“AFME is concerned with the rigid approach the Council has adopted to bond market transparency. These policy changes are not justified by any data analysis and, as a result, there is a significant risk that liquidity provision in illiquid or large sized bond trades could be hampered...."
The Association for Financial Markets in Europe (AFME) has today
issued a comment in response to the European Council agreement on the MiFIR proposal to strengthen market transparency.
Adam Farkas, Chief Executive of AFME, said: “This
is a milestone agreement which moves forward negotiations on MiFIR – a
regulation which governs how secondary markets function in the EU and
which is fundamental for their competitiveness and attracting
investments within and into the EU. While we still need to understand
the details of the Council agreement, the progress made is clearly a
step in the right direction and we commend the Czech Presidency’s hard
work for getting this over the line.
“AFME members in particular welcome the progress made by Member
States in reaching this agreement by recognising the need for investor
choice in equities trading mechanisms which will allow for cheaper and
more efficient execution to be delivered to end investors. However,
imposing artificial limitations on investors’ choice by maintaining a
hard volume cap in the level one framework may still hinder the EU’s
ability to attract global investors to its markets.
“AFME is concerned with the rigid approach the Council has
adopted to bond market transparency. These policy changes are not
justified by any data analysis and, as a result, there is a significant
risk that liquidity provision in illiquid or large sized bond trades
could be hampered. The Council’s approach removes the possibility for
flexibility to be allowed during periods of stress where investors’
demand for liquidity can spike significantly. It represents another
constraint on market makers, which are already subject to strict
regulatory limitations on the use of their balance sheets for liquidity
provision.
“Going forward, AFME would urge the European Parliament to follow
suit in agreeing its own position, ensuring that it keeps the
attractiveness of EU fixed income and equity markets for investors at
the forefront of its considerations. AFME also suggests that it
carefully reviews the potential negative impact of hard coding deferral
periods for bonds into level one legislation. As an alternative
approach, AFME would encourage the Parliament to consider delegating
greater powers to supervisory authorities, which should adopt a data
driven approach to the calibration of the deferral regime and consider the combined impact of transparency rules and other regulatory requirements on banks’ capacity to serve their clients.”
Separately, the Council has also agreed an approach on the Central Securities Depositories Regulation.
Adam Farkas, said: “AFME has long
argued that the implementation of mandatory buy-in requirements would
have a disproportionately negative impact on the liquidity and
competitiveness of EU capital markets. While we believe that a complete
removal of the mandatory buy-in regime is the best approach, we welcome
the Council’s position to view mandatory buy-ins as a measure of last
resort, to be activated subject to assessment and only in the case where
the level of settlement fails would be substantial in the EU. We
support further focusing on all other tools that would be more
appropriate to support settlement discipline and efficiency in Europe.”
In more detail:
The establishment of a properly constructed consolidated tape for
equities and bonds is an important incremental step toward further
integrating EU markets, reducing home biases in EU citizens’ investments
and attracting international capital to the EU. AFME would nevertheless
liked to have seen more ambition in the Council’s approach by the
establishment of a real time pre-trade, as well as post-trade, tape for
equities. We are somewhat perplexed, however, that consolidated tape
revenue share is not extended to all execution venues providing their
market data.
- Equity market structure issues:
We are pleased to see the general direction of travel towards
reducing complexity in EU equities market structure. This acknowledges
that restrictions targeting only certain execution methods, such as
those originally proposed on systematic internalisers and midpoint
trading, would reduce the facilitation of cheaper, more efficient equity
transactions to the detriment of end investors. However, maintaining a
volume cap remains directly at odds with international best practice,
threatening the EU’s objective to effectively compete with other markets
globally and it detracts from the EU’s status as a destination to
invest or raise capital.
While we support having 5 categories of bond deferrals, we are
disappointed to see that maximum deferral times continue to be hardcoded
into the Level One legislation. Not only does this approach lack the
flexibility that is critical, especially in times of market volatility,
it does not appear to be justified by any data driven analysis. An
incorrectly calibrated regime, resulting in inadequate deferral periods
that lead to liquidity providers experiencing undue risk, will upset the
fine balance between transparency and liquidity and end up negatively
impacting end investors....
more at AFME
© AFME
Key
Hover over the blue highlighted
text to view the acronym meaning
Hover
over these icons for more information
Comments:
No Comments for this Article