MiFID II – Review

European engagement

Ahead of the MiFIR review, AMAFI Chairman Stéphane Giordano, along with several members of the European Action Committee, presented AMAFI’s priorities (AMAFI / 21-31) to a number of key European figures, including Tilman Lueder (Head of Unit, Securities Markets, DG FISMA), the representatives of Slovenia, the Netherlands, Germany and Finland, the Spanish and Italian securities supervisors (CNMV and CONSOB), and ESMA.

One major topic of the discussions, particularly those with Mr Lueder, was the creation of an EU consolidated tape (AMAFI / 21-28), a central plank in the reforms proposed by the European Commission. Other issues covered included the transparency/liquidity tradeoff for the bond market (AMAFI / 21-29), the DTO’s scope of application, the cost of market data and the regime for OTC derivatives and reference data.

Investor protection – AMAFI’s priorities

AMAFI finalised in June a position paper on investor protection (AMAFI / 21-35 FR and 21-35 EN) that set out proposed amendments and built on discussions held in 2019 (AMAFI / 19-109, 19-110, 19-111). The aim was to reiterate and clarify the association’s priorities in the light of the measures already taken, particularly on inducements (see below). Designed to buttress AMAFI’s initiatives in this area, the paper provided input for work on the European Commission’s retail investment strategy.

In July, AMAFI also finalised the consolidated version of MiFID II as amended by the Quick Fix package (AMAFI / 21-36) and made it available to its working groups.

Inducements

In the context of questions raised by the inducements regime, discussions on the question of quality of service enhancement (see Info AMAFI 150) were wrapped up and member guidance published in mid-September (AMAFI /21-52).

Work also continued over the summer aimed at publishing a study on inducement practices and the resulting costs for investors. The study, due for release in October, will be accompanied by a survey showing that while investors believe investment advisory services to be important, they are reluctant to pay for them directly. This finding supports the case for maintaining the inducements regime