BETA

20 Amendments of Gunnar HÖKMARK related to 2011/0298(COD)

Amendment 219 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
(5) There is agreement among regulatory bodies at international level that weaknesses in corporate governance in a number of financial institutions, including the absence of effective checks and balances within them, have been a contributory factor to the financial crisis. Excessive and imprudent risk taking may lead to the failure of individual financial institutions and systemic problems in Member States and globally. Incorrect conduct of firms providing services to clients may lead to investor detriment and loss of investor confidence. In order to address the potentially detrimental effect of these weaknesses in corporate governance arrangements, the provisions of this Directive should be supplemented by more detailed principles and minimum standards. These principles and standards should apply taking into account the nature, scale and complexity of investment firms. On the matter of board members, it is the responsibility of shareholders to ensure that all members at all times are of sufficiently good repute and possess sufficient knowledge, skills and experience whilst it is acknowledged that directorships differ and that detailed provisions as well as quantitative limits on the number of positions to be held therefore are unwarranted.
2012/05/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 257 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 45 a (new)
(45a) High-frequency trading as a general phenomenon is to be seen as a natural element of technological advancement and improved business models. Academic studies vindicate, as a general conclusion, that high-frequency trading adds liquidity and reduces volatility. It has also, at the same time, been concluded that the new technology as any other form of trading as such can be misused for purposes of market abuse.
2012/05/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 260 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 46
(46) The use of high-frequency trading technology has increased the speed, capacity and complexity of how investors trade. It has also enabled market participants to facilitate direct access by their clients to markets through the use of their trading facilities, through direct electronic access or sponsored and direct market access. Trading technology has provided benefits to the market and market participants generally such as wider participation in markets, increased liquidity, narrower spreads, reduced short term volatility and the means to obtain better execution of orders for clients. Yet, this high-frequency trading technology also gives rise to a number of potential risks such as an increased risk of the overloading of the systems of trading venues due to large volumes of orders, risks of algorithmic trading generating duplicative or erroneous orders or otherwise malfunctioning in a way that may create a disorderly market. In addition there is the risk of algorithmic trading systems overreacting to other market events which can exacerbate volatility if there is a pre-existing market problem. Finally, algorithmic trading or high frequency trading can lend itself to certain forms of abusive behaviour if misused. On the other hand, high-frequency trading in general does, as demonstrated by numerous academic studies, reduce volatility and contributes to improved price formation across different market places.
2012/05/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 282 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 50
(50) There is a multitude of trading venues currently operating in the EU , among which a number are trading identical instruments. In order to address potential risks to the interests of investors it is necessary to formalise and further harmonise the processes on the consequences for trading on other venues if one trading venue decides to suspend or remove a financial instrument from trading. In the interest of legal certainty and to adequately address conflicts of interests when deciding to suspend or to remove instruments from trading, it should be ensured that if one regulated market or MTF stops trading due to non disclosure of information about an issuer or financial instrument, the others follow that decision unless continuing trading may be justified due to exceptional circumstances. In addition, it is necessary to formalise and improve the exchange of information and the cooperation of trading venues in cases of exceptional conditions in relation to a particular instrument that is traded on various venues. To achieve this, the primary listing venue should be responsible for the real-time surveillance of all order-books on both primary and secondary trading venues.
2012/05/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 345 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 85
(85) Explicit powers should be granted to competent authorities to limit the abilitymanage the positions of any person or class of persons from entering into ain derivative contracts in relation to a commodity. The application of a limit should be possible both in the case of individual transactions and positions built up over time. In the latter case in particulcompetent authority should ensure that the powers necessar,y the competent authority should ensure that these position limitso implement this position management are non-discriminatory, clearly spelled out, take due account of the specificity of the market in question, and are necessary to secure the integrity and orderly functioning of the market. Position limits should be employed only as appropriate and only in the delivery month, as they have the potential to have a material adverse impact on liquidity.
2012/05/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 409 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point i – subparagraph 2
provided that in all cases this is an ancillary activity to their main business, when considered on a group basis, and that main business is not the provision of investment services within the meaning of this Directive or banking services under Directive 2006/48/EC or acting as a market maker in relation to commodity derivatives;
2012/05/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 432 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – indent 2
– the capital employed for carrying out the activity; and – the extent to which the activity provides a material source of revenue on a group level.
2012/05/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 608 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. In order to secure that no one is discriminated or hindered regarding the opportunities of high-frequency trading Member States shall also ensure that access to market places is provided at a level playing field basis.
2012/05/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 609 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 17 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. In order to fight market abuse arising from high-frequency trading, Member States shall ensure that regulated markets and other trading venues have the right instruments for surveillance, follow-up and control in place covering all sorts of transactions.
2012/05/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 899 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 34 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Member States shall require that an investment firm or a market operator operating a regulated market, an MTF or an OTF, that are secondary trading venues to a specific share, cooperate with the primary listing venue of this share, in order for it to carry out its obligations in accordance with [Article 11 MAR].
2012/05/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 937 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The Commission may adopt a decision in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 95 in relation to a third country if the legal and supervisory arrangements of that third country ensure that firms authorised in that third comply with legally binding requirements which have equivalent effect to the requirements set out in this Directive, in Regulation (EU) No …/…..../.... [MiFIR] and in Directive 2006/49/EC [Capital Adequacy Directive] and their implementing measures and that third country provides for equivalent reciprocal recognition of the prudential framework applicable to investment firms authorised in accordance with this directive.
2012/05/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 940 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
The prudential framework of a third country may be considered to have equivalent effect where that framework fulfils all the following conditions:
2012/05/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 1070 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 54 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall require that, in relation to a share, an operator of a regulated market that is the primary listing venue of this share, cooperates with the operators of other regulated markets, MTFs and OTFs, that are secondary trading venues for this share, in order for it to carry out its obligations in accordance with [Article 11 MAR].
2012/05/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 1073 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 54 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
ESMA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to determine the specific circumstances that trigger an information requirement as referred to in paragraph 1 and the specific requirements and conditions for the cooperation referred to in paragraph 1a, including sharing of costs.
2012/05/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 1094 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 59 – title
Position limitmanagement powers
2012/05/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 1102 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 59 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Member States shall ensure that regulated markets, operators of MTFs and OTFs which admit to trading or trade commodity derivatives apply limits on the number of contracts which any given market members or participants can enter into over a specified period of position management powers with automatic review thresholds, which powers might include position limits on the size of position which any given market members or participants can enter into but only during the delivery month of the relevant commodity derivatimve, or alternative arrangements with equivalent effect such as position management with automatic review thresholds , to be imposed in order to:
2012/05/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 1121 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 59 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The limits or arrangementpowers shall be transparent and non- discriminatory, specifying the persons to whom they apply and any exemptions, and taking account of the nature and composition of market participants and of the use they make of the contracts admitted to trading. They shall specify clear quantitative thresholds such as the maximum number of contracts persons can enter, and also taking account of the liquidity characteristics of the underlying commodity market, including as well as patterns of production, consumption and transportation to market.
2012/05/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 1130 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 59 – paragraph 2
2. Regulated markets, MTF and OTFs shall inform their competent authority of the details of the limits or arrangementpowers. The competent authority shall communicate the same information to ESMA which shall publish and maintain on its website a database with summaries of the limits or arrangementpowers in force.
2012/05/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 1137 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 59 – paragraph 3
3. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 94 to determine the limits or alternative arrangements on the number of contracts whichmanagement powers over the ability of any person canto enter into derivative contracts over a specified period of time and the necessary equivalent effects of the alternative arrangements established in accordance with paragraph 1, as well as the conditions for exemptions. The limits or alternative arr and the method for determining position limits. For purposes of calculating compliance with position limits, positions in economically equivalent OTC transactions may be netted off against positions entered into on the regulated market, MTF or OTF. The management powers shall take account of the conditions referred to in paragraph 1 and the limits that have been set by regulated markets, MTFs and OTFs. The limits or alternative arrangementmanagement powers determined in the delegated acts shall also take precedence over any measures imposed by competent authorities pursuant to Article 72(1) paragraph (g) of this Directive.
2012/05/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 1227 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 72 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) limitmanage the ability of any person or class of persons fromto entering into a commodity derivative , including by introducing non- discriminatory limits on positions or twhen number of such derivative contracts per underlying which any given class of persons can enter into over a specified period of time, when necessaryecessary and as appropriate to ensure the integrity and orderly functioning of the affected markets;
2012/05/15
Committee: ECON