Article 30 Transactions executed with eligible counterparties
1. Member States shall ensure that investment firms authorised to execute orders on behalf of clients and/or to deal on own account and/or to receive and transmit orders, may bring about or enter into transactions with eligible counterparties without being obliged to comply with the obligations under Article 24, with the exception of paragraphs 4 and 5, Article 25, with the exception of paragraph 6, Article 27 and Article 28(1) in respect of those transactions or in respect of any ancillary service directly relating to those transactions. Member States shall ensure that, in their relationship with eligible counterparties, investment firms act honestly, fairly and professionally and communicate in a way which is fair, clear and not misleading, taking into account the nature of the eligible counterparty and of its business. 2. Member States shall recognise as eligible counterparties for the purposes of this Article investment firms, credit institutions, insurance companies, UCITS and their management companies, pension funds and their management companies, other financial institutions authorised or regulated under Union law or under the national law of a Member State, national governments and their corresponding offices including public bodies that deal with public debt at national level, central banks and supranational organisations. Classification as an eligible counterparty under the first subparagraph shall be without prejudice to the right of such entities to request, either on a general form or on a trade-by-trade basis, treatment as clients whose business with the investment firm is subject to Articles 24, 25, 27 and 28. 3. Member States may also recognise as eligible counterparties other undertakings meeting pre-determined proportionate requirements, including quantitative thresholds. In the event of a transaction where the prospective counterparties are located in different jurisdictions, the investment firm shall defer to the status of the other undertaking as determined by the law or measures of the Member State in which that undertaking is established. Member States shall ensure that the investment firm, when it enters into transactions in accordance with paragraph 1 with such undertakings, obtains the express confirmation from the prospective counterparty that it agrees to be treated as an eligible counterparty. Member States shall allow the investment firm to obtain that confirmation either in the form of a general agreement or in respect of each individual transaction. 4. Member States may recognise as eligible counterparties third country entities equivalent to those categories of entities referred to in paragraph 2. Member States may also recognise as eligible counterparties third country undertakings such as those referred to in paragraph 3 on the same conditions and subject to the same requirements as those laid down in paragraph 3. 5. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 89 to specify: (a) the procedures for requesting treatment as clients under paragraph 2; (b) the procedures for obtaining the express confirmation from prospective counterparties under paragraph 3; (c) the pre-determined proportionate requirements, including quantitative thresholds that would allow an undertaking to be considered to be an eligible counterparty under paragraph 3.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL · Reasons for and objectives of the proposal This proposal is part of a package of measures to further enable and support the potential of digital finance in terms of innovation and competition while mitigating the risks. It is in line with the Commission priorities to make Europe fit for the digital age and to build a future-ready economy that works for the people. The digital finance package includes a new Strategy on digital finance for the EU financial sector 1 with the aim to ensure that the EU embraces the digital revolution and drives it with innovative European firms in the lead, making the benefits of digital finance available to European consumers and businesses. In addition to this proposal, the package also includes a proposal for a regulation on markets in crypto assets 2 , a proposal for a regulation on a pilot regime for market infrastructures based on distributed ledger technology (DLT) 3 and a proposal for a regulation on digital operational resilience for the financial sector 4 . The reasons for, and objectives of, the two sets of legislative measures have been set out in the explanatory memoranda of the proposal for a regulation on a pilot regime for distributed ledger technology market infrastructures, proposal for a regulation on markets in crypto assets and proposal for a regulation on digital operational resilience, respectively, and apply here as well. The particular reasons for this proposal for a directive is that, in order to provide legal certainty as regards crypto assets and achieve the objectives of strengthening digital operational resilience, it is necessary to establish a temporary exemption for multilateral trading facilities and amend or clarify certain provisions in existing EU financial services directives. · Consistency with existing provisions in the policy area This proposal, similar to the proposals for regulation it accompanies, is part of a broader ongoing work at European and international level aimed at (i) strengthening the cybersecurity in financial services and address broader operational risks, and (ii) providing a clear, proportionate and enabling EU legal framework for crypto-asset service providers. · Consistency with other Union policies As stated by President von der Leyen in her Political Guidelines, 5 and set-out in the Communication ‘Shaping Europe’s digital future’, 6 it is crucial for Europe to reap all the benefits of the digital age and to strengthen its industry and innovation capacity, within safe and ethical boundaries. As regards crypto assets, this proposal is closely linked with wider Commission policies on blockchain technology, as crypto-assets, as the main application of blockchain technologies, are inextricably linked to the promotion of blockchain technology throughout Europe. As regards operational resilience, the European strategy for data 7 sets out four pillars - data protection, fundamental rights, safety and cyber-security - as essential pre-requisites for a society empowered by the use of data. A legislative framework strengthening the digital operational resilience of the Union’s financial entities is consistent with these policy objectives. The proposal would also support policies aimed at recovering from the coronavirus, as it would ensure that increased reliance on digital finance goes hand in hand with operational resilience. Both proposals also respond to calls from the CMU High-Level Forum to establish clear rules for the use of crypto asset (recommendation 7) and to put in place new rules on cyber resilience.
Revised version (Article 30 Transactions executed with eligible counterparties):
1. Member States shall ensure that investment firms authorised to execute orders on behalf of clients, and/or to deal on own account, and/or to receive and transmit orders have the possibility of bringing about or entering into transactions with eligible counterparties without being obliged to comply with Article 24, with the exception of paragraph 5a thereof, Article 25, Article 27 and Article 28(1), in respect of those transactions or in respect of any ancillary service directly relating to those transactions. Member States shall ensure that, in their relationship with eligible counterparties, investment firms act honestly, fairly and professionally and communicate in a way which is fair, clear and not misleading, taking into account the nature of the eligible counterparty and of its business. 2. Member States shall recognise as eligible counterparties for the purposes of this Article investment firms, credit institutions, insurance companies, UCITS and their management companies, pension funds and their management companies, other financial institutions authorised or regulated under Union law or under the national law of a Member State, national governments and their corresponding offices including public bodies that deal with public debt at national level, central banks and supranational organisations. Classification as an eligible counterparty under the first subparagraph shall be without prejudice to the right of such entities to request, either on a general form or on a trade-by-trade basis, treatment as clients whose business with the investment firm is subject to Articles 24, 25, 27 and 28. 3. Member States may also recognise as eligible counterparties other undertakings meeting pre-determined proportionate requirements, including quantitative thresholds. In the event of a transaction where the prospective counterparties are located in different jurisdictions, the investment firm shall defer to the status of the other undertaking as determined by the law or measures of the Member State in which that undertaking is established. Member States shall ensure that the investment firm, when it enters into transactions in accordance with paragraph 1 with such undertakings, obtains the express confirmation from the prospective counterparty that it agrees to be treated as an eligible counterparty. Member States shall allow the investment firm to obtain that confirmation either in the form of a general agreement or in respect of each individual transaction. 4. Member States may recognise as eligible counterparties third country entities equivalent to those categories of entities referred to in paragraph 2. Member States may also recognise as eligible counterparties third country undertakings such as those referred to in paragraph 3 on the same conditions and subject to the same requirements as those laid down in paragraph 3.
Article 31 Monitoring of compliance with the rules of the MTF or the OTF and with other legal obligations
1. Member States shall require that investment firms and market operators operating an MTF or OTF establish and maintain effective arrangements and procedures, relevant to the MTF or OTF, for the regular monitoring of the compliance by its members or participants or users with its rules. Investment firms and market operators operating an MTF or an OTF shall monitor the orders sent, including cancellations and the transactions undertaken by their members or participants or users under their systems, in order to identify infringements of those rules, disorderly trading conditions, conduct that may indicate behaviour that is prohibited under Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 or system disruptions in relation to a financial instrument and shall deploy the resource necessary to ensure that such monitoring is effective. 2. Member States shall require investment firms and market operators operating an MTF or an OTF to inform its competent authority immediately of significant infringements of its rules or disorderly trading conditions or conduct that may indicate behaviour that is prohibited under Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 or system disruptions in relation to a financial instrument. The competent authorities of the investment firms and market operators operating an MTF or an OTF shall communicate to ESMA and to the competent authorities of the other Member States the information referred to in the first subparagraph. In relation to conduct that may indicate behaviour that is prohibited under Regulation (EU) No 596/2014, a competent authority must be convinced that such behaviour is being or has been carried out before it notifies the competent authorities of the other Member States and ESMA. 3. Member States shall also require investment firms and market operators operating an MTF or an OTF to also supply without undue delay the information referred to in paragraph 2 to the authority competent for the investigation and prosecution of market abuse and to provide full assistance to the latter in investigating and prosecuting market abuse occurring on or through its systems. 4. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 89 to determine circumstances that trigger an information requirement as referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Political context This proposal is part of the Listing Act package, a set of measures to make public markets more attractive to EU companies and facilitate access to capital for small and medium-sized companies (SMEs). It is in line with the main aim of the Capital Markets Union (CMU) to improve access to market-based sources of financing for EU companies at each stage of their development, including for smaller companies. Listed companies, including those recently listed, often outpace privately owned companies in terms of annual revenue growth and job creation . 1 By listing on public markets, companies can diversify their investor base, reduce their dependency on bank financing, gain easier and cheaper access to additional equity capital and debt finance (through secondary offers), raise their public profile and increase brand recognition . Since the publication of the first CMU action plan in 2015, progress has been made to make it easier and cheaper for companies, in particular SMEs, to access public markets. In January 2018, the Directive 2014/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (MiFID II) 2 introduced a new category of multilateral trading facilities (MTFs), the SME growth markets 3 , to incentivise SMEs access to capital markets. In 2019, new EU rules were put forward under Regulation (EU) 2019/2115 of the European Parliament and of the Council 4 (SME Listing Act) reduce the regulatory burden for companies listing on SME growth markets, while preserving a high level of investor protection and market integrity. Nevertheless, despite this progress, stakeholders argue that further regulatory action is needed to streamline the listing process and make it more flexible for issuers. The new CMU action plan adopted in September 2020 announced that ‘in order to promote and diversify small and innovative companies’ access to funding, the Commission will seek to simplify the listing rules for public markets’. Following up on this and building on the 2019 SME Listing Act, the Commission set up a Technical Expert Stakeholder Group (TESG) on SMEs that confirmed stakeholders’ views that further legislative action is needed to support listing of companies, especially of SMEs. In its final report 5 of May 2021, the TESG made 12 recommendations to a mend the listing framework both on regulated markets, and SME growth markets. On 15 September 2021, President Von der Leyen announced in her letter of intent 6 addressed to the Parliament and the Presidency of the Council a legislative proposal to facilitate SMEs’ access to capital, which has been included in the 2022 Commission work programme. 7 A company’s decision to list is complex and is influenced by a multitude of factors, many of which are outside the reach of regulators and therefore cannot be addressed directly by legislation. For instance, the factors that affect the cost of listing services, and more broadly geopolitical instability, Brexit, COVID-19, and inflation, have all had (and may continue to have) an impact on the decision to list, when to list, and whether to remain listed in the EU. Regulatory requirements and the associated costs and burden, however, are also a major factor in a company’s decision to list and remain listed. The Listing Act package presents a targeted set of measures aiming to: (i) reduce the regulatory burden where it is considered to be excessive (i.e. where regulation could contribute to investor protection/market integrity in a more cost efficient manner for stakeholders); (ii) and increase the flexibility given under company law to companies founders or controlling shareholders to choose how to distribute voting rights after the admission to trading of shares. The regulatory framework applying to the listing process is multifaceted. Companies must comply with regulatory requirements before, during and after the initial public offering (IPO). The proposed Directive is accompanied by two other legislative proposals, all forming part of the Listing Act package: (i) a proposal for a Regulation amending the Prospectus Regulation and Market Abuse Regulation, which aims to streamline and clarify listing requirements applying on primary and secondary markets, while maintaining an appropriate level of investor protection and market integrity; and (ii) a proposal for a Directive on multiple-vote share structures, which aims to address the regulatory barriers that emerge at the pre-IPO phase and, in particular, the unequal opportunities of companies across the EU to choose the appropriate governance structures when listing. Reason for the proposal Listed companies, especially SMEs, need to make themselves known to possible investors: the current low level of investment research on such issuers, driven by many underpinning factors, leads to their low visibility and scarce investors’ interest, further limiting the liquidity for the already listed companies. Under MiFID II and Commission Delegated Directive (EU) 2017/593 8 w here the investment research is provided by third parties to investment firms in connexion with execution/brokerage services , it is not regarded as an inducement if it is received in return for: (i) a direct payment by the investment firm out of its own resources; or (ii) a payment from a separate research payment account controlled by the firm and subject to several conditions (known as “unbundling rules”). After a few years of application, the success of the unbundling rules is contestable. The unbundling rules seem to have met some of the objectives, including to better manage the conflicts of interest, to limit the over production of research on very liquid shares and to improve transparency of the costs associated to the provision of research. However, these rules have not contributed to growth of independent investment research providers. On the contrary, further to the introduction of the unbundling rules, independent research became unsustainable due to low prices charged by some larger research providers. Evidence further suggests that the unbundling rules might have impaired the overall availability of research, especially for small and medium capitalisation companies, and led to a shrinking market research infrastructure, which is detrimental to a competitive and diversified analysts’ market. EU brokers, that had in the past provided SME research as part of their “bundled” investment services, scaled back SME capacities following their decision not to pass the costs of research to their clients. The listed small and medium capitalisation companies segment was particularly affected because bundled payments allowed payments for research on large companies to be used for research on small and midcap companies. Overall, several surveys show that the SME coverage has significantly shrunk or even disappeared altogether in the years after the unbundling rules took effect. The consequence was further concentration in the “unbundled” research market and a reduction in the diversity and breadth of the research on offer. While the unbundling rules were designed to break the nexus between brokerage commissions and investment research as well as to create a “price” for investment research, unbundling has not actually allowed to independently price research and has also not opened up this market to independent (non-brokerage) providers. Most importantly, the unbundling rules have not prevented the negative trend in small and medium capitalisation companies research coverage and have not led to the emergence of independent, SME focused research providers. In 2021, the unbundling rules were first amended, as part of a more general effort under the CMRP 9 to help the recovery from the COVID-19 crisis which forced companies to rely more heavily on debt, weakening their funding structures. In circumstances, where companies needed urgent re-capitalisation, the need for more visibility of EU companies, in particular small and medium capitalisation companies , was considered fundamental and the implicit cost of not having the research coverage even higher. In that context, the CMRP, applicable since 28 February 2022, sought to improve the small and medium capitalisation companies ’ research coverage 10 by providing an exemption from the unbundling rules for investment research covering issuers whose market capitalisation does not exceed EUR 1 billion for the period of 36 months preceding the provision of the research, hence allowing in such cases for a joint payment for trade execution and research. Nevertheless, while this measure was widely welcomed, it did not sufficiently address the problem. As many investment firms and brokers offer services to companies of a varying size (and capitalisation), including those exceeding the capitalisation of EUR 1 billion set out in the CMRP, these investment firms and brokers decided against introducing two parallel systems for research invoicing, maintaining the unbundled approach for all clients. Therefore, the amendment in the CMRP did not fully reach its objective to support the production of the small and medium capitalisation companies research and a further legislative review in this context would be necessary. In addition to amendments to the research unbundling regime, the proposal introduces a limited number of amendments to the legislative framework governing the SME growth market, a category of MTFs, created under MiFID II to raise SMEs visibility and profile as well as to aid the development of common regulatory standards in the EU for markets specialised in SMEs. 11 Finally, the proposal also seeks to repeal the Listing Directive. The Listing Directive, a minimum harmonisation directive adopted in 2001, provided the basis for listing on EU markets before the adoption of the Prospectus Directive 12 and the Transparency Directive 13 , that have subsequently replaced most of the provisions harmonising the conditions for the provision of information regarding requests for the admission of securities to listing and the information on securities admitted to trading. MiFID introduced the notion ‘admission of financial instruments to trading on a regulated market’. ESMA’s Securities Markets Standing Committee analysis on the implementation of the Listing Directive found that many Member States are not applying any longer the concepts used in the Listing Directive in national law. 14 Moreover, those Member States that still apply such concepts under national law have a rather broad discretion to deviate from the rules set out in the Listing Directive to take into account specific local market conditions. Currently the two concepts ‘admission to official listing’ and ‘admission to trading on a regulated market’ are often used interchangeably in some Member States. The dual regime of admission to trading, on the one hand, and admission to official listing, on the other hand, could lead to legal uncertainty at EU level, in particular, due to the fact that the requirements on transparency and market abuse, that seek to protect investors and ensure market integrity, are not currently applied to instruments admitted to official listing, while those requirements apply to instruments admitted to trading on a regulated market. Objectives of the proposal The overall objective of this proposal is to introduce targeted adjustments to the EU rulebook in order to enhance visibility of listed companies, especially SMEs, and streamline the listing process with a view to enhancing legal clarity. The proposed targeted amendments to MiFID II seek to facilitate the development and provision of investment research on companies, especially for the small and medium capitalisation ones, and to further incentivise the attractiveness of the SME growth market regime, to ultimately ease small and medium capitalisation companies’ access to capital markets. This proposal increases the market capitalisation threshold for small and medium capitalisation companies, below which the re-bundling of trading execution fees and research fees would be possible. By increasing the current threshold of EUR 1 billion up to EUR 10 billion, the aim is to capture a broader scope of small and medium capitalisation companies, and in particular more medium size companies, that would benefit from a re-bundling regime, allowing in particular that payments for research on large companies may be used also for research on small companies”. The exemption to the unbundling regime will remove barriers to the entry to more research on small and medium capitalisation companies and globally is expected to revitalise the market for investment research. The more small and medium capitalisation companies research is made available to potential investors, the more chance those companies may have to find fundings. More investment research on those companies will bring them greater visibility and more prospect of attracting potential investors. Considering the high number of small and medium capitalisation companies in EU, it is crucial for the EU economy that those companies get access to diversified sources of fundings, including via the capital markets. Furthermore, this proposal aims to provide a framework for developing a particular type of research that is paid by the issuer (‘issuer-sponsored research’). A public consultation, exchanges with stakeholders, and different analyses, 15 showed that this type of research has developed, in particular, following the introduction of MiFID II, to compensate for the lack of the research coverage on small and medium capitalisation companies . Considering the conflicts of interest inherent in such research, it seems necessary to regulate its production to guarantee fair and accurate information for its consumers. T o promote more transparent and independent research, this proposal mandates that such research is produced following a code of conduct developed or endorsed by a market operator or a competent authority in the EU. 16 In order to make investment research labelled as issuer-sponsored research more easily accessible to the public and to promote the visibility of small and medium capitalisation companies with potential investors, the proposal mentions that Member States shall ensure that issuer s may submit the ir issuer-sponsored research to the collecti on body as defined under [Article 2 ( 2 ) of the proposal for a regulation on a European S ingle A ccess P oint ] . Once established, the European Single Access Point (ESAP), proposed by the Commission on 25 November 2021 17 and currently under interinstitutional negotiations with the EU co-legislators will provide a single point of access to public financial information on EU companies, including SMEs, and EU investment products. ESAP is designed to give EU companies, especially SMEs, greater visibility to investors and could be used to collect and disseminate issuer-sponsored research. Going forward, ESAP may be used to publish the issuers’ notifications related to issuer-sponsored research and the contents of such research. Moreover, the targeted amendments to MiFID II seek to clarify that an operator of a multilateral trading facility (MTF) can apply for a segment of the MTF to be registered as an SME growth market provided that certain requirements are complied with in respect of that segment. Furthermore, this proposal seeks to increase the harmonisation and coherence of the listing rules in the EU, in order to make the regulatory framework fit for purpose. This proposal in particular harmonises and consolidates the listing rules by repealing the Listing Directive and transferring its relevant provisions into MiFID II, in order to reduce legal uncertainty and risk of regulatory arbitrage in the EU. Those provisions concern: (i) the minimum free float requirement, which determines the portion of a company’s issued share capital that is in the hands of public investors, as opposed to company officers, directors, or shareholders that hold controlling interest; and (ii) the foreseeable market capitalisation of the shares for which admission to listing is sought or, if this cannot be assessed, the company's capital and reserves, including profit or loss, from the last financial year. The proposal also decreases the minimum free float requirement from 25% to 10% to allow for more flexibility for issuers who want to keep a large share in the company. In addition, the new minimum free float threshold of 10% will not be limited to the public in the EU/EEA. That geographical restriction of the free float requirement to the EU/EEA will not be maintained as MiFID II does not provide for such restriction for financial instruments admitted to trading. 
Revised version (Article 31 Monitoring of compliance with the rules of the MTF or the OTF and with other legal obligations):
1. Member States shall require that investment firms and market operators operating an MTF or OTF establish and maintain effective arrangements and procedures, relevant to the MTF or OTF, for the regular monitoring of the compliance by its members or participants or users with its rules. Investment firms and market operators operating an MTF or an OTF shall monitor the orders sent, including cancellations and the transactions undertaken by their members or participants or users under their systems, in order to identify infringements of those rules, disorderly trading conditions, conduct that may indicate behaviour that is prohibited under Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 or system disruptions in relation to a financial instrument and shall deploy the resource necessary to ensure that such monitoring is effective. Member States shall require that investment firms and market operators operating an MTF or an OTF have arrangements in place to ensure that they meet data quality standards pursuant to Article 22b of Regulation (EU) No 600/2014. 2. Member States shall require investment firms and market operators operating an MTF or an OTF to inform its competent authority immediately of significant infringements of its rules or disorderly trading conditions or conduct that may indicate behaviour that is prohibited under Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 or system disruptions in relation to a financial instrument. The competent authorities of the investment firms and market operators operating an MTF or an OTF shall communicate to ESMA and to the competent authorities of the other Member States the information referred to in the first subparagraph. In relation to conduct that may indicate behaviour that is prohibited under Regulation (EU) No 596/2014, a competent authority must be convinced that such behaviour is being or has been carried out before it notifies the competent authorities of the other Member States and ESMA. 3. Member States shall also require investment firms and market operators operating an MTF or an OTF to also supply without undue delay the information referred to in paragraph 2 to the authority competent for the investigation and prosecution of market abuse and to provide full assistance to the latter in investigating and prosecuting market abuse occurring on or through its systems. 4. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 89 to determine circumstances that trigger an information requirement as referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article.
Article 32 Suspension and removal of financial instruments from trading on an MTF or an OTF
1. Without prejudice to the right of the competent authority under Article 69(2) to demand suspension or removal of a financial instrument from trading, an investment firm or a market operator operating an MTF or an OTF may suspend or remove from trading a financial instrument which no longer complies with the rules of the MTF or an OTF unless such suspension or removal would be likely to cause significant damage to the investors’ interests or the orderly functioning of the market. 2. Member States shall require that an investment firm or a market operator operating an MTF or an OTF that suspends or removes from trading a financial instrument also suspends or removes derivatives referred to in points (4) to (10) of Section C of Annex I that relate or are referenced to that financial instrument where necessary to support the objectives of the suspension or removal of the underlying financial instrument. The investment firm or market operator operating an MTF or an OTF shall make public its decision on the suspension or removal of the financial instrument and of any related derivative and communicate the relevant decisions to its competent authority. The competent authority, in whose jurisdiction the suspension or removal originated, shall require that regulated markets, other MTFs, other OTFs and systematic internalisers, which fall under its jurisdiction and trade the same financial instrument or derivatives referred to in points (4) to (10) of Section C of Annex I to this Directive that relate or are referenced to that financial instrument, also suspend or remove that financial instrument or derivatives from trading, where the suspension or removal is due to suspected market abuse, a take-over bid or the non-disclosure of inside information about the issuer or financial instrument infringing Articles 7 and 17 of Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 except where such suspension or removal could cause significant damage to the investors’ interests or the orderly functioning of the market. The competent authority shall immediately make public and communicate to ESMA and the competent authorities of the other Member States such a decision. The notified competent authorities of the other Member States shall require that regulated markets, other MTFs, other OTFs and systematic internalisers, which fall under their jurisdiction and trade the same financial instrument or derivatives referred to in points (4) to (10) of Section C of Annex I that relate or are referenced to that financial instrument, also suspend or remove that financial instrument or derivatives from trading, where the suspension or removal is due to suspected market abuse, a take-over bid or the non-disclosure of inside information about the issuer or financial instrument infringing Articles 7 and 17 of Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 except where such suspension or removal could cause significant damage to the investors’ interests or the orderly functioning of the market. Each notified competent authority shall communicate its decision to ESMA and other competent authorities, including an explanation if the decision was not to suspend or remove from trading the financial instrument or derivatives referred to in points (4) to (10) of Section C of Annex I that relate or are referenced to that financial instrument. This paragraph also applies when the suspension from trading of a financial instrument or derivatives referred to in points (4) to (10) of Section C of Annex I that relate or are referenced to that financial instrument is lifted. The notification procedure referred to in this paragraph shall also apply in the case where the decision to suspend or remove from trading a financial instrument or derivatives referred to in points (4) to (10) of Section C of Annex I that relate or are referenced to that financial instrument is taken by the competent authority pursuant to points (m) and (n) of Article 69(2). In order to ensure that the obligation to suspend or remove from trading such derivatives is applied proportionately, ESMA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to further specify the cases in which the connection between a derivative as referred to in points (4) to (10) of Section C of Annex I relating or referenced to a financial instrument suspended or removed from trading and the original financial instrument implies that the derivative is also to be suspended or removed from trading, in order to achieve the objective of the suspension or removal of the underlying financial instrument. ESMA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 3 July 2015. 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 1095/2010. 3. ESMA shall develop draft implementing technical standards to determine the format and timing of the communications and the publication referred to in paragraph 2. ESMA shall submit those draft implementing technical standards to the Commission by 3 January 2016. 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 1095/2010. 4. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 89 to list situations constituting significant damage to the investors’ interests and the orderly functioning of the market referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article.
Article 33 SME growth markets
1. Member States shall provide that the operator of a MTF may apply to its home competent authority to have the MTF registered as an SME growth market. 2. Member States shall provide that the home competent authority may register the MTF as an SME growth market if the competent authority receives an application referred to in paragraph 1 and is satisfied that the requirements in paragraph 3 are complied with in relation to the MTF. 3. Member States shall ensure that MTFs are subject to effective rules, systems and procedures which ensure that the following is complied with: (a) at least 50 % of the issuers whose financial instruments are admitted to trading on the MTF are SMEs at the time when the MTF is registered as an SME growth market and in any calendar year thereafter; (b) appropriate criteria are set for initial and ongoing admission to trading of financial instruments of issuers on the market; (c) on initial admission to trading of financial instruments on the market there is sufficient information published to enable investors to make an informed judgment about whether or not to invest in the financial instruments, either an appropriate admission document or a prospectus if the requirements laid down in Directive 2003/71/EC are applicable in respect of a public offer being made in conjunction with the initial admission to trading of the financial instrument on the MTF; (d) there is appropriate ongoing periodic financial reporting by or on behalf of an issuer on the market, for example audited annual reports; (e) issuers on the market as defined in point (21) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 596/2014, persons discharging managerial responsibilities as defined in point (25) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 and persons closely associated with them as defined in point (26) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 comply with relevant requirements applicable to them under Regulation (EU) No 596/2014; (f) regulatory information concerning the issuers on the market is stored and disseminated to the public; (g) there are effective systems and controls aiming to prevent and detect market abuse on that market as required under the Regulation (EU) No 596/2014. 4. The criteria in paragraph 3 are without prejudice to compliance by the investment firm or market operator operating the MTF with other obligations under this Directive relevant to the operation of MTFs. They also do not prevent the investment firm or market operator operating the MTF from imposing additional requirements to those specified in that paragraph. 5. Member States shall provide that the home competent authority may deregister a MTF as an SME growth market in any of the following cases: (a) the investment firm or market operator operating the market applies for its deregistration; (b) the requirements in paragraph 3 are no longer complied with in relation to the MTF. 6. Members States shall require that if a home competent authority registers or deregisters an MTF as an SME growth market under this Article it shall as soon as possible notify ESMA of that registration or deregistration. ESMA shall publish on its website a list of SME growth markets and shall keep that list up to date. 7. Member States shall require that where a financial instrument of an issuer is admitted to trading on one SME growth market, the financial instrument may also be traded on another SME growth market only where the issuer has been informed and has not objected. In such a case however, the issuer shall not be subject to any obligation relating to corporate governance or initial, ongoing or ad hoc disclosure with regard to the latter SME growth market. 8. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 89 further specifying the requirements laid down in paragraph 3 of this Article. The measures shall take into account the need for the requirements to maintain high levels of investor protection to promote investor confidence in those markets while minimising the administrative burdens for issuers on the market and that de-registrations do not occur nor shall registrations be refused as a result of a merely temporary failure to meet the conditions set out in point (a) of paragraph 3 of this Article.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL Reasons for and objectives of the proposal Broadening access to market-based sources of financing for European companies at each stage of their development is at the heart of the Capital Markets Union (CMU). Since the launch of the Capital Markets Union Action Plan, the EU has made considerable progress to increase the sources of funding as firms gradually scale up, and make market-based finance more widely available across the EU. New rules are already in place to boost EU venture capital funds’ (EuVECA) investment in start-ups and medium-sized companies. Together with the European Investment Fund, the Commission has also launched a Pan-European Venture Capital Funds-of-Funds programme (VentureEU) to boost investment in innovative start-up and scale-up companies across Europe. New rules on prospectuses have already been adopted to support companies raising money on public markets for equity and debt. For small companies and mid-caps wishing to raise money across the EU, a new EU growth prospectus is being created. In addition, to increase access to finance for start-ups and entrepreneurs, the Commission has proposed a European label for investment-based and lending-based crowdfunding platforms ('European Crowdfunding Service Providers for Business'). However, more needs to be done to develop a more conducive regulatory framework supporting access to public funding for Small and Mid-sized Enterprises ( SMEs). This should be achieved in particular by promoting the SME Growth Market label created by the Markets in Financial Instrument Directive II (MiFID II) 1 and striking the right balance between investor protection and market integrity on the one hand, and avoiding unnecessary administrative burdens on the other. In the Mid-term Review of the Capital Markets Union Action Plan 2 of June 2017, the Commission strengthened the focus on SME access to public markets. In this context, the Commission committed to publishing 'an impact assessment that will explore whether targeted amendments to relevant EU legislation could deliver a more proportionate regulatory environment to support SME listing on public markets' . Newly listed Small and Mid-sized Enterprises (SMEs) are a key motor of investment and job creation. Recently listed companies often outstrip privately-owned companies in terms of annual growth and workforce increase. Listed companies are less dependent on bank financing and benefit from a more diversified investment-base, easier access to additional equity capital and debt finance (through secondary offers), and a higher public profile and brand recognition. However, despite the benefits, EU public markets for SMEs are struggling to attract new issuers. The number of Initial Public Offerings on SME-dedicated markets steeply declined in the European Union in the wake of the crisis, and did not significantly pick up since. As a result, Europe is producing only half of the SME Initial Public Offerings that it generated before the financial crisis (478 Initial Public Offerings on average per year in 2006-2007 vs. 218 between 2009 and 2017 on EU SME MTFs). Between 2006 and 2007, an average of EUR 13.8 billion was raised annually on European SME-dedicated MTFs through Initial Public Offerings. This amount fell to EUR 2.55 billion on average from 2009 to 2017. There are many factors driving SMEs' decision to go public and investors' decision to invest in SME financial instruments. The impact assessment 3 shows that public markets for SMEs face two groups of regulatory challenges: (i) on the supply side, issuers face high compliance costs to list on public markets; (ii) on the demand side, insufficient liquidity can weigh on issuers (due to higher costs of capital), on investors (that can be reluctant to invest in SME in the first place due to low liquidity levels and related volatility risks) and on market intermediaries (whose business models rely on customers order flow in liquid markets). Scope of the initiative: SME Growth Markets This initiative is strictly confined to SME Growth Markets 4 and companies listed on those trading venues. SME Growth Markets are a new category of multilateral trading venues (MTFs) that were introduced by the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive II in January 2018. When assessing whether SME issuers admitted to trading on regulated markets should benefit from equivalent regulatory alleviations, the decision was made to limit the beneficiaries of the relief to issuers admitted to trading on SME Growth Markets. Requirements imposed on regulated market issuers should apply in a similar way regardless of the size of the company. Different requirements for SMEs compared to large caps are likely to confuse stakeholders (in particular investors). Current regulatory context Companies listed on an SME Growth Market are required to comply with some EU rules, especially the Market Abuse Regulation 5 (MAR) and the Prospectus Regulation 6 . Since its entry into application on 1 July 2016, the Market Abuse Regulation has been extended to MTFs, including SME Growth Markets. This regulation aims to increase market integrity and investor confidence. It prohibits from: (i) engaging or attempting to engage in insider dealing; (ii) recommending that another person engage in insider dealing or induce another person to engage in insider dealing; (iii) unlawfully disclosing inside information 7 ; or (iv) engaging in or attempting to engage in market manipulation. Issuers are also subject to several disclosure and record-keeping obligations under the regulation. In particular, concerned issuers are under a general obligation to disclose inside information to the public as soon as possible. By strengthening market integrity and by extending the market abuse regime to MTFs, the Market Abuse Regulation was crucial in restoring investor confidence in financial markets. However, this piece of legislation is a 'one-size-fits-all' regulation. Almost all its requirements apply in the same manner to all issuers irrespective of their size or the trading venues where their financial instruments are admitted to trading. The regulation contains only two limited adaptations to issuers listed on SME Growth Markets. The first allows trading venues operating an SME Growth Market to post inside information on the trading venue's website (instead of the issuer's website). The second allows issuers listed on SME Growth Markets to produce insider lists only upon request from a national competent authority (NCA). However, the effect of this alleviation is limited because companies are still required to gather and store all relevant information to be able to produce insider lists on request. A prospectus is a legally required document presenting information about a company when securities are offered to the public or admitted to trading on a regulated market. Under the CMU Action Plan, the European Union has already made it easier and cheaper for smaller companies to access public markets, notably with the creation of the alleviated 'EU Growth Prospectus' in the revised Prospectus Regulation. An issuer may seek an admission to trading on a regulated market after having floated its shares on an SME Growth Market for a few years. It may do so to benefit from greater liquidity and a larger investor pool. However, if that issuer wants to transfer its shares from an SME Growth Market to a regulated market, it needs to produce a full prospectus as no alleviated prospectus schedule is available for companies in such a situation. The take-up of the SME Growth Market 'brand' is constrained by the limited number of alleviations currently envisaged in EU legislation for the issuers listed on this new type of trading venues. The overall objectives of this initiative is therefore to introduce technical adjustments to the EU rulebook in order to: (i) reduce the administrative burden and the regulatory compliance costs faced by SMEs when their financial instruments are admitted to trading on an SME Growth Market, while ensuring a high level of investor protection and market integrity; and (ii) increase the liquidity of equity instruments listed on SME Growth Markets. These targeted regulatory changes foreseen in this proposal will not fully revive access to public markets for SMEs on their own. Nevertheless, they address regulatory barriers flagged by various stakeholders as inhibiting capital-raising by SMEs on public markets. They do so whilst preserving the highest standards of investor protection and market integrity . Any changes should therefore be understood as a first step in the right direction, and not as a single remedy in itself. Besides, this proposal for a Regulation is not an overhaul of the Market Abuse Regulation (which has been into application for less than two years) or the Prospectus Regulation (which has been recently agreed by the co-legislators and which will enter into application as of July 2019). This proposal (together with the modifications envisaged in the Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2017/565) only brings technical amendments to make the EU legal framework applying to listed SMEs more proportionate. It will ensure that the 'SME Growth Market' label, created by MiFID II as of January 2018, is used by the various MTFs with a focus on SMEs across the EU. 
Revised version (Article 33 SME growth markets):
1. Member States shall provide that the operator of a MTF may apply to its home competent authority to have the MTF registered as an SME growth market. 2. Member States shall provide that the home competent authority may register the MTF as an SME growth market if the competent authority receives an application referred to in paragraph 1 and is satisfied that the requirements in paragraph 3 are complied with in relation to the MTF. 3. Member States shall ensure that MTFs are subject to effective rules, systems and procedures which ensure that the following is complied with: (a) at least 50 % of the issuers whose financial instruments are admitted to trading on the MTF are SMEs at the time when the MTF is registered as an SME growth market and in any calendar year thereafter; (b) appropriate criteria are set for initial and ongoing admission to trading of financial instruments of issuers on the market; (c) on initial admission to trading of financial instruments on the market there is sufficient information published to enable investors to make an informed judgment about whether or not to invest in the financial instruments, either an appropriate admission document or a prospectus if the requirements laid down in Directive 2003/71/EC are applicable in respect of a public offer being made in conjunction with the initial admission to trading of the financial instrument on the MTF; (d) there is appropriate ongoing periodic financial reporting by or on behalf of an issuer on the market, for example audited annual reports; (f) regulatory information concerning the issuers on the market is stored and disseminated to the public; (g) there are effective systems and controls aiming to prevent and detect market abuse on that market as required under the Regulation (EU) No 596/2014. 4. The criteria in paragraph 3 are without prejudice to compliance by the investment firm or market operator operating the MTF with other obligations under this Directive relevant to the operation of MTFs. They also do not prevent the investment firm or market operator operating the MTF from imposing additional requirements to those specified in that paragraph. 5. Member States shall provide that the home competent authority may deregister a MTF as an SME growth market in any of the following cases: (a) the investment firm or market operator operating the market applies for its deregistration; (b) the requirements in paragraph 3 are no longer complied with in relation to the MTF. 6. Members States shall require that if a home competent authority registers or deregisters an MTF as an SME growth market under this Article it shall as soon as possible notify ESMA of that registration or deregistration. ESMA shall publish on its website a list of SME growth markets and shall keep that list up to date. 7. Member States shall require that where a financial instrument of an issuer is admitted to trading on one SME growth market, the financial instrument may also be traded on another SME growth market only where the issuer has been informed and has not objected. In such a case however, the issuer shall not be subject to any obligation relating to corporate governance or initial, ongoing or ad hoc disclosure with regard to the latter SME growth market. 8. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 89 further specifying the requirements laid down in paragraph 3 of this Article. The measures shall take into account the need for the requirements to maintain high levels of investor protection to promote investor confidence in those markets while minimising the administrative burdens for issuers on the market and that de-registrations do not occur nor shall registrations be refused as a result of a merely temporary failure to meet the conditions set out in point (a) of paragraph 3 of this Article. 9. The Commission shall set up an expert stakeholder group by 1 July 2020 to monitor the functioning and success of SME growth markets. By 1 July 2021, the expert stakeholder group shall publish a report on its conclusions.
Article 34 Freedom to provide investment services and activities
1. Member States shall ensure that any investment firm authorised and supervised by the competent authorities of another Member State in accordance with this Directive, and in respect of credit institutions in accordance with Directive 2013/36/EU, may freely provide investment services and/or perform investment activities as well as ancillary services within their territories, provided that such services and activities are covered by its authorisation. Ancillary services may only be provided together with an investment service and/or activity. Member States shall not impose any additional requirements on such an investment firm or credit institution in respect of the matters covered by this Directive. 2. Any investment firm wishing to provide services or activities within the territory of another Member State for the first time, or which wishes to change the range of services or activities so provided, shall communicate the following information to the competent authorities of its home Member State: (a) the Member State in which it intends to operate; (b) a programme of operations stating in particular the investment services and/or activities as well as ancillary services which it intends to provide in the territory of that Member State and whether it intends to do so through the use of tied agents, established in its home Member State. Where an investment firm intends to use tied agents, the investment firm shall communicate to the competent authority of its home Member State the identity of those tied agents. Where an investment firm intends to use tied agents established in its home Member State, in the territory of the Member States in which it intends to provide services the competent authority of the home Member State of the investment firm shall, within one month from receipt of all the information, communicate to the competent authority of the host Member State designated as contact point in accordance with Article 79(1) the identity of the tied agents that the investment firm intends to use to provide investment services and activities in that Member State. The host Member State shall publish such information. ESMA may request access to that information in accordance with the procedure and under the conditions set out in Article 35 of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010. 3. The competent authority of the home Member State shall, within one month of receiving the information, forward it to the competent authority of the host Member State designated as contact point in accordance with Article 79(1). The investment firm may then start to provide the investment services and activities concerned in the host Member State. 4. In the event of a change in any of the particulars communicated in accordance with paragraph 2, an investment firm shall give written notice of that change to the competent authority of the home Member State at least one month before implementing the change. The competent authority of the home Member State shall inform the competent authority of the host Member State of that change. 5. Any credit institution wishing to provide investment services or activities as well as ancillary services in accordance with paragraph 1 through tied agents shall communicate to the competent authority of its home Member State the identity of those tied agents. Where the credit institution intends to use tied agents established in its home Member State in the territory of the Member States in which it intends to provide services, the competent authority of the home Member State of the credit institution shall, within one month from the receipt of all the information, communicate to the competent authority of the host Member State designated as contact point in accordance with Article 79(1) the identity of the tied agents that the credit institution intends to use to provide services in that Member State. The host Member State shall publish such information. 6. Member States shall, without further legal or administrative requirement, allow investment firms and market operators operating MTFs and OTFs from other Member States to provide appropriate arrangements on their territory so as to facilitate access to and trading on those markets by remote users, members or participants established in their territory. 7. The investment firm or the market operator operating an MTF or an OTF shall communicate to the competent authority of its home Member State the Member State in which it intends to provide such arrangements. The competent authority of the home Member State shall communicate, within one month, that information to the competent authority of the Member State in which the MTF or the OTF intends to provide such arrangements. The competent authority of the home Member State of the MTF shall, on the request of the competent authority of the host Member State of the MTF and without undue delay, communicate the identity of the remote members or participants of the MTF established in that Member State. 8. ESMA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify the information to be notified in accordance with paragraphs 2, 4, 5 and 7. ESMA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 3 July 2015. 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 1095/2010. 9. ESMA shall develop draft implementing technical standards to establish standard forms, templates and procedures for the transmission of information in accordance with paragraphs 3, 4, 5 and 7. ESMA shall submit those draft implementing technical standards to the Commission by 31 December 2016. 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 1095/2010.
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 34 Freedom to provide investment services and activities):
1. Member States shall ensure that any investment firm authorised and supervised by the competent authorities of another Member State in accordance with this Directive, and in respect of credit institutions in accordance with Directive 2013/36/EU, may freely provide investment services and/or perform investment activities as well as ancillary services within their territories, provided that such services and activities are covered by its authorisation. Ancillary services may only be provided together with an investment service and/or activity. Member States shall not impose any additional requirements on such an investment firm or credit institution in respect of the matters covered by this Directive. 2. Any investment firm wishing to provide services or activities within the territory of another Member State for the first time, or which wishes to change the range of services or activities so provided, shall communicate the following information to the competent authorities of its home Member State: (a) the Member State in which it intends to operate; (b) a programme of operations stating in particular the investment services and/or activities as well as ancillary services which it intends to provide in the territory of that Member State and whether it intends to do so through the use of tied agents, established in its home Member State. Where an investment firm intends to use tied agents, the investment firm shall communicate to the competent authority of its home Member State the identity of those tied agents. Any investment firm wishing to provide services or activities within the territory of another Member State for the first time, or which wishes to change the range of services or activities so provided, shall communicate the following information to the competent authorities of its home Member State: (a) the Member State in which it intends to operate; (b) a programme of operations stating in particular the investment services and/or activities as well as ancillary services which it intends to provide in the territory of that Member State and whether it intends to do so through the use of tied agents, established in its home Member State. Where an investment firm intends to use tied agents, the investment firm shall communicate to the competent authority of its home Member State the identity of those tied agents. Where an investment firm intends to use tied agents established in its home Member State, in the territory of the Member States in which it intends to provide services the competent authority of the home Member State of the investment firm shall, within one month from receipt of all the information, communicate to the competent authority of the host Member State designated as contact point in accordance with Article 79(1) the identity of the tied agents that the investment firm intends to use to provide investment services and activities in that Member State. The host Member State shall publish such information. ESMA may request access to that information in accordance with the procedure and under the conditions set out in Article 35 of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010. 3. The competent authority of the home Member State shall, within one month of receiving the information, forward it to the competent authority of the host Member State designated as contact point in accordance with Article 79(1). The investment firm may then start to provide the investment services and activities concerned in the host Member State. 4. In the event of a change in any of the particulars communicated in accordance with paragraph 2, an investment firm shall give written notice of that change to the competent authority of the home Member State at least one month before implementing the change. The competent authority of the home Member State shall inform the competent authority of the host Member State of that change. 5. Any credit institution wishing to provide investment services or activities as well as ancillary services in accordance with paragraph 1 through tied agents shall communicate to the competent authority of its home Member State the identity of those tied agents. Where the credit institution intends to use tied agents established in its home Member State in the territory of the Member States in which it intends to provide services, the competent authority of the home Member State of the credit institution shall, within one month from the receipt of all the information, communicate to the competent authority of the host Member State designated as contact point in accordance with Article 79(1) the identity of the tied agents that the credit institution intends to use to provide services in that Member State. The host Member State shall publish such information. 6. Member States shall, without further legal or administrative requirement, allow investment firms and market operators operating MTFs and OTFs from other Member States to provide appropriate arrangements on their territory so as to facilitate access to and trading on those markets by remote users, members or participants established in their territory. 7. The investment firm or the market operator operating an MTF or an OTF shall communicate to the competent authority of its home Member State the Member State in which it intends to provide such arrangements. The competent authority of the home Member State shall communicate, within one month, that information to the competent authority of the Member State in which the MTF or the OTF intends to provide such arrangements. The competent authority of the home Member State of the MTF shall, on the request of the competent authority of the host Member State of the MTF and without undue delay, communicate the identity of the remote members or participants of the MTF established in that Member State. 8. ESMA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify the information to be notified in accordance with paragraphs 2, 4, 5 and 7. ESMA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 3 July 2015. 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 1095/2010. 9. ESMA shall develop draft implementing technical standards to establish standard forms, templates and procedures for the transmission of information in accordance with paragraphs 2, 3, 4, 5 and 7. ESMA shall submit those draft implementing technical standards to the Commission by 31 December 2016. 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 1095/2010.
Article 35 Establishment of a branch
1. Member States shall ensure that investment services and/or activities as well as ancillary services may be provided within their territories in accordance with this Directive and with Directive 2013/36/EU through the right of establishment, whether by the establishment of a branch or by the use of a tied agent established in a Member State outside its home Member State, provided that those services and activities are covered by the authorisation granted to the investment firm or the credit institution in the home Member State. Ancillary services may only be provided together with an investment service and/or activity. Member States shall not impose any additional requirements save those allowed under paragraph 8, on the organisation and operation of the branch in respect of the matters covered by this Directive. 2. Member States shall require any investment firm wishing to establish a branch within the territory of another Member State or to use tied agents established in another Member State in which it has not established a branch, first to notify the competent authority of its home Member State and to provide it with the following information: (a) the Member States within the territory of which it plans to establish a branch or the Member States in which it has not established a branch but plans to use tied agents established there; (b) a programme of operations setting out, inter alia, the investment services and/or activities as well as the ancillary services to be offered; (c) where established, the organisational structure of the branch and indicating whether the branch intends to use tied agents and the identity of those tied agents; (d) where tied agents are to be used in a Member State in which an investment firm has not established a branch, a description of the intended use of the tied agent(s) and an organisational structure, including reporting lines, indicating how the agent(s) fit into the corporate structure of the investment firm; (e) the address in the host Member State from which documents may be obtained; (f) the names of those responsible for the management of the branch or of the tied agent. Where an investment firm uses a tied agent established in a Member State outside its home Member State, such tied agent shall be assimilated to the branch, where one is established, and shall in any event be subject to the provisions of this Directive relating to branches. 3. Unless the competent authority of the home Member State has reason to doubt the adequacy of the administrative structure or the financial situation of an investment firm, taking into account the activities envisaged, it shall, within three months of receiving all the information, communicate that information to the competent authority of the host Member State designated as contact point in accordance with Article 79(1) and inform the investment firm concerned accordingly. 4. In addition to the information referred to in paragraph 2, the competent authority of the home Member State shall communicate details of the accredited compensation scheme of which the investment firm is a member in accordance with Directive 97/9/EC to the competent authority of the host Member State. In the event of a change in the particulars, the competent authority of the home Member State shall inform the competent authority of the host Member State accordingly. 5. Where the competent authority of the home Member State refuses to communicate the information to the competent authority of the host Member State, it shall give reasons for its refusal to the investment firm concerned within three months of receiving all the information. 6. On receipt of a communication from the competent authority of the host Member State, or failing such communication from the latter at the latest after two months from the date of transmission of the communication by the competent authority of the home Member State, the branch may be established and commence business. 7. Any credit institution wishing to use a tied agent established in a Member State outside its home Member State to provide investment services and/or activities as well as ancillary services in accordance with this Directive shall notify the competent authority of its home Member State and provide it with the information referred to in paragraph 2. Unless the competent authority of the home Member State has reason to doubt the adequacy of the administrative structure or the financial situation of a credit institution, it shall, within three months of receiving all the information, communicate that information to the competent authority of the host Member State designated as contact point in accordance with Article 79(1) and inform the credit institution concerned accordingly. Where the competent authority of the home Member State refuses to communicate the information to the competent authority of the host Member State, it shall give reasons for its refusal to the credit institution concerned within three months of receiving all the information. On receipt of a communication from the competent authority of the host Member State, or failing such communication from the latter at the latest after two months from the date of transmission of the communication by the competent authority of the home Member State, the tied agent can commence business. Such tied agent shall be subject to the provisions of this Directive relating to branches. 8. The competent authority of the Member State in which the branch is located shall assume responsibility for ensuring that the services provided by the branch within its territory comply with the obligations laid down in Articles 24, 25, 27, 28, of this Directive and Articles 14 to 26 of Regulation (EU) No 600/2014 and the measures adopted pursuant thereto by the host Member State where allowed in accordance with Article 24(12). The competent authority of the Member State in which the branch is located shall have the right to examine branch arrangements and to request such changes as are strictly needed to enable the competent authority to enforce the obligations under Articles 24, 25, 27, 28 of this Directive and Articles 14 to 26 of Regulation (EU) No 600/2014 and measures adopted pursuant thereto with respect to the services and/or activities provided by the branch within its territory. 9. Each Member State shall provide that, where an investment firm authorised in another Member State has established a branch within its territory, the competent authority of the home Member State of the investment firm, in the exercise of its responsibilities and after informing the competent authority of the host Member State, may carry out on-site inspections in that branch. 10. In the event of a change in any of the information communicated in accordance with paragraph 2, an investment firm shall give written notice of that change to the competent authority of the home Member State at least one month before implementing the change. The competent authority of the host Member State shall also be informed of that change by the competent authority of the home Member State. 11. ESMA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify the information to be notified in accordance with paragraphs 2, 4, 7 and 10. ESMA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 3 July 2015. 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 1095/2010. 12. ESMA shall develop draft implementing technical standards to establish standard forms, templates and procedures for the transmission of information in accordance with paragraphs 3, 4, 7 and 10. ESMA shall submit those draft implementing technical standards to the Commission by 3 January 2016. 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 1095/2010.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL · Reasons for and objectives of the proposal This proposal is part of a package of measures to further enable and support the potential of digital finance in terms of innovation and competition while mitigating the risks. It is in line with the Commission priorities to make Europe fit for the digital age and to build a future-ready economy that works for the people. The digital finance package includes a new Strategy on digital finance for the EU financial sector 1 with the aim to ensure that the EU embraces the digital revolution and drives it with innovative European firms in the lead, making the benefits of digital finance available to European consumers and businesses. In addition to this proposal, the package also includes a proposal for a regulation on markets in crypto assets 2 , a proposal for a regulation on a pilot regime for market infrastructures based on distributed ledger technology (DLT) 3 and a proposal for a regulation on digital operational resilience for the financial sector 4 . The reasons for, and objectives of, the two sets of legislative measures have been set out in the explanatory memoranda of the proposal for a regulation on a pilot regime for distributed ledger technology market infrastructures, proposal for a regulation on markets in crypto assets and proposal for a regulation on digital operational resilience, respectively, and apply here as well. The particular reasons for this proposal for a directive is that, in order to provide legal certainty as regards crypto assets and achieve the objectives of strengthening digital operational resilience, it is necessary to establish a temporary exemption for multilateral trading facilities and amend or clarify certain provisions in existing EU financial services directives. · Consistency with existing provisions in the policy area This proposal, similar to the proposals for regulation it accompanies, is part of a broader ongoing work at European and international level aimed at (i) strengthening the cybersecurity in financial services and address broader operational risks, and (ii) providing a clear, proportionate and enabling EU legal framework for crypto-asset service providers. · Consistency with other Union policies As stated by President von der Leyen in her Political Guidelines, 5 and set-out in the Communication ‘Shaping Europe’s digital future’, 6 it is crucial for Europe to reap all the benefits of the digital age and to strengthen its industry and innovation capacity, within safe and ethical boundaries. As regards crypto assets, this proposal is closely linked with wider Commission policies on blockchain technology, as crypto-assets, as the main application of blockchain technologies, are inextricably linked to the promotion of blockchain technology throughout Europe. As regards operational resilience, the European strategy for data 7 sets out four pillars - data protection, fundamental rights, safety and cyber-security - as essential pre-requisites for a society empowered by the use of data. A legislative framework strengthening the digital operational resilience of the Union’s financial entities is consistent with these policy objectives. The proposal would also support policies aimed at recovering from the coronavirus, as it would ensure that increased reliance on digital finance goes hand in hand with operational resilience. Both proposals also respond to calls from the CMU High-Level Forum to establish clear rules for the use of crypto asset (recommendation 7) and to put in place new rules on cyber resilience.
Revised version (Article 35 Establishment of a branch):
1. Member States shall ensure that investment services and/or activities as well as ancillary services may be provided within their territories in accordance with this Directive and with Directive 2013/36/EU through the right of establishment, whether by the establishment of a branch or by the use of a tied agent established in a Member State outside its home Member State, provided that those services and activities are covered by the authorisation granted to the investment firm or the credit institution in the home Member State. Ancillary services may only be provided together with an investment service and/or activity. Member States shall not impose any additional requirements save those allowed under paragraph 8, on the organisation and operation of the branch in respect of the matters covered by this Directive. 2. Where an investment firm uses a tied agent established in a Member State outside its home Member State, such tied agent shall be assimilated to the branch, where one is established, and shall in any event be subject to the provisions of this Directive relating to branches. 3. Unless the competent authority of the home Member State has reason to doubt the adequacy of the administrative structure or the financial situation of an investment firm, taking into account the activities envisaged, it shall, within three months of receiving all the information, communicate that information to the competent authority of the host Member State designated as contact point in accordance with Article 79(1) and inform the investment firm concerned accordingly. 4. In addition to the information referred to in paragraph 2, the competent authority of the home Member State shall communicate details of the accredited compensation scheme of which the investment firm is a member in accordance with Directive 97/9/EC to the competent authority of the host Member State. In the event of a change in the particulars, the competent authority of the home Member State shall inform the competent authority of the host Member State accordingly. 5. Where the competent authority of the home Member State refuses to communicate the information to the competent authority of the host Member State, it shall give reasons for its refusal to the investment firm concerned within three months of receiving all the information. 6. On receipt of a communication from the competent authority of the host Member State, or failing such communication from the latter at the latest after two months from the date of transmission of the communication by the competent authority of the home Member State, the branch may be established and commence business. 7. Any credit institution wishing to use a tied agent established in a Member State outside its home Member State to provide investment services and/or activities as well as ancillary services in accordance with this Directive shall notify the competent authority of its home Member State and provide it with the information referred to in paragraph 2. Unless the competent authority of the home Member State has reason to doubt the adequacy of the administrative structure or the financial situation of a credit institution, it shall, within three months of receiving all the information, communicate that information to the competent authority of the host Member State designated as contact point in accordance with Article 79(1) and inform the credit institution concerned accordingly. Where the competent authority of the home Member State refuses to communicate the information to the competent authority of the host Member State, it shall give reasons for its refusal to the credit institution concerned within three months of receiving all the information. On receipt of a communication from the competent authority of the host Member State, or failing such communication from the latter at the latest after two months from the date of transmission of the communication by the competent authority of the home Member State, the tied agent can commence business. Such tied agent shall be subject to the provisions of this Directive relating to branches. 8. The competent authority of the Member State in which the branch is located shall assume responsibility for ensuring that the services provided by the branch within its territory comply with the obligations laid down in Articles 24, 25, 27, 28, of this Directive and Articles 14 to 26 of Regulation (EU) No 600/2014 and the measures adopted pursuant thereto by the host Member State where allowed in accordance with Article 24(12). The competent authority of the Member State in which the branch is located shall have the right to examine branch arrangements and to request such changes as are strictly needed to enable the competent authority to enforce the obligations under Articles 24, 25, 27, 28 of this Directive and Articles 14 to 26 of Regulation (EU) No 600/2014 and measures adopted pursuant thereto with respect to the services and/or activities provided by the branch within its territory. 9. Each Member State shall provide that, where an investment firm authorised in another Member State has established a branch within its territory, the competent authority of the home Member State of the investment firm, in the exercise of its responsibilities and after informing the competent authority of the host Member State, may carry out on-site inspections in that branch. 10. In the event of a change in any of the information communicated in accordance with paragraph 2, an investment firm shall give written notice of that change to the competent authority of the home Member State at least one month before implementing the change. The competent authority of the host Member State shall also be informed of that change by the competent authority of the home Member State. 11. ESMA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify the information to be notified in accordance with paragraphs 2, 4, 7 and 10. ESMA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 3 July 2015. 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 1095/2010. 12. ESMA shall develop draft implementing technical standards to establish standard forms, templates and procedures for the transmission of information in accordance with paragraphs 2, 3, 4, 7 and 10. ESMA shall submit those draft implementing technical standards to the Commission by 3 January 2016. 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 1095/2010.
Article 36 Access to regulated markets
1. Member States shall require that investment firms from other Member States which are authorised to execute client orders or to deal on own account have the right of membership or have access to regulated markets established in their territory by means of any of the following arrangements: (a) directly, by setting up branches in the host Member States; (b) by becoming remote members of or having remote access to the regulated market without having to be established in the home Member State of the regulated market, where the trading procedures and systems of the market in question do not require a physical presence for conclusion of transactions on the market. 2. Member States shall not impose any additional regulatory or administrative requirements, in respect of matters covered by this Directive, on investment firms exercising the right conferred by paragraph 1.
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 36 Access to regulated markets):
1. Member States shall require that investment firms from other Member States which are authorised to execute client orders or to deal on own account have the right of membership or have access to regulated markets established in their territory by means of any of the following arrangements: (a) directly, by setting up branches in the host Member States; (b) by becoming remote members of or having remote access to the regulated market without having to be established in the home Member State of the regulated market, where the trading procedures and systems of the market in question do not require a physical presence for conclusion of transactions on the market. Member States shall require that investment firms from other Member States which are authorised to execute client orders or to deal on own account have the right of membership or have access to regulated markets established in their territory by means of any of the following arrangements: (a) directly, by setting up branches in the host Member States; (b) by becoming remote members of or having remote access to the regulated market without having to be established in the home Member State of the regulated market, where the trading procedures and systems of the market in question do not require a physical presence for conclusion of transactions on the market. 2. Member States shall not impose any additional regulatory or administrative requirements, in respect of matters covered by this Directive, on investment firms exercising the right conferred by paragraph 1.
Article 37 Access to CCP, clearing and settlement facilities and right to designate settlement system
1. Without prejudice to Titles III, IV or V of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012, Member States shall require that investment firms from other Member States have the right of direct and indirect access to CCP, clearing and settlement systems in their territory for the purposes of finalising or arranging the finalisation of transactions in financial instruments. Member States shall require that direct and indirect access of those investment firms to such facilities be subject to the same non-discriminatory, transparent and objective criteria as apply to local members or participants. Member States shall not restrict the use of those facilities to the clearing and settlement of transactions in financial instruments undertaken on a trading venue in their territory. 2. Member States shall require that regulated markets in their territory offer all their members or participants the right to designate the system for the settlement of transactions in financial instruments undertaken on that regulated market, subject to the following conditions: (a) such links and arrangements between the designated settlement system and any other system or facility as are necessary to ensure the efficient and economic settlement of the transaction in question; (b) agreement by the competent authority responsible for the supervision of the regulated market that technical conditions for settlement of transactions concluded on the regulated market through a settlement system other than that designated by the regulated market are such as to allow the smooth and orderly functioning of financial markets. That assessment of the competent authority of the regulated market shall be without prejudice to the competencies of the national central banks as overseers of settlement systems or other supervisory authorities with competence in relation to such systems. The competent authority shall take into account the oversight/supervision already exercised by those institutions in order to avoid undue duplication of control.
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 37 Access to CCP, clearing and settlement facilities and right to designate settlement system):
1. Without prejudice to Titles III, IV or V of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012, Member States shall require that investment firms from other Member States have the right of direct and indirect access to CCP, clearing and settlement systems in their territory for the purposes of finalising or arranging the finalisation of transactions in financial instruments. Member States shall require that direct and indirect access of those investment firms to such facilities be subject to the same non-discriminatory, transparent and objective criteria as apply to local members or participants. Member States shall not restrict the use of those facilities to the clearing and settlement of transactions in financial instruments undertaken on a trading venue in their territory. 2. Member States shall require that regulated markets in their territory offer all their members or participants the right to designate the system for the settlement of transactions in financial instruments undertaken on that regulated market, subject to the following conditions: (a) such links and arrangements between the designated settlement system and any other system or facility as are necessary to ensure the efficient and economic settlement of the transaction in question; (b) agreement by the competent authority responsible for the supervision of the regulated market that technical conditions for settlement of transactions concluded on the regulated market through a settlement system other than that designated by the regulated market are such as to allow the smooth and orderly functioning of financial markets. Member States shall require that regulated markets in their territory offer all their members or participants the right to designate the system for the settlement of transactions in financial instruments undertaken on that regulated market, subject to the following conditions: (a) such links and arrangements between the designated settlement system and any other system or facility as are necessary to ensure the efficient and economic settlement of the transaction in question; (b) agreement by the competent authority responsible for the supervision of the regulated market that technical conditions for settlement of transactions concluded on the regulated market through a settlement system other than that designated by the regulated market are such as to allow the smooth and orderly functioning of financial markets. That assessment of the competent authority of the regulated market shall be without prejudice to the competencies of the national central banks as overseers of settlement systems or other supervisory authorities with competence in relation to such systems. The competent authority shall take into account the oversight/supervision already exercised by those institutions in order to avoid undue duplication of control.
Article 38 Provisions regarding CCPs, clearing and settlement arrangements in respect of MTFs
1. Member States shall not prevent investment firms and market operators operating an MTF from entering into appropriate arrangements with a CCP or clearing house and a settlement system of another Member State with a view to providing for the clearing and/or settlement of some or all trades concluded by the members or participants under their systems. 2. The competent authority of investment firms and market operators operating an MTF may not oppose the use of CCP, clearing houses and/or settlement systems in another Member State except where demonstrably necessary in order to maintain the orderly functioning of that MTF and taking into account the conditions for settlement systems established in Article 37(2). In order to avoid undue duplication of control, the competent authority shall take into account the oversight and supervision of the clearing and settlement system already exercised by the central banks as overseers of clearing and settlement systems or by other supervisory authorities with competence in relation to such systems.
Article 39 Establishment of a branch
1. A Member State may require that a third-country firm intending to provide investment services or perform investment activities with or without any ancillary services to retail clients or to professional clients within the meaning of Section II of Annex II in its territory establish a branch in that Member State. 2. Where a Member State requires that a third-country firm intending to provide investment services or to perform investment activities with or without any ancillary services in its territory establish a branch, the branch shall acquire a prior authorisation by the competent authorities of that Member State in accordance with the following conditions: (a) the provision of services for which the third-country firm requests authorisation is subject to authorisation and supervision in the third country where the firm is established and the requesting firm is properly authorised, whereby the competent authority pays due regard to any FATF recommendations in the context of anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism; (b) cooperation arrangements, that include provisions regulating the exchange of information for the purpose of preserving the integrity of the market and protecting investors, are in place between the competent authorities in the Member State where the branch is to be established and competent supervisory authorities of the third country where the firm is established; (c) sufficient initial capital is at free disposal of the branch; (d) one or more persons are appointed to be responsible for the management of the branch and they all comply with the requirement laid down in Article 9(1); (e) the third country where the third-country firm is established has signed an agreement with the Member State where the branch is to be established, which fully comply with the standards laid down in Article 26 of the OECD Model Tax Convention on Income and on Capital and ensures an effective exchange of information in tax matters, including, if any, multilateral tax agreements; (f) the firm belongs to an investor-compensation scheme authorised or recognised in accordance with Directive 97/9/EC. 3. The third-country firm referred to in paragraph 1 shall submit its application to the competent authority of the Member State where it intends to establish a branch.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL · Reasons for and objectives of the proposal This proposal is part of a package of measures to further enable and support the potential of digital finance in terms of innovation and competition while mitigating the risks. It is in line with the Commission priorities to make Europe fit for the digital age and to build a future-ready economy that works for the people. The digital finance package includes a new Strategy on digital finance for the EU financial sector 1 with the aim to ensure that the EU embraces the digital revolution and drives it with innovative European firms in the lead, making the benefits of digital finance available to European consumers and businesses. In addition to this proposal, the package also includes a proposal for a regulation on markets in crypto assets 2 , a proposal for a regulation on a pilot regime for market infrastructures based on distributed ledger technology (DLT) 3 and a proposal for a regulation on digital operational resilience for the financial sector 4 . The reasons for, and objectives of, the two sets of legislative measures have been set out in the explanatory memoranda of the proposal for a regulation on a pilot regime for distributed ledger technology market infrastructures, proposal for a regulation on markets in crypto assets and proposal for a regulation on digital operational resilience, respectively, and apply here as well. The particular reasons for this proposal for a directive is that, in order to provide legal certainty as regards crypto assets and achieve the objectives of strengthening digital operational resilience, it is necessary to establish a temporary exemption for multilateral trading facilities and amend or clarify certain provisions in existing EU financial services directives. · Consistency with existing provisions in the policy area This proposal, similar to the proposals for regulation it accompanies, is part of a broader ongoing work at European and international level aimed at (i) strengthening the cybersecurity in financial services and address broader operational risks, and (ii) providing a clear, proportionate and enabling EU legal framework for crypto-asset service providers. · Consistency with other Union policies As stated by President von der Leyen in her Political Guidelines, 5 and set-out in the Communication ‘Shaping Europe’s digital future’, 6 it is crucial for Europe to reap all the benefits of the digital age and to strengthen its industry and innovation capacity, within safe and ethical boundaries. As regards crypto assets, this proposal is closely linked with wider Commission policies on blockchain technology, as crypto-assets, as the main application of blockchain technologies, are inextricably linked to the promotion of blockchain technology throughout Europe. As regards operational resilience, the European strategy for data 7 sets out four pillars - data protection, fundamental rights, safety and cyber-security - as essential pre-requisites for a society empowered by the use of data. A legislative framework strengthening the digital operational resilience of the Union’s financial entities is consistent with these policy objectives. The proposal would also support policies aimed at recovering from the coronavirus, as it would ensure that increased reliance on digital finance goes hand in hand with operational resilience. Both proposals also respond to calls from the CMU High-Level Forum to establish clear rules for the use of crypto asset (recommendation 7) and to put in place new rules on cyber resilience.
Revised version (Article 39 Establishment of a branch):
1. A Member State may require that a third-country firm intending to provide investment services or perform investment activities with or without any ancillary services to retail clients or to professional clients within the meaning of Section II of Annex II in its territory establish a branch in that Member State. 3. The third-country firm referred to in paragraph 1 shall submit its application to the competent authority of the Member State where it intends to establish a branch.
Article 40 Obligation to provide information
A third-country firm intending to obtain authorisation for the provision of any investment services or the performance of investment activities with or without any ancillary services in the territory of a Member State through a branch shall provide the competent authority of that Member State with the following: (a) the name of the authority responsible for its supervision in the third country concerned. When more than one authority is responsible for supervision, the details of the respective areas of competence shall be provided; (b) all relevant details of the firm (name, legal form, registered office and address, members of the management body, relevant shareholders) and a programme of operations setting out the investment services and/or activities as well as the ancillary services to be provided and the organisational structure of the branch, including a description of any outsourcing to third parties of essential operating functions; (c) the name of the persons responsible for the management of the branch and the relevant documents to demonstrate compliance with requirements laid down in Article 9(1); (d) information about the initial capital at free disposal of the branch.
Article 41 Granting of the authorisation
1. The competent authority of the Member State where the third-country firm has established or intends to establish its branch shall only grant authorisation when the competent authority is satisfied that: (a) the conditions under Article 39 are fulfilled; and (b) the branch of the third-country firm will be able to comply with the provisions referred to in paragraph 2. The competent authority shall inform the third-country firm, within six months of submission of a complete application, whether or not the authorisation has been granted. 2. The branch of the third-country firm authorised in accordance with paragraph 1, shall comply with the obligations laid down in Articles 16 to 20, 23, 24, 25 and 27, Article 28(1), and Articles 30, 31 and 32 of this Directive and in Articles 3 to 26 of Regulation (EU) No 600/2014 and the measures adopted pursuant thereto and shall be subject to the supervision of the competent authority in the Member State where the authorisation was granted. Member States shall not impose any additional requirements on the organisation and operation of the branch in respect of the matters covered by this Directive and shall not treat any branch of third-country firms more favourably than Union firms.
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 41 Granting of the authorisation):
1. The competent authority of the Member State where the third‐country firm has established or intends to establish its branch shall only grant authorisation where the competent authority is satisfied that: (a) the conditions under Article 39 are fulfilled; and (b) the branch of the third‐country firm will be able to comply with the provisions referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3. The competent authority shall inform the third‐country firm, within six months of submission of a complete application, whether or not the authorisation has been granted. The competent authority of the Member State where the third‐country firm has established or intends to establish its branch shall only grant authorisation where the competent authority is satisfied that: (a) the conditions under Article 39 are fulfilled; and (b) the branch of the third‐country firm will be able to comply with the provisions referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3. The competent authority shall inform the third‐country firm, within six months of submission of a complete application, whether or not the authorisation has been granted. 2. The branch of the third‐country firm authorised in accordance with paragraph 1 shall comply with the obligations laid down in Articles 16 to 20, 23, 24, 25 and 27, Article 28(1), and Articles 30, 31 and 32 of this Directive and in Articles 3 to 26 of Regulation (EU) No 600/2014 and the measures adopted pursuant thereto and shall be subject to the supervision of the competent authority in the Member State where the authorisation was granted. Member States shall not impose any additional requirements on the organisation and operation of the branch in respect of the matters covered by this Directive and shall not treat any branch of third‐country firms more favourably than Union firms. Member States shall ensure that competent authorities notify ESMA on an annual basis of the list of branches of third‐country firms active on their territory. ESMA shall publish on annual basis a list of third‐country branches active in the Union, including the name of the third‐country firm to which the branch belongs. The branch of the third‐country firm authorised in accordance with paragraph 1 shall comply with the obligations laid down in Articles 16 to 20, 23, 24, 25 and 27, Article 28(1), and Articles 30, 31 and 32 of this Directive and in Articles 3 to 26 of Regulation (EU) No 600/2014 and the measures adopted pursuant thereto and shall be subject to the supervision of the competent authority in the Member State where the authorisation was granted. Member States shall not impose any additional requirements on the organisation and operation of the branch in respect of the matters covered by this Directive and shall not treat any branch of third‐country firms more favourably than Union firms. Member States shall ensure that competent authorities notify ESMA on an annual basis of the list of branches of third‐country firms active on their territory. ESMA shall publish on annual basis a list of third‐country branches active in the Union, including the name of the third‐country firm to which the branch belongs. The branch of the third‐country firm that is authorised in accordance with paragraph 1 shall report to the competent authority referred to in paragraph 2 the following information on an annual basis: (a) the scale and scope of the services and activities carried out by the branch in that Member State; (b) for third‐country firms performing the activity listed in point (3) of Section A of Annex I, their monthly minimum, average and maximum exposure to EU counterparties; (c) for third‐country firms providing one or both of the services listed in point (6) of Section A of Annex I, the total value of financial instruments originating from EU counterparties underwritten or placed on a firm commitment basis over the previous 12 months; (d) the turnover and the aggregated value of the assets corresponding to the services and activities referred to in point (a); a detailed description of the investor protection arrangements available to the clients of the branch, including the rights of those clients resulting from the investor‐compensation scheme referred to in point (f) of Article 39(2); (f) their risk management policy and arrangements applied by the branch for the services and activities referred to in point (a); (g) the governance arrangements, including key function holders for the activities of the branch; (h) any other information considered by the competent authority to be necessary to enable comprehensive monitoring of the activities of the branch. Upon request, the competent authorities shall communicate the following information to ESMA: (a) all the authorisations for branches authorised in accordance with paragraph 1 and any subsequent changes to such authorisations; (b) the scale and scope of the services and activities carried out by an authorised branch in the Member State; (c) the turnover and the total assets corresponding to the services and activities referred to in point (b); (d) the name of the third-country group to which an authorised branch belongs. 5. The competent authorities referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article, the competent authorities of entities that are part of the same group to which branches of third‐country firms authorised in accordance with paragraph 1 belong, and ESMA and EBA shall cooperate closely to ensure that all activities of that group in the Union are subject to comprehensive, consistent and effective supervision in accordance with this Directive, Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, Regulation (EU) No 600/2014, Regulation (EU) 2019/2033, Directive 2013/36/EU, and Directive (EU) 2019/2034. 6. ESMA shall develop draft implementing technical standards to specify the format in which the information referred to in paragraphs 3 and 4 is to be reported. ESMA shall submit those draft implementing technical standards to the Commission by 26 September 2020. Power is conferred on the Commission to supplement this Directive by adopting the implementing technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010. ESMA shall develop draft implementing technical standards to specify the format in which the information referred to in paragraphs 3 and 4 is to be reported. ESMA shall submit those draft implementing technical standards to the Commission by 26 September 2020. Power is conferred on the Commission to supplement this Directive by adopting the implementing technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010.
Article 42 Provision of services at the exclusive initiative of the client
Member States shall ensure that where a retail client or professional client within the meaning of Section II of Annex II established or situated in the Union initiates at its own exclusive initiative the provision of an investment service or activity by a third-country firm, the requirement for authorisation under Article 39 shall not apply to the provision of that service or activity by the third country firm to that person including a relationship specifically relating to the provision of that service or activity. An initiative by such clients shall not entitle the third-country firm to market otherwise than through the branch, where one is required in accordance with national law, new categories of investment products or investment services to that client.
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 42 Provision of services at the exclusive initiative of the client):
1. Member States shall ensure that where a retail client or professional client within the meaning of Section II of Annex II established or situated in the Union initiates at its own exclusive initiative the provision of an investment service or activity by a third‐country firm, the requirement for authorisation under Article 39 shall not apply to the provision of that service or activity by the third‐country firm to that person, including a relationship specifically relating to the provision of that service or activity. Without prejudice to intragroup relations, where a third‐country firm, including through an entity acting on its behalf or having close links with such third‐country firm or any other person acting on behalf of such entity, solicits clients or potential clients in the Union, it shall not be deemed to be a service provided at the own exclusive initiative of the client. Member States shall ensure that where a retail client or professional client within the meaning of Section II of Annex II established or situated in the Union initiates at its own exclusive initiative the provision of an investment service or activity by a third‐country firm, the requirement for authorisation under Article 39 shall not apply to the provision of that service or activity by the third‐country firm to that person, including a relationship specifically relating to the provision of that service or activity. Without prejudice to intragroup relations, where a third‐country firm, including through an entity acting on its behalf or having close links with such third‐country firm or any other person acting on behalf of such entity, solicits clients or potential clients in the Union, it shall not be deemed to be a service provided at the own exclusive initiative of the client. 2. An initiative by a client as referred to in paragraph 1 shall not entitle the third‐country firm to market new categories of investment products or investment services to that client otherwise than through the branch, where one is required in accordance with national law.
Article 43 Withdrawal of authorisations
The competent authority which granted an authorisation under Articles 41 may withdraw the authorisation issued to a third country firm where such a firm: (a) does not make use of the authorisation within 12 months, expressly renounces the authorisation or has provided no investment services or performed no investment activity for the preceding six months, unless the Member State concerned has provided for the authorisation to lapse in such cases; (b) has obtained the authorisation by making false statements or by any other irregular means; (c) no longer meets the conditions under which authorisation was granted; (d) has seriously and systematically infringed the provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive governing the operating conditions for investment firms and applicable to third-country firms; (e) falls within any of the cases where national law, in respect of matters outside the scope of this Directive, provides for withdrawal.
Article 44 Authorisation and applicable law
1. Member States shall reserve authorisation as a regulated market to those systems which comply with this Title. Authorisation as a regulated market shall be granted only where the competent authority is satisfied that both the market operator and the systems of the regulated market comply at least with the requirements laid down in this Title. In the case of a regulated market that is a legal person and that is managed or operated by a market operator other than the regulated market itself, Member States shall establish how the different obligations imposed on the market operator under this Directive are to be allocated between the regulated market and the market operator. The market operator shall provide all information, including a programme of operations setting out, inter alia, the types of business envisaged and the organisational structure, necessary to enable the competent authority to satisfy itself that the regulated market has established, at the time of initial authorisation, all the necessary arrangements to meet its obligations under this Title. 2. Member States shall require the market operator to perform tasks relating to the organisation and operation of the regulated market under the supervision of the competent authority. Member States shall ensure that competent authorities keep under regular review the compliance of regulated markets with this Title. They shall also ensure that competent authorities monitor that regulated markets comply at all times with the conditions for initial authorisation established under this Title. 3. Member States shall ensure that the market operator is responsible for ensuring that the regulated market that it manages complies with the requirements laid down in this Title. Member States shall also ensure that the market operator is entitled to exercise the rights that correspond to the regulated market that it manages by virtue of this Directive. 4. Without prejudice to any relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 or of Directive 2014/57/EU, the public law governing the trading conducted under the systems of the regulated market shall be that of the home Member State of the regulated market. 5. The competent authority may withdraw the authorisation issued to a regulated market, where it: (a) does not make use of the authorisation within 12 months, expressly renounces the authorisation or has not operated for the preceding six months, unless the Member State concerned has provided for authorisation to lapse in such cases; (b) has obtained the authorisation by making false statements or by any other irregular means; (c) no longer meets the conditions under which authorisation was granted; (d) has seriously and systematically infringed the provisions adopted pursuant to this Directive or Regulation (EU) No 600/2014; (e) falls within any of the cases where national law provides for withdrawal. 6. ESMA shall be notified of any withdrawal of authorisation.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL · Reasons for and objectives of the proposal This proposal is part of a package of measures to further enable and support the potential of digital finance in terms of innovation and competition while mitigating the risks. It is in line with the Commission priorities to make Europe fit for the digital age and to build a future-ready economy that works for the people. The digital finance package includes a new Strategy on digital finance for the EU financial sector 1 with the aim to ensure that the EU embraces the digital revolution and drives it with innovative European firms in the lead, making the benefits of digital finance available to European consumers and businesses. In addition to this proposal, the package also includes a proposal for a regulation on markets in crypto assets 2 , a proposal for a regulation on a pilot regime for market infrastructures based on distributed ledger technology (DLT) 3 and a proposal for a regulation on digital operational resilience for the financial sector 4 . The reasons for, and objectives of, the two sets of legislative measures have been set out in the explanatory memoranda of the proposal for a regulation on a pilot regime for distributed ledger technology market infrastructures, proposal for a regulation on markets in crypto assets and proposal for a regulation on digital operational resilience, respectively, and apply here as well. The particular reasons for this proposal for a directive is that, in order to provide legal certainty as regards crypto assets and achieve the objectives of strengthening digital operational resilience, it is necessary to establish a temporary exemption for multilateral trading facilities and amend or clarify certain provisions in existing EU financial services directives. · Consistency with existing provisions in the policy area This proposal, similar to the proposals for regulation it accompanies, is part of a broader ongoing work at European and international level aimed at (i) strengthening the cybersecurity in financial services and address broader operational risks, and (ii) providing a clear, proportionate and enabling EU legal framework for crypto-asset service providers. · Consistency with other Union policies As stated by President von der Leyen in her Political Guidelines, 5 and set-out in the Communication ‘Shaping Europe’s digital future’, 6 it is crucial for Europe to reap all the benefits of the digital age and to strengthen its industry and innovation capacity, within safe and ethical boundaries. As regards crypto assets, this proposal is closely linked with wider Commission policies on blockchain technology, as crypto-assets, as the main application of blockchain technologies, are inextricably linked to the promotion of blockchain technology throughout Europe. As regards operational resilience, the European strategy for data 7 sets out four pillars - data protection, fundamental rights, safety and cyber-security - as essential pre-requisites for a society empowered by the use of data. A legislative framework strengthening the digital operational resilience of the Union’s financial entities is consistent with these policy objectives. The proposal would also support policies aimed at recovering from the coronavirus, as it would ensure that increased reliance on digital finance goes hand in hand with operational resilience. Both proposals also respond to calls from the CMU High-Level Forum to establish clear rules for the use of crypto asset (recommendation 7) and to put in place new rules on cyber resilience.
Revised version (Article 44 Authorisation and applicable law):
1. Member States shall reserve authorisation as a regulated market to those systems which comply with this Title. Authorisation as a regulated market shall be granted only where the competent authority is satisfied that both the market operator and the systems of the regulated market comply at least with the requirements laid down in this Title. In the case of a regulated market that is a legal person and that is managed or operated by a market operator other than the regulated market itself, Member States shall establish how the different obligations imposed on the market operator under this Directive are to be allocated between the regulated market and the market operator. The market operator shall provide all information, including a programme of operations setting out, inter alia, the types of business envisaged and the organisational structure, necessary to enable the competent authority to satisfy itself that the regulated market has established, at the time of initial authorisation, all the necessary arrangements to meet its obligations under this Title. 2. Member States shall require the market operator to perform tasks relating to the organisation and operation of the regulated market under the supervision of the competent authority. Member States shall ensure that competent authorities keep under regular review the compliance of regulated markets with this Title. They shall also ensure that competent authorities monitor that regulated markets comply at all times with the conditions for initial authorisation established under this Title. 3. Member States shall ensure that the market operator is responsible for ensuring that the regulated market that it manages complies with the requirements laid down in this Title. Member States shall also ensure that the market operator is entitled to exercise the rights that correspond to the regulated market that it manages by virtue of this Directive. 4. Without prejudice to any relevant provisions of Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 or of Directive 2014/57/EU, the public law governing the trading conducted under the systems of the regulated market shall be that of the home Member State of the regulated market. 6. ESMA shall be notified of any withdrawal of authorisation.
Article 45 Requirements for the management body of a market operator
1. Member States shall require that all members of the management body of any market operator shall at all times be of sufficiently good repute, possess sufficient knowledge, skills and experience to perform their duties. The overall composition of the management body shall reflect an adequately broad range of experience. 2. Members of the management body shall, in particular, fulfil the following requirements: (a) All members of the management body shall commit sufficient time to perform their functions in the market operator. The number of directorships a member of the management body can hold, in any legal entity, at the same time shall take into account individual circumstances and the nature, scale and complexity of the market operator’s activities. Unless representing the Member State, members of the management body of market operators that are significant in terms of their size, internal organisation and the nature, the scope and the complexity of their activities shall not at the same time hold positions exceeding more than one of the following combinations: (i) one executive directorship with two non-executive directorships; (ii) four non-executive directorships. Executive or non-executive directorships held within the same group or undertakings where the market operator owns a qualifying holding shall be considered to be one single directorship. Competent authorities may authorise members of the management body to hold one additional non-executive directorship. Competent authorities shall regularly inform ESMA of such authorisations. Directorships in organisations which do not pursue predominantly commercial objectives shall be exempt from the limitation on the number of directorships a member of a management body can hold. (a) All members of the management body shall commit sufficient time to perform their functions in the market operator. The number of directorships a member of the management body can hold, in any legal entity, at the same time shall take into account individual circumstances and the nature, scale and complexity of the market operator’s activities. Unless representing the Member State, members of the management body of market operators that are significant in terms of their size, internal organisation and the nature, the scope and the complexity of their activities shall not at the same time hold positions exceeding more than one of the following combinations: (i) one executive directorship with two non-executive directorships; (ii) four non-executive directorships. Executive or non-executive directorships held within the same group or undertakings where the market operator owns a qualifying holding shall be considered to be one single directorship. Competent authorities may authorise members of the management body to hold one additional non-executive directorship. Competent authorities shall regularly inform ESMA of such authorisations. Directorships in organisations which do not pursue predominantly commercial objectives shall be exempt from the limitation on the number of directorships a member of a management body can hold. (b) The management body shall possess adequate collective knowledge, skills and experience to be able to understand the market operator’s activities, including the main risks. (c) Each member of the management body shall act with honesty, integrity and independence of mind to effectively assess and challenge the decisions of the senior management where necessary and to effectively oversee and monitor decision-making. 3. Market operators shall devote adequate human and financial resources to the induction and training of members of the management body. 4. Member States shall ensure that market operators which are significant in terms of their size, internal organisation and the nature, scope and complexity of their activities establish a nomination committee composed of members of the management body who do not perform any executive function in the market operator concerned. The nomination committee shall carry out the following: (a) identify and recommend, for the approval of the management body or for approval of the general meeting, candidates to fill management body vacancies. In doing so, the nomination committee shall evaluate the balance of knowledge, skills, diversity and experience of the management body. Further, the committee shall prepare a description of the roles and capabilities for a particular appointment, and assess the time commitment expected. Furthermore, the nomination committee shall decide on a target for the representation of the underrepresented gender in the management body and prepare a policy on how to increase the number of the underrepresented gender in the management body in order to meet that target; (b) periodically, and at least annually, assess the structure, size, composition and performance of the management body, and make recommendations to the management body with regard to any changes; (c) periodically, and at least annually, assess the knowledge, skills and experience of individual members of the management body and of the management body collectively, and report to the management body accordingly; (d) periodically review the policy of the management body for selection and appointment of senior management and make recommendations to the management body. In performing its duties, the nomination committee shall, to the extent possible and on an ongoing basis, take account of the need to ensure that the management body’s decision making is not dominated by any one individual or small group of individuals in a manner that is detrimental to the interests of the market operator as a whole. In performing its duties, the nomination committee shall be able to use any forms of resources it deems appropriate, including external advice. Where, under national law, the management body does not have any competence in the process of selection and appointment of any of its members, this paragraph shall not apply. 5. Member States or competent authorities shall require market operators and their respective nomination committees to engage a broad set of qualities and competences when recruiting members to the management body and for that purpose to put in place a policy promoting diversity on the management body. 6. Member States shall ensure that the management body of a market operator defines and oversees the implementation of the governance arrangements that ensure effective and prudent management of an organisation, including the segregation of duties in the organisation and the prevention of conflicts of interest, and in a manner that promotes the integrity of the market. Member States shall ensure that the management body monitors and periodically assesses the effectiveness of the market operator’s governance arrangements and takes appropriate steps to address any deficiencies. Members of the management body shall have adequate access to information and documents which are needed to oversee and monitor management decision-making. 7. The competent authority shall refuse authorisation if it is not satisfied that the members of the management body of the market operator are of sufficiently good repute, possess sufficient knowledge, skills and experience and commit sufficient time to perform their functions, or if there are objective and demonstrable grounds for believing that the management body of the market operator may pose a threat to its effective, sound and prudent management and to the adequate consideration of the integrity of the market. Member States shall ensure that, in the process of authorisation of a regulated market, the person or persons who effectively direct the business and the operations of an already authorised regulated market in accordance with this Directive are deemed to comply with the requirements laid down in paragraph 1. 8. Member States shall require the market operator to notify the competent authority of the identity of all members of its management body and of any changes to its membership, along with all information needed to assess whether the market operator complies with paragraphs 1 to 5. 9. ESMA shall issue guidelines on the following: (a) the notion of sufficient time commitment of a member of the management body to perform that member’s functions, in relation to the individual circumstances and the nature, scale and complexity of activities of the market operator; (b) the notion of adequate collective knowledge, skills and experience of the management body as referred to in point (b) of paragraph 2; (c) the notions of honesty, integrity and independence of mind of a member of the management body as referred to in point (c) of paragraph 2; (d) the notion of adequate human and financial resources devoted to the induction and training of members of the management body as referred to in paragraph 3; (e) the notion of diversity to be taken into account for the selection of members of the management body as referred to in paragraph 5. ESMA shall issue those guidelines by 3 January 2016.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 1.1. Reasons for the proposal Directive 2014/65/EU (‘MiFID’) together with Regulation (EU) No 600/2014 (‘MiFIR’) was adopted in the wake of the financial crisis. MiFID and MiFIR, collectively referred to as MiFID II, covers securities markets, investment intermediaries and trading venues. The new framework reinforces and replaces the current MiFID framework. MiFID II extends the number of financial instruments covered by trading rules and ensures that trading takes place on regulated platforms. It introduces rules on high frequency trading. It improves the transparency and oversight of financial markets – including derivatives markets - and addresses the issue of price volatility in commodity derivatives. The new framework improves conditions for competition in the trading and clearing of financial instruments. Building on the rules already in place, the revised MiFID rules also strengthen the protection of investors by introducing robust organisational and conduct of business requirements. The MiFID II package consists of a Directive and a Regulation. Member States need to transpose the Directive by 3 July 2016. Both MiFID and MiFIR are scheduled to apply as of 3 January 2017. The purpose of the draft proposal is to extend the entry into application of both instruments that are comprised in the MIFID II package as a result of the technical implementation challenges met by the European Securities and Markets Authority ('ESMA'), national competent authorities ('NCAs') and stakeholders. These challenges are of such magnitude that essential data infrastructures will not be in place in time for 3 January 2017. During the legislative process, the very high level of complexity of the MiFID II package and the need for a significant number of implementing measures were recognised. To this end, a period of 30 months was foreseen between the adoption and the entry into application, instead of the usual 18-24 months. Despite this unusually long period, ESMA has made clear to the Commission that the technical implementing challenges are of such magnitude that essential data infrastructures will not be in place in time for 3 January 2017. If the date of entry into application remains unchanged, this would mean, in practice, that neither competent authorities, nor market participants, would be in a position to apply the new rules on 3 January 2017. This would lead to legal uncertainty and potential market disruption. In light of these exceptional circumstances and the particular technical implementation challenges faced by ESMA and the competent authorities in this specific case, the Commission deems it necessary to extend the entry into application of both instruments that are comprised in MIFID II. Such extension shall be strictly limited to what is necessary to allow the technical implementation work to be finalised. 1.2 The 'data' challenge ESMA have informed the Commission that neither they nor NCAs will be in a position to apply MiFID II as of 3 January 2017. This is a result of significant challenges in collecting the data that is necessary for the operation of the MiFID II rules. In order to ensure legal certainty and avoid potential market disruption, urgent action is therefore needed to adjust the date of entry into application for MiFID II. The reasons for the urgency are linked to the need to establish new and extensive electronic data collection networks between trading venues, national regulators and ESMA. The new framework requires trading venues and systematic internalisers to provide competent authorities with financial instrument reference data that describes in a uniform manner the characteristics of every financial instrument subject to the scope of MiFID II. Additional data are also used for other purposes, in particular for the calculation of various liquidity and transparency thresholds used for on-venue trading of all financial instruments covered by MiFID as well as for positions reporting of commodity derivatives. In order to collect data in an efficient and harmonised manner, a new data collection infrastructure must be developed. This obliges ESMA, in conjunction with competent national authorities, to establish a Financial Instruments Reference Data System ('FIRDS'). FIRDS will need to cover the entire range of financial instruments that are included in the increased scope of MiFID II. In accomplishing this task, FIRDS will necessitate linking of data feeds between ESMA, NCAs and around 300 trading venues across the European Union. The vast majority of the new IT-systems underpinning FIRDS will need to be built from the ground, based on new parameters. The Commission recognises that as a result of the size and complexity of the data needed to be collected and processed for MiFID II to become operational, in particular for transaction reporting, transparency calculations and reporting of positions in commodity derivatives, neither stakeholders, such as trading platforms, nor NCAs nor ESMA are in a position to ensure that the necessary data collection infrastructures would be in place and become operational by 3 January 2017. Therefore, on 2 October 2015 ESMA informed the Commission that a delay in the technical implementation of MiFID II was unavoidable. 1.3. The scope of the proposal The absence of data has ramifications across multiple areas of MIFID II. As regards market regulation, it is clear that without the foundation of reference data (instrument ID) and the additional data infrastructures for transparency calculations and position reporting in place, it will not be possible to apply the majority of the market rules. In particular:  Transaction reporting : without reference data, there will be challenges to determine what instruments are within the scope. In addition, the necessary infrastructure for market participants to report to their competent authorities will not be available.  Transparency framework : the trade transparency rules for all financial instruments (equity as well as non-equity) cannot be established and applied. In addition, the calculations and thresholds for the liquidity assessment, waivers, deferred publication and, in the equity area, the double volume cap (which limits dark trading) cannot be established.  Commodity derivatives : in the absence of position reporting for commodity derivatives it will be very difficult to enforce position limits on such commodity derivative contracts. With no position reporting, there is a limited ability to effectively detect breaches of positon limits.  Microstructural regulation: many of the requirements in relation to algorithmic trading/high frequency trading are by their nature dependent on data. In particular, the key provisions on tick-size regime and the obligations in relation to market making obligations and schemes are also tailored on there being a liquid market as determined under the transparency framework. The investor protection rules, the conduct of business rules and certain associated organisational requirements under MIFID II will not be directly affected by the lack of data. The important exception is the rules on best execution , where the scope of the disclosure is designed by reference to there being a liquid market and other transparency concepts. For other investor protection rules, aside from issues relating to the definition of financial instruments or the scope of the legislation, data inter-linkages generally do not exist, as these rules directly concern distribution and not trading. It is, therefore, recognised that an alternative approach would be to extend the date of entry into application only for the parts of the legislation directly relating to data collection. However, after a careful analysis of that option, it appears that an extension for the whole package, including investor protection rules, as opposed to a staggered approach is preferable:  It avoids the risk of causing confusion and unnecessary costs that stakeholders would incur through a staggered implementation. Building various infrastructures simultaneously – as opposed to doing so in stages - would make the process more cost effective. For example, it avoids situations, where investment firms, involved in execution of orders, would have to set up organisational requirements/conduct rules in stages, which would be complicated, expensive and costly;  It avoids having to delineate between the areas that can be immediately implemented and those that cannot be, and, therefore, avoids the risk of causing unintended consequences which may not have been foreseen or sufficiently considered; and  It avoids the need for transitional rules, which by themselves would create new issues and divert resources of ESMA, NCAs and stakeholders from building the permanent framework. On the basis of the above considerations, extending the entry into application for the entire MiFID II rulebook is therefore necessary and justified. 1.4. Length of the extension An extension of one year should provide sufficient and reasonable time for ESMA, NCAs and operators to put in place the infrastructure for data collection, reporting and the transparency threshold calculations. There are five steps in the implementation process: (1) business requirements (which in this case are the necessary regulatory technical standards/implementing technical standards), (2) specifications, (3) development (4) testing and (5) deployment. ESMA estimates that it should complete these steps in relation to the reference data, transparency calculations and position reporting systems by January 2018. This assumes that there is sufficient legal clarity on the final requirements under the relevant regulatory technical standards by mid-2016. On this basis, the draft proposal therefore extends the entry into application of the whole framework until 3 January 2018 by one year. The extension of entry into application of the measures of the Member States transposing Directive 2014/65/EU should not impact adoption of delegated acts and technical standards to be developed under Directive 2014/65/EU. The Commission should adopt these measures in accordance with the procedure envisaged in order to allow the industry to set up and adjust internal systems to ensure compliance with new requirements on the date of entry into application of Directive 2014/65/EU.
Revised version (Article 45 Requirements for the management body of a market operator):
1. Member States shall require that all members of the management body of any market operator shall at all times be of sufficiently good repute, possess sufficient knowledge, skills and experience to perform their duties. The overall composition of the management body shall reflect an adequately broad range of experience. 2. Members of the management body shall, in particular, fulfil the following requirements: (a) All members of the management body shall commit sufficient time to perform their functions in the market operator. The number of directorships a member of the management body can hold, in any legal entity, at the same time shall take into account individual circumstances and the nature, scale and complexity of the market operator’s activities. Unless representing the Member State, members of the management body of market operators that are significant in terms of their size, internal organisation and the nature, the scope and the complexity of their activities shall not at the same time hold positions exceeding more than one of the following combinations: (i) one executive directorship with two non-executive directorships; (ii) four non-executive directorships. Executive or non-executive directorships held within the same group or undertakings where the market operator owns a qualifying holding shall be considered to be one single directorship. Competent authorities may authorise members of the management body to hold one additional non-executive directorship. Competent authorities shall regularly inform ESMA of such authorisations. Directorships in organisations which do not pursue predominantly commercial objectives shall be exempt from the limitation on the number of directorships a member of a management body can hold. (b) The management body shall possess adequate collective knowledge, skills and experience to be able to understand the market operator’s activities, including the main risks. (c) Each member of the management body shall act with honesty, integrity and independence of mind to effectively assess and challenge the decisions of the senior management where necessary and to effectively oversee and monitor decision-making. 3. Market operators shall devote adequate human and financial resources to the induction and training of members of the management body. 4. Member States shall ensure that market operators which are significant in terms of their size, internal organisation and the nature, scope and complexity of their activities establish a nomination committee composed of members of the management body who do not perform any executive function in the market operator concerned. The nomination committee shall carry out the following: (a) identify and recommend, for the approval of the management body or for approval of the general meeting, candidates to fill management body vacancies. In doing so, the nomination committee shall evaluate the balance of knowledge, skills, diversity and experience of the management body. Further, the committee shall prepare a description of the roles and capabilities for a particular appointment, and assess the time commitment expected. Furthermore, the nomination committee shall decide on a target for the representation of the underrepresented gender in the management body and prepare a policy on how to increase the number of the underrepresented gender in the management body in order to meet that target; (b) periodically, and at least annually, assess the structure, size, composition and performance of the management body, and make recommendations to the management body with regard to any changes; (c) periodically, and at least annually, assess the knowledge, skills and experience of individual members of the management body and of the management body collectively, and report to the management body accordingly; (d) periodically review the policy of the management body for selection and appointment of senior management and make recommendations to the management body. In performing its duties, the nomination committee shall, to the extent possible and on an ongoing basis, take account of the need to ensure that the management body’s decision making is not dominated by any one individual or small group of individuals in a manner that is detrimental to the interests of the market operator as a whole. In performing its duties, the nomination committee shall be able to use any forms of resources it deems appropriate, including external advice. Where, under national law, the management body does not have any competence in the process of selection and appointment of any of its members, this paragraph shall not apply. 5. Member States or competent authorities shall require market operators and their respective nomination committees to engage a broad set of qualities and competences when recruiting members to the management body and for that purpose to put in place a policy promoting diversity on the management body. 6. Member States shall ensure that the management body of a market operator defines and oversees the implementation of the governance arrangements that ensure effective and prudent management of an organisation, including the segregation of duties in the organisation and the prevention of conflicts of interest, and in a manner that promotes the integrity of the market. Member States shall ensure that the management body monitors and periodically assesses the effectiveness of the market operator’s governance arrangements and takes appropriate steps to address any deficiencies. Members of the management body shall have adequate access to information and documents which are needed to oversee and monitor management decision-making. 7. The competent authority shall refuse authorisation if it is not satisfied that the members of the management body of the market operator are of sufficiently good repute, possess sufficient knowledge, skills and experience and commit sufficient time to perform their functions, or if there are objective and demonstrable grounds for believing that the management body of the market operator may pose a threat to its effective, sound and prudent management and to the adequate consideration of the integrity of the market. Member States shall ensure that, in the process of authorisation of a regulated market, the person or persons who effectively direct the business and the operations of an already authorised regulated market in accordance with this Directive are deemed to comply with the requirements laid down in paragraph 1. 8. Member States shall require the market operator to notify the competent authority of the identity of all members of its management body and of any changes to its membership, along with all information needed to assess whether the market operator complies with paragraphs 1 to 5. 9. ESMA shall issue guidelines on the following: (a) the notion of sufficient time commitment of a member of the management body to perform that member’s functions, in relation to the individual circumstances and the nature, scale and complexity of activities of the market operator; (b) the notion of adequate collective knowledge, skills and experience of the management body as referred to in point (b) of paragraph 2; (c) the notions of honesty, integrity and independence of mind of a member of the management body as referred to in point (c) of paragraph 2; (d) the notion of adequate human and financial resources devoted to the induction and training of members of the management body as referred to in paragraph 3; (e) the notion of diversity to be taken into account for the selection of members of the management body as referred to in paragraph 5. ESMA shall issue those guidelines by 3 January 2016.
Article 46 Requirements relating to persons exercising significant influence over the management of the regulated market
1. Member States shall require the persons who are in a position to exercise, directly or indirectly, significant influence over the management of the regulated market to be suitable. 2. Member States shall require the market operator of the regulated market: (a) to provide the competent authority with, and to make public, information regarding the ownership of the regulated market and/or the market operator, and in particular, the identity and scale of interests of any parties in a position to exercise significant influence over the management; (b) to inform the competent authority of and to make public any transfer of ownership which gives rise to a change in the identity of the persons exercising significant influence over the operation of the regulated market. 3. The competent authority shall refuse to approve proposed changes to the controlling interests of the regulated market and/or the market operator where there are objective and demonstrable grounds for believing that they would pose a threat to the sound and prudent management of the regulated market.
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 46 Requirements relating to persons exercising significant influence over the management of the regulated market):
1. Member States shall require the persons who are in a position to exercise, directly or indirectly, significant influence over the management of the regulated market to be suitable. 2. Member States shall require the market operator of the regulated market: (a) to provide the competent authority with, and to make public, information regarding the ownership of the regulated market and/or the market operator, and in particular, the identity and scale of interests of any parties in a position to exercise significant influence over the management; (b) to inform the competent authority of and to make public any transfer of ownership which gives rise to a change in the identity of the persons exercising significant influence over the operation of the regulated market. Member States shall require the market operator of the regulated market: (a) to provide the competent authority with, and to make public, information regarding the ownership of the regulated market and/or the market operator, and in particular, the identity and scale of interests of any parties in a position to exercise significant influence over the management; (b) to inform the competent authority of and to make public any transfer of ownership which gives rise to a change in the identity of the persons exercising significant influence over the operation of the regulated market. 3. The competent authority shall refuse to approve proposed changes to the controlling interests of the regulated market and/or the market operator where there are objective and demonstrable grounds for believing that they would pose a threat to the sound and prudent management of the regulated market.
Article 47 Organisational requirements
1. Member States shall require the regulated market: (a) to have arrangements to identify clearly and manage the potential adverse consequences, for the operation of the regulated market or for its members or participants, of any conflict of interest between the interest of the regulated market, its owners or its market operator and the sound functioning of the regulated market, and in particular where such conflicts of interest might prove prejudicial to the accomplishment of any functions delegated to the regulated market by the competent authority; (b) to be adequately equipped to manage the risks to which it is exposed, to implement appropriate arrangements and systems to identify all significant risks to its operation, and to put in place effective measures to mitigate those risks; (c) to have arrangements for the sound management of the technical operations of the system, including the establishment of effective contingency arrangements to cope with risks of systems disruptions; (d) to have transparent and non-discretionary rules and procedures that provide for fair and orderly trading and establish objective criteria for the efficient execution of orders; (e) to have effective arrangements to facilitate the efficient and timely finalisation of the transactions executed under its systems; (f) to have available, at the time of authorisation and on an ongoing basis, sufficient financial resources to facilitate its orderly functioning, having regard to the nature and extent of the transactions concluded on the market and the range and degree of the risks to which it is exposed. 2. Member States shall not allow market operators to execute client orders against proprietary capital, or to engage in matched principal trading on any of the regulated markets they operate.
Amendment rationale: CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL · Reasons for and objectives of the proposal This proposal is part of a package of measures to further enable and support the potential of digital finance in terms of innovation and competition while mitigating the risks. It is in line with the Commission priorities to make Europe fit for the digital age and to build a future-ready economy that works for the people. The digital finance package includes a new Strategy on digital finance for the EU financial sector 1 with the aim to ensure that the EU embraces the digital revolution and drives it with innovative European firms in the lead, making the benefits of digital finance available to European consumers and businesses. In addition to this proposal, the package also includes a proposal for a regulation on markets in crypto assets 2 , a proposal for a regulation on a pilot regime for market infrastructures based on distributed ledger technology (DLT) 3 and a proposal for a regulation on digital operational resilience for the financial sector 4 . The reasons for, and objectives of, the two sets of legislative measures have been set out in the explanatory memoranda of the proposal for a regulation on a pilot regime for distributed ledger technology market infrastructures, proposal for a regulation on markets in crypto assets and proposal for a regulation on digital operational resilience, respectively, and apply here as well. The particular reasons for this proposal for a directive is that, in order to provide legal certainty as regards crypto assets and achieve the objectives of strengthening digital operational resilience, it is necessary to establish a temporary exemption for multilateral trading facilities and amend or clarify certain provisions in existing EU financial services directives. · Consistency with existing provisions in the policy area This proposal, similar to the proposals for regulation it accompanies, is part of a broader ongoing work at European and international level aimed at (i) strengthening the cybersecurity in financial services and address broader operational risks, and (ii) providing a clear, proportionate and enabling EU legal framework for crypto-asset service providers. · Consistency with other Union policies As stated by President von der Leyen in her Political Guidelines, 5 and set-out in the Communication ‘Shaping Europe’s digital future’, 6 it is crucial for Europe to reap all the benefits of the digital age and to strengthen its industry and innovation capacity, within safe and ethical boundaries. As regards crypto assets, this proposal is closely linked with wider Commission policies on blockchain technology, as crypto-assets, as the main application of blockchain technologies, are inextricably linked to the promotion of blockchain technology throughout Europe. As regards operational resilience, the European strategy for data 7 sets out four pillars - data protection, fundamental rights, safety and cyber-security - as essential pre-requisites for a society empowered by the use of data. A legislative framework strengthening the digital operational resilience of the Union’s financial entities is consistent with these policy objectives. The proposal would also support policies aimed at recovering from the coronavirus, as it would ensure that increased reliance on digital finance goes hand in hand with operational resilience. Both proposals also respond to calls from the CMU High-Level Forum to establish clear rules for the use of crypto asset (recommendation 7) and to put in place new rules on cyber resilience.
Revised version (Article 47 Organisational requirements):
2. Member States shall not allow market operators to execute client orders against proprietary capital, or to engage in matched principal trading on any of the regulated markets they operate.