Response to consultation on draft RTS on the identification of a group of connected clients (GCC)

Go back

Question 1. Could you please indicate, if the approach of sections 4, 6 and 7 of the existing EBA guidelines, now transposed in the Articles of the draft RTS, remains sound and is implementable with no major challenge or unduly high costs. Please elaborate.

See attached.

Question 2. Have you identified any additional aspect(s) that would require clarification? In this vein, would you see the need for further illustrative examples (and if yes, on which precise situation or specific case)? Please elaborate.

See attached.

Question 3. After considering the circumstances set out in Article 1 that constitute a single risk by means of control, could you please indicate if the described circumstances are sufficiently clear? Please elaborate.

N/A

Question 4. Is the additional Scenario C 0 related to the determination of a group of connected clients by means of control, listed in Section 3.4.1 (Groups of connected clients based on a control relationship), sufficiently clear? Would you see need for further illustrative examples of a control relationship?

See attached.

Question 5. After considering the circumstances set out in Article 2 that constitute a single risk by means of economic dependency, could you please indicate if the described circumstances are sufficiently clear? Please elaborate.

N/A

Question 6. In point (c) of Article 2(1), would you prefer following a quantitative approach by replacing the term “significant part” with a threshold of “50% or more” as envisaged in point 1 of LEX 10.16? What would be the advantages or disadvantages? Please elaborate.

See attached.

Question 7. What is your view on the wording “that cannot be replaced in a timely manner without excessively increased costs” compared to the wording used in the GL “that cannot be easily replaced”? What do you think about this change, is it more comprehensible? Please elaborate.

See attached.

Question 8. Is the additional Scenario E 8 related to the determination of a group of connected clients by means of economic dependencies, listed in Section 3.4.2 (Establishing interconnectedness based on economic dependency), sufficiently clear? Would you see need for further illustrative examples of an economic dependency relationship? Please elaborate.

See attached.

Question 9. After considering the circumstances set out in Article 3 that constitute a single risk by means of the combined existence of control and economic dependencies, could you please indicate if the described circumstances are sufficiently clear? Please elaborate.

N/A

Question 10. Is the additional Scenario E 7 related to the determination of a group of connected clients by means of the combined existence of control and economic dependencies, listed in Section 3.4.3 (Relation between interconnectedness through control and interconnectedness through economic dependency), sufficiently clear? Please elaborate.

N/A

Upload files

Name of the organization

Association for Financial Markets in Europe (AFME)