EFAMA has some concerns with ESMA’s clarifications. In the consultation paper (CP), ESMA seems to have a very broad interpretation of the ‘multilateral systems’ definition under MiFID II and states that ‘systems where trading interests can interact but where the execution of transactions is formally undertaken outside the system still qualify as a multilateral system and should be required to seek authorisation’ (paragraph 36).

We disagree with an extension of its scope to UCITS’ and AIFs’ management companies to the scope of the reporting requirements imposed by MiFIR, Art. 26. This extension would be in breach of the principle of proportionality, as:

EFAMA appreciates the Commission's efforts in pursuing an alleviation of certain MiFID II requirements in the interest of promoting a swift recovery from the economic crisis precipitated by the Covid-19 pandemic (....).

EFAMA believes however that there are more effective ways to foster SME access to markets and urges the Commission to consider a set of further measures (...)