Last week’s proposed delay of MiFID II has generated a great deal of reaction, which is continuing. The delay has not yet been agreed by the European Parliament, and even if it does, it may well be only a partial delay, holding back certain elements by up to a year, for example position limits.
This article on the Bloomberg website highlights the fact that National Competent Authorities (NCA) had until July to finalise local versions of the rule set, which under the current deadline gives only 6 months for a successful implementation. So long as this first first NCA deadline does not move, a delay of the main MiFID will provide more achievable time-frames. However, the article cautions against a “blanket” delay, arguing that this will not help the market.
This article on The Trade News web site considers the uncertainty that the next weeks of wrangling over the delay will bring. In it Anne Plested of Fidessa argues that a delay should not be a reason to hold back on any implementation plans, and we are reminded that a similar delay was refused for EMIR a few years ago. These sentiments are also expressed in this article on the Fund Strategy web site. Investment Week reports here from the Wealth Management Association summit, quoting FCA chairman John Griffith-Jones stating that any delay would be “realistic but not ideal”.
The messages coming out from the market are clear: If there is a delay, it may be partial. Until there is clarity, it would be wise to assume no delay. What would be most beneficial however is a clear decision as soon as possible.