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.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
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. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Hong Kong derivatives regime could drive more offshore booking
Industry warns new capital requirements for securities firms are higher than other jurisdictions
Will Iosco’s guidance solve pre-hedging puzzle?
Buy-siders doubt consent requirement will remove long-standing concerns
Responsible AI is about payoffs as much as principles
How one firm cut loan processing times and improved fraud detection without compromising on governance
Could one-off loan losses at US regional banks become systemic?
Investors bet Zions, Western Alliance are isolated problems, but credit risk managers are nervous
SEC poised to approve expansion of CME-FICC cross-margining
Agency’s new division heads moving swiftly on applications related to US Treasury clearing
ECB bank supervisors want top-down stress test that bites
Proposal would simplify capital structure with something similar to US stress capital buffer
Clearing houses warn Esma margin rules will stifle innovation
Changes in model confidence levels could still trip supervisory threshold even after relaxation in final RTS
BlackRock, Citadel Securities, Nasdaq mull tokenised equities’ impact on regulations
An SEC panel recently debated the ramifications of a future with tokenised equities