This week's news from Practice Insight: inside the letter sent to the EC on Priips scope, banks warn others against becoming too relaxed on CCP relocation, and Mifid firms' LEI drive runs out of steam
Banks explain that they've stopped chasing clients for LEIs despite it being a legal requirement under Mifid II, arguing that a lack of regulatory attention – including a six-month reprieve of sorts – signifies a relaxed attitude to the rule. Here LEI providers argue that without action from Esma the entire LEI project could be undermined
Just three months since implementation, Mifid II has already prompted both buy and sellside firms to change their approach to investment research. Many banks have already scaled back their offerings, while independent providers have experienced significant growth. Consolidation is inevitable, but in the meantime a price war among sellside firms may prompt regulatory intervention
Esma's central reference database is integral to Mifid II's drive towards transparency, but according to transaction reporting heads and trading venue regulatory specialists it's full of mistakes and gaps. With little progress made on correcting those mistakes so far, firms fear a backlog of old reports will need to be re-evaluated in future
According to traders and brokers, the new best execution regime is producing a worse end-result for clients than before. As front desk staff look to ease the recordkeeping burden, some are going to fewer market makers for an initial price, while others are neglecting to record quotes that don't result in trades - which is contrary to the rules
Four Mifid-focused in-house sources at EU investment banks reveal just how little progress has been made on the legal entity identifier front since Esma granted a six-month reprieve from the rule in late December
According to in-house sources at banks, buyside firms and trading venues, best execution reports are both too technical for retail and not granular enough for sophisticated buysiders, rendering them essentially useless for the end investor. They may over time improve accountability, but for now market participants are calling them a dumbed-down version of what many venues already provide
Brokers on some EU exchanges have been forced to restructure relationships around controversial Esma guidance on direct electronic access. If read literally, the Q&A prevents any intermediary that’s not regulated in the EU from providing any firm with DEA on an EU exchange
Banks, trading venues and APAs remain baffled by wildly inconsistent data reports produced under Mifid II. Different APAs ask for different information; LEI codes have expired and firms argue elements of trade reports simply aren't relevant to their business
According to heads of rates trading, hedge funds and senior lawyers, practically all new deals are still benchmarked against Libor because there’s just no viable alternative yet
According to market participants at European banks and commodity firms, Mifid II’s position limits for commodity trading are already hitting on-venue trading for certain asset classes. It’s especially an issue for precious metals which are overwhelmingly traded OTC
