5 Amendments of Paul TANG related to 2022/0403(COD)
Amendment 201 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Given the fact that entities that are established in countries that are listed as high-risk third countries that have strategic deficiencies in their regime on anti-money laundering and counter terrorist financing, as referred to in Article 9 of Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council32 , or in third countries that are listed in Annex I and Annex II to the Council conclusions on the revised EU list of non- cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes33 are subject to a less stringent regulatory environment, their operations may increase the risk, including due to increased counterparty credit risk and legal risk, for the Union financial stability. Consequently, such entities should not be eligible to be considered in the framework of intragroup transactions. __________________ 32 Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing, amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and repealing Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Commission Directive 2006/70/EC (OJ L 141, 5.6.2015, p. 73). 33 Council conclusions on the revised EU list of non-cooperative jurisdictions for tax purposes and the Annexes thereto (OJ C 413 I, 12.10.2021, p. 1).
Amendment 211 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) It is necessary to ensure that the calibration of the level of the clearing activity to be maintained in accounts at Union CCPs can be adapted to changing circumstances. ESMA has an important role in the assessment of the substantial systemic importance of third-country CCPs and their clearing services. ESMA, in cooperation with the European Banking Authority (EBA), the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) and the ESRB, and after having consulted the European System of Central Banks (ESCB), should therefore develop draft regulatory technical standards specifying the details of the level of substantially systemicTo reduce financial stability risks and ensure that a sufficient level of clearing services to be maintainare cleared in the in active accounts in Union CCPs by, financial and non-financial counterparties subject to the clearing obligation. Such calibration should not go beyond what is necess should be required to cleary and proportionate to reduce clearing in the identified clearing services at Tier 2 CCPs concerned. In that regard, ESMA should consider the costs, risks and the burden such calibration entails for financial and non-financial counterparties, the impact on their competitiveness, and the risk that those costs are passed on to non-financial firms. Furthermore,t least 40 per cent in active accounts in Union CCPs. Two years after the entry into force of this Regulation, ESMA, in cooperation with the EBA, EIOPA and the ESRB and after consulting the ESMACB should also ensube required that the envisaged reduction in clearing in those instruments, identifieo undertake an assessment whether this quantitative threshold has of substantial systemic importance, results in them no longer being considered ofled to a sufficient reduction of excessive exposures in substantially systemic importance when ESMA reviews the recognition ofclearing services offered by the relevant CCPs which according to Article 25(5) of that Regulation and where such a review should be done at least every five years. In addition, suitable phase-in periods for the progressive implementation of the requirement to hold a certain level of the clearing activity in the accounts at Union CCPs Tier 2 CCPs to the extent necessary to safeguard financial stability. Following this assessment, the European Commission may be empowered to adopt a delegated act to increase this quantitative threshould be foreseen.
Amendment 217 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) To ensure that clients are aware of their options and can take an informed decision as where to clear their derivative contracts, clearing members and clients that provide clearing services in both Union and recognised third-country CCPs should inform their clients about the option to clear a derivative contract in a Union CCP so that clearing in those services identified as of substantial systemic importance is reduced in Tier 2 CCPs in order to ensure the financial stability of the Union. However, this obligation to inform clients should be distinct from the active account requirement. Relevant clearing members should also systematically propose Union clearing alternatives to clients even for services that are not determined as being of substantial systemic importance by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA).
Amendment 258 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
Article 7 a – paragraph 1
Article 7 a – paragraph 1
1. Financial counterparties or a non- financial counterparties that are subject to the clearing obligation in accordance with Articles 4a and 10 on the [OP: please insert date of entry into force of this Regulation] or become subject to the clearing obligation thereafter and clear any of the categories of the derivative contracts referred to in paragraph 2 shall clear at least a proportion40 per cent of such contracts at accounts at CCPs authorised under Article 14.
Amendment 286 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
Article 7 a – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 7 a – paragraph 6 a (new)
(6a) ESMA in cooperation with EBA, EIOPA and the ESRB and after consulting the ESCB shall undertake [two years after the entry into force of this Regulation] whether the quantitative threshold referred to in paragraph 1 has led to a sufficient reduction of excessive exposures in substantially systemic clearing services offered by the relevant Tier 2 CCPs to the extent necessary to safeguard financial stability. Following this assessment, the European Commission may be empowered to adopt a delegated act to increase the quantitative threshold referred to in paragraph 1.