MiFID under review: European Commission consultation | Practical Law

MiFID under review: European Commission consultation | Practical Law

The Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (2004/39/EC) is currently under review. The consultation covers a wide range of subjects, and there are a number of surprises in it.

MiFID under review: European Commission consultation

Practical Law UK Articles 8-504-5674 (Approx. 4 pages)

MiFID under review: European Commission consultation

by Stephen Fletcher and Kirsty Gibson, Linklaters LLP
Published on 26 Jan 2011European Union, United Kingdom
The Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (2004/39/EC) is currently under review. The consultation covers a wide range of subjects, and there are a number of surprises in it.
The Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (2004/39/EC) (MiFID) is currently under review (see box "Background on MiFID"). Following a number of consultations, the Committee of European Securities Regulators (CESR) provided technical advice to the European Commission (the Commission) recommending possible revisions to MiFID in July 2010 and October 2010 (www.practicallaw.com/9-504-0384) (the technical advice). As a result, the Commission is now consulting on amendments to MiFID (the consultation).
The consultation covers a wide range of subjects, and there are a number of surprises in it where the Commission has taken an approach contrary to CESR's recommendations, or has made an entirely new proposal not covered by CESR's work.

Financial markets

The Commission is proposing to amend MiFID to take into account the new types of trading facilities, technological advances and methods of execution that exist in the post-MiFID world, but which are not currently regulated under MiFID.
Organised trading facilities. The Commission is looking to regulate organised trading facilities such as broker crossing systems and inter-dealer broker systems that bring together third-party interests and orders. This proposal is intended to capture operators of "dark pools" (for example, trading systems where there is no pre-trade transparency of orders in the system), which have attracted much regulatory interest. The proposals would exclude systems already regulated as regulated markets (RMs), multilateral trading facilities (MTFs) or systematic internalisers (SIs), and pure ad hoc over-the-counter (OTC) trading.
Automated trading. The Commission is taking a more interventionist approach than CESR to automated trading in response to perceived risks to the EU markets posed by automated and high frequency trading (HFT), and is proposing that MiFID be amended to provide a broad definition of automated trading (for background, see News brief “High frequency trading: the road to regulation). HFT would be treated as a sub-category of this definition, and all persons involved in HFT over certain thresholds would be required to be authorised under MiFID.
MTFs and RMs. In keeping with the technical advice, and in response to concerns that MTFs are in some cases subject to a lighter regime than RMs (though competing in the same space), leading to an unlevel playing field, the Commission is proposing to align the organisational requirements in this situation.
Systematic internalisers. The Commission is proposing to amend MiFID to provide more objective criteria for determining when a firm is an SI and imposing more quote requirements (an SI is an investment firm which, on an organised, frequent and systematic basis, deals on own account by executing client orders outside a regulated market or an MTF). This is in response to concerns that the low number of firms registered as SIs is due to a lack of clarity in the definition.

OTC derivatives trading

The consultation and proposed amendments to MiFID form part of the wider package of reforms of EU financial services and, in relation to OTC derivatives, should be read alongside the Commission's proposals for a regulation on OTC derivatives, central counterparties and trade repositories and for a regulation on short selling and certain credit default swaps.
The Commission, in keeping with US requirements in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, is proposing a mandatory requirement for all clearing-eligible and sufficiently liquid derivatives contracts (as determined by the European Securities and Markets Authority), to be traded on an RM, an MTF or an organised trading facility.
The consultation also includes proposals for the extension of the MiFID pre- and post-trade transparency regime to all derivatives contracts when traded on an organised trading venue and also when traded OTC.

Transparency

Following on from a considerable body of work by CESR assessing pre- and post-trade transparency in equity and non-equity markets, the Commission's proposals include the following:
  • Extending the transparency requirements to non-equity instruments, whether traded on RMs, MTFs, organised trading facilities or OTC. This would apply to all bonds and structured products with a prospectus or admitted to trading on an RM, MTF or OTF, and all derivatives eligible for central clearing.
  • Extending the pre- and post-trade transparency requirements to equity-like instruments, such as depositary receipts, exchange-traded funds and certificates issued by companies.

Commodity derivatives

The proposed revisions relating to the functioning of the commodity derivatives markets include imposing a position reporting obligation on organised trading venues which admit commodity derivatives, and narrowing the commodity derivatives exemptions in MiFID available to commercial users.

Transaction reporting

The Commission’s proposals include extending the transaction reporting (TR) regime to all instruments admitted to, and whose value correlates with the value of a financial instrument traded on, an RM, an MTF or an organised trading facility, as well as to commodity derivatives that are not admitted to trading or traded on an RM, an MTF or an organised trading facility. This is to bring the TR regime more in line with the scope of the Market Abuse Directive (2003/6/EC), since market supervision is the main purpose of the TR regime.

SME markets

The Commission also proposes introducing provisions to enable regulated markets and MTFs to create specialised SME markets.

Investor protection and intermediaries

In light of the financial crisis and a number of alleged mis-selling cases, the Commission believes that a revision of provisions relating to the scope of MiFID, the conduct of business rules and the authorisation and organisational provisions is necessary.
The Commission is proposing:
  • Clarifying the conditions that must be satisfied to qualify for an exemption from the appropriateness requirements when providing execution-only services in relation to non-complex products. The Commission is proposing two options: one where the existing MiFID conditions (for example, differentiating the categories of money market instruments) are modified (Article 19(6), MiFID); or one where the exemption is abolished altogether.
  • Making a number of modifications to the inducements regime (not anticipated by CESR work in this area), including abolishing the possibility of disclosing inducements in summary form and imposing an ex-post reporting obligation where the ex-ante disclosure referred to methods of calculating inducements.
  • Modifying MiFID to strengthen the fit and proper criteria, and clarifying its application to executive and non-executive directors.
  • Amending MiFID to provide more detailed and tailored requirements for the services of underwriting and placing.

Client categorisation

Controversially, the Commission is reversing the position that CESR took in relation to some client categorisation issues, including proposing:
  • Modifying MiFID to limit the availability of the eligible counterparty (ECP) regime in certain circumstances; in particular, to exclude transactions in complex products (such as asset-backed securities and non-standard OTC derivatives) and to exclude non-financial undertakings and certain financial institutions from the ECP regime (for example, based on size of the institution or on the nature of the business).
  • Amending MiFID to abolish the presumption that professional clients have the necessary level of knowledge or experience, or to limit the presumption to less complex financial instruments; this will impose a more rigorous assessment of suitability or appropriateness for professional clients.
  • Prohibiting local authorities from being classified as ECPs or per se professional clients.

Next steps

The consultation closes on 2 February 2011, which does not give firms much time to respond. The Commission proposes to publish legislative proposals for adoption in spring 2011.
Stephen Fletcher is a partner, and Kirsty Gibson is a managing PSL, in Linklaters LLP’s Financial Regulation Group. The consultation is at http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consultations/docs/ 2010/mifid/consultation_paper_en.pdf.

Background on MiFID

The Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID) came into force on 1 November 2007 (it comprises three main pieces of legislation: the Level 1 Directive (2004/39/EC), the Level 2 Directive (2006/73/EC) and Regulation 1287/2006/EC). It is designed to foster competition and a level playing field between the EEA's trading venues for financial instruments, and to ensure appropriate levels of protections for investors and consumers of investment services across the EEA.
(For a feature article on MiFID, see "MiFID: a changing environment for EU financial services".)