Transparency Directive rules too complex, says ESME
The European Securities Markets Expert Group has released recommendations regarding the implemented Transparency Directive
BRUSSELS – The European Securities Markets Expert Group (ESME), created by the European Commission, has produced its first report on the European Union’s Transparency Directive.
The report is the first since the directive’s application by market participants, and provides an opportunity for a review, with recommendations to be applied in future.
ESME reports that the rules for the notification of major shareholdings are too complex and difficult to comply with. It says this is often due to the nature of holdings that count towards the disclosure requirement, the thresholds at which holdings must be disclosed, the time period in which a shareholder has to make the disclosure and to whom.
Another major finding is that the understanding and consequences of security lending vary between member states – leading to recommendations that the role of the Committee of European Securities Regulators (CESR) be expanded.
The report says CESR and the Commission need to further harmonise reporting timeframes, mechanics and thresholds, and that CESR should produce specific recommendations on reporting requirements, ensuring members provide proper and prompt guidance.
Other recommendations include that reporting should be electronic; there should be at least three days in which to file with the issuer or competent authority; supervisors should notify the public rather than the issuer; the Commission should adopt a right for companies to ask for shareholder identification; there should be a uniform threshold of at least 3%; and that notifications should be made at the end of the global trading day.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Printing this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Copying this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Revealed: the three EU banks applying for IMA approval
BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank and Intesa Sanpaolo ask ECB to use internal models for FRTB
FCA presses UK non-banks to put their affairs in order
Greater scrutiny of wind-down plans by regulator could alter capital and liquidity requirements
Industry calls for major rethink of Basel III rules
Isda AGM: Divergence on implementation suggests rules could be flawed, bankers say
Saudi Arabia poised to become clean netting jurisdiction
Isda AGM: Netting regulation awaiting final approvals from regulators
Japanese megabanks shun internal models as FRTB bites
Isda AGM: All in-scope banks opt for standardised approach to market risk; Nomura eyes IMA in 2025
CFTC chair backs easing of G-Sib surcharge in Basel endgame
Isda AGM: Fed’s proposed surcharge changes could hike client clearing cost by 80%
UK investment firms feeling the heat on prudential rules
Signs firms are falling behind FCA’s expectations on wind-down and liquidity risk management
The American way: a stress-test substitute for Basel’s IRRBB?
Bankers divided over new CCAR scenario designed to bridge supervisory gap exposed by SVB failure