27 Amendments of Markus FERBER related to 2010/2075(INI)
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas consumer protection, transparent, efficient and liquid markets and competition on a level playing field were the key objectives when MiFID came into force, and whereas, following the financial crisis, limiting systemic risk must be prioritisedalso be an objective of the MiFID review,
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas market fragmentation has had an inevitableundesired impact upon liquidity and market efficiency, and whereas due to a decrease in transparency based on an increase of dark pools and crossing networks, the effect of an increased number of venues and increasingly technology-driven trading has significantly decreaseddecreased London Stock Exchange's average order execution size from EUR 22 266 in 2006 to EUR 9 923 in 2009 (CESR/10-394, p. 9),
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas dark pool trading encompasses both regulated dark pools operated by regulated markets and MTFs (according to the MiFID transparency waivers) and unregulated dark pools consisting of OTC transactions, including Broker Crossing Networks; although both regulated and unregulated dark pools have the same aim, the absence of regulation provide unregulated dark pools with a competitive advantage and creates a race to darker trading undermining market transparency in general;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas broker crossing networks (BCNs) provide different services to regulated markets (RMs) and multilateral trading facilities (MTFs) in so far as they are closed systems and a technological extension of the traditional, discretionary broker-client relationshipessentially function as multilateral trading facilities (MTFs) in so far as they automatically match order flow in a multilateral manner or as Systematic Internalisers (SI) when they perform bilateral execution,
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas greater transparency via pre- and post-trade reporting of trading activity across all asset classes should be established to provides improved early warning of the build-up and scale of developing problems,
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Suggests that, in the interests of equitable treatment, rules need to be introduced such that MTFs transacting either a similar volume of trade or having a similar market impact to an RM (subject to a threshold) arMTFs and RMs must be subject to the same level of supervision and therefore regulated in a comparable way;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Asks for an investigation into the functioning and purpose of the systematic internaliser (SI) regime and the bringing forward of improvements to the way in which this category is regulated to increase its use as a subset of OTC;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Demands that investment firms which provide a portfolio management service and act in the portfolio management capacity must be provided with best execution by the investment firms with whom they place orders notwithstanding that the portfolio manager is categorized by MiFID as an eligible counterparty;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 – introductory part
Paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. Calls for the introduction of new provisclassification as either MTFs if performing multilateral order matching or SIs if performing bilateral executions in MIFID for BCNs including requirements to submit to the competent authorities:
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Seeks a sectoral consultation which will inform the Commission on whether market makers and other bilateral execution venues should be allowed to interact with dark-pool orders within a BCN, or whether this should be disallowed and remain a venue for buy side customer orders to cross;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 – point a
Paragraph 10 – point a
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 – point c
Paragraph 10 – point c
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission to establish a working group to overcome the barrdifficultiers to a European consolidated tape and establish a privately run system that does not place any further financial burdens on taxpayers to a Commission-defined deadlinepreventing the consolidation of market data in Europe and particularly the poor quality of data of OTC transactions;
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Asks that all reporting venues be required to unbundlseparate post-trade data from pre-trade data so information can be made available to all market participants at an afford commercially reasonable and comparable cost; further, asks the Commission to consider limiting the number of venues that trades can be reported to so further fragmentation can be avoidedintroduce the concept of Approved Publication Arrangements (APAs) in order to introduce quality standards for OTC trade publication and reduce the usage of internet pages which are an obstacle to consolidation;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Insists that post-‘flash crash’, allCalls for the Commission to review what measures, if any, trading platforms stress-tesmust adopt so that their technology and surveillance systems to ensure that they could successfully deal with the activity associated with HFT and algorithmic trading in extreme circumstancesfunction even in extreme circumstances, and to prevent a comparable ‘flash crash’;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls for an examination of the costs and benefits of algorithmic trading and HFT on markets and its impact upon other market users, particularly institutional investors, to determine whether the significant market flow generated automatically is providing real liquidity to the market and what affect this has on overall price discovery;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
Amendment 161 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 – point a
Paragraph 20 – point a
(a) expressly prohibiting unfiltered sponsored access to companies that do not, regardless whether they belong to the same corporate group as the sponsor or not,
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 – point b
Paragraph 20 – point b
(b) requiring broker-dealerinvestment firms to establish, document and maintain a system of risk management controls, pre- and post-trade, and supervisory procedures to manage the financial, regulatory and other risks related to its market access;
Amendment 168 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls for an investigation into fee structures to ensure that investment firms' commission fees, execution fees, ancillary fees and any other related incentives are transparent, non- discriminatory and consistent with reliable price formation and are designed and implemented so as not to encourage trading for improper purposes;
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Suggests a study of the maker/taker fee model to determine whether any recipient of the more favourable "to be conducted by ESMA of maker obligations to determine if MiFID investment firms holding themselves out as marker" fee structuret makers should also be subject to more formal market maker obligations and supervision;
Amendment 177 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Requests that no unregulated market participant be able to gain direct or unfiltered sponsored access to formal trading venues and that significant market participants trading on their own account need to register with the regulator and allow their trading activities to be subject to an appropriate level of supervision and scrutiny for stability purposes;
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Calls for the extension of the scope of MiFID transparency regime to all "equity- like" instruments including depository receipts (DRs), exchange traded funds (ETFs), exchange traded commodities (EDCs), and certificates;
Amendment 185 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Supports the Commission's intention to include OTC derivative instruments within the scope of MiFID as the trading of such products transitions increasingly to formalganised trading venues and are subject to increasing standardisation and central clearing requirements;