![Risk.net](https://www.risk.net/sites/default/files/styles/print_logo/public/2018-09/print-logo.png?itok=1TpHrpuP)
Mifid: new UK notifications as Mifid deadline approaches
The UK Treasury notifies the EU Commission of new FSA requirements
LONDON – The UK Financial Services Authority (FSA) is one of the few national regulators in the EU on target to implement the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (Mifid), but it is still engaged in ironing out some last-minute wrinkles.
Article 4 of the Mifid Level 2 Implementing Directive limits the ability of EU member states to apply additional requirements to some of the areas covered by Mifid, prescribing conditions for creating or retaining additional national requirements and requiring national notification and justification of these for the Commission’s approval.
The FSA’s policy statement of July 2007 reported an agreement with the Commission regarding retaining measures covered by Article 4. These included conditions for independent advisers, provision of simplified prospectuses and key facts documents by advisers, the Commission’s disclosure in relation to the sale of packaged products, and investment managers’ use of client-dealing commission.
The Commission has since indicated that it does not require notification of some of these measures under Article 4, as they fall under national discretion. As a precaution, the UK Treasury has forwarded two notifications to the Commission on behalf of the FSA. These are notification of the retention of the FSA’s requirements on the use of dealing commission provisions. “This represents a continuation of UK rules introduced about two years ago,” says Alan Jenkins, European head of Mifid at BearingPoint. They are also notification of the retention of certain requirements for the packaged products market. These new notifications replace those issued on January 31, 2007, which have been withdrawn.
The Treasury’s notification of the FSA’s retention of requirements for dealing commission provisions explains that, under soft commission and bundled brokerage arrangements, goods and services are supplied to a portfolio manager in return for business put through a broker. “The UK feels it needs stronger constraints on soft commission than are provided by the inducements provisions in Mifid,” says Jenkins. In January 2006 the FSA began using dealing commission provisions to address particular market failures of these arrangements that were not adequately addressed by its general provisions on inducements.
In the notification to the Commission for the retention of specific requirements for the UK packaged products market, the Treasury justifies the FSA’s requirements retained in some areas that may require notification under Article 4. These requirements relate to the accuracy of representations of the service offered, information on product and service costs (hard disclosure of commission and commission equivalent).
Alan Jenkins says the editions represent “marginal extensions to what is specified in Mifid, but the notification demonstrates the strength of FSA feeling that these should be maintained after November 1”. The notifications are broadly as previously proposed in January. “The key point is that they have been agreed with the Commission,” says Jenkins.
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
Banks fret over vendor contracts as Dora deadline looms
Thousands of vendor contracts will need repapering to comply with EU’s new digital resilience rules
EU banks lose relief on model test after FRTB delay
Deferment of new trading book regime to January 2025 eats into transition period for “erratic” P&L attribution test
Sunday night football and the Basel III endgame
Big banks, political advocates and housing organisations are unlikely allies in race to dropkick new capital regime
Futures exchanges seek clarity on China licensing regime
Hazy details on landmark Futures and Derivatives Law breeds legal uncertainty, unnerving operators
Some EU banks wanted option to start FRTB on time
Representatives of member states raised possibility with European Commission at July meeting discussing the delay
For US Treasury troubles, treat the cause not the symptom
Regulatory alarm about hidden risk in the Treasury futures market misses the point, fund association execs write
Iosco delays pre-hedging consultation to November
Review into controversial practice splits industry
Honey, I shrunk the Fed. (Not a sci-fi fantasy)
Promoting the discount window may be the Fed’s key to shrinking its $7trn balance sheet, says Bill Nelson