natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
7. vítá rozhodnutí Komise provést hodnocení dopadů, které by mělo zahrnovat důkladnou analýzu možných nákladů a přínosů legislativních i nelegislativních opatření a rozsah jejich působnosti;
Welcomes the Commission decision to conduct an impact assessment which should include a thorough analysis of the potential costs and benefits of both legislative and non-legislative options, and their respective scope;
11. domnívá se, že pokud se Komise na základě výsledků studie hodnocení dopadů rozhodne pro legislativní úpravu, její návrh by se měl zaměřit zejména na:
Believes that if the Commission, on the basis of the results of the impact assessment study, does opt for legislation, its proposal should particularly focus on:
i) potvrzení a posílení přístupových práv za účelem zajištění spravedlivého a rovného přístupu k centrálním poskytovatelům služeb v oblasti zúčtování a vypořádání,
(i) re-confirming and strengthening access rights in order to ensure fair and non-discriminatory access to central clearing and settlement service providers;
ii) posílení práv držitelů oprávnění (jednotných pasů) k poskytování služeb v oblasti zúčtování a vypořádání, v případě nutnosti podpořené regulační konvergencí;
(ii) strengthening passporting rights for providers of clearing and settlement services supported, when needed, by regulatory convergence;
iii) zajištění transparentnosti a efektivního působení tržních sil;
(iii) allowing for transparency and enabling market forces to work effectively;
iv) dosažení konzistentnosti regulace, dohledu a transparentnosti, které umožní poskytovatelům služeb v oblasti zúčtování a vypořádání zvládat systémová rizika a protikonkurenční chování;
(iv) achieving consistency of regulation, supervision and transparency to enable providers of clearing and settlement services to manage systemic risk and anti-competitive behaviour;
v) zavedení funkčního přístupu k regulaci různých aktérů zohledňujícího různou povahu rizika a konkurenční situaci různých subjektů; a
(v) establishing a functional approach to the regulation of differentplayers, which takes into account the different risk profiles and competitive situations of different entities;
vi) zavedení definic, které jsou srozumitelné a konzistentní se stávajícími tržními postupy a s výrazy používanými na celém světě a v rámci EU;
(vi) introducing definitions that are coherent and consistent with existing market practices and with the terms used globally and within the EU;
Domnívá se, že snížení nákladů na přeshraniční zúčtování a vypořádání vyžaduje především odstranění 15 „Giovanniniho překážek“, pokud možno pomocí tržních mechanismů; požaduje, aby všechny subjekty, veřejné i soukromé, značně zvýšily své úsilí o jejich odstranění; podporuje Komisi v jejích snahách koordinovat tento projekt prostřednictvím skupiny CESAME;
Believes that bringing down the cost of cross-border clearing and settlement necessitates in particular the removal of the 15 "Giovannini barriers", through market mechanisms when possible; urges all entities, both public and private, to re-double their efforts to remove them; supports the Commission's efforts to coordinate this project via the CESAME Group;14.
14. obává se, že zaměření se na novou směrnici a nejistota, která by z toho vyplývala, by odváděly pozornost od snah odstranit Giovanniniho překážky (včetně významných investičních programů založených na široké shodě o vhodných technologiích); domnívá se, že v případě potřeby by si úprava měla jako svůj hlavní cíl stanovit odstranění těch právních a fiskálních překážek, které nelze odstranit bez zásahu veřejnoprávních orgánů;
Is concerned that focusing on a new directive, and the uncertainty this would involve, would be a distraction from efforts to remove the Giovannini barriers (including significant investment programmes, based on a broad consensus on appropriate technologies); believes that regulation should, if necessary, have as its primary goal the removal of those legal and fiscal barriers that cannot be removed without public intervention;
16. domnívá se, že fiskální překážky jsou důvodem vyšších nákladů na přeshraniční zúčtování a vypořádání; podporuje pokračující snahy o omezení těchto překážek; vítá vytvoření pracovní skupiny pro fiskální otázky, navrženou Komisí za účelem zahájení procesu koordinace a harmonizace v daňových záležitostech;
Believes that fiscal barriers are a reason for higher costs in cross-border clearing and settlement; supports ongoing attempts to reduce these barriers; welcomes the working group on fiscal issues, introduced by the Commission with a view to launching a process of coordination and harmonisation in tax matters;
Standardy CESR/ESCB
CESR/ESCB Standards
20. vyjadřuje politování nad načasováním přijetí standardů CESR-ESCB na dobu, kdy se posuzují opatření úrovně 1; znovu zdůrazňuje, že standardy Výboru evropských regulátorů na trzích s cennými papíry (CESR) nesmějí předurčovat opatření EU, ať již legislativní nebo nelegislativní povahy; důrazně požaduje rozsáhlé konzultace a transparentnost při zavádění standardů a domnívá se, že jejich uplatňování by mělo být odloženo alespoň do té doby, než Komise rozhodne, zda navrhne směrnici či nikoli; v každém případě zdůrazňuje, že bez ohledu na příspěvek CESR-ESCB, prvořadá odpovědnost a příslušnost v legislativní oblasti spočívá na evropském zákonodárci;
Regrets the timing of the adoption of CESR-ESCB standards during a period when Level 1 measures are under consideration; reaffirms that CESR standards must not pre-determine EU legislation, whether legislative or non-legislative; urges full consultation and transparency in the implementationof the standards and believes that implementation should be postponed at least until after the Commission has decided whether to propose a directive; points out that, in any case, whatever contribution is made by CESR-ESCB, the primary responsibility and competence for legislation in this sphere lies with the European legislator;
22. je přesvědčen, že pokud nebude navržena směrnice o zúčtování a vypořádání, musí se vytvořit alternativní prostředek kontroly CESR, kterým se zajistí účinný dohled parlamentu nad aktivitami úrovně 3; vyzývá všechny příslušné instituce a zainteresované strany, aby se zapojili do diskuse o tom, jakým způsobem lze tohoto cíle dosáhnout; uvádí tyto možnosti:
Believes that, if no directive is proposed on clearing and settlement, an effective alternative means of scrutinising CESR must be developed which ensures effective parliamentary oversight of Level 3 activities; calls on all relevant institutions and stakeholders to engage in a debate on how this might be achieved; notes the following ways in which this might be achieved:
(i) zajistit, aby se Evropskému parlamentu oznamovaly veškerá pověření zaslaná CESR, a rovněž zajistit, aby CESR Evropský parlament co nejdříve informoval o činnostech prováděných v oblasti úrovně 3, které se týkají politicky citlivých záležitostí;
(i) ensuring that notification is sent to the European Parliament of all mandates sent to CESR and also ensuring that CESR keeps the European Parliament informed, at the earliest possible stage, of work carried out at Level 3 on subjects which raise sensitive political issues;
(ii) rozvíjet a zvyšovat účinnost parlamentních slyšení za účasti zástupců CESR, s přísně křížově kladenými dotazy;
(ii) developing and enhancing the effectiveness of parliamentary hearings with representatives of CESR, with tough questioning and cross-examination;
(iii) petiční proces, jehož prostřednictvím mohou občané znepokojení určitými rozhodnutími CESR předkládat Hospodářskému a měnovému výboru formální stížnosti;
(iii) a petition process whereby citizens who are concerned about particular CESR decisions could make formal representations to the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs;
(iv) pravidelné písemné zprávy Výboru evropských regulátorů na trzích s cennými papíry (CESR) předkládané Hospodářskému a měnovému výboru;
(iv) submission of regular written reports by CESR to the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs;
5 KOM(2004) 312 v konečném znění, ze dne 28.4.2004 5 jasně neodlišují činnosti různých sektorů trhu a musí se výrazně zkvalitnit, bude-li navržena legislativní úprava;
COM(2004) 312 final, 28.4.2004 do not clearly distinguish between the activities of different sectors of the market and that they must be significantly improved if legislation is proposed;24.
24. uznává výhody úspor ze šíře nabídky a rozsahu, které může povolení koncentrace přinést ; poukazuje na to, že uživatelé zúčtovacích a vypořádacích služeb požadují konsolidaci již řadu let a od nedávné konsolidace se v případě, že bude řádně kontrolována, očekává, že v blízké budoucnosti přinese další výhody; je přesvědčen, že bez odpovídajícího legislativního a regulačního rámce nebude možné zajistit vyrovnané šance, potřebné k podpoře integrace;
Recognises the benefits of scale and scope that can flow from allowing concentration; notes that users of clearing and settlement services have been calling for consolidation for many years and that recent consolidation, if properly controlled, is expected to yield further benefits in the near future; believes that the absence of an appropriate legislative and regulatory framework does not allow for creation of the level playing field needed to foster integration;
26. souhlasí s tím, že některé části systému zúčtování a vypořádání zasluhují z pohledu politiky hospodářské soutěže důkladnější pozornost; uznává, že některé firmy mají na trhu zúčtovacích a vypořádacích služeb velký podíl, avšak že to samo o sobě nepůsobí protikonkurenčně; domnívá se, že pouze tam, kde je dominantního postavení zneužíváno v neprospěch klientů, je oprávněn zásah veřejné politiky;
Agrees that some parts of the clearing and settlement system industry deserve more careful attention from a competition policy perspective; recognises that certain firms have a large share of the market for clearing and settlement services but that this is not, in itself, anti-competitive; considers it is only where a dominant position is abused that customers suffer and public policy intervention is justified;
28. domnívá se, že účinná a transparentní rovná práva přístupu k zúčtovacím a vypořádacím službám jsou důležitá k zajištění konkurenceschopného integrovaného finančního trhu v EU; doporučuje využít možnosti aktivnějšího prosazování směrnice 2004/39/ES spolu s obezřetným využíváním obecných pravomocí Komise v oblasti hospodářské soutěže, aby se zajistilo, že omezení přístupu nebudou zneužívána z důvodů potlačení konkurence;
Believes that effective and transparent non-discriminatory access rights to clearing and settlement services are important in ensuring a competitive integrated financial market in the EU; recommends using the possibility of pro-active enforcement of Directive 2004/39/EC, along with vigilant use of the Commission’s general competition powers, to ensure access restrictions are not abused for anti-competitive reasons;
30. podporuje pokračující hodnocení dopadů, jež Komise provádí, aby posoudila potřebu legislativních opatření; podporuje názory Komise týkající se transparentnosti cenové struktury; poukazuje na to, že mohou vzniknout problémy s možností srovnání, pokud je několik nákladových položek sloučeno do jednoho tarifu; není přesvědčen o tom, že je nutné legislativně upravit oddělení „klíčových“ operací zúčtování a vypořádání a takzvaných služeb „přidané hodnoty“ za účelem legitimního řešení otázek týkajících se otevřené soutěže, nediskriminačního přístupu a zmírnění rizika; očekává, že návrhy Komise v této oblasti budou přiměřené zjištěným problémům na trhu;
Supports the ongoing impact assessment which the Commission is undertaking to assess the need for legislative measures; supports the Commission's ideas regarding the transparency of pricing structures; notes that comparability difficulties can arise if several cost components are combined together in a single tariff component; questions whether it is necessary to separate "core" clearing and settlement activities and so-called "value-added" services in order to address legitimate questions regarding free competition, non-discriminatory access and risk mitigation; expects the potential Commission's proposals in this area to be proportionate to problems identified in the market;
Clearing and settlement has been described as the "plumbing" of the financial markets – largely invisible, seldom understood and frequently overlooked but causes really unpleasant problems for everyone if it goes wrong.
Clearing and settlement has been described as the "plumbing" of the financial markets – largely invisible, seldom understood and frequently overlooked but causes really unpleasant problems for everyone if it goes wrong.
All recognise that getting clearing and settlement right is vital for safe, integrated and successful financial markets, but opinions differ sharply about how best to achieve this.
All recognise that getting clearing and settlement right is vital for safe, integrated and successful financial markets, but opinions differ sharply about how best to achieve this.
Domestic settlement services have been traditionally been carried out by Central Securities Depositories (“CSDs”) such as Crest in the UK and Sicovam in France.
Domestic settlement services have been traditionally been carried out by Central Securities Depositories (“CSDs”) such as Crest in the UK and Sicovam in France.
The 1970s saw the establishment of 2 International Central Securities Depositories ("ICSDs"), Euroclear in Belgium and Cedel in Luxembourg, to service the stateless Eurobond market.
The 1970s saw the establishment of 2 International Central Securities Depositories ("ICSDs"), Euroclear in Belgium and Cedel in Luxembourg, to service the stateless Eurobond market.
With the growth of cross border activity and mergers at the trading level, market participants starting calling for consolidation of clearing and settlement systems, seeing scale and systems integration as the best way to bring down costs.
With the growth of cross border activity and mergers at the trading level, market participants starting calling for consolidation of clearing and settlement systems, seeing scale and systems integration as the best way to bring down costs.
Clearstream was formed out of a merger of CEDEL and Deutsche Boerse Clearing in January 2000.
Clearstream was formed out of a merger of CEDEL and Deutsche Boerse Clearing in January 2000.
Euroclear subsequently bought the domestic CSDs in France, Netherlands and the UK/Ireland and is in the process of buying the Belgian CSD.
Euroclear subsequently bought the domestic CSDs in France, Netherlands and the UK/Ireland and is in the process of buying the Belgian CSD.
A vertical model has emerged in Germany and Italy where the stock exchanges own the clearing and settlement systems (DBAG-Clearstream and Borsa Italiana/Monte Titoli).
A vertical model has emerged in Germany and Italy where the stock exchanges own the clearing and settlement systems (DBAG-Clearstream and Borsa Italiana/Monte Titoli).
Across the Euronext zone, the UK and Ireland, there is a broadly horizontal model, where the ownership of exchanges and settlement systems are separate.
Across the Euronext zone, the UK and Ireland, there is a broadly horizontal model, where the ownership of exchanges and settlement systems are separate.
However, the lines between the two tend to be blurred because Euronext also has limited vertical holdings in clearing and settlement systems.
However, the lines between the two tend to be blurred because Euronext also has limited vertical holdings in clearing and settlement systems.
A varied pattern exists in Nordic, Central and Eastern Europe.
A varied pattern exists in Nordic, Central and Eastern Europe.
What is Clearing and Settlement?
What is Clearing and Settlement?
It is important to understand the separate activities making up the long value chain of buying and selling a security and transferring legal title to it and the different degrees of risk, cost and competition associated with each step.
It is important to understand the separate activities making up the long value chain of buying and selling a security and transferring legal title to it and the different degrees of risk, cost and competition associated with each step.
It is immensely difficult to formulate universally accepted definitions so it should be emphasised that the following is only a rough guide.
It is immensely difficult to formulate universally accepted definitions so it should be emphasised that the following is only a rough guide.
Clearing is the calculation of the mutual obligations of the parties to the transaction ie working out who owes what to whom.
Clearing is the calculation of the mutual obligations of the parties to the transaction ie working out who owes what to whom.
This should not be confused with the distinct and separate risk management activity whereby a central counterparty (or “CCP”) takes on the obligations agreed by the parties to the transaction and becomes the buyer to every seller and vice versa.
This should not be confused with the distinct and separate risk management activity whereby a central counterparty (or “CCP”) takes on the obligations agreed by the parties to the transaction and becomes the buyer to every seller and vice versa.
Although the exact definition is controversial, settlement generally involves the transfer of instruments and funds between the parties to the transaction.
Although the exact definition is controversial, settlement generally involves the transfer of instruments and funds between the parties to the transaction.
Thus settlement usually (though not invariably) involves the transfer of ownership.
Thus settlement usually (though not invariably) involves the transfer of ownership.
Custody covers safekeeping of physical securities, record keeping and asset servicing (eg receipt of dividends, interest payments and corporate actions (share repurchases etc)).
Custody covers safekeeping of physical securities, record keeping and asset servicing (eg receipt of dividends, interest payments and corporate actions (share repurchases etc)).
Custodian banks fall into 2 categories.
Custodian banks fall into 2 categories.
Local custodians (also known as sub-custodians or agent banks) are direct participants in the national CSD.
Local custodians (also known as sub-custodians or agent banks) are direct participants in the national CSD.
They play a very significant role as intermediaries, with many institutions choosing to access CSDs indirectly via a local custodian.
They play a very significant role as intermediaries, with many institutions choosing to access CSDs indirectly via a local custodian.
Some use local custodians because they themselves are not eligible to become a CSD member; others do so in order to outsource back office activity, particularly for cross border transactions where the complexity and fragmentation discussed below (under "Do we need a directive?") can often be managed more efficiently by a local specialist.
Some use local custodians because they themselves are not eligible to become a CSD member; others do so in order to outsource back office activity, particularly for cross border transactions where the complexity and fragmentation discussed below (under "Do we need a directive?") can often be managed more efficiently by a local specialist.
Global custodians provide customers with a single access points to different markets around the world.
Global custodians provide customers with a single access points to different markets around the world.
They are not generally members of CSDs but instead gain indirect access via a local custodian.
They are not generally members of CSDs but instead gain indirect access via a local custodian.
Do we need a new directive?
Do we need a new directive?
There is little evidence that provision of clearing and settlement services is inadequately regulated.
There is little evidence that provision of clearing and settlement services is inadequately regulated.
Rather than focusing on new legislation, our focus should be on bringing down the cost of cross border clearing and settlement, which is usually higher than for domestic transactions.
Rather than focusing on new legislation, our focus should be on bringing down the cost of cross border clearing and settlement, which is usually higher than for domestic transactions.
There is widespread consensus that the 15 barriers identified in the 2 Giovannini reports are the primary reasons for the higher relative costs of cross border clearing and settlement: these barriers cover differences in technical requirements, market practices, legal rules and tax procedures.
There is widespread consensus that the 15 barriers identified in the 2 Giovannini reports are the primary reasons for the higher relative costs of cross border clearing and settlement: these barriers cover differences in technical requirements, market practices, legal rules and tax procedures.
Removing the barriers could take years of difficult and detailed work by market participants, technicians, lawyers, regulators and public officials.
Removing the barriers could take years of difficult and detailed work by market participants, technicians, lawyers, regulators and public officials.
The Commission's focus should be on the work of the CESAME group in coordinating market led efforts to complete this challenging task.
The Commission's focus should be on the work of the CESAME group in coordinating market led efforts to complete this challenging task.
Removal of some of the barriers requires public sector action (for example regarding convergence of legal requirements and tax procedures) but we are at too early a stage of this project to know what, if any, legislation might be required and at what level.
Removal of some of the barriers requires public sector action (for example regarding convergence of legal requirements and tax procedures) but we are at too early a stage of this project to know what, if any, legislation might be required and at what level.
There is, as yet, no proven case for a new EU directive.
There is, as yet, no proven case for a new EU directive.
Embarking on legislation on competition, along the lines being considered by the Commission, may slow down progress on the Giovannini barriers.
Embarking on legislation on competition, along the lines being considered by the Commission, may slow down progress on the Giovannini barriers.
The focus of policy makers and market participants would inevitably be diverted from work on removing the barriers in order to concentrate on the battle over the directive.
The focus of policy makers and market participants would inevitably be diverted from work on removing the barriers in order to concentrate on the battle over the directive.
Following extensive work to develop a broad consensus on appropriate technology, very high levels of investment are now being made, aimed at making cross border settlement more efficient.
Following extensive work to develop a broad consensus on appropriate technology, very high levels of investment are now being made, aimed at making cross border settlement more efficient.
The uncertainty caused by a proposal for a directive may discourage and jeopardise this vital investment.
The uncertainty caused by a proposal for a directive may discourage and jeopardise this vital investment.
There are significant risks associated with the legislative option.
There are significant risks associated with the legislative option.
The polarisation of the current debate gives rise to the danger of the sort of political mishaps that have undermined the success of previous directives such as ISD2/MIFID.
The polarisation of the current debate gives rise to the danger of the sort of political mishaps that have undermined the success of previous directives such as ISD2/MIFID.