About a-team Marketing Services
The knowledge platform for the financial technology industry
The knowledge platform for the financial technology industry

A-Team Insight Blogs

MiFID II Delay Would Provide Time for a More Considered Approach

Subscribe to our newsletter

By Daniella Huggins, global marketing manager at Velocimetrics

As speculation solidifies into reality, it’s looking increasingly likely that MiFID II’s implementation date will be pushed back by a full year, extending the rather unrealistic 13-month compliance timeframe to a much more manageable 25 months.

MiFID II is a far-reaching regulation with an impact on multiple asset classes, business areas and trading industry participants of all different shapes and sizes. Anyone attempting to read it, even in bite-sized segments, would be recommended to do so armed with a decent caffeine supply. Its implementation, alongside the plethora of additional reforms currently facing European firms, will introduce significant change. For the managers tasked with making these things happen, considerable strategic and operational challenges lie ahead.

If the European Commission announces a delay, the industry’s collective sigh of relief will be clearly audible. Meeting the January 2017 deadline date with the information currently available presents real concerns. The latest regulatory technical standards were published in September, but leave a number of points with too wide a scope for interpretation, meaning the industry will need to wait for Level 3 Guidance for clarity. But that’s not expected until the New Year and this has left many firms feeling stuck between a rock and a hard place.

The regulation provides an outline and has, to an extent, left the industry to fill in the gaps in a number of areas. While firms need more detail before they can determine if the way in which they plan to meet the regulation will be right, they also face the requirement to act quickly. Being proactive is great, but if it is based on guesstimates because you don’t really know exactly what the final requirements will be, it can prove both unnecessarily expensive and time consuming.

The proposed delay to MiFID II will provide some much needed breathing space. It means firms can take a much more considered and planned approach to the regulation – hopefully with the direction they need to hand. Instead of implementing multiple point solutions as part of the need to act now, they’ll have time to consider the overall objectives of what the regulation is really trying to achieve, alongside the other compliance requirements cluttering their desks.

Firms can then determine if more holistic, end-to-end approaches that cohesively address multiple needs simultaneously could be deployed. This could include looking at how a firm could gain a much more detailed, real-time, understanding of what is happening to its trades from inception through to settlement. This would allow the firm to quickly spot emerging risks, such as errors or delays in the market data being used to formulate trading decisions, or the problem of a system starting to struggle as capacity rises. This insight could prove invaluable as firms seek to manage the multiple regulations that aim to control the market disruption risks that the growing complexity of trading technologies presents.

Being able to take a more cohesive approach often spares firms the challenges associated with integrating multiple point solutions down the line. A cohesive approach can also be much more cost effective as the firm can benefit from economies of scale and deliver business value over and above the compliance aspect.

We’ll have to wait and see what the outcome of the MiFID II delay being formally presented to the Commission is, but fingers crossed that postponement of the implementation date will be seen as more beneficial, and potentially risk adverse, than a rushed approach.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Related content

WEBINAR

Upcoming Webinar: Managing Non-Financial Misconduct Under SMCR

9 October 2025 11:00am ET | 3:00pm London | 4:00pm CET Duration: 50 Minutes Non-financial misconduct—encompassing behaviours such as bullying, sexual harassment, and discrimination is a key focus of the Senior Managers and Certification Regime (SMCR). The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has underscored that such misconduct is not only unethical but also poses significant risks...

BLOG

From Awareness to Execution: Closing the Regulatory Compliance Implementation Gap

By Jordan Domash, Founder and CEO, Responsiv. Even under a ‘regulation light’ administration, more than 1,400 new Federal executive orders, final rules, and proposed rules have emerged in 2025 alone. Layer on every potential state and international change, there’s a lot to sift through. Regulatory teams must then take these often-dense legal texts and quickly...

EVENT

Data Management Summit London

Now in its 16th year, the Data Management Summit (DMS) in London brings together the European capital markets enterprise data management community, to explore how data strategy is evolving to drive business outcomes and speed to market in changing times.

GUIDE

The DORA Implementation Playbook: A Practitioner’s Guide to Demonstrating Resilience Beyond the Deadline

The Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA) has fundamentally reshaped the European Union’s financial regulatory landscape, with its full application beginning on January 17, 2025. This regulation goes beyond traditional risk management, explicitly acknowledging that digital incidents can threaten the stability of the entire financial system. As the deadline has passed, the focus is now shifting...