EU Equity pre- and post-trade transparency regulation: from ISD to MiFID II
Einde inhoudsopgave
EU Equity pre- and post-trade transparency regulation (LBF vol. 21) 2021/4.II.1.3.1:4.II.1.3.1 General
EU Equity pre- and post-trade transparency regulation (LBF vol. 21) 2021/4.II.1.3.1
4.II.1.3.1 General
Documentgegevens:
mr. J.E.C. Gulyás, datum 01-02-2021
- Datum
01-02-2021
- Auteur
mr. J.E.C. Gulyás
- JCDI
JCDI:ADS266450:1
- Vakgebied(en)
Financieel recht / Bank- en effectenrecht
Financieel recht / Europees financieel recht
Financiële dienstverlening / Financieel toezicht
Toon alle voetnoten
Voetnoten
Voetnoten
For a similar explanation, see CESR, Feedback Statement: Technical Advice on Level 2 Implementing Measures on mandates of the first set where the deadline was extended and the second set of mandates: Markets in Financial Instruments Directive, April 2005(CESR/05-291b)(hereafter: CESR, Feedback Statement: MiFID I, April 2005(CESR/05-291b)), p. 42.
Deze functie is alleen te gebruiken als je bent ingelogd.
The general MiFID I post-trade transparency obligations were laid down in the MiFID I Directive. The MiFID I Directive required RMs and MTFs to make public ‘at least’: (i) the current bid and offer prices and (ii) the depth of trading interests at those prices (volume) which were ‘advertised through their systems.1 The wording ‘at least’ indicated that the MiFID I pre-trade transparency obligation was minimum harmonised’.2 Member States were permitted to require RMs and MTFs to publish more pre-trade information than obliged under MiFID I. CESR (predecessor of ESMA) in addition clarified that the wording ‘advertised through their systems’ referred to the MiFID I pre-trade information RMs and MTFs at a minimum needed to publish (‘advertise’), not what information actually was published (‘advertised’) through their systems.3