As the European trade association representing numerous ETF issuers, EFAMA welcomes the opportunity of this questionnaire to submit a few high-level considerations to the attention of Committee 5 member supervisors. Our inputs are intended to accompany the more detailed submissions of the several European ETF issuers our association represents, in view of informing the Committee’s future work around a possible review of IOSCO’s 2013 Principles for the Regulation of Exchange Traded Funds.
EFAMA believes that ESMA’s draft ‘marketing communication’ Guidelines still require important clarifications to ensure full alignment between them and MiFID II’s Commission Delegated Regulation Article 44. This alignment is essential to ensure coherent rules for fund management companies and distributors. Unfortunately, parts of the proposed Guidelines are overly prescriptive and may unintentionally make some marketing materials vaguer or even inconsistent with local MiFID requirements for distributors.
Investors would benefit from an EU legal framework with due diligence guidelines and reporting requirements for companies in the real economy. This framework should be consistent with the reporting requirements in the revised NFRD and the disclosures in the Sustainability-Related Disclosures regulation (SFDR). At the same time, any framework for supply chain due diligence should not impose a competitive disadvantage for EU companies.
A flawed review process not tackling the heart of the issue
EFAMA has always made it clear that a revision of the PRIIPs Regulatory Technical Standard (RTS) falls short of conducting a proper Level 1 review. A review that is explicitly required by the Level 1 Regulation and is overdue for more than one year.