BETA


2023/0177(COD) Transparency and integrity of Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) rating activities

Progress: Awaiting Council's 1st reading position

RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Lead ECON LALUCQ Aurore (icon: S&D S&D) GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL José Manuel (icon: EPP EPP), KELLEHER Billy (icon: Renew Renew), ANDRESEN Rasmus (icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE), ROOKMAKER Dorien (icon: ECR ECR), PAPADIMOULIS Dimitrios (icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL)
Committee Opinion EMPL
Committee Opinion ENVI
Committee Opinion JURI DURAND Pascal (icon: S&D S&D) Axel VOSS (icon: PPE PPE)
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
TFEU 114

Events

2024/04/24
   EP - Text adopted by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
Documents
2024/04/24
   EP - Decision by Parliament, 1st reading
Documents
2024/02/22
   EP - Approval in committee of the text agreed at 1st reading interinstitutional negotiations
Documents
2024/02/14
   CSL - Coreper letter confirming interinstitutional agreement
2024/02/14
   EP - Text agreed during interinstitutional negotiations
Documents
2023/12/14
   IT_SENATE - Contribution
Documents
2023/12/13
   EP - Committee decision to enter into interinstitutional negotiations confirmed by plenary (Rule 71)
2023/12/11
   EP - Committee decision to enter into interinstitutional negotiations announced in plenary (Rule 71)
2023/12/08
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading
Details

The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs adopted the report by Aurore LALUCQ (S&D, FR) on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the transparency and integrity of Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) rating activities.

The committee responsible recommended that the European Parliament's position adopted at first reading under the ordinary legislative procedure should amend the proposal as follows:

Subject-matter and scope

The proposed Regulation introduces a common regulatory approach to enhance the integrity, transparency, comparability, responsibility, reliability, alignment with Union law, good governance, and independence of ESG rating activities, contributing to the transparency and quality of ESG ratings. It aims to contribute to the smooth functioning of the internal market, while achieving a high level of consumer and investor protection and preventing greenwashing or other types of misinformation, including social-washing.

The rules relating to ESG rating providers should not apply to ESG ratings drawn up by European financial companies and used exclusively for internal purposes or shared within their group. The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) should draw up draft regulatory standards to strictly delineate what constitutes internal use.

These rules should not apply to ratings issued by a member of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB).

Provision of ESG ratings in the Union

Any legal person who wishes to provide ESG ratings in the Union should be subject to either of the following: an authorisation issued by ESMA; an implementing decision; an authorisation for endorsement.

Recognition of third country ESG rating providers

Until the Commission has adopted an equivalence decision, third country ESG rating providers may provide ESG ratings to regulated financial undertakings in the Union, provided that ESMA has recognised that third country ESG rating provider.

A third country ESG rating provider recognised by ESMA should demonstrate that establishing a legal presence within the Union would be disproportionate to the nature, size and complexity of the third country ESG rating provider. ESMA should take into account whether the third country ESG rating provider belongs to a group. Third country ESG rating providers that wish to be recognised should have a legal representative .

Integrity and reliability of ESG rating activities

ESG rating providers should establish and maintain a permanent, independent and effective oversight function to ensure oversight overall aspects of the provision of their ESG ratings. The oversight function should have the necessary resources and expertise and have access to all information necessary to perform its functions.

ESG rating providers should not provide consulting activities to investors, or financial or non-financial undertakings. Furthermore, ESG rating providers providing banking, insurance and reinsurance or investment activities, as well as entities that are part of a group to which an ESG rating provider belongs, should take appropriate measures to prevent conflicts of interest .

ESG rating providers should ensure that rating analysts, employees and any other natural person whose services are placed at its disposal or under its control and who are directly involved in the provision of ESG ratings, including analysts directly involved in the rating process and persons involved in the provision of scores, are appropriately trained and have the knowledge and experience that is necessary for the performance of the duties and tasks assigned, in particular a sufficient understanding of potential material financial risk to the rated entity and potential material impact of the rated entity on the environment and on society in general.

ESG rating providers should ensure that, when carrying out an assessment, the persons concerned should be independent of the rated entity and should not be involved in the decision making of the rated entity during the period of the assessment leading to the issuance of an ESG rating and for one year thereafter.

When the persons concerned participate in or otherwise influence the determination of an ESG rating of any rated entity, ESG rating providers should take all reasonable steps to ensure that their independence is not affected by any existing or potential conflict of interest or business or other direct relationship involving those persons.

Use of several ESG rating providers

When an entity or investor requests an ESG rating from two or more providers, they must consider designating at least one provider whose market share in the EU does not exceed 5%.

Record-keeping requirements

ESG rating providers should keep a record of key rating-related information, including rating, the rated legal entity or financial instrument, the rating type, the horizon or outlook used for the rating, and the rating status, and make that information available upon request to competent authorities in charge of the supervision of the regulated financial undertakings in the Union.

Transparency requirements

ESG rating providers should disclose on their website, as a minimum, the methodologies, models and key rating assumptions they use in their ESG rating activities. Separate E, S and G ratings should be provided rather than a single ESG metric that aggregates E, S and G factors.

In particular, ESG rating providers should provide a single ESG rating that aggregates E, S and G factors or an aggregated indicator of these factors, as well as the score assigned to each relevant factor and the weighting of each of these factors in the aggregation.

Independence and avoidance of conflicts of interest

ESG rating providers should: (i) put in place a robust governance arrangement, including a clear organisational structure with well-defined, transparent and consistent roles and responsibilities for all persons involved in the provision of an ESG rating; (ii) take necessary steps to ensure the independence and avoidance of conflicts of interest of all persons involved in the provision of an ESG rating.

Documents
2023/12/04
   EP - Vote in committee, 1st reading
2023/12/04
   EP - Committee decision to open interinstitutional negotiations with report adopted in committee
2023/11/29
   EP - Specific opinion
Documents
2023/10/25
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2023/10/23
   EP - DURAND Pascal (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in JURI
2023/10/18
   IT_CHAMBER - Contribution
Documents
2023/10/06
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2023/07/10
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading
2023/07/04
   EP - LALUCQ Aurore (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in ECON
2023/06/14
   EC - Document attached to the procedure
2023/06/14
   EC - Document attached to the procedure
2023/06/14
   EC - Document attached to the procedure
2023/06/13
   EC - Legislative proposal published
Details

PURPOSE: to lay down a consistent and effective regime to address the shortcomings and vulnerabilities that environmental, social, and governance ratings pose.

PROPOSED ACT: Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council.

ROLE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: the European Parliament decides in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure and on an equal footing with the Council.

BACKGROUND: environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing, that is, investing which takes ESG factors into account when making investment decisions, is becoming an important part of mainstream finance. Notably, investment funds with sustainable characteristics or objectives have largely increased in number, size and the type of capital they attract. In this context, an ESG investment ecosystem has developed, including amongst others the supply of ESG ratings. Such ESG ratings are marketed as providing an opinion on the exposure of a company or entity to environmental, social and/or governance factors , and their impact on society.

The current ESG rating market suffers from deficiencies and is not functioning properly, with users’ and rated entities’ needs regarding ESG ratings not being met and confidence in ratings undermined. This problem has a number of different dimensions, mainly (i) the lack of transparency on the characteristics of ESG ratings, their methodologies and their data sources and (ii) the lack of clarity on how ESG rating providers operate. Therefore, ESG ratings do not serve their purpose and do not sufficiently enable users, investors and rated entities to take informed decisions as regards ESG-related risks, impacts and opportunities.

Hence, the Commission committed in the renewed sustainable finance strategy adopted in July 2021, to take action to improve the reliability, comparability and transparency of ESG ratings.

CONTENT: this proposal aims to introduces a common regulatory approach to enhance the integrity, transparency, responsibility, good governance, and independence of ESG rating activities , contributing to the transparency and quality of ESG ratings. It aims to contribute to the smooth functioning of the internal market, while achieving a high level of consumer and investor protection and preventing greenwashing or other types of misinformation, including social-washing, by introducing transparency requirements related to ESG ratings and rules on the organisation and conduct of ESG rating providers.

More specifically, this proposal aims to enhance the quality of information about ESG ratings, by (i) improving transparency of ESG ratings characteristics and methodologies to enable investors to make better informed investment decisions in regard to sustainability objectives, and by (ii) ensuring increased clarity on operations of ESG rating providers and the prevention of risks of conflict of interest at ESG rating providers’ level.

As supervisor of the ESG rating providers under this proposal, the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) would be the appropriate body to take stock of the developments and highlight potential issues of concern, liaising with relevant national authorities in the Member State where ESG ratings are used and where ESG rating providers are located and have their operations.

Budgetary implications

This proposal empowers ESMA to carry out a new function, namely to authorise and supervise ESG rating providers providing their services under this Regulation. This will require ESMA to charge ESG rating providers fees, which should cover all administrative costs incurred by ESMA for its authorisation and supervision activities. The total annual cost increase is estimated at approximately EUR 3.7-3.8 million. This cost will not be borne by EU budget.

Documents

  • Text adopted by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T9-0347/2024
  • Decision by Parliament, 1st reading: T9-0347/2024
  • Approval in committee of the text agreed at 1st reading interinstitutional negotiations: PE759.068
  • Coreper letter confirming interinstitutional agreement: GEDA/A/(2024)001016
  • Text agreed during interinstitutional negotiations: PE759.068
  • Contribution: COM(2023)0314
  • Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading: A9-0417/2023
  • Specific opinion: PE756.346
  • Amendments tabled in committee: PE754.956
  • Contribution: COM(2023)0314
  • Committee draft report: PE753.758
  • Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex
  • Document attached to the procedure: SEC(2023)0241
  • Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex
  • Document attached to the procedure: SWD(2023)0204
  • Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex
  • Document attached to the procedure: SWD(2023)0207
  • Legislative proposal published: COM(2023)0314
  • Legislative proposal published: EUR-Lex
  • Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex SEC(2023)0241
  • Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex SWD(2023)0204
  • Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex SWD(2023)0207
  • Committee draft report: PE753.758
  • Amendments tabled in committee: PE754.956
  • Specific opinion: PE756.346
  • Coreper letter confirming interinstitutional agreement: GEDA/A/(2024)001016
  • Text agreed during interinstitutional negotiations: PE759.068
  • Text adopted by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T9-0347/2024
  • Contribution: COM(2023)0314
  • Contribution: COM(2023)0314

Votes

A9-0417/2023 – Aurore Lalucq – Provisional agreement – Am 2 #

2024/04/24 Outcome: +: 464, -: 115, 0: 13
DE ES FR RO NL HU PT SE AT BE IE FI DK IT BG LT EE SK SI HR EL LV LU MT CZ PL
Total
84
53
75
21
28
15
17
20
17
21
12
13
11
49
13
10
7
12
7
12
13
8
6
4
21
43
icon: PPE PPE
150

Hungary PPE

1

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Slovenia PPE

3

Luxembourg PPE

2

Malta PPE

For (1)

1
icon: S&D S&D
112

Romania S&D

2

Belgium S&D

2

Denmark S&D

2

Bulgaria S&D

2

Lithuania S&D

2

Estonia S&D

2

Slovakia S&D

For (1)

1

Slovenia S&D

2

Greece S&D

1

Latvia S&D

2

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Czechia S&D

For (1)

1
icon: Renew Renew
94

Hungary Renew

For (1)

1
3

Austria Renew

For (1)

1

Ireland Renew

2

Finland Renew

3

Bulgaria Renew

2

Lithuania Renew

1

Estonia Renew

3

Slovenia Renew

2

Croatia Renew

For (1)

1

Greece Renew

Against (1)

1

Latvia Renew

For (1)

1

Luxembourg Renew

2

Poland Renew

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
66

Spain Verts/ALE

3

Netherlands Verts/ALE

3

Portugal Verts/ALE

1

Sweden Verts/ALE

3

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Belgium Verts/ALE

3

Ireland Verts/ALE

2

Finland Verts/ALE

3

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Italy Verts/ALE

2

Lithuania Verts/ALE

2

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Czechia Verts/ALE

3

Poland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1
icon: The Left The Left
31

Portugal The Left

4

Belgium The Left

For (1)

1

Finland The Left

For (1)

1

Denmark The Left

1

Greece The Left

2

Czechia The Left

Against (1)

1
icon: NI NI
34

Germany NI

Against (1)

2

Spain NI

1

France NI

3

Romania NI

Against (1)

1

Netherlands NI

Against (1)

1

Belgium NI

For (1)

1

Croatia NI

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2

Greece NI

For (1)

3

Latvia NI

1

Czechia NI

Against (1)

1
icon: ID ID
47

Austria ID

Against (2)

2

Denmark ID

Abstain (1)

1

Estonia ID

For (1)

1

Czechia ID

Against (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
58

Germany ECR

Against (1)

1

France ECR

Against (1)

1

Romania ECR

Against (1)

1

Sweden ECR

3

Finland ECR

1

Bulgaria ECR

2

Lithuania ECR

Against (1)

1

Slovakia ECR

Abstain (1)

1

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Greece ECR

Abstain (1)

1

Latvia ECR

Against (1)

1
AmendmentsDossier
421 2023/0177(COD)
2023/10/25 ECON 421 amendments...
source: 754.956

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

docs/8
date
2024-04-24T00:00:00
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2024-0347_EN.html title: T9-0347/2024
type
Text adopted by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
body
EP
events/8
date
2024-04-24T00:00:00
type
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading
body
EP
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2024-0347_EN.html title: T9-0347/2024
forecasts
  • date: 2024-04-22T00:00:00 title: Indicative plenary sitting date
procedure/stage_reached
Old
Awaiting Parliament's position in 1st reading
New
Awaiting Council's 1st reading position
docs/8
date
2024-04-24T00:00:00
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2024-0347_EN.html title: T9-0347/2024
type
Text adopted by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
body
EP
events/8
date
2024-04-24T00:00:00
type
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading
body
EP
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2024-0347_EN.html title: T9-0347/2024
forecasts
  • date: 2024-04-22T00:00:00 title: Indicative plenary sitting date
procedure/stage_reached
Old
Awaiting Parliament's position in 1st reading
New
Awaiting Council's 1st reading position
forecasts/0
date
2024-04-24T00:00:00
title
Vote scheduled
forecasts/0
date
2024-04-22T00:00:00
title
Indicative plenary sitting date
forecasts/0
date
2024-04-24T00:00:00
title
Vote in plenary scheduled
forecasts/0
date
2024-04-22T00:00:00
title
Indicative plenary sitting date
forecasts/0
date
2024-04-24T00:00:00
title
Vote in plenary scheduled
forecasts/0
date
2024-04-22T00:00:00
title
Indicative plenary sitting date
forecasts/0
date
2024-04-24T00:00:00
title
Vote in plenary scheduled
forecasts/0
date
2024-04-22T00:00:00
title
Indicative plenary sitting date
forecasts/0
date
2024-04-24T00:00:00
title
Vote in plenary scheduled
forecasts/0
date
2024-04-22T00:00:00
title
Indicative plenary sitting date
forecasts/0
date
2024-04-24T00:00:00
title
Vote in plenary scheduled
forecasts/0
date
2024-04-22T00:00:00
title
Indicative plenary sitting date
docs/7
date
2024-02-14T00:00:00
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/commissions/econ/inag/2024/02-14/ECON_AG(2024)759068_EN.docx title: PE759.068
type
Text agreed during interinstitutional negotiations
body
EP
events/7
date
2024-02-22T00:00:00
type
Approval in committee of the text agreed at 1st reading interinstitutional negotiations
body
EP
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/commissions/econ/inag/2024/02-14/ECON_AG(2024)759068_EN.docx title: PE759.068
docs/6
date
2024-02-14T00:00:00
docs
title: GEDA/A/(2024)001016
type
Coreper letter confirming interinstitutional agreement
body
CSL
forecasts
  • date: 2024-04-22T00:00:00 title: Indicative plenary sitting date
docs/6
date
2023-12-08T00:00:00
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-9-2023-0417_EN.html title: A9-0417/2023
type
Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
body
EP
events/4/summary
  • The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs adopted the report by Aurore LALUCQ (S&D, FR) on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the transparency and integrity of Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) rating activities.
  • The committee responsible recommended that the European Parliament's position adopted at first reading under the ordinary legislative procedure should amend the proposal as follows:
  • Subject-matter and scope
  • The proposed Regulation introduces a common regulatory approach to enhance the integrity, transparency, comparability, responsibility, reliability, alignment with Union law, good governance, and independence of ESG rating activities, contributing to the transparency and quality of ESG ratings. It aims to contribute to the smooth functioning of the internal market, while achieving a high level of consumer and investor protection and preventing greenwashing or other types of misinformation, including social-washing.
  • The rules relating to ESG rating providers should not apply to ESG ratings drawn up by European financial companies and used exclusively for internal purposes or shared within their group. The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) should draw up draft regulatory standards to strictly delineate what constitutes internal use.
  • These rules should not apply to ratings issued by a member of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB).
  • Provision of ESG ratings in the Union
  • Any legal person who wishes to provide ESG ratings in the Union should be subject to either of the following: an authorisation issued by ESMA; an implementing decision; an authorisation for endorsement.
  • Recognition of third country ESG rating providers
  • Until the Commission has adopted an equivalence decision, third country ESG rating providers may provide ESG ratings to regulated financial undertakings in the Union, provided that ESMA has recognised that third country ESG rating provider.
  • A third country ESG rating provider recognised by ESMA should demonstrate that establishing a legal presence within the Union would be disproportionate to the nature, size and complexity of the third country ESG rating provider. ESMA should take into account whether the third country ESG rating provider belongs to a group. Third country ESG rating providers that wish to be recognised should have a legal representative .
  • Integrity and reliability of ESG rating activities
  • ESG rating providers should establish and maintain a permanent, independent and effective oversight function to ensure oversight overall aspects of the provision of their ESG ratings. The oversight function should have the necessary resources and expertise and have access to all information necessary to perform its functions.
  • ESG rating providers should not provide consulting activities to investors, or financial or non-financial undertakings. Furthermore, ESG rating providers providing banking, insurance and reinsurance or investment activities, as well as entities that are part of a group to which an ESG rating provider belongs, should take appropriate measures to prevent conflicts of interest .
  • ESG rating providers should ensure that rating analysts, employees and any other natural person whose services are placed at its disposal or under its control and who are directly involved in the provision of ESG ratings, including analysts directly involved in the rating process and persons involved in the provision of scores, are appropriately trained and have the knowledge and experience that is necessary for the performance of the duties and tasks assigned, in particular a sufficient understanding of potential material financial risk to the rated entity and potential material impact of the rated entity on the environment and on society in general.
  • ESG rating providers should ensure that, when carrying out an assessment, the persons concerned should be independent of the rated entity and should not be involved in the decision making of the rated entity during the period of the assessment leading to the issuance of an ESG rating and for one year thereafter.
  • When the persons concerned participate in or otherwise influence the determination of an ESG rating of any rated entity, ESG rating providers should take all reasonable steps to ensure that their independence is not affected by any existing or potential conflict of interest or business or other direct relationship involving those persons.
  • Use of several ESG rating providers
  • When an entity or investor requests an ESG rating from two or more providers, they must consider designating at least one provider whose market share in the EU does not exceed 5%.
  • Record-keeping requirements
  • ESG rating providers should keep a record of key rating-related information, including rating, the rated legal entity or financial instrument, the rating type, the horizon or outlook used for the rating, and the rating status, and make that information available upon request to competent authorities in charge of the supervision of the regulated financial undertakings in the Union.
  • Transparency requirements
  • ESG rating providers should disclose on their website, as a minimum, the methodologies, models and key rating assumptions they use in their ESG rating activities. Separate E, S and G ratings should be provided rather than a single ESG metric that aggregates E, S and G factors.
  • In particular, ESG rating providers should provide a single ESG rating that aggregates E, S and G factors or an aggregated indicator of these factors, as well as the score assigned to each relevant factor and the weighting of each of these factors in the aggregation.
  • Independence and avoidance of conflicts of interest
  • ESG rating providers should: (i) put in place a robust governance arrangement, including a clear organisational structure with well-defined, transparent and consistent roles and responsibilities for all persons involved in the provision of an ESG rating; (ii) take necessary steps to ensure the independence and avoidance of conflicts of interest of all persons involved in the provision of an ESG rating.
docs/7
date
2023-12-14T00:00:00
docs
url: https://connectfolx.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2023)0314 title: COM(2023)0314
type
Contribution
body
IT_SENATE
events/6
date
2023-12-13T00:00:00
type
Committee decision to enter into interinstitutional negotiations confirmed by plenary (Rule 71)
body
EP
events/5
date
2023-12-11T00:00:00
type
Committee decision to enter into interinstitutional negotiations announced in plenary (Rule 71)
body
EP
docs/6
date
2023-12-08T00:00:00
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-9-2023-0417_EN.html title: A9-0417/2023
type
Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading
body
EP
events/4
date
2023-12-08T00:00:00
type
Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading
body
EP
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-9-2023-0417_EN.html title: A9-0417/2023
procedure/stage_reached
Old
Awaiting committee decision
New
Awaiting Parliament's position in 1st reading
docs/5
date
2023-11-29T00:00:00
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/JURI-AL-756346_EN.html title: PE756.346
committee
JURI
type
Specific opinion
body
EP
events/2
date
2023-12-04T00:00:00
type
Vote in committee, 1st reading
body
EP
events/3
date
2023-12-04T00:00:00
type
Committee decision to open interinstitutional negotiations with report adopted in committee
body
EP
procedure/Other legal basis
Rules of Procedure EP 159
forecasts
  • date: 2023-12-04T00:00:00 title: Vote scheduled in committee
forecasts/0/date
Old
2023-11-28T00:00:00
New
2023-12-04T00:00:00
committees/3/rapporteur
  • name: DURAND Pascal date: 2023-10-23T00:00:00 group: Group of Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
docs/5/date
Old
2023-10-17T00:00:00
New
2023-10-18T00:00:00
docs/4
date
2023-10-25T00:00:00
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ECON-AM-754956_EN.html title: PE754.956
type
Amendments tabled in committee
body
EP
docs/5
date
2023-10-17T00:00:00
docs
url: https://connectfolx.europarl.europa.eu/connefof/app/exp/COM(2023)0314 title: COM(2023)0314
type
Contribution
body
IT_CHAMBER
commission
  • body: EC dg: Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union commissioner: MCGUINNESS Mairead
docs/3
date
2023-10-06T00:00:00
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ECON-PR-753758_EN.html title: PE753.758
type
Committee draft report
body
EP
forecasts
  • date: 2023-11-28T00:00:00 title: Vote scheduled in committee
committees/0/shadows/2
name
ANDRESEN Rasmus
group
Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance
abbr
Verts/ALE
committees/0/shadows/2
name
ROOKMAKER Dorien
group
European Conservatives and Reformists Group
abbr
ECR
committees/0/shadows/2
name
PAPADIMOULIS Dimitrios
group
The Left group in the European Parliament - GUE/NGL
abbr
GUE/NGL
committees/0/shadows/1
name
KELLEHER Billy
group
Renew Europe group
abbr
Renew
committees/1
Old
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
committee_full
Legal Affairs
committee
JURI
associated
False
New
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
committee
ENVI
associated
False
opinion
False
committees/2
Old
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
committee_full
Employment and Social Affairs
committee
EMPL
associated
False
opinion
False
New
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
committee_full
Legal Affairs
committee
JURI
associated
False
committees/3
Old
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
committee
ENVI
associated
False
opinion
False
New
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
committee_full
Employment and Social Affairs
committee
EMPL
associated
False
opinion
False
committees/0/shadows
  • name: GARCÍA-MARGALLO Y MARFIL José Manuel group: Group of European People's Party abbr: EPP
committees/1
Old
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
committee
ENVI
associated
False
opinion
False
New
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
committee_full
Legal Affairs
committee
JURI
associated
False
committees/2
Old
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
committee_full
Legal Affairs
committee
JURI
associated
False
New
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
committee_full
Employment and Social Affairs
committee
EMPL
associated
False
opinion
False
committees/3
Old
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
committee_full
Employment and Social Affairs
committee
EMPL
associated
False
opinion
False
New
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
committee_full
Environment, Public Health and Food Safety
committee
ENVI
associated
False
opinion
False
committees/1/opinion
False
committees/3/opinion
False
committees/0/rapporteur
  • name: LALUCQ Aurore date: 2023-07-04T00:00:00 group: Group of Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
docs/0/docs/0
url
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=SECfinal&an_doc=2023&nu_doc=0241
title
EUR-Lex
events/1
date
2023-07-10T00:00:00
type
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading
body
EP
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee
  • ECON/9/12324
procedure/stage_reached
Old
Preparatory phase in Parliament
New
Awaiting committee decision
docs/0
date
2023-06-13T00:00:00
docs
type
Legislative proposal
body
EC
events/0/summary
  • PURPOSE: to lay down a consistent and effective regime to address the shortcomings and vulnerabilities that environmental, social, and governance ratings pose.
  • PROPOSED ACT: Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council.
  • ROLE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT: the European Parliament decides in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure and on an equal footing with the Council.
  • BACKGROUND: environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing, that is, investing which takes ESG factors into account when making investment decisions, is becoming an important part of mainstream finance. Notably, investment funds with sustainable characteristics or objectives have largely increased in number, size and the type of capital they attract. In this context, an ESG investment ecosystem has developed, including amongst others the supply of ESG ratings. Such ESG ratings are marketed as providing an opinion on the exposure of a company or entity to environmental, social and/or governance factors , and their impact on society.
  • The current ESG rating market suffers from deficiencies and is not functioning properly, with users’ and rated entities’ needs regarding ESG ratings not being met and confidence in ratings undermined. This problem has a number of different dimensions, mainly (i) the lack of transparency on the characteristics of ESG ratings, their methodologies and their data sources and (ii) the lack of clarity on how ESG rating providers operate. Therefore, ESG ratings do not serve their purpose and do not sufficiently enable users, investors and rated entities to take informed decisions as regards ESG-related risks, impacts and opportunities.
  • Hence, the Commission committed in the renewed sustainable finance strategy adopted in July 2021, to take action to improve the reliability, comparability and transparency of ESG ratings.
  • CONTENT: this proposal aims to introduces a common regulatory approach to enhance the integrity, transparency, responsibility, good governance, and independence of ESG rating activities , contributing to the transparency and quality of ESG ratings. It aims to contribute to the smooth functioning of the internal market, while achieving a high level of consumer and investor protection and preventing greenwashing or other types of misinformation, including social-washing, by introducing transparency requirements related to ESG ratings and rules on the organisation and conduct of ESG rating providers.
  • More specifically, this proposal aims to enhance the quality of information about ESG ratings, by (i) improving transparency of ESG ratings characteristics and methodologies to enable investors to make better informed investment decisions in regard to sustainability objectives, and by (ii) ensuring increased clarity on operations of ESG rating providers and the prevention of risks of conflict of interest at ESG rating providers’ level.
  • As supervisor of the ESG rating providers under this proposal, the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) would be the appropriate body to take stock of the developments and highlight potential issues of concern, liaising with relevant national authorities in the Member State where ESG ratings are used and where ESG rating providers are located and have their operations.
  • Budgetary implications
  • This proposal empowers ESMA to carry out a new function, namely to authorise and supervise ESG rating providers providing their services under this Regulation. This will require ESMA to charge ESG rating providers fees, which should cover all administrative costs incurred by ESMA for its authorisation and supervision activities. The total annual cost increase is estimated at approximately EUR 3.7-3.8 million. This cost will not be borne by EU budget.