|
|
The Association for Financial Markets in Europe (AFME) participated in the consultation process in relation to the technical advice on possible delegated acts to the Market Abuse Regulation (596/2014) (“MAR”) and addressed its key concerns with respect to the provisions and commentary detailed within the Consultation Paper.
AFME does not consider the extensive non-exhaustive lists of example practices detailed within the draft technical advice as the most useful way to clarify the market manipulation indicators detailed at Annex I MAR. AFME considers the extensive lists provided as being unuseable in practice and suggests that general principles be stated which would illuminate the examples listed in the Annex. It would also be helpful for the advice to stipulate when a practice is not abusive behaviour, for example, by stating that the practice is not manipulative behaviour if conducted for legitimate reasons
AFME ais greatly concerned with the commentary that transactions by collective schemes, in which a PDMR has invested, are to be included within the prohibition and disclosure regime. Given the aims of the provision, AFME does not understand the rationale that transactions, over which the PDMR has no influence, should be caught by the prohibition.
AFME is concerned that the provisions relating the reporting of infringements would mean, in practice, that firms will be required to have different regimes for differing types of infringement reporting e.g. market abuse regime vs. national legislation. In cases of systemic risk, disclosure should be made by the credit or financial institution to the competent authority of the Member State where the credit or financial institution has its registered office. When the credit or financial institution is not registered in a Member State, disclosure should be made to the competent authority of the Member State, which provides lead prudential oversight of the financial institution.