ESMA streamlines several Q&As as part of simplification efforts 22 October 2026 Market Abuse MiFID - Secondary Markets Short Selling Simplification and Burden Reduction The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU regulator and supervisor, has updated its Questions and Answers (Q&As) on market…
Why this matters
The update announces that ESMA has withdrawn or amended Q&As that are obsolete, already reflected in legislation or market practice, or covered by other ESMA publications. Because Q&As are a form of guidance, the document is classified as guidance.
ESMA finalises the review of guidelines on the delay in disclosure of inside information 16 October 2026 Guidelines and Technical standards Market Abuse Market Integrity Simplification and Burden Reduction The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU’s financial markets regulator and supervisor, has…
AI Analysis
ESMA has finalised revised guidelines under Article 17 of the Market Abuse Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 on when issuers may delay disclosure of inside information. The guidelines add five legitimate-interest scenarios, remove guidance for intermediate steps in protracted processes following the Listing Act changes effective 5 June 2026, and apply when published in all 24 EU official languages.
Key dates
2026-06-05
Relevant amendments introduced by Regulation (EU) 2024/2809, the Listing Act, began applying; intermediate information in protracted processes generally ceased to require immediate ad hoc disclosure before completion, subject to the amended MAR conditions.
2026-10-16
ESMA announced the final revised guidelines. They become applicable from their publication on ESMA's website in all 24 official EU languages.
Suggested considerations
Review inside-information and delayed-disclosure policies against the final ESMA guidelines and Article 17 of Regulation (EU) No 596/2014, including the five new legitimate-interest scenarios.
Update decision trees and escalation procedures so that a proposed delay is assessed against all MAR Article 17(4) conditions rather than being approved solely because it matches an ESMA example.
Reassess controls for protracted processes in light of Regulation (EU) 2024/2809: distinguish intermediate steps that are no longer subject to ad hoc disclosure from final outcomes and from information whose confidentiality has ceased to be maintained.
Add a specific check that a proposed delay does not contradict the issuer's latest public announcement or other communication on the same matter.
Maintain contemporaneous written records of the inside-information assessment, legitimate interest, expected prejudice from immediate disclosure, confidentiality controls, rationale for the delay and the point at which disclosure must resume; consider whether and how the competent-authority notification and explanation required by Article 17(4) and Article 17(5) apply.
Coordinate disclosure assessments across parent and subsidiary issuers where information about one group company could prejudice another company's delay, with clear ownership of confidentiality and announcement decisions.
Train directors, senior managers, investor-relations personnel, transaction teams and advisers on the new examples, particularly public-authority requests, sensitive commercial opportunities and key-person appointments.
Monitor the ESMA website for the publication of the final guideline text in all 24 official EU languages and record the applicable version used in the firm's disclosure framework.
What changed
The revised guidelines retain a non-exhaustive list of circumstances that may support delayed disclosure and add five situations: a public authority requests non-disclosure; the issuer needs additional information to enable market participants to assess the information correctly; disclosure of sensitive commercial information could cause the loss of a business opportunity; disclosure could jeopardise the appointment of a governing-body member or manager in a key position; and disclosure of information concerning another group company could directly prejudice the issuer or undermine that...
Compliance impact
The update is material for issuers because an unjustified delay or premature disclosure can create market-abuse, supervisory and reputational risk, while inadequate records may prevent the issuer demonstrating compliance with Article 17(4). The guidance expands the practical circumstances that may support delay but does not displace the issuer's case-by-case assessment, confidentiality obligations, competent-authority processes or the requirement to disclose when the conditions for delay are no longer met.
New Q&As available 16 October 2026 CCP Digital Finance and Innovation The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU's securities markets regulator, has published the following question and answer: Crypto-Asset Service Provider (CASP) Use by CASPs of payment accounts provided by non-bank payment service…
AI Analysis
ESMA published five Q&As on 16 October 2026 covering MiCA client-funds safeguarding, ECSPR fee-based crowdfunding models and EMIR 3’s active account requirement (AAR). The update is principally interpretive, but it materially affects CASP safeguarding structures, crowdfunding platforms marketed as “investment clubs” and counterparties calculating the EUR 6 billion and 85% AAR tests.
Key dates
2026-10-16
ESMA published Q&As 2949, 2950, 2936, 2937 and 2938.
2025-06-25
The EMIR 3 active account regime began applying to counterparties already within scope after the six-month implementation period.
Suggested considerations
CASPs should consider mapping each client-funds flow against MiCA Article 70(2) and (3), documenting the end-of-next-business-day transfer control and verifying that any intermediary-held credit-institution account is specifically held for the CASP and technically segregated.
CASPs and their payment-service-provider partners may wish to review contractual terms, account mandates, insolvency protections, reconciliation processes and evidence demonstrating clients’ ownership rights and prohibition of proprietary use.
Crowdfunding providers using registration, membership or access fees should consider documenting why their model does or does not constitute a crowdfunding service under Regulation (EU) 2020/1503 and reviewing website disclosures, fee descriptions, client communications and investor-protection controls.
AAR counterparties should recalculate the 12-month aggregate month-end average gross notional position, including the applicable group perimeter and excluding client-clearing activity, against the EUR 6 billion and EUR 100 billion thresholds.
AAR counterparties relying on the 85% exemption should consider testing the one-half rule across the relevant derivative classes, retaining the underlying EU-CCP clearing data and avoiding any assumption that the exemption removes the representativeness requirement.
Affected counterparties should review trade-level residual-maturity data, bucket allocation, annual-average trade counts and reporting calendars so that representative clearing can be demonstrated at the applicable reporting date.
Compliance teams may wish to update policies, procedures, management information and regulatory inventories to distinguish ESMA Q&A interpretive expectations from directly binding Level 1 and Level 2 requirements.
What changed
For CASPs, ESMA clarifies that client funds may be temporarily held in an account with a non-bank payment service provider, such as a payment institution or electronic money institution, provided the funds are transferred to an account with a credit institution or central bank no later than the end of the business day following receipt.
Compliance impact
The publication does not create a new standalone authorisation or reporting regime, but it narrows interpretive uncertainty in areas where deficient controls could expose firms to MiCA safeguarding, ECSPR conduct or EMIR supervisory findings. The most consequential points are the restriction of the 85% AAR exemption, the EUR 6 billion trigger for representativeness obligations and the requirement for CASPs to evidence legally and operationally effective segregation and safeguarding arrangements.
ESMA updates its manual on transparency with new guidance for OTC derivatives and tick-size regime 15 October 2026 Trading The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU regulator and supervisor, has updated its manual on transparency to provide further guidance on the identification of over-the-counter…
AI Analysis
ESMA updated its MiFID II/MiFIR transparency manual on 15 October 2026, adding guidance on identifying OTC derivatives subject to transparency requirements, the reference data to be supplied for those instruments, and application of the equity tick-size regime. The OTC reference-data guidance is expressly draft guidance until the related RTS 2 and consolidated tape provider input/output technical standards enter into force, while the tick-size material is intended to improve supervisory convergence rather than create a new standalone binding rule.
Key dates
2026-10-15
ESMA published the updated transparency manual and added the OTC derivative reference-data guidance, tick-size Q&As and recommendations.
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to map OTC derivatives currently treated as subject to transparency against the identifying reference-data requirements in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/1003.
Firms should consider reviewing instrument-master, transaction-reporting and transparency-publication workflows to ensure OTC derivative identifiers and related reference data can be supplied consistently to relevant publication and consolidated-tape processes.
Trading venues may wish to assess tick-size logic for subscription rights and verify that the liquidity band applied is aligned with the underlying share, while documenting any intervention or exception decisions against the manual's recommendations.
Investment firms and trading venues should consider reviewing existing MiFID II/MiFIR transparency procedures, controls and vendor specifications in light of the manual's Q&As and the distinction between current guidance and draft OTC reference-data guidance.
Firms should monitor the entry into force of the related RTS 2 and consolidated tape provider input/output standards and be prepared to refresh implementation plans, testing and contractual data specifications when those standards become applicable.
Nationally supervised firms may wish to retain evidence showing how tick-size decisions, venue interventions and escalation to competent authorities were assessed against the updated supervisory-convergence material.
What changed
The manual clarifies that OTC derivatives subject to transparency must be identified using the identifying reference data specified by Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2025/1003, supporting consistent reporting and publication through the consolidated tape. It also explains how that reference data should be provided for transparency purposes; ESMA states this part should be treated as draft until the related RTS 2 and RTS on consolidated tape provider input/output data enter into force.
Compliance impact
The update signals closer supervisory scrutiny of instrument identification, reference-data quality and consistent tick-size application, with potential downstream effects on transparency publication, consolidated-tape data quality and venue controls. It does not itself establish a new binding compliance deadline; the OTC reference-data material remains draft pending the related technical standards, but firms may face remediation and supervisory questions if existing data or tick-size processes are inconsistent with the clarified approach.
ESMA promotes clarity in claims on impact and transition 12 October 2026 Sustainable finance The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU’s financial markets regulator and supervisor, has published two additional thematic notes on sustainability-related claims. Impact claims This thematic note examines…
AI Analysis
ESMA published two thematic notes on 2026-10-12 addressing positive impact claims and climate transition claims used in communications about funds, bonds and benchmarks. The notes do not create new regulatory requirements, but they signal that supervisors will expect sustainability claims to be specific, substantiated, balanced and transparent about methodologies, assumptions, data limitations and dependencies, particularly where claims concern real-world impact or future performance.
Key dates
2026-10-12
ESMA published the thematic notes on impact claims and climate transition claims.
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to inventory all impact and climate transition claims appearing in websites, fund marketing, factsheets, presentations, social media, bond materials and benchmark communications.
Firms should consider documenting the causal theory behind each positive impact claim, including the investment or financing activity expected to generate the impact and the distinction between intended, expected and achieved outcomes.
Firms should consider establishing measurable impact indicators, calculation methodologies, baselines, monitoring frequency and governance for reviewing whether claimed outcomes have occurred.
Firms making transition claims should consider documenting the transition objective, eligibility criteria, milestones, target dates, implementation actions, dependencies on investee companies or other parties, and the process for reporting slippage.
Marketing and product-governance reviews may wish to require prominent explanation of material assumptions, data gaps, estimates, methodological limitations and uncertainty surrounding forward-looking claims.
Firms should consider checking that claims are consistent across regulatory disclosures, marketing communications, portfolio holdings, bond frameworks, benchmark methodologies and public sustainability reports.
Compliance teams may wish to retain evidence supporting each claim and to review whether qualifying information is sufficiently clear, balanced and proximate to the claim rather than hidden in technical documentation.
Firms should consider assessing whether product names, labels, comparisons, impact figures and transition terminology could create an impression of guaranteed or already-achieved environmental or social outcomes.
What changed
ESMA has provided practical do's and don'ts for non-regulatory communications containing impact or climate transition claims, based on observed market practices. Firms communicating positive impact claims should explain the intended difference, the mechanism through which impact is expected to arise, and how outcomes will be measured. Firms making climate transition claims should describe the transition ambition, implementation approach, assessment of progress, relevant assumptions, data limitations and external dependencies.
Compliance impact
The immediate legal impact is limited because ESMA states that the notes are non-binding and introduce no new regulatory or reporting requirements. Their supervisory significance is nevertheless material: unclear, unsubstantiated or unbalanced sustainability communications may increase greenwashing, conduct and investor-protection risk under existing requirements, potentially leading to demands for remediation, supervisory scrutiny or enforcement under applicable national and EU frameworks.
ESMA sets out supervisory expectations on services related to unauthorised stablecoins 08 October 2026 Digital Finance and Innovation The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU regulator and supervisor, has published an opinion clarifying supervisory expectations of crypto-asset services involving…
AI Analysis
ESMA published an opinion on 8 October 2026 stating that MiCA-authorised crypto-asset service providers should cease providing EU clients with services relating to asset-referenced tokens and e-money tokens that do not comply with MiCA. The opinion signals a broad, supervisory-enforced wind-down: firms should prevent new or increased client exposure and remediate remaining exposures as soon as possible, and no later than 8 January 2027.
Key dates
2026-10-08
ESMA published its opinion on the provision of crypto-asset services in relation to non-MiCA-compliant asset-referenced tokens and e-money tokens.
2027-01-08 Deadline
Latest date by which National Competent Authorities should require remediation of remaining pre-existing exposures, calculated as three months after publication; firms may be required to act earlier.
Suggested considerations
Firms should inventory every ART and EMT made available to EU clients and classify whether each token satisfies the applicable MiCA requirements, including any relevant authorisation, notification, offer, and admission-to-trading conditions.
Compliance teams may wish to map each affected token across trading, exchange, execution, placing, order-routing, advice, transfer, custody, and portfolio-management workflows, including bundled or indirect services.
Firms should consider suspending onboarding, purchases, subscriptions, trading, swaps, staking-related access where relevant, and other activities that could allow EU clients to acquire or increase exposure to a non-MiCA-compliant token.
Technology and operations teams should assess geolocation, account, wallet, order-management, token-listing, transfer, and API controls, with testing and monitoring designed to prevent EU-client access or increased exposure.
Legal and product teams should review client terms, token-listing policies, disclosures, contractual restrictions, and arrangements with issuers, liquidity providers, exchanges, and other intermediaries.
Firms should identify pre-existing client exposures and prepare a documented wind-down or remediation plan capable of completion by 2027-01-08, subject to any earlier NCA requirement.
Firms may wish to define narrowly controlled exit-only services for liquidation, conversion, withdrawal, transfer, and safekeeping, with time limits, risk controls, client communications, records, and escalation to the relevant NCA.
Governance functions should document the interpretation of the ESMA opinion, approvals for affected product changes, control ownership, exceptions, surveillance, management information, and evidence available for supervisory review.
What changed
The opinion covers the full range of MiCA crypto-asset services, including operating trading platforms, exchanging crypto-assets for funds or other crypto-assets, executing orders, placing crypto-assets, reception and transmission of orders, investment advice, transfers, custody and administration, and portfolio management. ESMA expects National Competent Authorities to supervise so that CASPs do not maintain, introduce, or facilitate EU-client access to non-MiCA-compliant ARTs or EMTs.
Compliance impact
The impact is high for MiCA-authorised CASPs because the expectation applies across the service lifecycle and requires controls preventing both continued availability and increased client exposure, not only new issuance or admission to trading. Non-compliance may lead to supervisory intervention, mandated wind-down or remediation, restrictions on services, and heightened scrutiny of governance, systems, client communications, and outsourcing arrangements.
ESMA calls on firms to finalise preparations ahead of T+1 settlement deadlines 20 July 2026 Post Trading The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU regulator and supervisor, has published a statement highlighting key deadlines and action points to be ready for the transition to a T+1 settlement cycle…
Why this matters
ESMA regulatory deadline for T+1 settlement preparations with critical milestones in 2026 and implementation in October 2027. Affects trading and settlement infrastructure across capital markets participants requiring significant operational readiness and ecosystem coordination.
New Q&As available 10 July 2026 Digital Finance and Innovation Sustainable finance Trading The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU's securities markets regulator, has published the following question and answer: EU ESG Ratings Regulation (ESGRR) Consulting activities to investors or undertakings…
AI Analysis
Key dates
10 July 2026
- ESMA publishes the new Q&As on ESGRR, MiCA, and MiFIR secondary market topics
Suggested considerations
Review ESG ratings policies to ensure consulting, notification, issuer feedback, and factual error review procedures align with ESMA’s latest ESGRR Q&As.
Update internal case-handling workflows so notifications are screened for the designated contact issue and the two-working-day notification period is calculated consistently.
Document how your firm distinguishes internal-use ESG ratings or in-house financial services from externally provided ESG ratings activity.
Reassess whether any second-party opinion business can rely on the ESGRR exemption and record the legal basis for that conclusion.
Re-map MiCA permissions for custody, administration, transfer, and lending services to confirm the firm is not performing activities outside its authorisation scope.
What changed
- ESMA added a Q&A clarifying consulting activities to investors or undertakings under the EU ESG Ratings Regulation (ESGRR), which is relevant where a ratings provider’s advisory services may...
ESMA added Q&As on the application and scope of the two working day notification period under ESGRR, indicating that firms must apply the notification clock consistently and in line with ESMA’s...
ESMA clarified access to the dataset for factual error review under ESGRR, which affects how rated entities or issuers can review underlying data used in ESG ratings processes.
ESMA added a Q&A on notifications without a designated contact under ESGRR, which is relevant for governance and outreach workflows when a notification lacks an identified recipient.
ESMA clarified the obligation to consider issuer feedback under ESGRR, reinforcing that issuer comments cannot be ignored and must be handled through a documented review process.
Compliance impact
Non-compliance risk is high because these Q&As affect how firms interpret regulatory scope, notification timing, and operational controls across sustainability, crypto, and market structure regimes. Firms that ignore the guidance may face supervisory challenge, remediation costs, and potential findings that their current procedures, permissions, or disclosures are misaligned with ESMA’s expectations.
ESMA reminds firms of existing rules and obligations under binary option measures amid growing popularity of prediction markets globally 03 July 2026 Investor protection The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU’s financial markets regulator and supervisor, has issued a statement reminding firms of…
Why this matters
ESMA clarification on existing binary options rules applied to emerging prediction markets/event contracts. Firms must ensure event contracts qualifying as derivatives comply with product intervention measures and obtain proper authorization.
New Q&As available 28 May 2026 Digital Finance and Innovation Market Abuse Sustainable finance The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU's securities markets regulator, has published the following question and answer: EU ESG Ratings Regulation (ESGRR) Defined ranking system (2853) Transitional…
AI Analysis
ESMA has released new Q&As clarifying several operational aspects of the EU ESG Ratings Regulation (ESGRR), the Market Abuse Regulation (MAR) delegated audit requirements, and an exemption from MiCA white paper obligations for certain crypto-asset offerings. These Q&As materially affect how ESG rating providers structure their methodologies and registrations, how firms plan and evidence MAR compliance audits, and when MiCA white papers are required, and therefore should immediately be integrated into internal compliance frameworks.
Key dates
03 January 2025
– ESG Ratings Regulation (ESGRR) enters into force, starting the formal legislative timeline and triggering preparatory obligations for future ESG rating providers
02 July 2026
– ESGRR applies and the main substantive requirements become effective; from this date entities have one month to notify ESMA of their intention to apply for authorisation or registration as ESG rating providers
Suggested considerations
Map all existing and planned ESG rating products against ESMA’s clarified concept of a “defined ranking system” and update methodologies, scales, and disclosures to ensure they meet ESGRR and Q&A expectations.
For ESG rating providers operating before 02 July 2026, develop and execute a documented transitional compliance plan that aligns governance, methodologies, data controls and transparency with ESGRR, ensuring timely notification to ESMA within one month from 02 July 2026.
For entities intending to launch ESG rating activities after ESGRR entry into force, prepare and submit complete authorisation or registration files to ESMA before commencing rating activity, incorporating the Q&A guidance on initial registration requirements.
Establish or enhance a formal process to identify, assess and record “material changes to registration information” for ESG rating providers, and implement controls to ensure ESMA is notified within required timelines before or immediately after such changes, as specified in the Q&A.
Review and update MAR compliance frameworks, with particular focus on market soundings procedures, to incorporate ESMA’s expectations on the scope, independence, and documentation of the annually conducted audit required under Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/957.
What changed
- ESMA clarifies what constitutes a “defined ranking system” under the EU ESG Ratings Regulation (ESGRR), including when rating scales, score bands or league tables will be regarded as a ranking...
ESMA sets out transitional provisions for existing ESG rating providers active before ESGRR application, detailing conditions and timelines under which they may continue operating while completing...
ESMA explains how ESG rating providers established after the ESGRR date of entry into force must comply, including the need to obtain authorisation/registration before commencing activity in the EU...
ESMA defines what qualifies as “material changes to registration information” for ESG rating providers under ESGRR, indicating the types of changes (e.g.
Under MAR and Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/957, ESMA clarifies expectations regarding the annually conducted audit of market soundings arrangements, including scope, independence of the...
Compliance impact
Non-compliance with ESGRR, MAR and MiCA as interpreted in ESMA’s Q&As may lead to authorisation refusals or withdrawals, administrative fines, product restrictions, and heightened supervisory scrutiny. Given the enforcement nature of ESG ratings supervision and MAR/MiCA regimes, firms face significant conduct, reputational and business model risks if they fail to align promptly with this guidance.
ESMA issues guidance on effective use of resolution tools in CCP crisis planning 13 May 2026 CCP The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU’s financial markets regulator and supervisor, has today published a resolution briefing for Central Counterparties (CCPs). The briefing provides practical…
ESMA promotes proportionate supervision of MiFID II sustainability requirements 06 May 2026 Investor protection The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU’s financial markets regulator and supervisor, has issued a statement presenting the results of its Common Supervisory Action (CSA) on how…
ESMA releases reporting templates and instructions for the Active Account Requirement 13 April 2026 CCP Market data The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU’s financial markets regulator and supervisor, has published the reporting templates and instructions for the Active Account Requirement (AAR)…
ESMA clarifies expectations in the run-up to the launch of EU’s Consolidated Tapes 01 April 2026 Market data Trading The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU’s financial markets regulator and supervisor, has published Questions and Answers (Q&As) on the onboarding of data contributors to the EU’s…
AI Analysis
ESMA has issued Q&As clarifying expectations for data contributors onboarding to the EU's Consolidated Tapes (CTs) for equities, bonds, and derivatives, emphasizing pre-go-live cooperation with selected Consolidated Tape Providers (CTPs). This matters because it mandates trading venues and Authorised Publication Arrangements (APAs) to establish data transmission setups ahead of the **01 April 2026** launch, ensuring market transparency under MiFIR while minimizing disruptions. Compliance professionals must prioritize this to avoid supervisory scrutiny from ESMA and National Competent Authorities (NCAs).
Key dates
2025
- ESMA selected fairCT for bonds CTP (authorization ongoing).
22 December 2025
- ESMA selected EuroCTP for equities/ETFs CTP (authorization ongoing)
January 2026
- ESMA launched derivatives CTP selection
11 February 2026 Deadline
- Deadline for derivatives CTP selection participation requests
01 April 2026
- CTs go-live; mandatory data contribution from trading venues/APAs begins.
Suggested considerations
For data contributors: Immediately engage selected CTPs (EuroCTP, fairCT; derivatives post-selection) to agree transmission protocols, conduct connectivity testing, and complete end-to-end testing before 01 April 2026 go-live.[User Query]
For CTPs: Deploy confidentiality/integrity safeguards for pre-authorization data; prepare operational rules per Q&As (accessible via ESMA's online tool).[User Query]
For all firms: Review ESMA Q&As via online tool; update internal policies, IT systems, and vendor contracts for CT compliance; coordinate with NCAs if needed.[User Query]
Document cooperation efforts to demonstrate readiness during ESMA/NCAs supervision.
What changed
- Mandatory pre-authorization engagement: Data contributors (trading venues and APAs) must cooperate with selected CTPs *before* formal CTP authorization to set up data transmission, including...
CTP confidentiality obligations: Selected CTPs must implement safeguards for data confidentiality and integrity during preparatory phases.[User Query]
Legal obligation reinforcement: ESMA and NCAs remind that data contribution to CTPs is a binding requirement from CT go-live, tied to MiFIR.[User Query] No new rules are introduced; this clarifies...
Compliance impact
Urgency: High – With CT go-live just days away (01 April 2026), failure to complete onboarding risks non-compliance with MiFIR obligations, potential enforcement by ESMA/NCAs, and market access disruptions. This amplifies operational resilience demands amid MiFIR review, affecting data reporting workflows for Capital Markets & Trading firms.[User Query]
New Q&As available 27 February 2026 CCP Digital Finance and Innovation Financial reporting Issuer disclosure Transparency The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU's securities markets regulator, has published or updated the following Questions and Answers: European crowdfunding service providers…
AI Analysis
ESMA has published or updated multiple Q&As covering European crowdfunding, MiCA for crypto-asset service providers (CASPs), EMIR for central counterparties (CCPs), and Transparency Directive requirements on financial reporting and alternative performance measures (APMs). These updates provide clarifications on operational, reporting, and disclosure obligations, enhancing supervisory convergence and compliance certainty amid evolving EU regulations like MiCA and IFRS 18. Compliance professionals must prioritize these to avoid enforcement risks, particularly with upcoming effective dates in 2027.
Key dates
27 February 2026
- Publication date of new/updated Q&As on crowdfunding, MiCA, EMIR, and Transparency Directive
1 January 2027
- Effective date for new Q&A on IFRS 18 & APMs interaction (2775) and updates to APM-related Q&As (1868, 1874, 1875, 1877)
31 December 2027 Deadline
- Deadline for trading platform operators under MiCA to ensure compliant white papers for legacy tokens (related context from prior MiCA Q&As)
Suggested considerations
Review and update policies: CASPs must align withdrawal processes (Art. 75), overhead calculations, client fund interest handling, fiat payout mechanisms, offer/placing distinctions, and trading platform compliance with Title II.
Crowdfunding firms: Assess and document use of nominee structures per Q&A 2601.
CCPs/counterparties: Implement AAR reporting for thresholds, representativeness (with subcategory identification and trade reporting examples), and stress testing; reference ESMA's supervisory briefing for compliance models.
Issuers/reporters: Revise APM disclosures for IFRS 18 compatibility, ensuring prominence, clear definitions, and consistent presentation inside/outside statements effective 1 January 2027.
General: Integrate Q&As into compliance training, internal audits, and NCA reporting; monitor ESMA's Questions and Answers section for full texts.
What changed
- Crowdfunding: New Q&A (2601) on use of fiduciary (nominee) structures in equity crowdfunding, clarifying permissible structures for service providers.
MiCA (CASPs): Updates include clarification on withdrawal requirements under Article 75 (2320); fixed overheads calculation (2349); interests from client funds at credit institutions (2486); fiat...
EMIR (CCPs): New Q&As on AAR threshold calculation (2418, 2779), AAR representativeness obligation (2776, 2777), and AAR stress testing (2778), building on ESMA's supervisory briefing for...
Transparency Directive: New Q&A (2775, effective 1 January 2027) on IFRS 18 and APMs interaction; updated Q&As (effective 1 January 2027) on measures in/outside financial statements (1868), interim...
Compliance impact
Urgency: High - These Q&As address supervisory priorities in high-risk areas like crypto (MiCA) and CCP resilience (EMIR), with imminent 2027 deadlines for reporting changes aligning to IFRS 18. Non-compliance risks fines, authorization delays, or supervisory actions, especially as ESMA emphasizes convergence (e.g., AAR briefing). Firms in crypto/digital assets face heightened scrutiny amid MiCA rollout, while reporters must adapt quickly to avoid disclosure breaches.
ESMA issues a supervisory briefing on algorithmic trading 26 February 2026 Trading The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU’s financial markets regulator and supervisor, today published a supervisory briefing to support consistent supervision of algorithmic trading across the EU. The briefing…
Why this matters
This regulatory update from ESMA provides guidance and supervisory expectations for firms engaged in algorithmic trading, with a focus on areas such as pre-trade controls, governance, testing, and the use of emerging technologies like AI.
ESMA reminds firms of their obligations under CFD product intervention measures amid rising offerings of perpetual futures 24 February 2026 Investor protection The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU’s financial markets regulator and supervisor, has issued a statement reminding firms of their…
Why this matters
The regulatory update from ESMA focuses on the increased offering of perpetual futures and similar derivatives, often linked to crypto-assets, which are likely to fall under the existing CFD product intervention measures.
ESMA publishes a supervisory briefing on the AAR representativeness obligation 20 February 2026 CCP The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU’s financial markets regulator and supervisor, has published a supervisory briefing on the representativeness obligation linked to the active account…
AI Analysis
ESMA has published supervisory guidance clarifying how counterparties must comply with the **representativeness obligation** under the Active Account Requirement (AAR), a key component of EMIR 3 that mandates EU counterparties maintain active accounts at EU central counterparties (CCPs) and clear representative volumes of derivatives trades. This briefing is critical because market participants and regulators have held conflicting interpretations of the representativeness requirement, creating compliance uncertainty that this guidance now resolves.
Key dates
26 February 2026
- AAR RTS enter into force (20 days after Official Journal publication on 6 February 2026)
31 July 2026 Deadline
- First EMIR 3 representativeness reporting deadline
31 January 2027 Deadline
- First AAR compliance report due
Suggested considerations
*Immediate (by 26 February 2026):
Review the ESMA supervisory briefing and Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2026/305 in detail
Assess whether your firm meets the €6 billion notional clearing volume outstanding threshold triggering AAR obligations
Identify internal teams responsible for AAR compliance (trading, operations, compliance, reporting)
*Short-term (by 31 July 2026):
What changed
The supervisory briefing addresses three core compliance areas: Identifying Most Relevant Subcategories: Counterparties must continuously identify the five most relevant subcategories for each class of derivatives over each reference period, based on their trading activity. The guidance clarifies that the number of subcategories to select equals the maximum number available for that derivative class. Representativeness Compliance Standard: Counterparties must clear, on an annual average basis, at least five trades in each of the most relevant subcategories per class of derivative contracts...
ESMA publishes statement supporting the smooth implementation of the Listing Act – simplifying prospectus compliance for issuers 18 February 2026 Prospectus The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU’s financial markets regulator and supervisor, has issued a statement with practical guidance to…
AI Analysis
ESMA has issued a public statement providing practical guidance on implementing changes to the Prospectus Regulation (PR) under the Listing Act, clarifying the transitional regime for registration documents and universal registration documents approved or filed until 4 June 2026, allowing their continued use in prospectuses. This matters because it reduces compliance burdens for issuers accessing capital markets while preserving investor protection, enabling smoother transitions amid upcoming Level 2 measures. Issuers and advisors can rely on this non-binding guidance as ESMA expects NCAs to follow it.
Key dates
March 2026
Listing Act provisions for secondary and growth issuance prospectuses enter application
5 March 2026
Expected non-application date of Delegated Act amending (EU) 2019/980; interim PR Annexes IV/V/VII/VIII and Articles 14a/15a apply, with recommended Delegated Act disclosures
Until 4 June 2026
Registration/universal registration documents approved/filed fall under Article 48a transitional regime; usable thereafter until validity ends
5 June 2026 / 10 June 2026
Bulk of Listing Act provisions (including standard prospectuses) enter application; new Level 2 requirements apply from related ESMA technical advice
H1 2026
Potential NCA flexibility for early implementation of new requirements if available
Suggested considerations
Review and file/approve registration/universal registration documents before 4 June 2026 to leverage transitional regime; ensure ongoing supplements/amendments under old PR.
For EU Follow-on/Growth prospectuses pre-Delegated Act: Structure per PR Annexes IV/V/VII/VIII; voluntarily adopt recommended Delegated Act disclosures for compliance with Articles 14a/15a.
Advisors/issuers: Rely on ESMA statement for NCA interactions; update templates/processes for standardized formats and ESG disclosures (e.g., alignment with ICMA Green Bond Principles or EU Taxonomy if advertised).
NCAs: Apply ESMA's clarified transitional approach to avoid gaps.
Monitor Delegated Act adoption (likely pre-5 March 2026) and ESMA Level 2 technical standards.
What changed
- Transitional regime clarification under Article 48a PR: Registration documents and universal registration documents approved or filed until 4 June 2026 fall within the Article 48a(1) transitional...
Interim disclosure guidance for new prospectus types: Until the Delegated Act amending Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/980 applies (expected post-5 March 2026), EU Follow-on prospectuses...
Standardized presentation: Listing Act introduces clearer prospectus formats (e.g., banning generic risk factors), applying from March 2026 for secondary/growth prospectuses and June 2026 for...
Compliance impact
Urgency: High – Immediate relevance today (18 February 2026) for ongoing prospectus preparations, as it clarifies transitional use of existing documents and interim disclosures amid imminent deadlines (March/June 2026). Failure to align risks invalidation of documents or heightened scrutiny, but guidance eases burden reduction—critical for issuers timing listings to minimize costs while ensuring investor protection.
ESMA promotes clarity in communications on ESG strategies 14 January 2026 Sustainable finance The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU’s financial markets regulator and supervisor, published today a second thematic note on sustainability-related claims, focusing on ESG strategies. The note…
AI Analysis
ESMA published a thematic note on January 14, 2026, providing guidance on clear, fair, and not misleading communications regarding ESG strategies, specifically ESG integration and ESG exclusions, to mitigate greenwashing risks in non-regulatory materials like marketing. This matters because sustainability claims heavily influence investor decisions, and misleading communications can lead to supervisory actions, reputational damage, and loss of trust, aligning with existing EU rules under SFDR and related frameworks without imposing new disclosures.
Key dates
1 July 2025
- Publication of ESMA's first thematic note on ESG credentials (to be read in combination)
14 January 2026
- Publication date of the thematic note on ESG strategies (second in series)
Suggested considerations
Review and update all non-regulatory ESG communications (marketing, websites, presentations, DDQs, PPMs) against the four principles and do's/don'ts.
Ensure consistency across channels, substantiate claims with accessible evidence, and avoid vagueness or overstatements.
Train compliance/marketing teams; monitor for updates as further thematic notes may follow.
Cross-reference with first note and regulations like SFDR, Cross-Border Distribution Regulation.
What changed
This is not a formal regulatory change but supervisory guidance reinforcing four principles for non-regulatory communications (e.g., marketing materials, websites, investor presentations, voluntary...
Accurate: Claims must fairly represent sustainability profiles without exaggeration, falsehoods, omissions, cherry-picking, vagueness, or misleading ESG terminology/imagery.
Accessible: Information must be easy to understand and navigate, with layered substantiation in electronic formats for retail materials.
Substantiated: Backed by clear reasoning, facts, processes, and methodologies; disclose data limitations and comparison bases.
Up to date: Reflect current data, with timely disclosure of material changes and analysis dates. Practical do's/don'ts include explaining ESG processes in plain language, disclosing portfolio...
Compliance impact
Urgency: High – Immediate risk of enforcement for greenwashing in high-visibility ESG marketing, amid rising supervisory scrutiny; non-compliance threatens fines, remediation, and reputational harm as investor focus on sustainability grows. Proactive alignment builds trust and differentiates firms.
ESAs publish joint Guidelines on ESG stress testing 08 January 2026 Guidelines and Technical standards Joint Committee The European Supervisory Authorities (EBA, EIOPA and ESMA - the ESAs) published today their Joint Guidelines on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) stress testing . These Guidelines provide…
AI Analysis
The European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs)—EBA, EIOPA, and ESMA—published final Joint Guidelines on 8 January 2026 to standardize how national competent authorities (NCAs) integrate ESG risks into supervisory stress testing frameworks for banking and insurance sectors, without mandating new ESG-specific tests. These guidelines promote consistency, long-term methodologies, and common standards across the EU, initially prioritizing climate and environmental risks (physical and transition) before expanding to social and governance factors. They matter for compliance professionals as they shape future supervisory expectations, enhancing resilience assessments and aligning with CRD (Article 100(4)) and Solvency II (Article 304c(3)) mandates, potentially influencing firm-level stress testing preparations.
Key dates
08 January 2026
Publication of Final Report and Joint Guidelines by ESAs
10 January 2026 Deadline
Statutory deadline for ESAs to publish guidelines per CRD Article 100(4) and Solvency II Article 304c(3)
Two months after official EU translations (expected ~March/April 2026) Deadline
NCAs notify respective ESAs of compliance or intent to comply
01 January 2027
Application date of Joint Guidelines for NCAs
Suggested considerations
For NCAs: Review and integrate ESG risks into stress testing frameworks via materiality assessments; define objectives, scenarios, and governance; notify ESAs of compliance post-translation; maintain risk-based, phased approach.
For Firms: No direct mandates, but prepare by enhancing internal ESG risk modeling, data collection (especially climate/physical/transition risks), and stress testing capabilities to align with supervisory expectations; conduct voluntary ESG scenario analyses.
General: Monitor NCA implementations, update policies for ESG risk integration in ICAAP/ORSA, and engage in industry feedback on data/methodological gaps.
What changed
- Standardized Integration of ESG Risks: NCAs must embed ESG risks into existing supervisory stress tests or ad-hoc assessments, using a risk-based materiality assessment to scope relevant risks,...
Methodological and Governance Guidance: Outlines design for ESG-inclusive tests, including objectives (e.g., capital/liquidity robustness, strategy resilience), scenario analysis, and organizational...
No New Obligations: Does not require NCAs to conduct dedicated ESG stress tests, but ensures consistency when they do, improving legal certainty and transparency in approval processes.
Phased Approach: Initial focus on climate/environmental risks, with gradual extension to full ESG coverage based on data and model maturity.
Compliance impact
Urgency: Medium. While not imposing immediate firm-level requirements, the guidelines signal escalating supervisory focus on ESG risks from 2027, with potential for more frequent/punitive stress tests; firms delaying ESG integration risk capital/liquidity shortfalls in exercises, amplified by improving data availability and EU sustainability push (e.g., CSRD, SFDR). Proactive preparation mitigates future remediation costs and supports strategic resilience.
New Q&As available 19 December 2025 Digital Finance and Innovation Fund Management Market Abuse Prospectus Sustainable finance The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), the EU's securities markets regulator, has published or updated the following Questions and Answers: Alternative Investment Fund Managers…
AI Analysis
ESMA published new Q&As on December 19, 2025, addressing practical implementation questions across multiple regulatory frameworks including AIFMD, ESG rating activities, and sustainable finance rules. These guidance documents clarify regulatory expectations and promote consistent supervisory approaches across EU member states, making them essential for firms operating in affected areas to ensure compliant implementation.
Key dates
30 June 2025
- ESMA's final report on prospectus ESG disclosure requirements became effective (referenced in search results as June 6, 2025 publication date)
22 September 2025
- ESMA published updated consolidated Q&A on SFDR and Level 2 Regulation with new PAI disclosure guidance
17 October 2025
- ESMA updated MiCAR Q&As on execution service classification
19 December 2025
- ESMA published new Q&As across multiple regulatory domains
Suggested considerations
*Immediate (0-30 days):
*Short-term (1-3 months):
level information
advertised securities per Annex 21 requirements
What changed
The December 19, 2025 Q&A publication covers several regulatory domains:
AIFMD Exclusion Criteria: New guidance on the UNGC/OECD Guidelines exclusion (Q&A 2734), clarifying when alternative investment fund managers must apply exclusion-related requirements
ESG Rating Activities: Updated Q&As addressing regulatory requirements for ESG rating providers, including clarification on group-affiliated small ESG rating activities
Sustainable Finance: Continued development of guidance under SFDR and related sustainability disclosure frameworks
Digital Finance and Innovation: Guidance supporting implementation of digital finance rules