On the proposal for a Regulations (EU) No 1095/2010, No 648/2012, No 600/2014, No 909/2014, 2015/2365, 2019/1156, 2021/23, 2022/858, 2023/1114, No 1060/2009, 2016/1011, 2017/2402, 2023/2631 and 2024/3005 as regards the further development of capital market integration and supervision within the Union
BUDG-PA-788811
Committee on Budgets · Rapporteur: Hélder Sousa Silva
Written by a language model from the full text only; every figure comes from the text. The paragraph links open the paragraph a statement rests on — check the text itself before relying on it.
The Committee on Budgets gives its budgetary assessment of the Market Infrastructure and Supervision Package, which strengthens the European Securities and Markets Authority's (ESMA) supervisory role.¶¶ It welcomes the package's objectives but says ESMA's new tasks need adequate money and staff, and that supervisory fees should reflect real costs without duplicating national fees.¶¶ It wants a single framework for ESMA's supervisory fees, a single 50/50 Union/national competent authority ratio for non-fee-funded activities, and a market-size-based key for national contributions.¶¶¶ It proposes single non-renewable eight-year mandates for ESMA's Chair, Executive Director and Executive Board members, with staggered first terms.¶ It asks the Commission to revise the financial statement if new tasks are added, and concludes the proposal is compatible with the multiannual financial framework and budget rules, subject to its amendments.¶¶
Committee position. The Committee on Budgets concludes that, subject to its amendments, the proposal is compatible with the multiannual financial framework and budget rules. It proposes a single fee framework, a single 50/50 financing ratio, a market-size-based contribution key and eight-year non-renewable mandates for ESMA's leadership.¶¶¶
Key points
- Welcomes the Market Infrastructure and Supervision Package, which strengthens supervisory integration and gives ESMA important new responsibilities, and says these need adequate financial and human resources.¶
- Says the transfer of supervisory responsibilities must be proportionate and cost-efficient, that supervisory fees should reflect actual costs and avoid duplication with national fees, and that ESMA and national authorities should keep close dialogue.¶
- Underlines the importance of regularly assessing fee levels against cost developments under Delegated Regulation (EU) 2019/715.¶
- Notes ESMA will need significant additional staff as some national responsibilities are centralised at Union level, and stresses recruiting and retaining highly qualified staff with an appropriate distribution of posts and grades.¶
- Notes the Union budget will finance upfront IT development, with part recovered through supervisory fees, and says the recovery period should be long enough to avoid a disproportionate burden on the first directly supervised entities.¶
- Supports a single horizontal framework for supervisory fees under the ESMA Regulation, and says the Commission's power to adopt one delegated act setting the fee methodology should be mandatory and subject to a clear deadline before the new mandates start.¶
- Considers non-fee-funded activities should be financed by a single 50/50 Union/national competent authority ratio, for transparency, sustainability and better budgetary control.¶
- Proposes single non-renewable eight-year mandates for ESMA's Chair, Executive Director and Executive Board members, staggered first terms of six, seven and eight years, and transitional arrangements for the current Chair and Executive Director.¶
- Says mandatory national competent authority contributions should be allocated by the actual size and structure of national financial markets, not vote weighting under Protocol No 36, through a market-size-based key set by delegated act.¶
- Stresses that any additional supervisory responsibilities, tasks or IT tools added in negotiations should be assessed financially and the Legislative Financial and Digital Statement revised, and invites the Commission to help the budgetary authority assess amendments.¶
- Concludes that, subject to its amendments, the proposal is compatible with the Multiannual Financial Framework, the own resources system, the Interinstitutional Agreement and the Financial Regulation's budgetary principles.¶
Who is affected
- ESMA: would gain new supervisory responsibilities, more staff and a changed funding and governance framework.¶¶¶
- National competent authorities: would contribute under a new market-size-based key and a single 50/50 financing ratio.¶¶
- Supervised entities: would pay supervisory fees reflecting actual costs, without duplication of national fees.¶
- The Union budget: would finance upfront IT development and part of ESMA's non-fee-funded activities.¶¶¶
Figures and deadlines
- approximately EUR 612 million: estimated financial impact of the Package over 2028-2034¶
- EUR 53 million: part of the impact covered by the Union budget
- approximately EUR 21 million in staff expenditure, EUR 4 million in infrastructure and operating expenditure and EUR 27 million in operational expenditure
- EUR 26 million: financed through contributions from national competent authorities
- EUR 533 million: financed through supervisory fees
- around 480 additional full-time equivalent (FTE) staff, of which 26 funded by the Union and NCAs contributions and 454 covered by supervisory fees¶
- almost 900 staff: ESMA's establishment plan by 2034
- around 65 % of its budget by 2034: supervisory fees as ESMA's main revenue source¶