their duties, the competent authorities shall take into account the convergence in respect of supervisory tools and supervisory practices in the application of the laws, regulations and administrative requirements adopted pursuant to this Directive and to Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. For that purpose, Member States shall ensure that: (a) the competent authorities, as parties to the European System of Financial Supervision (ESFS), cooperate with trust and full mutual respect, in particular when ensuring the flow of appropriate and reliable information between them and other parties to the ESFS, in accordance with the principle of sincere cooperation set out in Article 4(3) of the Treaty on European Union; (b) the competent authorities participate in the activities of EBA and, as appropriate, in the colleges of supervisors; (c) the competent authorities make every effort to comply with those guidelines and recommendations issued by EBA in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 and to respond to the warnings and recommendations issued by the ESRB pursuant to Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010; (d) the competent authorities cooperate closely with the ESRB; (e) national mandates conferred on the competent authorities do not inhibit the performance of their duties as members of EBA, of the ESRB, where appropriate, or under this Directive and under Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The establishment of a European Single Access Point (ESAP) by 2024 is a flagship action of the Capital Markets Union (CMU) Action Plan adopted by the European Commission in September 2020 1 . ESAP will contribute to the achievement of the CMU’s objectives by providing EU-wide access to information published by entities that is relevant to capital markets, financial services and sustainable finance, i.e. mainly information about their economic activities and products. ESAP will provide access to this information in an efficient and non-discriminatory manner. Information about entities’ activities and products is essential for decision-making by providers of capital. ESAP will contribute to further integrating the financial services and capital markets in the single market, to allocating capital more efficiently across the EU and promoting the development of smaller national capital markets and economies by giving them greater visibility. ESAP will also allow non-listed entities including Small and Medium-Sized enterprises (SMEs) to make available information on a voluntary basis. This will facilitate their access to capital. This proposal is part of a package comprised of: · a proposal for a Regulation establishing a European Single Access Point; · a proposal for a Directive amending certain Directives (this proposal); and · a proposal for a Regulation amending certain Regulations. Amendments to certain Directives are necessary to achieve the above objectives to contribute to the integration of the single market, particularly as regards the collection of information to be made available to ESAP. 
Revised version (Article 6 Cooperation within the European System of Financial Supervision):
In the exercise of their duties, the competent authorities shall take into account the convergence in respect of supervisory tools and supervisory practices in the application of the laws, regulations and administrative requirements adopted pursuant to this Directive and to Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. For that purpose, Member States shall ensure that: (a) the competent authorities, as parties to the European System of Financial Supervision (ESFS), cooperate with trust and full mutual respect, in particular when ensuring the flow of appropriate and reliable information between them and other parties to the ESFS, in accordance with the principle of sincere cooperation set out in Article 4(3) of the Treaty on European Union; (b) the competent authorities participate in the activities of EBA and, as appropriate, in the colleges of supervisors; (d) the competent authorities cooperate closely with the ESRB; (e) national mandates conferred on the competent authorities do not inhibit the performance of their duties as members of EBA, of the ESRB, where appropriate, or under this Directive and under Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.
Article 7 Union dimension of supervision
The competent authorities in each Member State shall, in the exercise of their general duties, duly consider the potential impact of their decisions on the stability of the financial system in the other Member States concerned and, in particular, in emergency situations, based on the information available at the relevant time.
Article 8 Authorisation
1. Member States shall require credit institutions to obtain authorisation before commencing their activities. Without prejudice to Articles 10 to 14, they shall lay down the requirements for such authorisation and notify EBA. 2. EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify: (a) the information to be provided to the competent authorities in the application for the authorisation of credit institutions, including the programme of operations provided for in Article 10; (b) the requirements applicable to shareholders and members with qualifying holdings pursuant to Article 14; and (c) obstacles which may prevent effective exercise of the supervisory functions of the competent authority, as referred to in Article 14. Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) of the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010. 3. EBA shall develop draft implementing technical standards on standard forms, templates and procedures for the provision of the information referred to in point (a) of the first subparagraph of paragraph 2. Power is conferred on the Commission to adopt the implementing technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010. 4. EBA shall submit the draft technical standards referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3 to the Commission by 31 December 2015.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The proposed amendment to Directive 2013/36/EU (the Capital Requirements Directive or CRD) is part of a legislative package that includes also amendments to Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (the Capital Requirements Regulation or CRR), to Directive 2014/59/EU (the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive or BRRD), and to Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 (the Single Resolution Mechanism Regulation or SRMR). Over the past years the EU implemented a substantial reform of the financial services regulatory framework to enhance the resilience of institutions (i.e. credit institutions and investment firms) operating in the EU financial sector, largely based on global standards agreed with the EU’s international partners. In particular, the reform package included Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (the Capital Requirements Regulation or CRR) and Directive 2013/36/EU (the Capital Requirements Directive or CRD), on prudential requirements for and supervision of institutions, Directive 2014/59/EU (the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive or BRRD), on recovery and resolution of institutions and Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 on the Single Resolution Mechanism (SRM). These measures were taken in response to the financial crisis that unfolded in 2007-2008 and reflect internationally agreed standards. While the reforms have rendered the financial system more stable and resilient against many types of possible future shocks and crises, they do not yet comprehensively address all identified problems. The present proposals therefore aim to complete the reform agenda by tackling remaining weaknesses and implementing some outstanding elements of the reform that are essential to ensure the institutions' resilience but have only recently been finalised by global standard setters (i.e. the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) and the Financial Stability Board (FSB)):  a binding leverage ratio which will prevent institutions from excessively increasing leverage, e.g. to compensate for low profitability;  a binding net stable funding ratio (NSFR) which will build on institutions’ improved funding profiles and establish a harmonised standard for how much stable, long-term sources of funding an institution needs to weather periods of market and funding stress;  more risk sensitive own funds (i.e. capital) requirements for institutions that trade to an important extent in securities and derivatives which will prevent too much divergence in those requirements that is not based on the institutions' risk profiles;  last but not least, new standards on the total loss-absorbing capacity (TLAC) of global systemically important institutions (G-SIIs) which will require those institutions to have more loss-absorbing and recapitalisation capacity, tackle interconnections in the global financial markets and further strengthen the EU’s ability to resolve failing G-SIIs while minimising risks for taxpayers. The Commission recognised the need for further risk reduction in its Communication of 24 November 2015 and committed to bring forward a legislative proposal that builds on the international agreements listed above. Such risk reduction measures will not only further strengthen the resilience of the European banking system and the markets' confidence in it, but will also provide the basis for further progress in completing the Banking Union. The need for further concrete legislative steps to be taken in terms of reducing risks in the financial sector has been recognised also by the Ecofin Council Conclusions from 17 June 2016. The European Parliament resolution of 10 March 2016 on the Banking Union – Annual Report 2015 also indicates some areas in the current regulatory framework that could be further addressed. At the same time, the Commission needed to take account of the existing regulatory framework and the new regulatory developments at international level and respond to challenges affecting the EU economy, especially the need to promote growth and jobs at times of uncertain economic outlook. Various major policy initiatives, such as the Investment Plan for Europe (EFSI) and the Capital Markets Union have been launched in order to strengthen the economy of the Union. The ability of institutions to contribute to financing the economy needs to be enhanced without impinging on the stability of the regulatory framework. In order to ensure that recent reforms in the financial sector interact smoothly with each other and with new policy initiatives, but also with broader recent reforms in the financial sector, the Commission carried out, on the basis of a call for evidence, a thorough holistic assessment of the existing financial services framework (including the CRR, CRD, BRRD and SRMR). The upcoming review of global standards was also assessed from a wider economic impact perspective. Amendments based on international developments represent a faithful implementation of international standards into Union law, subject to targeted adjustments in order to reflect EU specificities and broader policy considerations. For instance, the predominant reliance on bank financing by EU small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) or for infrastructure projects prompts specific regulatory adjustments that ensure institutions remain capable of funding them as they constitute the backbone of the single market. A smooth interaction with existing requirements, such as for central clearing and collateralisation of derivatives exposures, or a gradual transition to some of the new requirements are necessary. Such adjustments, limited in terms of scope or time, do therefore not impinge on the overall soundness of the proposals, which are aligned with the basic level of ambition of the international standards. Moreover, based on the call for evidence, the proposals aim at improving existing rules. The analysis of the Commission showed that the present framework can be applied in a more proportionate way, taking into account in particular the situation of smaller and less complex institutions where some of the current disclosure, reporting and complex trading book-related requirements appear not to be justified by prudential considerations. Furthermore, the Commission has considered the risk attached to loans to SMEs and for funding infrastructure projects and found that for some of those loans, it would be justified to apply lower own funds requirements than are applied at present. Accordingly, the present proposals will bring corrections to these requirements and will enhance the proportionality of the prudential framework for institutions. Thereby, the ability of institutions to finance the economy will be enhanced without impinging on the stability of the regulatory framework. Finally, the Commission, in close cooperation with the Expert Group on Banking, Payments and Insurance has assessed the application of options and discretions set out in the CRD and the CRR. Based on this analysis, the present proposal is intending to eliminate some options and discretions concerning the provisions on the leverage ratio, on large exposures and on own funds. It is proposed to end to the possibility to create new State guaranteed deferred tax assets not relying on future profitability that would be exempted from deduction from regulatory capital. 
Revised version (Article 8 Authorisation):
1. Member States shall require credit institutions to obtain authorisation before commencing their activities. Without prejudice to Articles 10 to 14, they shall lay down the requirements for such authorisation and notify EBA. EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify: (a) the information to be provided to the competent authorities in the application for the authorisation of credit institutions, including the programme of operations, structural organisation and governance arrangements provided for in Article 10; (b) the requirements applicable to shareholders and members with qualifying holdings, or, where there are no qualifying holdings, to the 20 largest shareholders or members, pursuant to Article 14; and (c) obstacles which may prevent effective exercise of the supervisory functions of the competent authority, as referred to in Article 14. Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) of the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010. 3. EBA shall develop draft implementing technical standards on standard forms, templates and procedures for the provision of the information referred to in point (a) of the first subparagraph of paragraph 2. Power is conferred on the Commission to adopt the implementing technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010. 4. EBA shall submit the draft technical standards referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3 to the Commission by 31 December 2015. 5. EBA shall issue guidelines, in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, addressed to the competent authorities to specify a common assessment methodology for granting authorisations in accordance with this Directive.
Article 9 Prohibition against persons or undertakings other than credit institutions from carrying out the business of taking deposits or other repayable funds from the public
1. Member States shall prohibit persons or undertakings that are not credit institutions from carrying out the business of taking deposits or other repayable funds from the public. 2. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to the taking of deposits or other funds repayable by a Member State, or by a Member State's regional or local authorities, by public international bodies of which one or more Member States are members, or to cases expressly covered by national or Union law, provided that those activities are subject to regulations and controls intended to protect depositors and investors.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The proposed amendment to Directive 2013/36/EU (the Capital Requirements Directive or CRD) is part of a legislative package that includes also amendments to Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (the Capital Requirements Regulation or CRR), to Directive 2014/59/EU (the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive or BRRD), and to Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 (the Single Resolution Mechanism Regulation or SRMR). Over the past years the EU implemented a substantial reform of the financial services regulatory framework to enhance the resilience of institutions (i.e. credit institutions and investment firms) operating in the EU financial sector, largely based on global standards agreed with the EU’s international partners. In particular, the reform package included Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (the Capital Requirements Regulation or CRR) and Directive 2013/36/EU (the Capital Requirements Directive or CRD), on prudential requirements for and supervision of institutions, Directive 2014/59/EU (the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive or BRRD), on recovery and resolution of institutions and Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 on the Single Resolution Mechanism (SRM). These measures were taken in response to the financial crisis that unfolded in 2007-2008 and reflect internationally agreed standards. While the reforms have rendered the financial system more stable and resilient against many types of possible future shocks and crises, they do not yet comprehensively address all identified problems. The present proposals therefore aim to complete the reform agenda by tackling remaining weaknesses and implementing some outstanding elements of the reform that are essential to ensure the institutions' resilience but have only recently been finalised by global standard setters (i.e. the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) and the Financial Stability Board (FSB)):  a binding leverage ratio which will prevent institutions from excessively increasing leverage, e.g. to compensate for low profitability;  a binding net stable funding ratio (NSFR) which will build on institutions’ improved funding profiles and establish a harmonised standard for how much stable, long-term sources of funding an institution needs to weather periods of market and funding stress;  more risk sensitive own funds (i.e. capital) requirements for institutions that trade to an important extent in securities and derivatives which will prevent too much divergence in those requirements that is not based on the institutions' risk profiles;  last but not least, new standards on the total loss-absorbing capacity (TLAC) of global systemically important institutions (G-SIIs) which will require those institutions to have more loss-absorbing and recapitalisation capacity, tackle interconnections in the global financial markets and further strengthen the EU’s ability to resolve failing G-SIIs while minimising risks for taxpayers. The Commission recognised the need for further risk reduction in its Communication of 24 November 2015 and committed to bring forward a legislative proposal that builds on the international agreements listed above. Such risk reduction measures will not only further strengthen the resilience of the European banking system and the markets' confidence in it, but will also provide the basis for further progress in completing the Banking Union. The need for further concrete legislative steps to be taken in terms of reducing risks in the financial sector has been recognised also by the Ecofin Council Conclusions from 17 June 2016. The European Parliament resolution of 10 March 2016 on the Banking Union – Annual Report 2015 also indicates some areas in the current regulatory framework that could be further addressed. At the same time, the Commission needed to take account of the existing regulatory framework and the new regulatory developments at international level and respond to challenges affecting the EU economy, especially the need to promote growth and jobs at times of uncertain economic outlook. Various major policy initiatives, such as the Investment Plan for Europe (EFSI) and the Capital Markets Union have been launched in order to strengthen the economy of the Union. The ability of institutions to contribute to financing the economy needs to be enhanced without impinging on the stability of the regulatory framework. In order to ensure that recent reforms in the financial sector interact smoothly with each other and with new policy initiatives, but also with broader recent reforms in the financial sector, the Commission carried out, on the basis of a call for evidence, a thorough holistic assessment of the existing financial services framework (including the CRR, CRD, BRRD and SRMR). The upcoming review of global standards was also assessed from a wider economic impact perspective. Amendments based on international developments represent a faithful implementation of international standards into Union law, subject to targeted adjustments in order to reflect EU specificities and broader policy considerations. For instance, the predominant reliance on bank financing by EU small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) or for infrastructure projects prompts specific regulatory adjustments that ensure institutions remain capable of funding them as they constitute the backbone of the single market. A smooth interaction with existing requirements, such as for central clearing and collateralisation of derivatives exposures, or a gradual transition to some of the new requirements are necessary. Such adjustments, limited in terms of scope or time, do therefore not impinge on the overall soundness of the proposals, which are aligned with the basic level of ambition of the international standards. Moreover, based on the call for evidence, the proposals aim at improving existing rules. The analysis of the Commission showed that the present framework can be applied in a more proportionate way, taking into account in particular the situation of smaller and less complex institutions where some of the current disclosure, reporting and complex trading book-related requirements appear not to be justified by prudential considerations. Furthermore, the Commission has considered the risk attached to loans to SMEs and for funding infrastructure projects and found that for some of those loans, it would be justified to apply lower own funds requirements than are applied at present. Accordingly, the present proposals will bring corrections to these requirements and will enhance the proportionality of the prudential framework for institutions. Thereby, the ability of institutions to finance the economy will be enhanced without impinging on the stability of the regulatory framework. Finally, the Commission, in close cooperation with the Expert Group on Banking, Payments and Insurance has assessed the application of options and discretions set out in the CRD and the CRR. Based on this analysis, the present proposal is intending to eliminate some options and discretions concerning the provisions on the leverage ratio, on large exposures and on own funds. It is proposed to end to the possibility to create new State guaranteed deferred tax assets not relying on future profitability that would be exempted from deduction from regulatory capital. 
Revised version (Article 9 Prohibition against persons or undertakings other than credit institutions from carrying out the business of taking deposits or other repayable funds from the public):
1. Member States shall prohibit persons or undertakings that are not credit institutions from carrying out the business of taking deposits or other repayable funds from the public. 2. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to the taking of deposits or other funds repayable by a Member State, or by a Member State's regional or local authorities, by public international bodies of which one or more Member States are members, or to cases expressly covered by national or Union law, provided that those activities are subject to regulations and controls intended to protect depositors and investors. 3. Member States shall notify to the Commission and to EBA the national laws that expressly allow undertakings other than credit institutions to carry out the business of taking deposits and other repayable funds from the public. 4. Pursuant to this Article, Member States may not exempt credit institutions from the application of this Directive and Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.
Article 10 Programme of operations and structural organisation
Member States shall require applications for authorisation to be accompanied by a programme of operations setting out the types of business envisaged and the structural organisation of the credit institution.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The proposed amendment to Directive 2013/36/EU (the Capital Requirements Directive or CRD) is part of a legislative package that includes also amendments to Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (the Capital Requirements Regulation or CRR), to Directive 2014/59/EU (the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive or BRRD), and to Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 (the Single Resolution Mechanism Regulation or SRMR). Over the past years the EU implemented a substantial reform of the financial services regulatory framework to enhance the resilience of institutions (i.e. credit institutions and investment firms) operating in the EU financial sector, largely based on global standards agreed with the EU’s international partners. In particular, the reform package included Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (the Capital Requirements Regulation or CRR) and Directive 2013/36/EU (the Capital Requirements Directive or CRD), on prudential requirements for and supervision of institutions, Directive 2014/59/EU (the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive or BRRD), on recovery and resolution of institutions and Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 on the Single Resolution Mechanism (SRM). These measures were taken in response to the financial crisis that unfolded in 2007-2008 and reflect internationally agreed standards. While the reforms have rendered the financial system more stable and resilient against many types of possible future shocks and crises, they do not yet comprehensively address all identified problems. The present proposals therefore aim to complete the reform agenda by tackling remaining weaknesses and implementing some outstanding elements of the reform that are essential to ensure the institutions' resilience but have only recently been finalised by global standard setters (i.e. the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) and the Financial Stability Board (FSB)):  a binding leverage ratio which will prevent institutions from excessively increasing leverage, e.g. to compensate for low profitability;  a binding net stable funding ratio (NSFR) which will build on institutions’ improved funding profiles and establish a harmonised standard for how much stable, long-term sources of funding an institution needs to weather periods of market and funding stress;  more risk sensitive own funds (i.e. capital) requirements for institutions that trade to an important extent in securities and derivatives which will prevent too much divergence in those requirements that is not based on the institutions' risk profiles;  last but not least, new standards on the total loss-absorbing capacity (TLAC) of global systemically important institutions (G-SIIs) which will require those institutions to have more loss-absorbing and recapitalisation capacity, tackle interconnections in the global financial markets and further strengthen the EU’s ability to resolve failing G-SIIs while minimising risks for taxpayers. The Commission recognised the need for further risk reduction in its Communication of 24 November 2015 and committed to bring forward a legislative proposal that builds on the international agreements listed above. Such risk reduction measures will not only further strengthen the resilience of the European banking system and the markets' confidence in it, but will also provide the basis for further progress in completing the Banking Union. The need for further concrete legislative steps to be taken in terms of reducing risks in the financial sector has been recognised also by the Ecofin Council Conclusions from 17 June 2016. The European Parliament resolution of 10 March 2016 on the Banking Union – Annual Report 2015 also indicates some areas in the current regulatory framework that could be further addressed. At the same time, the Commission needed to take account of the existing regulatory framework and the new regulatory developments at international level and respond to challenges affecting the EU economy, especially the need to promote growth and jobs at times of uncertain economic outlook. Various major policy initiatives, such as the Investment Plan for Europe (EFSI) and the Capital Markets Union have been launched in order to strengthen the economy of the Union. The ability of institutions to contribute to financing the economy needs to be enhanced without impinging on the stability of the regulatory framework. In order to ensure that recent reforms in the financial sector interact smoothly with each other and with new policy initiatives, but also with broader recent reforms in the financial sector, the Commission carried out, on the basis of a call for evidence, a thorough holistic assessment of the existing financial services framework (including the CRR, CRD, BRRD and SRMR). The upcoming review of global standards was also assessed from a wider economic impact perspective. Amendments based on international developments represent a faithful implementation of international standards into Union law, subject to targeted adjustments in order to reflect EU specificities and broader policy considerations. For instance, the predominant reliance on bank financing by EU small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) or for infrastructure projects prompts specific regulatory adjustments that ensure institutions remain capable of funding them as they constitute the backbone of the single market. A smooth interaction with existing requirements, such as for central clearing and collateralisation of derivatives exposures, or a gradual transition to some of the new requirements are necessary. Such adjustments, limited in terms of scope or time, do therefore not impinge on the overall soundness of the proposals, which are aligned with the basic level of ambition of the international standards. Moreover, based on the call for evidence, the proposals aim at improving existing rules. The analysis of the Commission showed that the present framework can be applied in a more proportionate way, taking into account in particular the situation of smaller and less complex institutions where some of the current disclosure, reporting and complex trading book-related requirements appear not to be justified by prudential considerations. Furthermore, the Commission has considered the risk attached to loans to SMEs and for funding infrastructure projects and found that for some of those loans, it would be justified to apply lower own funds requirements than are applied at present. Accordingly, the present proposals will bring corrections to these requirements and will enhance the proportionality of the prudential framework for institutions. Thereby, the ability of institutions to finance the economy will be enhanced without impinging on the stability of the regulatory framework. Finally, the Commission, in close cooperation with the Expert Group on Banking, Payments and Insurance has assessed the application of options and discretions set out in the CRD and the CRR. Based on this analysis, the present proposal is intending to eliminate some options and discretions concerning the provisions on the leverage ratio, on large exposures and on own funds. It is proposed to end to the possibility to create new State guaranteed deferred tax assets not relying on future profitability that would be exempted from deduction from regulatory capital. 
Revised version (Article 10 Programme of operations, structural organisation and governance arrangements):
1. Member States shall require applications for authorisation to be accompanied by a programme of operations setting out the types of business envisaged and the structural organisation of the credit institution, including indication of the parent undertakings, financial holding companies and mixed financial holding companies within the group. Member States shall also require applications for authorisation to be accompanied by a description of the arrangements, processes and mechanisms referred to in Article 74(1). 2. Competent authorities shall refuse authorisation to commence the activity of a credit institution unless they are satisfied that the arrangements, processes and mechanisms referred to in Article 74(1) enable sound and effective risk management by that institution.
Article 11 Economic needs
Member States shall not require the application for authorisation to be examined in terms of the economic needs of the market.
Article 12 Initial capital
1. Without prejudice to other general conditions laid down in national law, the competent authorities shall refuse authorisation to commence the activity of a credit institution where a credit institution does not hold separate own funds or where its initial capital is less than EUR 5 million. 2. Initial capital shall comprise only one or more of the items referred to in Article 26(1)(a) to (e) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. 3. Member States may decide that credit institutions which do not fulfil the requirement to hold separate own funds and which were in existence on 15 December 1979 may continue to carry out their business. They may exempt such credit institutions from complying with the requirement contained in the first subparagraph of Article 13(1). 4. Member States may grant authorisation to particular categories of credit institutions the initial capital of which is less than that specified in paragraph 1, subject to the following conditions: (a) the initial capital is no less than EUR 1 million; (b) the Member States concerned notify the Commission and EBA of their reasons for exercising that option.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal This proposal sets out a series of measures to better counter the financing of terrorism and to ensure increased transparency of financial transactions and of corporate entities under the preventive legal framework in place in the Union, namely Directive (EU) 2015/849 (the "4AMLD") 1 . It also sets out certain consequential changes to the relevant company law rules under Directive 2009/101/EC 2 . The adoption of the updated Anti-Money Laundering rules in May 2015 represented a significant step in improving the effectiveness of the EU's efforts to combat the laundering of money from criminal activities and to counter the financing of terrorist activities. But the terrorist threat has grown and evolved recently. At the same time, fuelled by advances in technology and communications, the globally interconnected financial system makes it simple to hide and move funds around the world, by quickly and easily setting up layer upon layer of paper companies, crossing borders and jurisdictions and making it increasingly difficult to track down the money. Money launderers, tax evaders, terrorists, fraudsters and other criminals are all able to cover their tracks in this way. A sound financial system, with proper scrutiny and analytical tools in place, may, by helping to uncover anomalous transaction patterns, contribute to a better understanding of terrorist and criminal connections, networks and threats, and lead to relevant preventive actions by all competent authorities involved. However, gaps still exist in the oversight of the many financial means used by terrorists, from cash and trade in cultural artefacts to virtual currencies and anonymous pre-paid cards. This proposal seeks to address those gaps while avoiding unnecessary obstacles to the functioning of payments and financial markets for ordinary, lawabiding citizens and businesses, so balancing the need to increase security with the need to protect fundamental rights, including data protection, and economic freedoms. At the same time and in addition to terrorist financing issues, significant gaps in the transparency of financial transactions around the world have been revealed which indicate that offshore jurisdictions are often used as locations of intermediary entities that distance the real owner from the assets owned, often to avoid or evade tax. This proposal seeks to prevent the large-scale concealment of funds which can hinder the effective fight against financial crime, and to ensure enhanced corporate transparency so that true beneficial owners of companies or other legal arrangements cannot hide behind undisclosed identities. In the European Agenda on Security 3 the Commission identified as a priority the upgrading of the EU legal framework to address terrorism. The conclusions of the Justice and Home Affairs Council on 20 November 2015 4 , the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 8 December 2015 5 , as well as of the European Council of 18 December 2015 6 all stressed the need to further intensify the work in this field, building on the improvements made in the 4AMLD. On 2 February 2016, the Commission presented an Action Plan for strengthening the fight against terrorist financing 7 that focuses on two main strands of action: tracing terrorists through financial movements and preventing them from moving funds or other assets; and disrupting the sources of revenue used by terrorist organisations, by targeting their capacity to raise funds. The Action Plan announced a number of targeted operational and legislative measures, including the present proposal, to be put in place rapidly. On 12 February 2016, the Economic and Financial Affairs Ministers Council called on the Commission to submit its proposal to amend the 4AMLD as soon as possible and no later than the second quarter of 2016. On 22 April 2016 the informal ECOFIN Council also called for action in particular to enhance the accessibility of beneficial ownership registers, to clarify the registration requirements for trusts, to speed up the interconnection of national beneficial ownership registers, promote automatic exchange of information on beneficial ownership, and strengthen customer due diligence rules 8 . In its Resolution of 16 December 2015 9 , the European Parliament had already stressed that improved transparency, coordination and convergence in relation to corporate tax policies provides an effective framework to guarantee fair competition between firms in the Union and protect state budgets from adverse outcomes. The proposed revision of the 4AMLD is also consistent with global developments. At international level, the UN Security Council Resolutions 2199(2015) and 2253(2015) called for measures to prevent terrorist groups from gaining access to international financial institutions. In addition, the G20 statement of 18 April 2016 calls on the Financial Action Task Force ('FATF') and the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes to make initial proposals to improve the implementation of the international standards on transparency, including on the availability of beneficial ownership information, and its international exchange. Effective supervision and enforcement are crucial to prevent money laundering, the financing of terrorism and crime in general. The Commission will be monitoring the correct transposition of the Union requirements in national law, as well as their effective implementation by Member States in practice. 
Revised version (Article 12 Initial capital):
1. Without prejudice to other general conditions laid down in national law, the competent authorities shall refuse authorisation to commence the activity of a credit institution where a credit institution does not hold separate own funds or where its initial capital is less than EUR 5 million. 3. Member States may decide that credit institutions which do not fulfil the requirement to hold separate own funds and which were in existence on 15 December 1979 may continue to carry out their business. They may exempt such credit institutions from complying with the requirement contained in the first subparagraph of Article 13(1). 4. Member States may grant authorisation to particular categories of credit institutions the initial capital of which is less than that specified in paragraph 1, subject to the following conditions: (a) the initial capital is no less than EUR 1 million; (b) the Member States concerned notify the Commission and EBA of their reasons for exercising that option.
Article 13 Effective direction of the business and place of the head office
1. The competent authorities shall grant authorisation to commence the activity of a credit institution only where at least two persons effectively direct the business of the applicant credit institution. They shall refuse such authorisation if the members of the management body do not meet the requirements referred to in Article 91(1). 2. Each Member State shall require that: (a) a credit institution which is a legal person and which, under its national law, has a registered office, has its head office in the same Member State as its registered office; (b) a credit institution other than that referred to in point (a) has its head office in the Member State which granted it authorisation and in which it actually carries out its business.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The establishment of a European Single Access Point (ESAP) by 2024 is a flagship action of the Capital Markets Union (CMU) Action Plan adopted by the European Commission in September 2020 1 . ESAP will contribute to the achievement of the CMU’s objectives by providing EU-wide access to information published by entities that is relevant to capital markets, financial services and sustainable finance, i.e. mainly information about their economic activities and products. ESAP will provide access to this information in an efficient and non-discriminatory manner. Information about entities’ activities and products is essential for decision-making by providers of capital. ESAP will contribute to further integrating the financial services and capital markets in the single market, to allocating capital more efficiently across the EU and promoting the development of smaller national capital markets and economies by giving them greater visibility. ESAP will also allow non-listed entities including Small and Medium-Sized enterprises (SMEs) to make available information on a voluntary basis. This will facilitate their access to capital. This proposal is part of a package comprised of: · a proposal for a Regulation establishing a European Single Access Point; · a proposal for a Directive amending certain Directives (this proposal); and · a proposal for a Regulation amending certain Regulations. Amendments to certain Directives are necessary to achieve the above objectives to contribute to the integration of the single market, particularly as regards the collection of information to be made available to ESAP. 
Revised version (Article 13 Effective direction of the business and place of the head office):
1. The competent authorities shall grant authorisation to commence the activity of a credit institution only where at least two persons effectively direct the business of the applicant credit institution. They shall refuse such authorisation if the members of the management body do not meet the requirements referred to in Article 91(1).
Article 14 Shareholders and members
1. The competent authorities shall refuse authorisation to commence the activity of a credit institution unless a credit institution has informed them of the identities of its shareholders or members, whether direct or indirect, natural or legal persons, that have qualifying holdings and of the amounts of those holdings or, where there are no qualifying holdings, of the 20 largest shareholders or members. In determining whether the criteria for a qualifying holding are fulfilled, the voting rights referred to in Articles 9 and 10 of Directive 2004/109/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 2004 on the harmonisation of transparency requirements in relation to information about issuers whose securities are admitted to trading on a regulated market ( 1 ) and the conditions regarding aggregation thereof set out in Article 12(4) and (5) of that Directive, shall be taken into account. Member States shall not take into account voting rights or shares which institutions hold as a result of providing the underwriting of financial instruments or placing of financial instruments on a firm commitment basis included under point 6 of Section A of Annex I to Directive 2004/39/EC, provided that those rights are not exercised or otherwise used to intervene in the management of the issuer and are disposed of within one year of acquisition. 2. The competent authorities shall refuse authorisation to commence the activity of a credit institution if, taking into account the need to ensure the sound and prudent management of a credit institution, they are not satisfied as to the suitability of the shareholders or members, in particular where the criteria set out in Article 23(1) are not met. Article 23(2) and (3) and Article 24 shall apply. 3. Where close links exist between the credit institution and other natural or legal persons, competent authorities shall grant authorisation only if those links do not prevent the effective exercise of their supervisory functions. The competent authorities shall refuse authorisation to commence the activity of a credit institution where the laws, regulations or administrative provisions of a third country governing one or more natural or legal persons with which the credit institution has close links, or difficulties involved in the enforcement of those laws, regulations or administrative provisions, prevent the effective exercise of their supervisory functions. The competent authorities shall require credit institutions to provide them with the information they require to monitor compliance with the conditions referred to in this paragraph on an ongoing basis.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The proposed amendment to Directive 2013/36/EU (the Capital Requirements Directive or CRD) is part of a legislative package that includes also amendments to Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (the Capital Requirements Regulation or CRR), to Directive 2014/59/EU (the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive or BRRD), and to Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 (the Single Resolution Mechanism Regulation or SRMR). Over the past years the EU implemented a substantial reform of the financial services regulatory framework to enhance the resilience of institutions (i.e. credit institutions and investment firms) operating in the EU financial sector, largely based on global standards agreed with the EU’s international partners. In particular, the reform package included Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (the Capital Requirements Regulation or CRR) and Directive 2013/36/EU (the Capital Requirements Directive or CRD), on prudential requirements for and supervision of institutions, Directive 2014/59/EU (the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive or BRRD), on recovery and resolution of institutions and Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 on the Single Resolution Mechanism (SRM). These measures were taken in response to the financial crisis that unfolded in 2007-2008 and reflect internationally agreed standards. While the reforms have rendered the financial system more stable and resilient against many types of possible future shocks and crises, they do not yet comprehensively address all identified problems. The present proposals therefore aim to complete the reform agenda by tackling remaining weaknesses and implementing some outstanding elements of the reform that are essential to ensure the institutions' resilience but have only recently been finalised by global standard setters (i.e. the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) and the Financial Stability Board (FSB)):  a binding leverage ratio which will prevent institutions from excessively increasing leverage, e.g. to compensate for low profitability;  a binding net stable funding ratio (NSFR) which will build on institutions’ improved funding profiles and establish a harmonised standard for how much stable, long-term sources of funding an institution needs to weather periods of market and funding stress;  more risk sensitive own funds (i.e. capital) requirements for institutions that trade to an important extent in securities and derivatives which will prevent too much divergence in those requirements that is not based on the institutions' risk profiles;  last but not least, new standards on the total loss-absorbing capacity (TLAC) of global systemically important institutions (G-SIIs) which will require those institutions to have more loss-absorbing and recapitalisation capacity, tackle interconnections in the global financial markets and further strengthen the EU’s ability to resolve failing G-SIIs while minimising risks for taxpayers. The Commission recognised the need for further risk reduction in its Communication of 24 November 2015 and committed to bring forward a legislative proposal that builds on the international agreements listed above. Such risk reduction measures will not only further strengthen the resilience of the European banking system and the markets' confidence in it, but will also provide the basis for further progress in completing the Banking Union. The need for further concrete legislative steps to be taken in terms of reducing risks in the financial sector has been recognised also by the Ecofin Council Conclusions from 17 June 2016. The European Parliament resolution of 10 March 2016 on the Banking Union – Annual Report 2015 also indicates some areas in the current regulatory framework that could be further addressed. At the same time, the Commission needed to take account of the existing regulatory framework and the new regulatory developments at international level and respond to challenges affecting the EU economy, especially the need to promote growth and jobs at times of uncertain economic outlook. Various major policy initiatives, such as the Investment Plan for Europe (EFSI) and the Capital Markets Union have been launched in order to strengthen the economy of the Union. The ability of institutions to contribute to financing the economy needs to be enhanced without impinging on the stability of the regulatory framework. In order to ensure that recent reforms in the financial sector interact smoothly with each other and with new policy initiatives, but also with broader recent reforms in the financial sector, the Commission carried out, on the basis of a call for evidence, a thorough holistic assessment of the existing financial services framework (including the CRR, CRD, BRRD and SRMR). The upcoming review of global standards was also assessed from a wider economic impact perspective. Amendments based on international developments represent a faithful implementation of international standards into Union law, subject to targeted adjustments in order to reflect EU specificities and broader policy considerations. For instance, the predominant reliance on bank financing by EU small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) or for infrastructure projects prompts specific regulatory adjustments that ensure institutions remain capable of funding them as they constitute the backbone of the single market. A smooth interaction with existing requirements, such as for central clearing and collateralisation of derivatives exposures, or a gradual transition to some of the new requirements are necessary. Such adjustments, limited in terms of scope or time, do therefore not impinge on the overall soundness of the proposals, which are aligned with the basic level of ambition of the international standards. Moreover, based on the call for evidence, the proposals aim at improving existing rules. The analysis of the Commission showed that the present framework can be applied in a more proportionate way, taking into account in particular the situation of smaller and less complex institutions where some of the current disclosure, reporting and complex trading book-related requirements appear not to be justified by prudential considerations. Furthermore, the Commission has considered the risk attached to loans to SMEs and for funding infrastructure projects and found that for some of those loans, it would be justified to apply lower own funds requirements than are applied at present. Accordingly, the present proposals will bring corrections to these requirements and will enhance the proportionality of the prudential framework for institutions. Thereby, the ability of institutions to finance the economy will be enhanced without impinging on the stability of the regulatory framework. Finally, the Commission, in close cooperation with the Expert Group on Banking, Payments and Insurance has assessed the application of options and discretions set out in the CRD and the CRR. Based on this analysis, the present proposal is intending to eliminate some options and discretions concerning the provisions on the leverage ratio, on large exposures and on own funds. It is proposed to end to the possibility to create new State guaranteed deferred tax assets not relying on future profitability that would be exempted from deduction from regulatory capital. 
Revised version (Article 14 Shareholders and members):
1. The competent authorities shall refuse authorisation to commence the activity of a credit institution unless a credit institution has informed them of the identities of its shareholders or members, whether direct or indirect, natural or legal persons, that have qualifying holdings and of the amounts of those holdings or, where there are no qualifying holdings, of the 20 largest shareholders or members. In determining whether the criteria for a qualifying holding are fulfilled, the voting rights referred to in Articles 9 and 10 of Directive 2004/109/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 2004 on the harmonisation of transparency requirements in relation to information about issuers whose securities are admitted to trading on a regulated market ( 3 ) and the conditions regarding aggregation thereof set out in Article 12(4) and (5) of that Directive, shall be taken into account. Member States shall not take into account voting rights or shares which institutions hold as a result of providing the underwriting of financial instruments or placing of financial instruments on a firm commitment basis included under point 6 of Section A of Annex I to Directive 2004/39/EC, provided that those rights are not exercised or otherwise used to intervene in the management of the issuer and are disposed of within one year of acquisition. 2. Competent authorities shall refuse authorisation to commence the activity of a credit institution if, taking into account the need to ensure the sound and prudent management of a credit institution, they are not satisfied as to the suitability of the shareholders or members in accordance with the criteria set out in Article 23(1). Article 23(2) and (3) and Article 24 shall apply. 3. Where close links exist between the credit institution and other natural or legal persons, competent authorities shall grant authorisation only if those links do not prevent the effective exercise of their supervisory functions. The competent authorities shall refuse authorisation to commence the activity of a credit institution where the laws, regulations or administrative provisions of a third country governing one or more natural or legal persons with which the credit institution has close links, or difficulties involved in the enforcement of those laws, regulations or administrative provisions, prevent the effective exercise of their supervisory functions. The competent authorities shall require credit institutions to provide them with the information they require to monitor compliance with the conditions referred to in this paragraph on an ongoing basis.
Article 15 Refusal of authorisation
Where a competent authority refuses authorisation to commence the activity of a credit institution, it shall notify the applicant of the decision and the reasons therefor within six months of receipt of the application or, where the application is incomplete, within six months of receipt of the complete information required for the decision. A decision to grant or refuse authorisation shall, in any event, be taken within 12 months of the receipt of the application.
Article 16 Prior consultation of the competent authorities of other Member States
1. The competent authority shall, before granting authorisation to a credit institution, consult the competent authorities of another Member State where the credit institution is: (a) a subsidiary of a credit institution authorised in that other Member State; (b) a subsidiary of the parent undertaking of a credit institution authorised in that other Member State; (c) controlled by the same natural or legal persons as those who control a credit institution authorised in that other Member State. 2. The competent authority shall, before granting authorisation to a credit institution, consult the competent authority that is responsible for the supervision of insurance undertakings or investment firms in the Member State concerned where the credit institution is: (a) a subsidiary of an insurance undertaking or investment firm authorised in the Union; (b) a subsidiary of the parent undertaking of an insurance undertaking or investment firm authorised in the Union; (c) controlled by the same natural or legal persons as those who control an insurance undertaking or investment firm authorised in the Union. 3. The relevant competent authorities referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall in particular consult each other when assessing the suitability of the shareholders and the reputation and experience of members of the management body involved in the management of another entity of the same group. They shall exchange any information regarding the suitability of shareholders and the reputation and experience of members of the management body which is of relevance for the granting of an authorisation and for the ongoing assessment of compliance with operating conditions.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The establishment of a European Single Access Point (ESAP) by 2024 is a flagship action of the Capital Markets Union (CMU) Action Plan adopted by the European Commission in September 2020 1 . ESAP will contribute to the achievement of the CMU’s objectives by providing EU-wide access to information published by entities that is relevant to capital markets, financial services and sustainable finance, i.e. mainly information about their economic activities and products. ESAP will provide access to this information in an efficient and non-discriminatory manner. Information about entities’ activities and products is essential for decision-making by providers of capital. ESAP will contribute to further integrating the financial services and capital markets in the single market, to allocating capital more efficiently across the EU and promoting the development of smaller national capital markets and economies by giving them greater visibility. ESAP will also allow non-listed entities including Small and Medium-Sized enterprises (SMEs) to make available information on a voluntary basis. This will facilitate their access to capital. This proposal is part of a package comprised of: · a proposal for a Regulation establishing a European Single Access Point; · a proposal for a Directive amending certain Directives (this proposal); and · a proposal for a Regulation amending certain Regulations. Amendments to certain Directives are necessary to achieve the above objectives to contribute to the integration of the single market, particularly as regards the collection of information to be made available to ESAP. 
Revised version (Article 16 Prior consultation of the competent authorities of other Member States):
3. The relevant competent authorities referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall in particular consult each other when assessing the suitability of the shareholders and the reputation and experience of members of the management body involved in the management of another entity of the same group. They shall exchange any information regarding the suitability of shareholders and the reputation and experience of members of the management body which is of relevance for the granting of an authorisation and for the ongoing assessment of compliance with operating conditions.
Article 17 Branches of credit institutions authorised in another Member State
Host Member States shall not require authorisation or endowment capital for branches of credit institutions authorised in other Member States. The establishment and supervision of such branches shall be effected in accordance with Article 35, Article 36(1), (2) and (3), Article 37, Articles 40 to 46, Article 49 and Articles 74 and 75.
Article 18 Withdrawal of authorisation
The competent authorities may only withdraw the authorisation granted to a credit institution where such a credit institution: (a) does not make use of the authorisation within 12 months, expressly renounces the authorisation or has ceased to engage in business for more than six months, unless the Member State concerned has made provision for the authorisation to lapse in such cases; (b) has obtained the authorisation through false statements or any other irregular means; (c) no longer fulfils the conditions under which authorisation was granted; (d) no longer meets the prudential requirements set out in Parts Three, Four or Six of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 or imposed under Article 104(1)(a) or Article 105 of this Directive or can no longer be relied on to fulfil its obligations towards its creditors, and, in particular, no longer provides security for the assets entrusted to it by its depositors; (e) falls within one of the other cases where national law provides for withdrawal of authorisation; or (f) commits one of the breaches referred to in Article 67(1).
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal This proposal sets out a series of measures to better counter the financing of terrorism and to ensure increased transparency of financial transactions and of corporate entities under the preventive legal framework in place in the Union, namely Directive (EU) 2015/849 (the "4AMLD") 1 . It also sets out certain consequential changes to the relevant company law rules under Directive 2009/101/EC 2 . The adoption of the updated Anti-Money Laundering rules in May 2015 represented a significant step in improving the effectiveness of the EU's efforts to combat the laundering of money from criminal activities and to counter the financing of terrorist activities. But the terrorist threat has grown and evolved recently. At the same time, fuelled by advances in technology and communications, the globally interconnected financial system makes it simple to hide and move funds around the world, by quickly and easily setting up layer upon layer of paper companies, crossing borders and jurisdictions and making it increasingly difficult to track down the money. Money launderers, tax evaders, terrorists, fraudsters and other criminals are all able to cover their tracks in this way. A sound financial system, with proper scrutiny and analytical tools in place, may, by helping to uncover anomalous transaction patterns, contribute to a better understanding of terrorist and criminal connections, networks and threats, and lead to relevant preventive actions by all competent authorities involved. However, gaps still exist in the oversight of the many financial means used by terrorists, from cash and trade in cultural artefacts to virtual currencies and anonymous pre-paid cards. This proposal seeks to address those gaps while avoiding unnecessary obstacles to the functioning of payments and financial markets for ordinary, lawabiding citizens and businesses, so balancing the need to increase security with the need to protect fundamental rights, including data protection, and economic freedoms. At the same time and in addition to terrorist financing issues, significant gaps in the transparency of financial transactions around the world have been revealed which indicate that offshore jurisdictions are often used as locations of intermediary entities that distance the real owner from the assets owned, often to avoid or evade tax. This proposal seeks to prevent the large-scale concealment of funds which can hinder the effective fight against financial crime, and to ensure enhanced corporate transparency so that true beneficial owners of companies or other legal arrangements cannot hide behind undisclosed identities. In the European Agenda on Security 3 the Commission identified as a priority the upgrading of the EU legal framework to address terrorism. The conclusions of the Justice and Home Affairs Council on 20 November 2015 4 , the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 8 December 2015 5 , as well as of the European Council of 18 December 2015 6 all stressed the need to further intensify the work in this field, building on the improvements made in the 4AMLD. On 2 February 2016, the Commission presented an Action Plan for strengthening the fight against terrorist financing 7 that focuses on two main strands of action: tracing terrorists through financial movements and preventing them from moving funds or other assets; and disrupting the sources of revenue used by terrorist organisations, by targeting their capacity to raise funds. The Action Plan announced a number of targeted operational and legislative measures, including the present proposal, to be put in place rapidly. On 12 February 2016, the Economic and Financial Affairs Ministers Council called on the Commission to submit its proposal to amend the 4AMLD as soon as possible and no later than the second quarter of 2016. On 22 April 2016 the informal ECOFIN Council also called for action in particular to enhance the accessibility of beneficial ownership registers, to clarify the registration requirements for trusts, to speed up the interconnection of national beneficial ownership registers, promote automatic exchange of information on beneficial ownership, and strengthen customer due diligence rules 8 . In its Resolution of 16 December 2015 9 , the European Parliament had already stressed that improved transparency, coordination and convergence in relation to corporate tax policies provides an effective framework to guarantee fair competition between firms in the Union and protect state budgets from adverse outcomes. The proposed revision of the 4AMLD is also consistent with global developments. At international level, the UN Security Council Resolutions 2199(2015) and 2253(2015) called for measures to prevent terrorist groups from gaining access to international financial institutions. In addition, the G20 statement of 18 April 2016 calls on the Financial Action Task Force ('FATF') and the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes to make initial proposals to improve the implementation of the international standards on transparency, including on the availability of beneficial ownership information, and its international exchange. Effective supervision and enforcement are crucial to prevent money laundering, the financing of terrorism and crime in general. The Commission will be monitoring the correct transposition of the Union requirements in national law, as well as their effective implementation by Member States in practice. 
Revised version (Article 18 Withdrawal of authorisation):
The competent authorities may only withdraw the authorisation granted to a credit institution where such a credit institution: (a) does not make use of the authorisation within 12 months, expressly renounces the authorisation or has ceased to engage in business for more than six months, unless the Member State concerned has made provision for the authorisation to lapse in such cases; (b) has obtained the authorisation through false statements or any other irregular means; (c) no longer fulfils the conditions under which authorisation was granted; (e) falls within one of the other cases where national law provides for withdrawal of authorisation; or (f) commits one of the breaches referred to in Article 67(1).
Article 19 Name of credit institutions
For the purposes of exercising their activities, credit institutions may, notwithstanding any provisions in the host Member State concerning the use of the words 'bank', 'savings bank' or other banking names, use throughout the territory of the Union the same name that they use in the Member State in which their head office is situated. In the event of there being any danger of confusion, the host Member State may, for the purposes of clarification, require that the name be accompanied by certain explanatory particulars.
Article 20 Notification of authorisation and withdrawal of authorisation
1. Competent authorities shall notify EBA of every authorisation granted under Article 8. 2. EBA shall publish on its website, and shall update regularly, a list of the names of all credit institutions that have been granted authorisation. 3. The consolidating supervisor shall provide the competent authorities concerned and EBA with all information regarding the group of credit institutions in accordance with Article 14(3), Article 74(1) and Article 109(2), in particular regarding the legal and organisational structure of the group and its governance. 4. The list referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article shall include the names of credit institutions that do not have the capital specified in Article 12(1) and shall identify those credit institutions as such. 5. The competent authorities shall notify EBA of each withdrawal of authorisation together with the reasons for such a withdrawal.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 1.1. Reasons for and objectives of the proposal EU Member States have been severely affected by the economic crisis resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. This calls for a quick reaction to support capital markets participants. In the Communication of the Commission of 13 March 2020, entitled ‘Coordinated economic response to the COVID-19 outbreak’, the Commission highlighted the importance of ensuring the liquidity of the EU financial sector and countering a threatening recession through actions at all levels. Furthermore, on 27 May 2020, in its Communication entitled ‘Europe’s moment: Repair and Prepare for the Next Generation’ , the Commission presented key instruments supporting the recovery plan for Europe, including measures that aim at kick-starting the economy and helping private investment. This Communication also stressed that liquidity and access to finance will be a continued challenge for companies. The objective of this targeted amendment is to provide for the best possible conditions for European economies to emerge from the current COVID-19 pandemic. The rules on investments services can play a key role in promoting the recapitalisation of European companies as they emerge from the crisis. The modified commodities regime will allow companies in the real economy to react to market volatility while also enabling nascent commodity contracts, which is also important to promote the international role of the Euro. The present review is driven by two key objectives: · Facilitating investments in the real economy and · Allowing for a rapid recapit alisation of European companies. To ensure that financial institutions and intermediaries can fulfil their essential function in financing the real economy, targeted adjustments of certain requirements of Directive 2014/65/EU (‘MiFID II’) are appropriate. Already in 2019, stakeholders had warned the Commission that several aspects of the MiFID II distribution rules were either unnecessary or perceived as overly burdensome. The current COVID-19 pandemic makes it even more important to remove formal burdens where they are not strictly necessary. A more finely calibrated view of investor requirements would also leave more resources for dealing with the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Commission therefore strives to recalibrate those areas to strike the right balance between a sufficient level of transparency towards the client, the highest standards of protection and acceptable compliance costs for firms. In that context, this amendment to MiFID II applying to investments in financial instrument has the aim of removing administrative burdens that result from documentation and disclosure rules that are not counterbalanced by corresponding increases in investor protection. It also recalibrates the position limit and corresponding hedging exemption regime to foster nascent euro denominated markets. 
Revised version (Article 20 Notification of authorisation and withdrawal of authorisation):
1. Competent authorities shall notify EBA of every authorisation granted under Article 8. 2. EBA shall publish on its website, and shall update at least annually, a list of the names of all credit institutions that have been granted authorisation. 3. The consolidating supervisor shall provide the competent authorities concerned and EBA with all information regarding the group of credit institutions in accordance with Article 14(3), Article 74(1) and Article 109(2), in particular regarding the legal and organisational structure of the group and its governance. 3a. The list referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article shall include the names of undertakings referred to in point (1)(b) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 and shall identify those credit institutions as such. That list shall also outline any changes in comparison with the previous version of the list. 4. The list referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article shall include the names of credit institutions that do not have the capital specified in Article 12(1) and shall identify those credit institutions as such. 5. The competent authorities shall notify EBA of each withdrawal of authorisation together with the reasons for such a withdrawal.
Article 21 Waiver for credit institutions permanently affiliated to a central body
1. The competent authorities may waive the requirements set out in Articles 10 and 12 and Article 13(1) of this Directive with regard to a credit institution referred to in Article 10 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 in accordance with the conditions set out therein. Member States may maintain and make use of existing national law regarding the application of such a waiver provided that it does not conflict with this Directive or with Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. 2. Where the competent authorities exercise a waiver referred to in paragraph 1, Articles 17, 33, 34 and 35, Article 36(1) to (3), Articles 39 to 46, Section II of Chapter 2 of Title VII and Chapter 4 of Title VII shall apply to the whole as constituted by the central body together with its affiliated institutions.
Article 22 Notification and assessment of proposed acquisitions
1. Member States shall require any natural or legal person or such persons acting in concert (the "proposed acquirer"), who have taken a decision either to acquire, directly or indirectly, a qualifying holding in a credit institution or to further increase, directly or indirectly, such a qualifying holding in a credit institution as a result of which the proportion of the voting rights or of the capital held would reach or exceed 20 %, 30 % or 50 % or so that the credit institution would become its subsidiary (the "proposed acquisition"), to notify the competent authorities of the credit institution in which they are seeking to acquire or increase a qualifying holding in writing in advance of the acquisition, indicating the size of the intended holding and the relevant information, as specified in accordance with Article 23(4). Member States shall not be required to apply the 30 % threshold where, in accordance with Article 9(3)(a) of Directive 2004/109/EC, they apply a threshold of one-third. 2. The competent authorities shall acknowledge receipt of notification under paragraph 1 or of further information under paragraph 3 promptly and in any event within two working days following receipt in writing to the proposed acquirer. The competent authorities shall have a maximum of 60 working days as from the date of the written acknowledgement of receipt of the notification and all documents required by the Member State to be attached to the notification on the basis of the list referred to in Article 23(4) (the "assessment period"), to carry out the assessment provided for in Article 23(1) (the "assessment"). The competent authorities shall inform the proposed acquirer of the date of the expiry of the assessment period at the time of acknowledging receipt. 3. The competent authorities may, during the assessment period if necessary, and no later than on the 50th working day of the assessment period, request further information that is necessary to complete the assessment. Such a request shall be made in writing and shall specify the additional information needed. For the period between the date of request for information by the competent authorities and the receipt of a response thereto by the proposed acquirer, the assessment period shall be suspended. The suspension shall not exceed 20 working days. Any further requests by the competent authorities for completion or clarification of the information shall be at their discretion but shall not result in a suspension of the assessment period. 4. The competent authorities may extend the suspension referred to in the second subparagraph of paragraph 3 up to 30 working days if the proposed acquirer is situated or regulated in a third country or is a natural or legal person not subject to supervision under this Directive or under Directive 2009/65/EC, 2009/138/EC, or 2004/39/EC. 5. If the competent authorities decide to oppose the proposed acquisition, they shall, within two working days of completion of the assessment, and not exceeding the assessment period, inform the proposed acquirer in writing, providing the reasons. Subject to national law, an appropriate statement of the reasons for the decision may be made accessible to the public at the request of the proposed acquirer. This shall not prevent a Member State from allowing the competent authority to publish such information in the absence of a request by the proposed acquirer. 6. If the competent authorities do not oppose the proposed acquisition within the assessment period in writing, it shall be deemed to be approved. 7. The competent authorities may fix a maximum period for concluding the proposed acquisition and extend it where appropriate. 8. Member States shall not impose requirements for notification to, or approval by, the competent authorities of direct or indirect acquisitions of voting rights or capital that are more stringent than those set out in this Directive. 9. EBA shall develop draft implementing technical standards to establish common procedures, forms and templates for the consultation process between the relevant competent authorities as referred to in Article 24. EBA shall submit those draft implementing technical standards to the Commission by 31 December 2015. Power is conferred on the Commission to adopt the implementing technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 23 Assessment criteria
1. In assessing the notification provided for in Article 22(1) and the information referred to in Article 22(3), the competent authorities shall, in order to ensure the sound and prudent management of the credit institution in which an acquisition is proposed, and having regard to the likely influence of the proposed acquirer on that credit institution, assess the suitability of the proposed acquirer and the financial soundness of the proposed acquisition in accordance with the following criteria: (a) the reputation of the proposed acquirer; (b) the reputation, knowledge, skills and experience, as set out in Article 91(1), of any member of the management body and any member of senior management who will direct the business of the credit institution as a result of the proposed acquisition; (c) the financial soundness of the proposed acquirer, in particular in relation to the type of business pursued and envisaged in the credit institution in which the acquisition is proposed; (d) whether the credit institution will be able to comply and continue to comply with the prudential requirements based on this Directive and Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, and where applicable, other Union law, in particular Directives 2002/87/EC and 2009/110/EC, including whether the group of which it will become a part has a structure that makes it possible to exercise effective supervision, effectively exchange information among the competent authorities and determine the allocation of responsibilities among the competent authorities; (e) whether there are reasonable grounds to suspect that, in connection with the proposed acquisition, money laundering or terrorist financing within the meaning of Article 1 of Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing ( 2 ) is being or has been committed or attempted, or that the proposed acquisition could increase the risk thereof. 2. The competent authorities may oppose the proposed acquisition only if there are reasonable grounds for doing so on the basis of the criteria set out in paragraph 1 or if the information provided by the proposed acquirer is incomplete. 3. Member States shall neither impose any prior conditions in respect of the level of holding that must be acquired nor allow their competent authorities to examine the proposed acquisition in terms of the economic needs of the market. 4. Member States shall publish a list specifying the information that is necessary to carry out the assessment and that must be provided to the competent authorities at the time of notification referred to in Article 22(1). The information required shall be proportionate and adapted to the nature of the proposed acquirer and the proposed acquisition. Member States shall not require information that is not relevant for a prudential assessment. 5. Notwithstanding Article 22(2), (3) and (4), where two or more proposals to acquire or increase qualifying holdings in the same credit institution have been notified to the competent authority, the latter shall treat the proposed acquirers in a non-discriminatory manner.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The establishment of a European Single Access Point (ESAP) by 2024 is a flagship action of the Capital Markets Union (CMU) Action Plan adopted by the European Commission in September 2020 1 . ESAP will contribute to the achievement of the CMU’s objectives by providing EU-wide access to information published by entities that is relevant to capital markets, financial services and sustainable finance, i.e. mainly information about their economic activities and products. ESAP will provide access to this information in an efficient and non-discriminatory manner. Information about entities’ activities and products is essential for decision-making by providers of capital. ESAP will contribute to further integrating the financial services and capital markets in the single market, to allocating capital more efficiently across the EU and promoting the development of smaller national capital markets and economies by giving them greater visibility. ESAP will also allow non-listed entities including Small and Medium-Sized enterprises (SMEs) to make available information on a voluntary basis. This will facilitate their access to capital. This proposal is part of a package comprised of: · a proposal for a Regulation establishing a European Single Access Point; · a proposal for a Directive amending certain Directives (this proposal); and · a proposal for a Regulation amending certain Regulations. Amendments to certain Directives are necessary to achieve the above objectives to contribute to the integration of the single market, particularly as regards the collection of information to be made available to ESAP. 
Revised version (Article 23 Assessment criteria):
2. The competent authorities may oppose the proposed acquisition only if there are reasonable grounds for doing so on the basis of the criteria set out in paragraph 1 or if the information provided by the proposed acquirer is incomplete. 3. Member States shall neither impose any prior conditions in respect of the level of holding that must be acquired nor allow their competent authorities to examine the proposed acquisition in terms of the economic needs of the market. 4. Member States shall publish a list specifying the information that is necessary to carry out the assessment and that must be provided to the competent authorities at the time of notification referred to in Article 22(1). The information required shall be proportionate and adapted to the nature of the proposed acquirer and the proposed acquisition. Member States shall not require information that is not relevant for a prudential assessment. 5. Notwithstanding Article 22(2), (3) and (4), where two or more proposals to acquire or increase qualifying holdings in the same credit institution have been notified to the competent authority, the latter shall treat the proposed acquirers in a non-discriminatory manner.
Article 24 Cooperation between competent authorities
1. The relevant competent authorities shall fully consult each other when carrying out the assessment if the proposed acquirer is one of the following: (a) a credit institution, insurance undertaking, reinsurance undertaking, investment firm, or a management company within the meaning of Article 2(1)(b) of Directive 2009/65/EC ("UCITS management company") authorised in another Member State or in a sector other than that in which the acquisition is proposed; (b) the parent undertaking of a credit institution, insurance undertaking, reinsurance undertaking, investment firm or UCITS management company authorised in another Member State or in a sector other than that in which the acquisition is proposed; (c) a natural or legal person controlling a credit institution, insurance undertaking, reinsurance undertaking, investment firm or UCITS management company authorised in another Member State or in a sector other than that in which the acquisition is proposed. 2. The competent authorities shall, without undue delay, provide each other with any information which is essential or relevant for the assessment. In that regard, the competent authorities shall communicate to each other upon request all relevant information and shall communicate on their own initiative all essential information. A decision by the competent authority that has authorised the credit institution in which the acquisition is proposed shall indicate any views or reservations expressed by the competent authority responsible for the proposed acquirer.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The establishment of a European Single Access Point (ESAP) by 2024 is a flagship action of the Capital Markets Union (CMU) Action Plan adopted by the European Commission in September 2020 1 . ESAP will contribute to the achievement of the CMU’s objectives by providing EU-wide access to information published by entities that is relevant to capital markets, financial services and sustainable finance, i.e. mainly information about their economic activities and products. ESAP will provide access to this information in an efficient and non-discriminatory manner. Information about entities’ activities and products is essential for decision-making by providers of capital. ESAP will contribute to further integrating the financial services and capital markets in the single market, to allocating capital more efficiently across the EU and promoting the development of smaller national capital markets and economies by giving them greater visibility. ESAP will also allow non-listed entities including Small and Medium-Sized enterprises (SMEs) to make available information on a voluntary basis. This will facilitate their access to capital. This proposal is part of a package comprised of: · a proposal for a Regulation establishing a European Single Access Point; · a proposal for a Directive amending certain Directives (this proposal); and · a proposal for a Regulation amending certain Regulations. Amendments to certain Directives are necessary to achieve the above objectives to contribute to the integration of the single market, particularly as regards the collection of information to be made available to ESAP. 
Revised version (Article 24 Cooperation between competent authorities):
2. The competent authorities shall, without undue delay, provide each other with any information which is essential or relevant for the assessment. In that regard, the competent authorities shall communicate to each other upon request all relevant information and shall communicate on their own initiative all essential information. A decision by the competent authority that has authorised the credit institution in which the acquisition is proposed shall indicate any views or reservations expressed by the competent authority responsible for the proposed acquirer.
Article 25 Notification in the case of a divestiture
Member States shall require any natural or legal person who has taken a decision to dispose, directly or indirectly, of a qualifying holding in a credit institution to notify the competent authorities in writing in advance of the divestiture, indicating the size of the holding concerned. Such a person shall also notify the competent authorities if it has taken a decision to reduce its qualifying holding so that the proportion of the voting rights or of the capital held would fall below 20 %, 30 % or 50 % or so that the credit institution would cease to be its subsidiary. Member States shall not be required to apply the 30 % threshold where, in accordance with Article 9(3)(a) of Directive 2004/109/EC, they apply a threshold of one-third.
Article 26 Information obligations and penalties
1. Credit institutions shall, on becoming aware of any acquisitions or disposals of holdings in their capital that cause holdings to exceed or fall below one of the thresholds referred to in Article 22(1) and Article 25, inform the competent authorities of those acquisitions or disposals. Credit institutions admitted to trading on a regulated market shall, at least annually, inform the competent authorities of the names of shareholders and members possessing qualifying holdings and the sizes of such holdings as shown, for example, by the information received at the annual general meetings of shareholders and members or as a result of compliance with the regulations relating to companies admitted to trading on a regulated market. 2. Member States shall require that, where the influence exercised by the persons referred to in Article 22(1) is likely to operate to the detriment of the prudent and sound management of the institution, the competent authorities shall take appropriate measures to put an end to that situation. Such measures may consist in injunctions, penalties, subject to Articles 65 to 72, against members of the management body and managers, or the suspension of the exercise of the voting rights attached to the shares held by the shareholders or members of the credit institution in question. Similar measures shall apply to natural or legal persons who fail to comply with the obligation to provide prior information as set out in Article 22(1) and subject to Articles 65 to 72. If a holding is acquired despite opposition by the competent authorities, Member States shall, regardless of any other penalty to be adopted, provide either for exercise of the corresponding voting rights to be suspended, or for the nullity of votes cast or for the possibility of their annulment.
Article 27 Criteria for qualifying holdings
In determining whether the criteria for a qualifying holding as referred to in Articles 22, 25 and 26 are fulfilled, the voting rights referred to in Articles 9, 10 and 11 of Directive 2004/109/EC and the conditions regarding aggregation thereof set out in Article 12(4) and (5) of that Directive, shall be taken into account. In determining whether the criteria for a qualifying holding as referred to in Article 26 are fulfilled, Member States shall not take into account voting rights or shares which institutions may hold as a result of providing the underwriting of financial instruments or placing of financial instruments on a firm commitment basis included under point 6 of Section A of Annex I to Directive 2004/39/EC, provided that those rights are not exercised or otherwise used to intervene in the management of the issuer and are disposed of within one year of acquisition.
Article 28 Initial capital of investment firms
1. The initial capital of investment firms shall comprise only one or more of the items referred to in points (a) to (e) of Article 26(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. 2. All investment firms other than those referred to in Article 29 shall have initial capital of EUR 730 000 .
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 1.1. Reasons for and objectives of the proposal EU Member States have been severely affected by the economic crisis resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. This calls for a quick reaction to support capital markets participants. In the Communication of the Commission of 13 March 2020, entitled ‘Coordinated economic response to the COVID-19 outbreak’, the Commission highlighted the importance of ensuring the liquidity of the EU financial sector and countering a threatening recession through actions at all levels. Furthermore, on 27 May 2020, in its Communication entitled ‘Europe’s moment: Repair and Prepare for the Next Generation’ , the Commission presented key instruments supporting the recovery plan for Europe, including measures that aim at kick-starting the economy and helping private investment. This Communication also stressed that liquidity and access to finance will be a continued challenge for companies. The objective of this targeted amendment is to provide for the best possible conditions for European economies to emerge from the current COVID-19 pandemic. The rules on investments services can play a key role in promoting the recapitalisation of European companies as they emerge from the crisis. The modified commodities regime will allow companies in the real economy to react to market volatility while also enabling nascent commodity contracts, which is also important to promote the international role of the Euro. The present review is driven by two key objectives: · Facilitating investments in the real economy and · Allowing for a rapid recapit alisation of European companies. To ensure that financial institutions and intermediaries can fulfil their essential function in financing the real economy, targeted adjustments of certain requirements of Directive 2014/65/EU (‘MiFID II’) are appropriate. Already in 2019, stakeholders had warned the Commission that several aspects of the MiFID II distribution rules were either unnecessary or perceived as overly burdensome. The current COVID-19 pandemic makes it even more important to remove formal burdens where they are not strictly necessary. A more finely calibrated view of investor requirements would also leave more resources for dealing with the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Commission therefore strives to recalibrate those areas to strike the right balance between a sufficient level of transparency towards the client, the highest standards of protection and acceptable compliance costs for firms. In that context, this amendment to MiFID II applying to investments in financial instrument has the aim of removing administrative burdens that result from documentation and disclosure rules that are not counterbalanced by corresponding increases in investor protection. It also recalibrates the position limit and corresponding hedging exemption regime to foster nascent euro denominated markets.
Article 29 Initial capital of particular types of investment firms
1. An investment firm that does not deal in any financial instruments for its own account or underwrite issues of financial instruments on a firm commitment basis, but which holds client money or securities and which offers one or more of the following services, shall have initial capital of EUR 125 000 : (a) the reception and transmission of investors' orders for financial instruments; (b) the execution of investors' orders for financial instruments; (c) the management of individual portfolios of investments in financial instruments. 2. The competent authorities may allow an investment firm which executes investors' orders for financial instruments to hold such instruments for its own account if the following conditions are met: (a) such positions arise only as a result of the firm's failure to match investors' orders precisely; (b) the total market value of all such positions is subject to a ceiling of 15 % of the firm's initial capital; (c) the firm meets the requirements set out in Articles 92 to 95 and Part Four of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (d) such positions are incidental and provisional in nature and strictly limited to the time required to carry out the transaction in question. 3. Member States may reduce the amount referred to in paragraph 1 to EUR 50 000 where a firm is not authorised to hold client money or securities, to deal for its own account, or to underwrite issues on a firm commitment basis. 4. The holding of non-trading-book positions in financial instruments in order to invest own funds shall not be considered as dealing for its own account in relation to the services set out in paragraph 1 or for the purposes of paragraph 3.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 1.1. Reasons for and objectives of the proposal EU Member States have been severely affected by the economic crisis resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. This calls for a quick reaction to support capital markets participants. In the Communication of the Commission of 13 March 2020, entitled ‘Coordinated economic response to the COVID-19 outbreak’, the Commission highlighted the importance of ensuring the liquidity of the EU financial sector and countering a threatening recession through actions at all levels. Furthermore, on 27 May 2020, in its Communication entitled ‘Europe’s moment: Repair and Prepare for the Next Generation’ , the Commission presented key instruments supporting the recovery plan for Europe, including measures that aim at kick-starting the economy and helping private investment. This Communication also stressed that liquidity and access to finance will be a continued challenge for companies. The objective of this targeted amendment is to provide for the best possible conditions for European economies to emerge from the current COVID-19 pandemic. The rules on investments services can play a key role in promoting the recapitalisation of European companies as they emerge from the crisis. The modified commodities regime will allow companies in the real economy to react to market volatility while also enabling nascent commodity contracts, which is also important to promote the international role of the Euro. The present review is driven by two key objectives: · Facilitating investments in the real economy and · Allowing for a rapid recapit alisation of European companies. To ensure that financial institutions and intermediaries can fulfil their essential function in financing the real economy, targeted adjustments of certain requirements of Directive 2014/65/EU (‘MiFID II’) are appropriate. Already in 2019, stakeholders had warned the Commission that several aspects of the MiFID II distribution rules were either unnecessary or perceived as overly burdensome. The current COVID-19 pandemic makes it even more important to remove formal burdens where they are not strictly necessary. A more finely calibrated view of investor requirements would also leave more resources for dealing with the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Commission therefore strives to recalibrate those areas to strike the right balance between a sufficient level of transparency towards the client, the highest standards of protection and acceptable compliance costs for firms. In that context, this amendment to MiFID II applying to investments in financial instrument has the aim of removing administrative burdens that result from documentation and disclosure rules that are not counterbalanced by corresponding increases in investor protection. It also recalibrates the position limit and corresponding hedging exemption regime to foster nascent euro denominated markets.
Article 30 Initial capital of local firms
Local firms shall have initial capital of EUR 50 000 insofar as they benefit from the freedom of establishment or to provide services specified in Articles 31 and 32 of Directive 2004/39/EC.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 1.1. Reasons for and objectives of the proposal EU Member States have been severely affected by the economic crisis resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. This calls for a quick reaction to support capital markets participants. In the Communication of the Commission of 13 March 2020, entitled ‘Coordinated economic response to the COVID-19 outbreak’, the Commission highlighted the importance of ensuring the liquidity of the EU financial sector and countering a threatening recession through actions at all levels. Furthermore, on 27 May 2020, in its Communication entitled ‘Europe’s moment: Repair and Prepare for the Next Generation’ , the Commission presented key instruments supporting the recovery plan for Europe, including measures that aim at kick-starting the economy and helping private investment. This Communication also stressed that liquidity and access to finance will be a continued challenge for companies. The objective of this targeted amendment is to provide for the best possible conditions for European economies to emerge from the current COVID-19 pandemic. The rules on investments services can play a key role in promoting the recapitalisation of European companies as they emerge from the crisis. The modified commodities regime will allow companies in the real economy to react to market volatility while also enabling nascent commodity contracts, which is also important to promote the international role of the Euro. The present review is driven by two key objectives: · Facilitating investments in the real economy and · Allowing for a rapid recapit alisation of European companies. To ensure that financial institutions and intermediaries can fulfil their essential function in financing the real economy, targeted adjustments of certain requirements of Directive 2014/65/EU (‘MiFID II’) are appropriate. Already in 2019, stakeholders had warned the Commission that several aspects of the MiFID II distribution rules were either unnecessary or perceived as overly burdensome. The current COVID-19 pandemic makes it even more important to remove formal burdens where they are not strictly necessary. A more finely calibrated view of investor requirements would also leave more resources for dealing with the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Commission therefore strives to recalibrate those areas to strike the right balance between a sufficient level of transparency towards the client, the highest standards of protection and acceptable compliance costs for firms. In that context, this amendment to MiFID II applying to investments in financial instrument has the aim of removing administrative burdens that result from documentation and disclosure rules that are not counterbalanced by corresponding increases in investor protection. It also recalibrates the position limit and corresponding hedging exemption regime to foster nascent euro denominated markets.
Article 31 Coverage for firms not authorised to hold client money or securities
1. Coverage for the firms referred to in point (2)(c) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 shall take one of the following forms: (a) initial capital of EUR 50 000 ; (b) professional indemnity insurance covering the whole territory of the Union or some other comparable guarantee against liability arising from professional negligence, representing at least EUR 1 000 000 applying to each claim and in aggregate EUR 1 500 000 per annum for all claims; (c) a combination of initial capital and professional indemnity insurance in a form resulting in a level of coverage equivalent to that referred to in points (a) or (b). The Commission shall periodically review the amounts referred to in the first subparagraph. 2. If a firm referred to in point (2)(c) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 is also registered under Directive 2002/92/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 December 2002 on insurance mediation ( 3 ), it shall comply with Article 4(3) of that Directive and have coverage in one of the following forms: (a) initial capital of EUR 25 000 ; (b) professional indemnity insurance covering the whole territory of the Union or some other comparable guarantee against liability arising from professional negligence, representing at least EUR 500 000 applying to each claim and in aggregate EUR 750 000 per annum for all claims;
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal This proposal sets out a series of measures to better counter the financing of terrorism and to ensure increased transparency of financial transactions and of corporate entities under the preventive legal framework in place in the Union, namely Directive (EU) 2015/849 (the "4AMLD") 1 . It also sets out certain consequential changes to the relevant company law rules under Directive 2009/101/EC 2 . The adoption of the updated Anti-Money Laundering rules in May 2015 represented a significant step in improving the effectiveness of the EU's efforts to combat the laundering of money from criminal activities and to counter the financing of terrorist activities. But the terrorist threat has grown and evolved recently. At the same time, fuelled by advances in technology and communications, the globally interconnected financial system makes it simple to hide and move funds around the world, by quickly and easily setting up layer upon layer of paper companies, crossing borders and jurisdictions and making it increasingly difficult to track down the money. Money launderers, tax evaders, terrorists, fraudsters and other criminals are all able to cover their tracks in this way. A sound financial system, with proper scrutiny and analytical tools in place, may, by helping to uncover anomalous transaction patterns, contribute to a better understanding of terrorist and criminal connections, networks and threats, and lead to relevant preventive actions by all competent authorities involved. However, gaps still exist in the oversight of the many financial means used by terrorists, from cash and trade in cultural artefacts to virtual currencies and anonymous pre-paid cards. This proposal seeks to address those gaps while avoiding unnecessary obstacles to the functioning of payments and financial markets for ordinary, lawabiding citizens and businesses, so balancing the need to increase security with the need to protect fundamental rights, including data protection, and economic freedoms. At the same time and in addition to terrorist financing issues, significant gaps in the transparency of financial transactions around the world have been revealed which indicate that offshore jurisdictions are often used as locations of intermediary entities that distance the real owner from the assets owned, often to avoid or evade tax. This proposal seeks to prevent the large-scale concealment of funds which can hinder the effective fight against financial crime, and to ensure enhanced corporate transparency so that true beneficial owners of companies or other legal arrangements cannot hide behind undisclosed identities. In the European Agenda on Security 3 the Commission identified as a priority the upgrading of the EU legal framework to address terrorism. The conclusions of the Justice and Home Affairs Council on 20 November 2015 4 , the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 8 December 2015 5 , as well as of the European Council of 18 December 2015 6 all stressed the need to further intensify the work in this field, building on the improvements made in the 4AMLD. On 2 February 2016, the Commission presented an Action Plan for strengthening the fight against terrorist financing 7 that focuses on two main strands of action: tracing terrorists through financial movements and preventing them from moving funds or other assets; and disrupting the sources of revenue used by terrorist organisations, by targeting their capacity to raise funds. The Action Plan announced a number of targeted operational and legislative measures, including the present proposal, to be put in place rapidly. On 12 February 2016, the Economic and Financial Affairs Ministers Council called on the Commission to submit its proposal to amend the 4AMLD as soon as possible and no later than the second quarter of 2016. On 22 April 2016 the informal ECOFIN Council also called for action in particular to enhance the accessibility of beneficial ownership registers, to clarify the registration requirements for trusts, to speed up the interconnection of national beneficial ownership registers, promote automatic exchange of information on beneficial ownership, and strengthen customer due diligence rules 8 . In its Resolution of 16 December 2015 9 , the European Parliament had already stressed that improved transparency, coordination and convergence in relation to corporate tax policies provides an effective framework to guarantee fair competition between firms in the Union and protect state budgets from adverse outcomes. The proposed revision of the 4AMLD is also consistent with global developments. At international level, the UN Security Council Resolutions 2199(2015) and 2253(2015) called for measures to prevent terrorist groups from gaining access to international financial institutions. In addition, the G20 statement of 18 April 2016 calls on the Financial Action Task Force ('FATF') and the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes to make initial proposals to improve the implementation of the international standards on transparency, including on the availability of beneficial ownership information, and its international exchange. Effective supervision and enforcement are crucial to prevent money laundering, the financing of terrorism and crime in general. The Commission will be monitoring the correct transposition of the Union requirements in national law, as well as their effective implementation by Member States in practice. 
Revised version (Article 31 Coverage for firms not authorised to hold client money or securities):
(a) initial capital of EUR 50 000 ; (b) professional indemnity insurance covering the whole territory of the Union or some other comparable guarantee against liability arising from professional negligence, representing at least EUR 1 000 000 applying to each claim and in aggregate EUR 1 500 000 per annum for all claims; a combination of initial capital and professional indemnity insurance in a form resulting in a level of coverage equivalent to that referred to in points (a) or (b). The Commission shall periodically review the amounts referred to in the first subparagraph. (a) initial capital of EUR 25 000 ; (b) professional indemnity insurance covering the whole territory of the Union or some other comparable guarantee against liability arising from professional negligence, representing at least EUR 500 000 applying to each claim and in aggregate EUR 750 000 per annum for all claims;
Article 32 Grandfathering provision
1. By way of derogation from Article 28(2), Article 29(1) and (3) and Article 30, Member States may continue authorising investment firms and firms covered by Article 30 which were in existence on or before 31 December 1995, the own funds of which are less than the initial capital levels specified for them in Article 28(2), Article 29(1) or (3) or Article 30. The own funds of such investment firms or firms shall not fall below the highest reference level calculated after 23 March 1993. That reference level shall be the average daily level of own funds calculated over a six-month period preceding the date of calculation. It shall be calculated every six months in respect of the corresponding preceding period. 2. If control of an investment firm or a firm covered by paragraph 1 is taken by a natural or legal person other than the person who controlled it on or before 31 December 1995, the own funds of that investment firm or firm shall attain at least the level specified for them in Article 28(2), Article 29(1) or (3), or Article 30, except in the case of a first transfer by inheritance made after 31 December 1995, subject to the approval of the competent authorities and for a period of not more than 10 years from the date of that transfer. 3. In the event of a merger of two or more investment firms or firms covered by Article 30, the own funds of the firm resulting from the merger need not attain the level specified in Article 28(2), Article 29(1) or (3) or Article 30. Nevertheless, during any period when the level specified in Article 28(2), Article 29(1) or (3) or Article 30 has not been attained, the own funds of the firm resulting from the merger shall not fall below the total own funds of the merged firms at the time of the merger. 4. The own funds of investment firms and firms covered by Article 30 shall not fall below the levels specified in Article 28(2), Article 29(1) or(3) or Article 30 and in paragraphs 1 and 3 of this Article. 5. Where competent authorities consider it necessary, in order to ensure the solvency of such investment firms and firms, that the requirements set out in paragraph 4 are met, paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 shall not apply.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 1.1. Reasons for and objectives of the proposal EU Member States have been severely affected by the economic crisis resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. This calls for a quick reaction to support capital markets participants. In the Communication of the Commission of 13 March 2020, entitled ‘Coordinated economic response to the COVID-19 outbreak’, the Commission highlighted the importance of ensuring the liquidity of the EU financial sector and countering a threatening recession through actions at all levels. Furthermore, on 27 May 2020, in its Communication entitled ‘Europe’s moment: Repair and Prepare for the Next Generation’ , the Commission presented key instruments supporting the recovery plan for Europe, including measures that aim at kick-starting the economy and helping private investment. This Communication also stressed that liquidity and access to finance will be a continued challenge for companies. The objective of this targeted amendment is to provide for the best possible conditions for European economies to emerge from the current COVID-19 pandemic. The rules on investments services can play a key role in promoting the recapitalisation of European companies as they emerge from the crisis. The modified commodities regime will allow companies in the real economy to react to market volatility while also enabling nascent commodity contracts, which is also important to promote the international role of the Euro. The present review is driven by two key objectives: · Facilitating investments in the real economy and · Allowing for a rapid recapit alisation of European companies. To ensure that financial institutions and intermediaries can fulfil their essential function in financing the real economy, targeted adjustments of certain requirements of Directive 2014/65/EU (‘MiFID II’) are appropriate. Already in 2019, stakeholders had warned the Commission that several aspects of the MiFID II distribution rules were either unnecessary or perceived as overly burdensome. The current COVID-19 pandemic makes it even more important to remove formal burdens where they are not strictly necessary. A more finely calibrated view of investor requirements would also leave more resources for dealing with the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Commission therefore strives to recalibrate those areas to strike the right balance between a sufficient level of transparency towards the client, the highest standards of protection and acceptable compliance costs for firms. In that context, this amendment to MiFID II applying to investments in financial instrument has the aim of removing administrative burdens that result from documentation and disclosure rules that are not counterbalanced by corresponding increases in investor protection. It also recalibrates the position limit and corresponding hedging exemption regime to foster nascent euro denominated markets.
Article 33 Credit institutions
Member States shall provide that the activities listed in Annex I may be carried out within their territories, in accordance with Article 35, Article 36(1), (2) and (3), Article 39(1) and (2) and Articles 40 to 46 either by establishing a branch or by providing services, by any credit institution authorised and supervised by the competent authorities of another Member State, provided that such activities are covered by the authorisation.
Article 34 Financial institutions
1. Member States shall provide that the activities listed in Annex I may be carried out within their territories, in accordance with Article 35, Article 36(1), (2) and (3), Article 39(1) and (2) and Articles 40 to 46, either by establishing a branch or by providing services, by any financial institution from another Member State, whether a subsidiary of a credit institution or the jointly owned subsidiary of two or more credit institutions, the memorandum and Articles of association of which permit the carrying out of those activities and which fulfils each of the following conditions: (a) the parent undertaking or undertakings are authorised as credit institutions in the Member State by the law of which the financial institution is governed; (b) the activities in question are actually carried out within the territory of the same Member State; (c) the parent undertaking or undertakings holds 90 % or more of the voting rights attaching to shares in the capital of the financial institution; (d) the parent undertaking or undertakings satisfies the competent authorities regarding the prudent management of the financial institution and has declared, with the consent of the relevant home Member State competent authorities, that they jointly and severally guarantee the commitments entered into by the financial institution; (e) the financial institution is effectively included, for the activities in question in particular, in the consolidated supervision of the parent undertaking, or of each of the parent undertakings, in accordance with Title VII, Chapter 3 of this Directive and Part One, Title II, Chapter 2 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, in particular for the purposes of the own funds requirements set out in Article 92 of that Regulation, for the control of large exposures provided for in Part Four of that Regulation and for the purposes of the limitation of holdings provided for in Articles 89 and 90 of that Regulation. The competent authorities of the home Member State shall check compliance with the conditions set out in the first subparagraph and shall supply the financial institution with a certificate of compliance which shall form part of the notification referred to in Articles 35 and 39. 2. If a financial institution as referred to in the first subparagraph of paragraph 1 ceases to fulfil any of the conditions imposed, the competent authorities of the home Member State shall notify the competent authorities of the host Member State and the activities carried out by that financial institution in the host Member State shall become subject to the law of the host Member State. 3. Paragraphs 1 and 2 shall apply accordingly to subsidiaries of a financial institution as referred to in the first subparagraph of paragraph 1.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal This proposal sets out a series of measures to better counter the financing of terrorism and to ensure increased transparency of financial transactions and of corporate entities under the preventive legal framework in place in the Union, namely Directive (EU) 2015/849 (the "4AMLD") 1 . It also sets out certain consequential changes to the relevant company law rules under Directive 2009/101/EC 2 . The adoption of the updated Anti-Money Laundering rules in May 2015 represented a significant step in improving the effectiveness of the EU's efforts to combat the laundering of money from criminal activities and to counter the financing of terrorist activities. But the terrorist threat has grown and evolved recently. At the same time, fuelled by advances in technology and communications, the globally interconnected financial system makes it simple to hide and move funds around the world, by quickly and easily setting up layer upon layer of paper companies, crossing borders and jurisdictions and making it increasingly difficult to track down the money. Money launderers, tax evaders, terrorists, fraudsters and other criminals are all able to cover their tracks in this way. A sound financial system, with proper scrutiny and analytical tools in place, may, by helping to uncover anomalous transaction patterns, contribute to a better understanding of terrorist and criminal connections, networks and threats, and lead to relevant preventive actions by all competent authorities involved. However, gaps still exist in the oversight of the many financial means used by terrorists, from cash and trade in cultural artefacts to virtual currencies and anonymous pre-paid cards. This proposal seeks to address those gaps while avoiding unnecessary obstacles to the functioning of payments and financial markets for ordinary, lawabiding citizens and businesses, so balancing the need to increase security with the need to protect fundamental rights, including data protection, and economic freedoms. At the same time and in addition to terrorist financing issues, significant gaps in the transparency of financial transactions around the world have been revealed which indicate that offshore jurisdictions are often used as locations of intermediary entities that distance the real owner from the assets owned, often to avoid or evade tax. This proposal seeks to prevent the large-scale concealment of funds which can hinder the effective fight against financial crime, and to ensure enhanced corporate transparency so that true beneficial owners of companies or other legal arrangements cannot hide behind undisclosed identities. In the European Agenda on Security 3 the Commission identified as a priority the upgrading of the EU legal framework to address terrorism. The conclusions of the Justice and Home Affairs Council on 20 November 2015 4 , the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 8 December 2015 5 , as well as of the European Council of 18 December 2015 6 all stressed the need to further intensify the work in this field, building on the improvements made in the 4AMLD. On 2 February 2016, the Commission presented an Action Plan for strengthening the fight against terrorist financing 7 that focuses on two main strands of action: tracing terrorists through financial movements and preventing them from moving funds or other assets; and disrupting the sources of revenue used by terrorist organisations, by targeting their capacity to raise funds. The Action Plan announced a number of targeted operational and legislative measures, including the present proposal, to be put in place rapidly. On 12 February 2016, the Economic and Financial Affairs Ministers Council called on the Commission to submit its proposal to amend the 4AMLD as soon as possible and no later than the second quarter of 2016. On 22 April 2016 the informal ECOFIN Council also called for action in particular to enhance the accessibility of beneficial ownership registers, to clarify the registration requirements for trusts, to speed up the interconnection of national beneficial ownership registers, promote automatic exchange of information on beneficial ownership, and strengthen customer due diligence rules 8 . In its Resolution of 16 December 2015 9 , the European Parliament had already stressed that improved transparency, coordination and convergence in relation to corporate tax policies provides an effective framework to guarantee fair competition between firms in the Union and protect state budgets from adverse outcomes. The proposed revision of the 4AMLD is also consistent with global developments. At international level, the UN Security Council Resolutions 2199(2015) and 2253(2015) called for measures to prevent terrorist groups from gaining access to international financial institutions. In addition, the G20 statement of 18 April 2016 calls on the Financial Action Task Force ('FATF') and the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes to make initial proposals to improve the implementation of the international standards on transparency, including on the availability of beneficial ownership information, and its international exchange. Effective supervision and enforcement are crucial to prevent money laundering, the financing of terrorism and crime in general. The Commission will be monitoring the correct transposition of the Union requirements in national law, as well as their effective implementation by Member States in practice. 
Revised version (Article 34 Financial institutions):
(a) the parent undertaking or undertakings are authorised as credit institutions in the Member State by the law of which the financial institution is governed; (b) the activities in question are actually carried out within the territory of the same Member State; (c) the parent undertaking or undertakings holds 90 % or more of the voting rights attaching to shares in the capital of the financial institution; (d) the parent undertaking or undertakings satisfies the competent authorities regarding the prudent management of the financial institution and has declared, with the consent of the relevant home Member State competent authorities, that they jointly and severally guarantee the commitments entered into by the financial institution; (e) the financial institution is effectively included, for the activities in question in particular, in the consolidated supervision of the parent undertaking, or of each of the parent undertakings, in accordance with Title VII, Chapter 3 of this Directive and Part One, Title II, Chapter 2 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, in particular for the purposes of the own funds requirements set out in Article 92 of that Regulation, for the control of large exposures provided for in Part Four of that Regulation and for the purposes of the limitation of holdings provided for in Articles 89 and 90 of that Regulation. The competent authorities of the home Member State shall check compliance with the conditions set out in the first subparagraph and shall supply the financial institution with a certificate of compliance which shall form part of the notification referred to in Articles 35 and 39. 2. If a financial institution as referred to in the first subparagraph of paragraph 1 ceases to fulfil any of the conditions imposed, the competent authorities of the home Member State shall notify the competent authorities of the host Member State and the activities carried out by that financial institution in the host Member State shall become subject to the law of the host Member State. 3. Paragraphs 1 and 2 shall apply accordingly to subsidiaries of a financial institution as referred to in the first subparagraph of paragraph 1.
Article 35 Notification requirement and interaction between competent authorities
1. A credit institution wishing to establish a branch within the territory of another Member State shall notify the competent authorities of its home Member State. 2. Member States shall require every credit institution wishing to establish a branch in another Member State to provide all the following information when effecting the notification referred to in paragraph 1: (a) the Member State within the territory of which it plans to establish a branch; (b) a programme of operations setting out, inter alia, the types of business envisaged and the structural organisation of the branch; (c) the address in the host Member State from which documents may be obtained; (d) the names of those to be responsible for the management of the branch. 3. Unless the competent authorities of the home Member State have reason to doubt the adequacy of the administrative structure or the financial situation of the credit institution, taking into account the activities envisaged, they shall, within three months of receipt of the information referred to in paragraph 2, communicate that information to the competent authorities of the host Member State and shall inform the credit institution accordingly. The home Member State's competent authorities shall also communicate the amount and composition of own funds and the sum of the own funds requirements under Article 92 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the credit institution. By way of derogation from the second subparagraph, in the case referred to in Article 34 the home Member State's competent authorities shall communicate the amount and composition of own funds of the financial institution and the total risk exposure amounts calculated in accordance with Article 92(3) and (4) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the credit institution which is its parent undertaking. 4. Where the competent authorities of the home Member State refuse to communicate the information referred to in paragraph 2 to the competent authorities of the host Member State, they shall give reasons for their refusal to the credit institution concerned within three months of receipt of all the information. That refusal or a failure to reply shall be subject to a right to apply to the courts in the home Member State. 5. EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify the information to be notified in accordance with this Article. Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010. 6. EBA shall develop draft implementing technical standards to establish standard forms, templates and procedures for such notification. Power is conferred on the Commission to adopt the implementing technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010. 7. EBA shall submit the draft technical standards referred to in paragraphs 5 and 6 to the Commission by 1 January 2014.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The establishment of a European Single Access Point (ESAP) by 2024 is a flagship action of the Capital Markets Union (CMU) Action Plan adopted by the European Commission in September 2020 1 . ESAP will contribute to the achievement of the CMU’s objectives by providing EU-wide access to information published by entities that is relevant to capital markets, financial services and sustainable finance, i.e. mainly information about their economic activities and products. ESAP will provide access to this information in an efficient and non-discriminatory manner. Information about entities’ activities and products is essential for decision-making by providers of capital. ESAP will contribute to further integrating the financial services and capital markets in the single market, to allocating capital more efficiently across the EU and promoting the development of smaller national capital markets and economies by giving them greater visibility. ESAP will also allow non-listed entities including Small and Medium-Sized enterprises (SMEs) to make available information on a voluntary basis. This will facilitate their access to capital. This proposal is part of a package comprised of: · a proposal for a Regulation establishing a European Single Access Point; · a proposal for a Directive amending certain Directives (this proposal); and · a proposal for a Regulation amending certain Regulations. Amendments to certain Directives are necessary to achieve the above objectives to contribute to the integration of the single market, particularly as regards the collection of information to be made available to ESAP. 
Revised version (Article 35 Notification requirement and interaction between competent authorities):
1. A credit institution wishing to establish a branch within the territory of another Member State shall notify the competent authorities of its home Member State. 3. Unless the competent authorities of the home Member State have reason to doubt the adequacy of the administrative structure or the financial situation of the credit institution, taking into account the activities envisaged, they shall, within three months of receipt of the information referred to in paragraph 2, communicate that information to the competent authorities of the host Member State and shall inform the credit institution accordingly. The home Member State's competent authorities shall also communicate the amount and composition of own funds and the sum of the own funds requirements under Article 92 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the credit institution. By way of derogation from the second subparagraph, in the case referred to in Article 34 the home Member State's competent authorities shall communicate the amount and composition of own funds of the financial institution and the total risk exposure amounts calculated in accordance with Article 92(3) and (4) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the credit institution which is its parent undertaking. 4. Where the competent authorities of the home Member State refuse to communicate the information referred to in paragraph 2 to the competent authorities of the host Member State, they shall give reasons for their refusal to the credit institution concerned within three months of receipt of all the information. That refusal or a failure to reply shall be subject to a right to apply to the courts in the home Member State. 5. EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify the information to be notified in accordance with this Article. Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010. 6. EBA shall develop draft implementing technical standards to establish standard forms, templates and procedures for such notification. Power is conferred on the Commission to adopt the implementing technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010. 7. EBA shall submit the draft technical standards referred to in paragraphs 5 and 6 to the Commission by 1 January 2014.
Article 36 Commencement of activities
1. Before the branch of a credit institution commences its activities the competent authorities of the host Member State shall, within two months of receiving the information referred to in Article 35, prepare for the supervision of the credit institution in accordance with Chapter 4 and if necessary indicate the conditions under which, in the interests of the general good, those activities shall be carried out in the host Member State. 2. On receipt of a communication from the competent authorities of the host Member State, or in the event of the expiry of the period provided for in paragraph 1 without receipt of any communication from the latter, the branch may be established and may commence its activities. 3. In the event of a change in any of the information communicated pursuant to points (b), (c) or (d) of Article 35(2), a credit institution shall give written notice of the change in question to the competent authorities of the home and host Member States at least one month before making the change in order to enable the competent authorities of the home Member State to take a decision following a notification under Article 35, and the competent authorities of the host Member State to take a decision setting out the conditions for the change pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article. 4. Branches which have commenced their activities, in accordance with the provisions in force in their host Member States, before 1 January 1993, shall be presumed to have been subject to the procedures set out in Article 35 and in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article. They shall be governed, from 1 January 1993, by paragraph 3 of this Article and by Articles 33 and 52 and Chapter 4. 5. EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify the information to be notified in accordance with this Article. Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010. 6. EBA shall develop draft implementing technical standards to establish standard forms, templates and procedures for such notification. Power is conferred on the Commission to adopt the implementing technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010. 7. EBA shall submit the draft technical standards referred to in paragraphs 5 and 6 to the Commission by 1 January 2014.
Article 37 Information about refusals
Member States shall inform the Commission and EBA of the number and type of cases in which there has been a refusal pursuant to Article 35 and Article 36(3).
Article 38 Aggregation of branches
Any number of places of business set up in the same Member State by a credit institution with headquarters in another Member State shall be regarded as a single branch.
Article 39 Notification procedure
1. Any credit institution wishing to exercise the freedom to provide services by carrying out its activities within the territory of another Member State for the first time shall notify the competent authorities of the home Member State of the activities on the list in Annex I which it intends to carry out. 2. The competent authorities of the home Member State shall, within one month of receipt of the notification provided for in paragraph 1, send that notification to the competent authorities of the host Member State. 3. This Article shall not affect rights acquired by credit institutions providing services before 1 January 1993. 4. EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify the information to be notified in accordance with this Article. Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010. 5. EBA shall develop draft implementing technical standards to establish standard forms, templates and procedures for such notification. Power is conferred on the Commission to adopt the implementing technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010. 6. EBA shall submit the draft technical standards referred to in paragraphs 4 and 5 to the Commission by 1 January 2014.
Article 40 Reporting requirements
The competent authorities of the host Member States may require that all credit institutions having branches within their territories shall report to them periodically on their activities in those host Member States. Such reports shall only be required for information or statistical purposes, for the application of Article 51(1), or for supervisory purposes in accordance with this Chapter. They shall be subject to professional secrecy requirements at least equivalent to those referred to in Article 53(1). The competent authorities of the host Member States may in particular require information from the credit institutions referred to in the first subparagraph in order to allow those competent authorities to assess whether a branch is significant in accordance with Article 51(1).
Article 41 Measures taken by the competent authorities of the home Member State in relation to activities carried out in the host Member State
1. Where the competent authorities of the host Member State on the basis of information received from the competent authorities of the home Member State under Article 50 ascertain that a credit institution having a branch or providing services within its territory fulfils one of the following conditions in relation to the activities carried out in that host Member State, they shall inform the competent authorities of the home Member State: (a) the credit institution does not comply with the national provisions transposing this Directive or with Regulation (EU) No 575/2013; (b) there is a material risk that the credit institution will not comply with the national provisions transposing this Directive or with Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. The competent authorities of the home Member State shall, without delay, take all appropriate measures to ensure that the credit institution concerned remedies its non-compliance or takes measures to avert the risk of non-compliance. The competent authorities of the home Member State shall communicate those measures to the competent authorities of the host Member State without delay. 2. Where the competent authorities of the host Member State consider that the competent authorities of the home Member State have not fulfilled their obligations or will not fulfil their obligations pursuant to the second subparagraph of paragraph 1, they may refer the matter to EBA and request its assistance in accordance with Article 19 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010. Where EBA acts in accordance with that Article, it shall take any decision under Article 19(3) of that Regulation within 24 hours. EBA may also assist the competent authorities in reaching an agreement on its own initiative in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) of that Regulation.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal The establishment of a European Single Access Point (ESAP) by 2024 is a flagship action of the Capital Markets Union (CMU) Action Plan adopted by the European Commission in September 2020 1 . ESAP will contribute to the achievement of the CMU’s objectives by providing EU-wide access to information published by entities that is relevant to capital markets, financial services and sustainable finance, i.e. mainly information about their economic activities and products. ESAP will provide access to this information in an efficient and non-discriminatory manner. Information about entities’ activities and products is essential for decision-making by providers of capital. ESAP will contribute to further integrating the financial services and capital markets in the single market, to allocating capital more efficiently across the EU and promoting the development of smaller national capital markets and economies by giving them greater visibility. ESAP will also allow non-listed entities including Small and Medium-Sized enterprises (SMEs) to make available information on a voluntary basis. This will facilitate their access to capital. This proposal is part of a package comprised of: · a proposal for a Regulation establishing a European Single Access Point; · a proposal for a Directive amending certain Directives (this proposal); and · a proposal for a Regulation amending certain Regulations. Amendments to certain Directives are necessary to achieve the above objectives to contribute to the integration of the single market, particularly as regards the collection of information to be made available to ESAP. 
Revised version (Article 41 Measures taken by the competent authorities of the home Member State in relation to activities carried out in the host Member State):
The competent authorities of the home Member State shall, without delay, take all appropriate measures to ensure that the credit institution concerned remedies its non-compliance or takes measures to avert the risk of non-compliance. The competent authorities of the home Member State shall communicate those measures to the competent authorities of the host Member State without delay. 2. Where the competent authorities of the host Member State consider that the competent authorities of the home Member State have not fulfilled their obligations or will not fulfil their obligations pursuant to the second subparagraph of paragraph 1, they may refer the matter to EBA and request its assistance in accordance with Article 19 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010. Where EBA acts in accordance with that Article, it shall take any decision under Article 19(3) of that Regulation within 24 hours. EBA may also assist the competent authorities in reaching an agreement on its own initiative in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) of that Regulation.
Article 42 Reasons and communication
Any measure taken pursuant to Article 41(1), or Article 43 or 44 involving penalties or restrictions on the exercise of the freedom to provide services or the freedom of establishment shall be properly reasoned and communicated to the credit institution concerned.
Article 43 Precautionary measures
1. Before following the procedure set out in Article 41, the competent authorities of the host Member State may, in emergency situations, pending measures by the competent authorities of the home Member State or reorganisation measures referred to in Article 3 of Directive 2001/24/EC, take any precautionary measures necessary to protect against financial instability that would seriously threaten the collective interests of depositors, investors and clients in the host Member State. 2. Any precautionary measures under paragraph 1 shall be proportionate to their purpose to protect against financial instability that would seriously threaten collective interests of depositors, investors and clients in the host Member State. Such precautionary measures may include a suspension of payment. They shall not result in a preference for the creditors of the credit institution in the host Member State over creditors in other Member States. 3. Any precautionary measure under paragraph 1 shall cease to have effect when the administrative or judicial authorities of the home Member State take reorganisation measures under Article 3 of Directive 2001/24/EC. 4. The competent authorities of the host Member State shall terminate precautionary measures where they consider those measures to have become obsolete under Article 41, unless they cease to have effect in accordance with paragraph 3 of this Article. 5. The Commission, EBA and the competent authorities of the other Member States concerned shall be informed of precautionary measures taken under paragraph 1 without undue delay. Where the competent authorities of the home Member State or of any other affected Member State object to measures taken by the competent authorities of the host Member State, they may refer the matter to EBA and request its assistance in accordance with Article 19 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010. Where EBA acts in accordance with that Article, it shall take any decision under Article 19(3) of that Regulation within 24 hours. EBA may also assist the competent authorities in reaching an agreement on its own initiative in accordance with the second subparagraph of Article 19(1) of that Regulation.