MiFID 2.0: Casting New Light on Europe´s Capital Markets

Published in: 

An outstanding conclusion to the work of the task force set by ECMI and CEPS on the review of the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID), this report provides a generous set of findings drawn from current legislative proposals, academic literature, and market views. It identifies potential market failures and offers valid alternatives, while focusing on three core areas: transparency, market structure, and provision of investment services. 

In a context of growing uncertainty upon the future of Europe's capital markets, the review of a fundamental piece of legislation such as the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID) represents a significant opportunity to strengthen the role of the internal market and to regain investors' confidence, hampered by the financial crisis. MiFID has unquestionably changed the landscape of European (secondary) capital markets in many ways. Most notably, the Directive has led to a more competitive environment, huge investments in technologies, and greater investor protection. It has at the same time brought the EU and the US markets closer.
The Task Force Group, run by ECMI/CEPS and chaired by Pierre Francotte, former CEO of Euroclear, has gathered 31 representatives of European financial markets, including stock exchanges, multilateral trading facilities, asset managers, investment banks, and commercial banks.

As rapporteurs of the Task Force CEPS Research Fellow Diego Valiante and CEO Karel Lannoo find that the review of MiFID should clarify intended scopes, fill gaps in the legal text, and harmonise supervisory practices among member states. It should make sure that the benefits of a new competitive environment are spread along the value chain and passed-on to final users, retail and wholesale investors, as appropriate.

The views expressed in the Executive Summary and Final Report do not necessarily reflect the views and positions of all members involved in this Task Force, nor do members necessarily endorse any reference to academic and independent studies cited in the Report. For a full disclaimer, please refer to the Report itself.