MiFID II Keynote Speech, PwC Breakfast Briefing MiFID II Are you Ready?

Similar documents
Closing keynote speech

MiFID II - Product Governance

Questions and Answers

2016 Work Programme. 29 January 2016 ESMA/2015/1475 rev.

Supervisory Convergence Work Programme 2018

Supervisory Convergence Work Programme 2017

Final report. Guidelines on remuneration policies and practices (MiFID) 11 June 2013 ESMA/2013/606

Summary of feedback received

DISCUSSION PAPER ON ACCESS TO SERVICE FACILITIES AND RAIL RELATED SERVICES

EBA/CP/2013/12 21 May Consultation Paper

Consultation Paper Draft Guidelines on Anti-Procyclicality Margin Measures for Central Counterparties

EBA FINAL draft Regulatory Technical Standards

Consultation paper. Guidelines on remuneration policies and practices (MiFID) September 2012 ESMA/2012/570

Suitability Themed Review

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING DECISION. of XXX

MiFID II. Overview: Transaction Reporting Riskcare Ltd. A Riskcare Service

Guidelines on the management body of market operators and data reporting services providers

on remuneration policies and practices related to the sale and provision of retail banking products and services

Strengthening accountability in banking: UK branches of foreign banks Feedback on ***FCA CP15/10 / PRA CP9/15

BLOOMBERG MiFID II SOLUTIONS

Commissioning Services from Community and Voluntary Sector

Guidance on the General Data Protection Regulation: (1) Getting started

Final report. Joint ESMA and EBA Guidelines

AFA Monitoring Report. July September 2012

CESR/06-669: THE PASSPORT UNDER MiFID ABI RESPONSE TO CESR CONSULTATION PAPER

Figure 1. The layers of New Zealand s biosecurity system and the scope of the GIA

ECB-PUBLIC OPINION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK. of 4 October 2017

Regulation fatigue: tackling the burden of regulatory compliance for asset management

GUIDELINES ON SOUND REMUNERATION POLICIES EBA/GL/2015/22 27/06/2016. Guidelines

VACANCY NOTICE SECONDED NATIONAL EXPERTS (DIFFERENT PROFILES) (F/M) REF.: ESMA/2018/VAC3/SNE

About Lloyds Banking Group

DISCUSSION PAPER ON ACCESS TO SERVICE FACILITIES AND RAIL RELATED SERVICES. Article 1. Subject matter

GDPR factsheet Key provisions and steps for compliance

Assistant Accountant Apprenticeship

Procurement Document

ESMA. 103 Rue de Grenelle Paris France

ICAEW Technical Release

CP ON GL ON MEASURES TO REDUCE OR REMOVE IMPEDIMENTS TO RESOLVABILITY EBA/CP/2014/15. 9 July Consultation Paper

PostNL group procedure

EBA/CP/2016/ December Consultation Paper. Draft Guidelines on supervision of significant branches

International Compliance Officer Training

MiFID II Product Governance: Guidelines on Information Exchange Between Manufacturers and Distributors

Strengthening Singapore s payment services through regulation

MiFID II: Its Impact on Retail Financial Services, and How to Comply

Summary of comments on CEIOPS-CP-34/09. Consultation Paper on the Draft Advice on Transparency and Accountability

RPL Policy and Procedures

Brexit: considerations for your Internal Audit operating model

White Paper. The Impact of MiFID II and MAR on Communications Compliance

Feedback Statement and Impact Assessment. Professional discipline. Financial Reporting Council. April 2016

BT s response to Ofcom consultation document. Price Rises in Fixed Term Contracts

Final Report. Guidelines. on internal governance under Directive 2013/36/EU EBA/GL/2017/ September 2017

August THE APPOINTMENT OF THE AUDITOR AND THE DURATION OF THE AUDIT ENGAGEMENT: Striving for a Workable Single Market in the EU

What does it mean for you?

TABLE OF CONTENTS WATER SERVICES ASSOCIATION OF AUSTRALIA PROCESS BENCHMARKING AUDIT PROTOCOLS COPYRIGHT:... 3

Human Resources Audit. XYZ Group

Customer Data Protection. Temenos module for the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)

The Sage quick start guide for businesses

Singapore s regulatory sandbox new consultation

James Cook University. Internal Audit Protocol

British Bankers Association response to EBA consultation on Recovery Planning Templates

Senior management arrangements, Systems and Controls

Post-Trading Consultative Working Group (PTCWG)

Functional Skills in English Speaking, Listening and Communication Level 1 Controlled Internal Assessment Centre Guidance

Supervision of Persons who are not Limited Certificate Holders

INVITATION TO TENDER (ITT) TENDER RETURN DATE AND TIME (DEADLINE): 12 APRIL pm

The Commission s Financial Services Policy

Independent Regulators Group Rail. IRG Rail

CAMBRIDGESHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL SAFETY OF SPORTS GROUNDS FUNCTION POLICY DOCUMENT

ICAEW REPRESENTATION 09/16

ARTICLE 29 Data Protection Working Party

CP ON DRAFT GL ON SUPPORT MEASURES EBA/CP/2014/17. 9 July Consultation Paper

GUIDANCE NOTE FOR DEPOSIT TAKERS (Class 1(1) and Class 1(2))

Recruitment and Appointment Policy Responsible Officer. Executive Director, Human Resources Approved by

Zurich, January Overview of MiFID II. Impacts on your business and operating model

MSRB Notice. Request for Input on Draft Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Rule G-42 and the Making of Recommendations

Temporary Storage Facilities Manual

Measuring your approach MiFID II Paper: Product Governance and Distributor Governance Rules

COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION. Brussels, 22 November /13. Interinstitutional File: 2013/0027 (COD)

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL

FinTech and cloud in banking

DRAFT MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION

Conduct of Business Sourcebook. Chapter 10. Appropriateness (for non- MiFID non-advised services) (non-mifid provisions)

Consultation Paper. Draft Implementing Technical Standards

OFFICE OF THE DATA PROTECTION COMMISSIONER. Official Languages Act Language Scheme

The Auditor s Response to the Risks of Material Misstatement Posed by Estimates of Expected Credit Losses under IFRS 9

COMMITTEE FOR PROPRIETARY MEDICINAL PRODUCTS (CPMP) POSITION PAPER ON COMPLIANCE WITH PHARMACOVIGILANCE REGULATORY OBLIGATIONS

Regulatory Guide: FAA 01.2 [September 2010] QFE ADVISER BUSINESS STATEMENT GUIDE

TECHNICAL RELEASE TECH 05/14BL. Data Protection Handling information provided by clients

European Parliament resolution of 8 March 2011 on the revision of the General Product Safety Directive and market surveillance (2010/2085(INI))

QUALIFICATION HANDBOOK

Australian Financial Markets Association. Principles relating to product approval - retail structured financial products

Senior Management Regime: Statement of Responsibilities (Third Country Relevant Authorised Persons only)

Parliament of Romania Chamber of Deputies Committee for information technologies and communications

Annual peer review of EU CCP supervision Supervisory activities on CCPs Default Management Procedures

Lexcel: 2004 A Practical Guide for Sole Practitioners

Keep up-to-date. Invest in your future.

Ref: IASB and IFRS Interpretations Committee Due Process Handbook

SAI Global Full Service Team

HAUC England Advice Note No. 2014/02. Code of Practice for Inspections: Defects Not Causing Danger Inspections ENGLAND

CESR CALL FOR EVIDENCE IMPLEMENTING MEASURES FOR THE DIRECTIVE ON FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS MARKETS RESPONSE OF AFEI

Transcription:

MiFID II Keynote Speech, PwC Breakfast Briefing MiFID II Are you Ready? 28.06.17. Denise Murray, Head of Asset Management: Authorisation and Inspection Division Introduction Good morning Ladies and Gentlemen. It is a pleasure to be here this morning and I would like to thank PwC for the opportunity to speak with you on the challenges and opportunities that MiFID II presents. As we move into the final 6 months of preparations, the Central Bank maintains its commitment to engage with industry, outline our expectations and gauge preparedness for business in the MiFID II world. Today I would like to focus on four areas: An update on the Central Bank s own approach to MiFID II implementation; Industry s preparedness; A brief summary of some of the relevant European Security Markets Authority s (ESMA) initiatives; and Finally, I will mention the potential impact of MiFID II on Irish Firms which do not currently need but which may require authorisation as a result of MiFID II. As I begin I d like to reflect for one moment on what MiFID II/MiFIR seek to achieve the changes proposed are fundamentally rooted in common sense. They look to achieve more stable, transparent financial markets; to protect investors and to improve client outcomes. Few of us here today would disagree with these objectives. As you are all no doubt very much aware, MiFID II represents the most substantial overhaul of EU legislation for markets in financial instruments in more than a decade. It presents a major implementation challenge for firms and Competent Authorities across Europe. 1

The go live date of 3 January 2018 is fast approaching and as the, the Chair of ESMA 1, Steven Maijoor has recently again confirmed there will be no further extensions to the implementation deadline. The last 10 years have been unprecedented in the history of financial markets. The world initially faced a financial crisis, followed by an economic crisis, and since then there has been considerable focus to bring our economies back on a sustainable growth path. MiFID II/MiFIR are key reform measures, and the most significant piece of level 2 regulation that has ever been undertaken by ESMA. Since 2014, ESMA has been delivering technical advice to the European Commission. In addition, it has issued 47 level two texts covering issues ranging from market microstructure, pre and post-trade transparency, commodity derivatives to authorisations procedures and investor protection. The level two texts were drafted following consultations with stakeholders and with the input of Competent Authority experts, including many colleagues from the Central Bank. The impact that MiFID II will have on the asset management industry cannot be understated. Firms should fully understand the effect this legislation will have both on their businesses and on the industry as a whole. The landscape is set to change and our asset management industry must stand ready to adapt. As, Michael Hodson, the Central Bank s Director of the Asset Management Supervision 2, has previously stated, firms that proactively manage regulatory amendments tend to create opportunities that elude firms who view implementation as merely a compliance task. Furthermore, firms who willingly engage and adapt are those who benefit most. 1 Steven Maijoor speech at Futures Industry Association IDX Conference, London, 7 June 2017 2 KPMG Seminar - Michael Hodson, Director of Asset Management Supervision 7 February 2017 2

Topic One: An update on the preparations of the Central Bank Now I would like to discuss the first of the four areas I want to focus on today, the Central Bank s preparedness for MiFID II. As I mentioned earlier, the implementation of MiFID II is a major challenge for industry and Competent Authorities. I would like to share with you some of the initiatives that our Asset Management Supervision Directorate has undertaken since 2015: At the outset, we established an internal MiFID II Implementation Project that has undertaken a review of the primary legislation and all published level 2 & 3 texts. This has comprised of some 152 Articles and as I mentioned already, 47 level two texts, several sets of Guidelines and Q&As. It has involved not just the Asset Management Supervision Directorate resources but also significant staff resources across the organisation. We have augmented our supervision system to accommodate the new rules. In Q1 and Q2 of this year our MiFID II subject matter experts provided in-depth training to staff on the key changes MiFID II will bring and on how these changes will affect the firms we supervise. This training ensures that our supervisors understand the new regime, allowing them to provide robust challenge to firms in the lead up to implementation and when the new rules come into play. Supervisors issued a MiFID II questionnaire to all regulated firms in March, which posed a number of questions on their implementation of MiFID II. The purpose of this exercise was to give us an industry wide snapshot of firms preparedness. Supervisors have had a number of follow up engagements with firms as a result of this exercise. Additionally, we have undertaken a heat-mapping exercise to establish how the new rules will affect the business models of the firms we currently supervise. These heatmaps, along with the outcomes of the MiFID II questionnaire, are currently being used to guide engagements between Supervisors and our Medium High and Medium Low Impact Asset Management Firms. 3

I will address the general findings of the heat-mapping exercise in a few moments. Engagement with industry was a key priority for our implementation programme. We are and will continue to participate in industry engagements like this one today, and Central Bank representatives have been speaking at a number of MiFID II round tables and conferences since 2015. At an EU level, our ESMA representatives are engaged in the negotiation and finalisation of various ESMA measures and we continue to provide technical advice to the Department of Finance as it enters final preparations for the transposition of MiFID II into Irish Law. Another area, which will see significant change, is Transaction Reporting. As you know, a standardised reporting regime is provided for across Europe, with new standards and formats prescribed in legislation. To that end, the Central Bank is building and enhancing its systems to receive, validate, store, and exchange transaction reports with other Competent Authorities. We have a number of projects in train to manage these significant IT developments. The Central Bank has issued communications (which are available on our website) regarding the operational and technical arrangements, for submitting transaction reports and the proposed testing timeframes. Under MiFID II, Competent and European Supervisory Authorities will have the power to prohibit or restrict the sale of any financial instrument or structured deposit that causes serious concerns regarding investor protection, orderly functioning of the market or the stability of the financial system. Interventions may take the form of restricting how products can be marketed, distributed or sold to certain client groups. The powers also allow Competent Authorities and the European Supervisory Authorities to prohibit or restrict types of financial activities or practices carried out by those firms within the scope of the legislation. 4

The Central Bank recently published a Consultation Paper on the protection of retail investors in relation to the distribution of Contracts for Difference. The Central Bank has engaged extensively with industry on this topic, and we are participating at European level, where there has been an ever-increasing focus on this matter with many Competent Authorities taking action. We are the first Competent Authority in Europe to consult on the potential use of this new product intervention supervisory power. The Consultation closed on 29 May and we received a number of responses, which we are currently considering. Topic Two: Firms preparedness Having discussed with you how the Central Bank has prepared and continues to prepare for MiFID II implementation, I would now like to move closer to home and speak to firms preparedness. The Central Bank expects that firms are now well advanced in their MiFID II implementation projects; in particular, we expect that there has been considerable advances by those firms, which did not have a project plan in place when we issued our industry questionnaire in March. As I mentioned previously our supervisory teams are using heat-maps to inform their engagement with firms, we have focused on the potential impact of MiFID II on business models. We have initially prioritised meetings with the compliance officers of the higher impact firms. One of the most notable outputs from this exercise was that firms and the Central Bank were very much aligned in terms of the key impacts of MiFID II. Additionally, it is clear that industry is working hard to be compliant on the implementation deadline, by for example, increasing dedicated MiFID II resources. It may be worth flagging some of the general themes, which emerged from this exercise: 5

Some firms noted that despite the fact that they have significant MIFID II budgets, they shall face time pressures to ensure that all systems and processes are fully compliant by the implementation deadline. Some firms, which are part of wider international groups, have broader group-wide MiFID II projects and have the additional challenge of ensuring that the Irish firms take appropriate steps to implement and ultimately own MiFID II initiatives at a local level. The majority of the firms we engaged with have indicated that they will provide nonindependent advice only. The firms that have indicated that they intend to provide both, independent and non-independent advice have outlined that they will have the required processes in place for implementation. MiFID II also introduced product governance requirements for firms who manufacture or distribute financial products. Throughout the heat-map engagements, questions arose as to the practicalities of the manufacturer s responsibility to perform a target market assessment. However, the recent publication of ESMA s guidelines on 2 June, which are focussed on this assessment process, should address these queries. Supervisors had a lot of discussions with firms on the new rules in relation to investment research. On the Buy-side, the issues, which we discussed, included whether firms will pay for research directly or establish Research Payment Accounts (RPAs). Whilst on the Sell-side firms have advised that they still need to determine whether they will pay for research or if the cost shall be passed on to their clients. Firms through the heat mapping exercise also drew attention to the changes MiFID II brings to the concept of the Systematic Internaliser and the new Organised Trading Facility or OTF. In the market infrastructure space, firms are coming to terms with for example pretrade transparency requirements, waivers and the Double Volume Cap. Firms that operate such venues are currently having their waiver applications assessed by ESMA. As the scope of transaction reporting requirements has been extended to include firms who receive and transmit orders. Some firms have highlighted uncertainty in 6

relation to the extent of their responsibilities and whether or not they can avail of exemptions outlined in the level 2 texts. Other challenges that firms are facing include uncertainty as to whether or not brokers will transaction report on their behalf, or whether they will need to engage the services of an Approved Reporting Mechanism (ARM). Some firms were not as advanced in their decision-making as we would have expected, in relation to how the enhanced transaction and indeed trade reporting responsibilities are going to be managed. In terms of our next steps, having completed the first phase of the MiFID II heat-map project, supervisors will utilise the outputs from these meetings, to further frame engagement with firms throughout the second half of 2017 and into 2018. The heat-map project will also continue for the remainder of the year, with supervisors meeting with firms not as heavily impacted by the new legislation as those included in the initial phase. Topic Three: Brief summary of some of the relevant European Security Markets Authority s initiatives Turning to the third topic, which centres on updates from ESMA. As the Central Bank remains fully committed to the principle of supervisory convergence, we engage with and rely on ESMA to produce the level 2 and level 3 guidance on all aspects of MiFID. The Central Bank will therefore not be issuing guidance on particular areas of MiFID II over and above what is provided by ESMA. ESMA has made significant progress over the last number of months, undertaking a broad range of activities aimed at supporting market participants and competent authorities in their preparations for implementation. This has included work on providing Q&As across a broad range of issues related to transparency requirements, commodity derivatives, data reporting and market structures topics. 7

14 Q&As were recently added covering information on costs and charges, post-sale reporting, and appropriateness. I also want to remind firms that ESMA has launched its Q&A tool, which allows interested stakeholders to submit questions directly for consideration. This is an excellent resource and we encourage you to take advantage of this direct line to ESMA. The Q&As will continue to be updated with the aim of promoting common supervisory approaches and practices. ESMA has also submitted two draft regulatory technical standards on package orders and the non-equity consolidated tape to the European Commission. These level two texts are expected to be adopted in the coming weeks. Additionally, ESMA has published opinions on transparency and position limit regimes for instruments traded on non-eu trading venues. These opinions should: Clarify which transactions executed on non-eu trading venues will be subject to the post-trade transparency rules; and Whether positions held in contracts traded on non-eu trading venues will be subject to the position limits regime. ESMA has devised the procedures described in the opinions to provide legal certainty to market participants and to find a pragmatic way forward in two highly technical areas of MiFID II/MIFIR framework. ESMA has also published an opinion clarifying the concept of Traded on a Trading Venue, in particular for OTC-derivatives, following many requests for clarifications from stakeholders. Again, the opinion provides for, a pragmatic approach ensuring that MiFID II/MIFIR are implemented in an expedient manner. And I might take this opportunity to remind you that the Central Bank continues to communicate significant EU and domestic developments in relation to MiFID II to industry via its Markets Update bulletin. Interested parties can subscribe to receive this publication on the Central Bank s website. 8

Topic Four: Unauthorised Business Before I conclude, I would like to spend a few moments speaking about the expanded scope of MiFID II and in doing so draw industry s attention to the possibility that this may necessitate some firms requiring the Central Bank s authorisation on the implementation deadline. The Central Bank is responsible for preventing unauthorised financial services business. It is a criminal offence for an unauthorised firm or person to provide financial services in Ireland that require authorisation under legislation. MiFID II removes and narrows certain exemptions from authorisation that were available under MiFID. A full discussion of this is outside the scope of today s speech but I would like to draw the wider market s attention and in particular those proprietary traders and other businesses that deal in financial instruments on their own account in the course of an otherwise unregulated business model. If you are unsure as to whether or not your firm s activities fall within the scope of MiFID II, you should consult legal representatives who are familiar with the regime. The Central Bank expects firms who require authorisation from the implementation deadline to apply in sufficient time so that applications can be assessed and a determination made prior to 3 January 2018. Additionally, under MiFID II, the Ancillary Activity Exemption continues to apply for firms whose investment services and activities are ancillary to the business of the main group; but this exemption has significantly narrowed. MiFID II places an obligation on all firms who wish to take advantage of the Ancillary Activity Exemption to notify the Central Bank that they make use of the exemption. Notification forms are available on the Central Bank s website as are all MiFID application forms. 9

We are asking all firms who come within the scope of this exemption to submit this notification in good time. I want to urge all firms who currently engage in investment services or activities but who, because of the exemptions under MiFID, have not applied for authorisation, to review their activities in light of MiFID II. For those firms operating in this space, the Central Bank is warning that firms must have a valid authorisation or completed the notification process to comply with MiFID II. 10

Conclusion Key Messages To conclude, I want to reiterate that, yes MiFID II represents the most substantial overhaul of EU legislation for markets in financial instruments in more than a decade. But at its core is the key objective of making financial markets more stable, transparent and cognisant of investor protection obligations, which will ultimately benefit all of us; regulators, firms and clients alike. The key messages, which I hope you all take away from my remarks this morning, are: We understand the challenge that MiFID II has presented to your businesses, as competent authorities have had similar challenges to overcome. However, as I stated earlier there will be no further extensions to the implementation date. We expect Irish firms to: Be fully resourced to meet their regulatory obligations; Be advanced in terms of implementing their project plans, with key decisions made at this point; and Have fully considered the implications of MiFID II on their businesses and have made the changes to their systems, policies and procedures. It is currently not our intention to issue guidance to industry beyond what is produced by ESMA. This aligns with the Central Bank s approach to supervisory convergence. We strongly urge firms, which may not currently require a MiFID authorisation to consider the impact of MiFID II. Firms, which require authorisation or to complete the notification process, should apply in good time to the Central Bank so that we may review applications by 3 January 2018. Finally, I would like to thank you for your attention this morning and your continued engagement on this topic. MiFID II will bring momentous and positive change to financial 11

services taking advantage of this change will bring opportunities and give the best chance of success in the new regulatory regime. 12