MiFID II implementation potential delay

Géraldine D'Argembeau 13 November 2015


In a speech to the EU Parliament, Steven Maijoor, Chairman of the ESMA, flagged that the current MiFID II timetable is “extremely tight” and delaying certain parts of it might be needed. In a separate statement, a spokesman of the European Commission stated “the most legally sound approach would be to delay the whole package by one year.”

Extract of Steven Maijoor’s statement:  

“I would also like to take the opportunity today to look ahead, as ESMA’s work on MiFID II, MAR and CSDR is by no means finished.

The next technical standards package is already very much in the pipeline and consists of implementing technical standards of a mostly technical nature and also not quite as voluminous as the previous one. Nonetheless, it comprises important topics such as position reporting, which is of paramount importance for having an efficient position limits regime and which represents one of the many significant implementation challenges for national supervisors and ESMA.

The implementation challenges in the run-up to the implementation date of MiFID II is the other topic I would like to mention. I am not going to surprise anybody in the room when saying that the timing for stakeholders and regulators alike to implement the rules and build the necessary IT systems is extremely tight. Even more, there are a few areas where the calendar is already unfeasible. This relates to the fact that it will take some time, and well into 2016, before the text of the RTS will be stable and final. The building of some complex IT systems can only really take off when the final details are firmly set in the RTS and some of the most complex IT systems would need at least a year to be built. We have therefore raised these timing issues with the European Commission, and the fact that some IT systems will not be ready in January 2017, and the uncertainty this will create as they are needed for the execution of certain elements of MIFID 2. Related to that, we have raised with the Commission whether this uncertainty would need a legislative response with delaying certain parts of MIFID 2, mainly related to transparency, transaction and position reporting.” 

Related links (full statement):

Steven Maijoor’s statement