Thematic Pillar Hub · 20 Published Briefings
Bafin Wplg Amf Consob Cnmv Supervision research topics and source records from Euro Firm Ledger. Holding an EU MiFID II passport does not grant uniform marketing freedom: BaFin, AMF, CNMV, CONSOB, AFM, and FSMA enforce permanent MiFIR Article 42 and domestic advertising bans across Continental Europe.
A named author is recorded on some briefings in this hub, including Lukas Lindqvist, CEFA . Reviewer records and automated-check status appear on each briefing when available.
Holding an EU MiFID II passport does not grant uniform marketing freedom: BaFin, AMF, CNMV, CONSOB, AFM, and FSMA enforce permanent MiFIR Article 42 and domestic advertising bans across Continental Europe.
Germany’s Wertpapierinstitutsgesetz (WpIG) carved investment firms out of the Banking Act (KWG), splitting ongoing prudential surveillance with the Deutsche Bundesbank while BaFin leads licensing and WpHG conduct.
Going far beyond ESMA’s OTC CFD baseline, Germany’s BaFin issued binding General Administrative Acts banning both retail CFDs AND exchange-traded futures carrying additional margin-deficit obligations (Nachschusspflicht).
BaFin’s MaComp administrative circular translates MiFID II conduct principles into granular German inspection rules—governing ex-ante cost PDFs (BT 3), negative target markets (BT 5), and § 70 WpHG quality-enhancement inducements.
Enacted ahead of MiFID II, France’s Loi Sapin 2 outlaws electronic advertising and sports sponsorships targeting French retail savers for binary options and CFDs lacking intrinsic per-position guaranteed stop-losses.
France bifurcates MiFID II licensing across two authorities: ACPR authorizes Entreprises d’Investissement (EI) after mandatory AMF conduct approval, whereas AMF alone licenses Sociétés de Gestion de Portefeuille (SGP).
Effective August 3, 2023, Spain’s CNMV enacted Europe’s strictest MiFIR Article 42 marketing intervention—prohibiting all retail CFD advertising, influencer campaigns, CPA referral programs, and brand sponsorships across Spain.
Spain’s CNMV pioneered mandatory client-typed verbatim risk expressions ("Producto difícil de entender...") for complex MiFID products alongside Circular 1/2022 prior-notification gates on mass crypto campaigns.
Armed with Article 7-octies TUF and Article 36 of Law 58/2019 (Decreto Crescita), Italy’s CONSOB bypasses slow court injunctions to order Italian telecom ISPs to black out abusive broker domains every week.
Under Articles 5 and 19 of Italy’s Testo Unico della Finanza (TUF), Società di Intermediazione Mobiliare (SIMs) are chartered by CONSOB after binding Banca d’Italia prudential review and supervised across strict Twin-Peaks lines.
The Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM) leads Europe on two specialized fronts: extending CFD-style leverage caps to securitized retail Turbos in October 2021 and supervising Europe’s premier RTS 6 HFT market-making cluster.
Effective August 18, 2016, Belgium’s FSMA enacted Europe’s only complete prohibition on commercializing OTC leveraged CFDs, rolling spot FX, and binary options to retail consumers in Belgium.
Poland’s Komisja Nadzoru Finansowego (KNF) created Europe’s only intermediate retail CFD category—the "Experienced Retail Client" (Klient detaliczny doświadczony)—unlocking 40:1 FX/index leverage while keeping full NBP and ICSD protection.
Austria’s WAG 2018 and Wertpapierfirmengesetz (WPFG) pair FMA conduct supervision and OeNB prudential analytics across two distinct charters: full EU-passportable Wertpapierfirmen (WPF) and § 4 WAG domestic-only WDUs.
Luxembourg’s CSSF Circular 20/758 (updated by Circulars 21/785 and 22/806) enforces strict Grand-Duchy central-administration substance, Authorized Management residency, and internal control lines across MiFID investment firms.
Coordinated under the Nordic-Baltic Supervisory Memorandum, Sweden’s Finansinspektionen, Denmark’s Finanstilsynet, Norway’s Finanstilsynet, and Finland’s FIN-FSA enforce some of Europe’s toughest inducement, margin, and AML sanctioning regimes.
Portugal’s CMVM and Greece’s HCMC actively police unauthorized introducing brokers, WhatsApp/Telegram finfluencer signal groups, and cross-border tied agents targeting Iberian and Hellenic retail savers.
Vilnius, Tallinn, and Riga power Europe’s multi-license fintech stack—combining Electronic Money Institution (EMI), MiFID II brokerage, and MiCA CASP charters under intense Bank of Lithuania, EFSA, and Latvijas Banka oversight.
MiFIR Articles 42 and 43 govern how national regulators like BaFin, CNMV, AFM, and KNF enact permanent domestic product bans—subject to a mandatory 1-month advance notification and public ESMA proportionality opinion.
MiFID II Articles 70-72 harmonize minimum administrative sanctioning ceilings across all 30 EEA states—mandating corporate fines up to at least EUR 5 million or 10% of consolidated group turnover, personal EUR 5 million fines, and 5-year public naming.
MiFIR Article 42 explicitly empowers a national competent authority to prohibit or restrict the marketing, distribution, or sale of financial instruments "in or from that Member State"—binding every firm touching residents of that host state regardless of where its home MiFID license sits.
Under MiFIR Article 40(6), ESMA’s temporary product-intervention powers must be renewed every 3 months as an interim bridge; once almost all 30 EEA national competent authorities enacted permanent domestic Article 42 measures matching or exceeding ESMA’s baseline, ESMA allowed the temporary bridge to lapse.
In Spain, CNMV’s 11 July 2023 Resolution explicitly prohibits event and sports-club brand sponsorships by entities predominantly marketing CFDs to retail investors unless strict non-CFD ring-fencing applies; France’s Loi Sapin 2 similarly bans sports sponsorships promoting prohibited high-risk contracts.
Under MiFID II Article 70(6)(f)-(h), every member state must empower its NCA to levy administrative fines of at least EUR 5,000,000 on natural persons and at least EUR 5,000,000 or 10% of total annual consolidated group turnover (or 2x benefit gained) on legal entities.
A § 34f GewO license is a purely domestic German trade-office (IHK/Gewerbeamt) exemption under MiFID II Article 3 limited to distributing investment funds inside Germany with zero EEA passporting rights; a § 15 WpIG institution is a full BaFin-supervised MiFID II firm eligible for 30-state Article 34/35 passports.
No! Remote Article 34 passported firms remain under their home NCA’s audit and ICSD compensation scheme; however, an Article 35 German branch of an EEA firm DOES become subject to BaFin host WpHG conduct supervision (and § 89 branch conduct audits) for German branch operations!