Response to consultation on draft RTS on requirements for policies and procedures on conflicts of interest for issuers of ARTs under MiCAR
Q1: Do you have any comments on the definitions proposed in Article 1? If so, please explain your reasoning.
We believe that the definitions included in Article 1 are clear and correct.
Q2: Do you think that other types of specific circumstances should be covered by Articles 2 and 3?
We think Articles 2 and 3 are clear and well detailed; nevertheless, point (b) of paragraph 1 should be further clarified with some specifications (although the time limits are appropriate). There are no other typical or specific circumstances that need to be identified.
Q3: Do you think that other types of specific prevention or mitigation measures should be highlighted in Article 4?
We consider the cases listed in Article 4 to be exhaustive, and so that no other types of specific prevention or mitigation measures should be highlighted.
Q4: Do you have any comments on the provisions proposed in Article 5 and 6 related to the scope and the arrangements to deal with personal transactions? If so, please explain your reasoning.
We believe that all the provisions proposed in Articles 5 and 6 related to the scope and the arrangements to deal with personal transactions are well detailed.
Q5: Do you have any comments on the provisions proposed in Article 7 on the Remuneration procedures, policies and arrangements? If so, please explain your reasoning.
In letter (a) of Article 7 both holders of ARTs (external members) and shareholders/members of the issuer (internal members) are mentioned, and are regulated in the same way. We believe that, since these are two different types of entities with interests in the issuer of ARTs, they should be addressed to specific provisions.
Q6: Do you have any comments on the provisions proposed in Article 8 related to the Arrangements with third parties providing one of the functions as referred in Article 34(5), point (h) of Regulation (EU) 2023/1114? If so, please explain your reasoning.
We have no comments on the proposed provisions, relating to agreements with third parties performing any of the functions referred to in Article 34(5)(h) of MiCAR.
Q7: Do you have any comments on the provisions proposed in Article 9 related to the Adequate resources? If so, please explain your reasoning.
We are calling for the introduction of a proportionality criterion: The proposed provision is correct in the case where the company concerned is small, whereas in the case of a structured company, of significant size, a single person would hardly be able to manage conflicts of interest. The number of resources must be commensurate with the quantity and size of the subject being supervised.
Q8: Do you have any comments on the provisions proposed in Article 10 related to Disclosures of the general nature and source of conflicts of interest and the steps taken to mitigate them? If so, please explain your reasoning.
There are no comments on the proposed provisions related to disclosures of the general nature and source of conflicts of interest and the steps taken to mitigate them.