Mifir Legal Text
In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve those objectives. In order to facilitate the execution of one or more client orders for bonds, structured finance products, emission allowances and derivatives that have not been declared subject to netting in accordance with Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council (6), an OTF fund operator shall be allowed to engage in rigging account trading within the meaning of Directive 2014/65/EU, subject to the customer`s consent. Process. In respect of sovereign debt for which there is no liquid market, an investment firm or market operator operating an OTF should be able to engage in transactions other than trading the matched principal for its own account. When applying principal matched trading, all pre- and post-trade transparency requirements and best execution obligations must be met. The OTF operator or an entity belonging to the same group or legal person as the investment firm or market operator should not act as a systematic internaliser in the OTF it operates. In addition, the operator of an OTF should be subject to the same obligations as an MTF as regards the proper management of potential conflicts of interest. In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission in respect of the adoption of the Decision on the equivalence of the legal and supervisory framework of third countries for the provision of services by third-country firms or third-country trading venues for the purposes of admission as derivatives trading venues and access to third-country and third-country CCPs trading in trading. become.
Trading venues to trading venues and CCPs established in the Union. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council (17). In this section, we provide links to some of the most important EU texts related to the adoption and implementation of MiFID II. These texts are mentioned in our information notes on this microsite. 6. Articles 8, 10, 18 and 21 shall not apply to regulated markets, market operators and investment firms in respect of a transaction in which the counterparty is a member of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB) and where that transaction is concluded under a monetary, exchange rate and financial stability policy which that ESCB member is legally entitled to conduct and if that member has such a transaction and previously informed its counterparty. that the transaction is optional. Since the European Commission published its review of MiFID in 2010, there has been a steady stream of texts from the European institutions on MiFID II. For the system that crosses sales orders, the operator must be able to decide whether, when, and how many two or more orders to reconcile within the system. In accordance with Article 20(1), (2), (4) and (5) of Directive 2014/65/EU and without prejudice to Article 20(3) of Directive 2014/65/EU, the investment firm should be able to facilitate client-to-client negotiations with a view to combining two or more potentially compatible trading interests in the course of the same transaction. At both levels of discretion, the OTF operator shall take into account its obligations under Articles 18 and 27 of Directive 2014/65/EU. The market operator or investment firm operating an OTF should clearly indicate to the users of the trading venue how they will exercise their discretion.
Since an OTF is a genuine trading venue, the platform operator must be neutral. Therefore, the investment firm or market operator operating the OTF should be subject to non-discriminatory execution requirements and neither the investment firm nor the market operator operating the OTF should be subject to non-discriminatory execution requirements. operating the OTF, or an entity belonging to the same group or legal person as the investment firm or market operator, should not be allowed to execute client orders of an OTF against its capital. The new legislation should therefore consist of two different legal instruments, a Directive and this Regulation. Together, the two legal instruments should provide the legal framework for the requirements applicable to investment firms, regulated markets and data reporting services providers. This Regulation should therefore be read in conjunction with the Directive. The need to establish a single rulebook for all institutions with regard to certain requirements and to avoid possible regulatory arbitrage, as well as to provide market participants with greater legal certainty and regulatory complexity, justifies the use of a legal basis for the creation of a regulation. In order to eliminate barriers to trade and significant distortions of competition which remain due to differences in national laws and to avoid other likely barriers to trade and significant distortions of competition, it is therefore necessary to adopt a Regulation laying down uniform rules for all Member States. That directly applicable act aims to contribute decisively to the proper functioning of the internal market and should therefore be based on Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), as interpreted in accordance with the settled case-law of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Obvious errors in the definitions of “competent authority” and “structured filing” were corrected in July 2016 in corrections to the text (see here and here). Other minor corrections were made to the text of MiFID II on 10.
March 2017 (see here). Following a technical opinion from the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) and a public consultation, the European Commission (the Commission) published in 2011 legislative proposals to amend MiFID by transforming it into a new Directive (MiFID II1) and a new Regulation (MiFIR2). The legislative proposals have been the subject of intense political debate between the European Parliament, the Council of the EU and the Commission. An informal agreement was finally reached between the EU institutions in February 2014. The final texts of MiFID II and MiFIR were published in the Official Journal of the EU on 12 June 2014 and entered into force 20 days later, on 2 July 2014. It will enter into force 30 months after its entry into force on 3 January 2017. Details of transactions in financial instruments should be communicated to competent authorities to enable them to detect and investigate potential cases of market abuse in order to monitor the fair and orderly functioning of the markets and activities of investment firms. The scope of that supervision covers all financial instruments traded on a trading venue and financial instruments the underlying of which is a financial instrument traded on a trading venue or where the underlying is an index or basket of financial instruments traded on a trading venue.