35 Amendments of Olle SCHMIDT related to 2010/2075(INI)
Amendment 9 #
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 also be prioritised, in the review of MiFID in addition to the above mentioned objectives.
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the decrease in order size has led to a reduction in the capacity of market participants to instantly execute large orders on a particular market and has encouraged the expansion ofo manage market impact of large orders have favoured the use of unregulated dark pools (mainly by carrying out transactions OTC) and not using regulated dark- pool trading, and whereass (MTFs or RMs) as evidenced by the fact that less than 10% of all trading in EEA equities shares on organised markets use the MiFID pre-trade transparency waivers (CESR/10- 394),; Recognises that half of the OTC transactions are below the standard market size and do not require protection against market impact.
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas bBroker cCrossing nNetworks (BCNs) provide different servicesmix services provided by to rRegulated mMarkets (RMs) and mMultilateral tTrading fFacilities (MTFs) in so far as they are closed systems and a technological extension of the(i.e. multilateral trading) with execution orders on a bilateral basis (i.e. traditional, discretionary broker-client relationship),
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. Whereas competition between execution venues is necessary to keep efficient markets, competition needs to happen on a level playing field to avoid favouring certain venues over others; Recognises that dark pool trading encompasses both regulated dark pools operated by regulated markets and MTFs (according to the MiFID transparency waivers) and unregulated dark pools carrying out OTC transactions, including broker crossing networks; Recognises that although both regulated and unregulated dark pools have the same aim, the absence of a level playing field between these execution venues provides unregulated dark pools with a competitive advantage and creates a race to darker trading undermining market transparency in general,
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas HFT provides liquidity to financial markets and is largely positive, therefore it would be useful to determine whether there are the risks associated with electronic order systems and the significant share of trading volumes attributable to certain HFT strategies, considering, among others, the conclusions of the Securities and Exchange Commission estimated at 30-50 %, were manifest in relation to the US "flash crash" on 6 May 2010 when HFT liquidity providers exited the market,
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. CRecognises that market infrastructures have been very resilient throughout the crisis and calls upon the Commission to secure the necessarynonetheless strengthening of market infrastructures across all trading venues and clearing systems to enable them to cope with future risk through enhanced transparency, improved resilience and regulatory oversight of all aggregated trades;,
Amendment 65 #
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 havare subject to the proportionate level of supervision and therefore regulated ing a similar market impact to an RM (subject to a threcomparable way, as competition between MTFs and RMs should) are subject to the same level of supervision and therefore regulated in a comparable way; happen on a level playing field while noting the important role of MTFs for market entry,
Amendment 66 #
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 havare subject to a proportionate level of supervision and therefore regulated ing a similar market impact to an RM (subject to a threcomparable way, as competition between MTFs and RMs should) are subject to the same level of supervision and therefore regulated in a comparable way; happen on a level playing field while noting the important role of MTFs for market entry,
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Asks for an investigation into the functioning 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 76 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Asks for ESMA to conduct an investigation into the functioning 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 79 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls for ESMA to conduct a review of whether order-by- order best execution needs to be better served by regulation in relation to the availability of data, both post-trade and in relation to execution quality, and in relation to market technology, such as order routers and venue connections;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 – introductory part
Paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. Calls for the introduction of new provisions in MIFID for BCNs including requirements to submit to the competent authoritiesBCNs to be supervised by competent authorities as MTFs and/or SIs depending on their activities resulting from:
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 – introductory part
Paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. Calls for the Commission to introduction ofe new provisions in MIFID for BCNs including requirements to submit to the competent authorities:
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls for an investigation into a suitable volume threwhat transparency regime should above which BCNs would be required to convert to an MTF;be applied to BCNs in view of the transparency obligations imposed on MTFs and SIs,
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Seeks a sectoral consultation which will inform the Commission on whether market makers (systematic internaliser) should be allowed to interact with MTFs dark- pool orders within a BCN, or whether this should be disallowed and remain a venue for buy side customer orders to cross;and the consequences for market transparency in general as well as for investors concerned,
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Seeks a sectoral consultation by ESMA which will inform the Commission on whether market makers 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 105 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Suggests that a minimum order size for dark-pool transactions, whether on an organised trading venue or BCN, may be warranted and asks for an investigation into the merits of this forAsks for an investigation from the Commission into the effects of setting a minimum order size for dark pool transactions and if it could maintaining adequate flow of trade through the lit venues in the interests of price discovery;,
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Suggests that a minimum order size for dark-pool transactions, whether on an organised trading venue or BCN, may be warranted and asks for ESMA to conduct an investigation into the merits of this for maintaining adequate flow of trade through the lit venues in the interests of price discovery;
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 – introductory part
Paragraph 10 – introductory part
10. Calls for the Commission to conduct a review of the existing MiFID pre-trade transparency waivers to:
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 – point a
Paragraph 10 – point a
(a) considers whether reduceing the threshold of the lLarge- in- s Size waiver in recognitionview of reduced trade size would disturb market transparency to a unsuitable extent,
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 – point c
Paragraph 10 – point c
(c) considers whether broadening the Reference Price waiver to include trades that fall within the current spread in the reference market; would have a negative effect of market transparency to the detriment of investors,
Amendment 129 #
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 deadline;preventing the consolidation of market data in Europe and particularly the poor quality of data of OTC transactions,
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the CESR to draw up common reporting standards and formats for the reporting of post-trade data to aid in data consolidation;
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls upon the CESRESMA to draw up common reporting standards and formats for the reporting of post-trade data to aid in data consolidation;
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Asks that measures be taken to improve the quality of data of OTC transaction publication and that all reporting venues bare required to unbundlseparate pre and post trade data so information can be made available to all market participants at an affordable and comparable cost; further, asks the Commission to consider limiting the number ofapplying quality standards to venues that trades can be reported to so further fragmentation can be avoided;data are more reliable,
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Calls for a reduction in the time limit for deferred publication so that transactions are reported to the regulators within twenty- four hours of taking place; with regards to electronicpublication of transactions, in ordinary circumstances, delays of more than 1 minute should be considered unacceptable;,
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls for an examination of the costs and benefits of HFTalgorithmic and high- frequency trading 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 150 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls foron ESMA to conduct an examination of the costs and benefits of 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 159 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 – introductory part
Paragraph 20 – introductory part
20. Calls on regulators to monitor and regulate the provision of sponsored access and upon the Commission to consider additional measures including:
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls for an investigation by ESMA into fee structures to ensure that 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 174 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Suggests ESMA conduct a study of the maker/taker fee model to determine whether any recipient of the more favourable "maker" fee structure should also be subject to formal market maker obligations and supervision;
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Requests the consideration of introducing a post trade transparency requirement, pre and post trade, on all non-equity financial instruments subject to significant secondary trading, including government and corporate bond markets, to be applied in an asset-specific manner; for corporate bonds and CPP eligable derivatives subject to significant secondary trading,
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Requests the consideration by the Commission ad ESMA of introducing a transparency requirement, pre and post trade, on all non-equity financial instruments subject to significant secondary trading, including government and corporate bond markets, to be applied in an asset-specific manner;
Amendment 187 #
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 move to formalganised trading venues and are subject to increasing standardisation and central clearing requirements;
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Requests a review of the IOSCO standards for clearing houses, securities settlement systems and systemically important payment systems addressing any weaknesses concerning market opacity;with a view to improve further market transparency,