On October 10, 2015, the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) informed that the planned implementation timeline for MiFID II will not hold, asking the European Commission to allow for a delay. This announcement started a harsh debate between ESMA and the European Commission. However, on February 10, the European Commission proposed a postponement of MiFID II by a year, setting the new target date at January 3, 2018. Even if the European Parliament and the member states must formally approve the proposal, the event of a delay is now almost a certainty.
There is also an apparent risk for even further delay. The deadline to convert the EU rules into law has been set to July 3, 2016. Currently, the Regulatory Technical Standards are not endorsed by the European Commission (or accepted by the Parliament and the Council), nor have the Delegated Acts been issued. This leaves very limited time for regulators to transpose the Directive into national law.
Even if the Regulatory Technical Standards and the Delegated Acts will be in place ”soon”, the time allowed for the national lawmakers may prove too short. One reason is that these documents are not detailed enough to convert into law, as they still leave room for interpretation, e.g. regarding the proposed Double Volume Caps on dark pool trading.
There is definitely a need for an interactive process between the local Competent Authorities and the industry in order to get the national law in place. Additionally, a stated goal of ESMA is to “promote supervisory convergence” to ensure a level playing field. For this purpose, there will be a comprehensive Level 3 process, where all the 28 Competent Authorities need to work together to supply QAs and guidelines.
In essence, the issue today is not whether MiFID II be delayed, but how, and for how long. There are at least three probable scenarios:
Risk & Compliance MiFID II marked a sea change in the approach to the handling of order, trade and transaction data. Rigorous new requirements around data capture, analysis, reporting and record-keeping made the communication of data a central theme in ensuring trading systems were MiFID II compliant, and connectivity – between external and internal systems, databases and processors […] August 14, 2018
Risk & Compliance Roughly six months after the introduction of MiFID II, Johannes Frey-Skött – VP Apps Engineering, Itiviti – talks to The TRADE about the short-term impact of the regulation on European market players, looking at both the positive and negative effects witnessed so far. He also outlines current pain points in MiFID II compliance and the […] July 17, 2018
Risk & Compliance With the pressure of initial implementation now a distant memory, MiFID II-regulated firms are turning their attention to the real work required to create sustainable long-term solutions. For many, the race to meet the January 3 deadline meant implementing temporary compliance processes that were far from perfect. Unless updated and improved, these could lead to […] July 10, 2018
Risk & Compliance What happens when one of the top 10 active brokers in Canada is confronted with: Stringent risk control requirements for electronic trading Time-to-market imperative to supersede TMX’ monitoring service termination Need to consolidate 14 internal trading platforms into a central gateway for enterprise-level risk management Optimization of latency and access speed for client connectivity Download […] June 26, 2018
By submitting this form, you acknowledge that data collected by us will be handled in accordance with our Privacy Notice.