Examining the June 2026 Rapporteur reports on MISP

EU RegCORE Client Alert | Capital Markets Union + Savings and Investment Union

QuickTake

On 11 June 2026, the European Parliament’s Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) published two draft reports on the Market Integration and Supervision Package (MIP or MISP), marking the Parliament’s first substantive legislative engagement with the Commission’s proposals published in December 2025. These draft reports represent the most far-reaching legislative repositioning of EU capital market supervision since the original Commission proposals assessed in our December 2025 Client Alert.Available here.Show Footnote

The two draft reports are: (1) Rapporteur Markus Ferber’s draft report (PE 789.866) on the proposed Master Regulation (procedure 2025/0383(COD)), amending the ESMA Regulation, EMIR, MiFIR, CSDR, MiCAR and other regulations; and (2) Rapporteur Eero Heinäluoma’s draft report (PE 789.867) on the proposed Master Directive (procedure 2025/0382(COD)), amending the UCITS Directive, AIFMD and MiFID II. Both are first-reading positions under the ordinary legislative procedure. The ECB issued its opinion on 9 April 2026;See our coverage here.Show Footnote the EESC opinion was adopted on 18 March 2026. Reasoned opinions asserting non-compliance with subsidiarity have been submitted by the Czech Chamber of Deputies and the Italian Chamber of Deputies.

In several areas—notably the extension of ESMA direct supervision to all CCPs and CSDs, the creation of direct ESMA supervision for significant asset management groups and depositaries, and the introduction of a competitiveness mandate—the Parliament goes substantially beyond the Commission’s proposals. In other areas—notably crypto-asset services providers (CASPs)—the Parliament moderates the Commission’s centralisation ambition. Market participants should recalibrate their planning against this materially changed legislative landscape.

Key elements of the Parliament’s position include:

• Wider ESMA direct supervision for FMIs. The Parliament extends ESMA direct supervision to all EU CCPs and all 32 EU CSDs, eliminating the Commission’s “significant”/”less significant” distinction. ESMA also becomes the direct supervisor of significant asset management groups and gains direct supervisory powers over depositaries.
• Narrower ESMA scope for CASPs; new competitiveness mandate. The Parliament scales back the Commission’s blanket ESMA oversight of all CASPs to a tiered significance-based model. A statutory secondary competitiveness objective for ESMA is introduced—a structural addition absent from the Commission’s proposal—together with enforcement safeguards including a Board of Appeal interim relief mechanism.
• ESMA governance and institutional changes. The Parliament introduces material modifications to ESMA’s governance structure including double voting rights for Executive Board members, a capital markets practice experience requirement, a Commission voting seat on the Board of Supervisors and a supervisory secondment programme to build common supervisory culture.
• Fee protections and enforcement safeguards. An explicit prohibition on double-charging by ESMA and NCAs, with annual ESMA reporting on NCA fee levels. A Board of Appeal safeguard permits interim suspension of ESMA enforcement action pending appeal; the threshold for breach-of-Union-law investigations is raised.
• Asset management reforms. Direct ESMA supervision of significant asset management groups (≥EUR 100bn UCITS / ≥EUR 150bn AIFMD), new efficient portfolio management technique requirements (90% revenue return floor), macroprudential stress testing for open-ended AIFs and tightened non-cooperative tax jurisdiction exclusions.
• Trading venues and systematic internalisers. The national surveillance authority role would be converted from permanent to a three-year transitional period, after which ESMA would assume full market surveillance. ESMA would be required to report within three years on whether significant systematic internalisers should be subject to direct supervision. Mandatory SI rulebook publication and tick-size price improvement requirements would be introduced.

Crucially, these reports are first-reading positions of the ECON Committee, and the full Parliament plenary and Council trilogue negotiations remain ahead. 

The subsidiarity concerns raised by the Czech and Italian Chambers of Deputies—both asserting non-compliance with the subsidiarity principle—signal that the transfer of supervisory powers to ESMA will face political resistance from certain Member States.   

Equally, the ECB has provided its opinion (9 April 2026) on MISP and the EESC’s opinion was adopted on 18 March 2026.   

The degree to which the Parliament's expansive vision of ESMA direct supervision (particularly the extension to all CCPs and CSDs, as well as large asset managers) survives Council scrutiny is likely to be a key battleground in trilogue. Regulated firms should engage proactively in the legislative process at this stage, given the scale of the structural changes proposed.