EU finance ministers at the 12 June 2026 Ecofin Council debated the Market Integration and Supervision (MISP) package, revealing persistent divergences on the scope of ESMA's direct supervision, criteria for designating significant entities, and the role of national competent authorities (NCAs). The discussion, chaired by Makis Keravnos, showed broad support for ESMA directly supervising significant market participants and establishing an executive board, but ministers pulled opposite ways on the details.
Commissioner Maria Luís Albuquerque urged ambitious progress, warning that joint supervisory teams (JSTs) could raise costs by at least 40%. ECB's Boris Vujčić backed the Commission proposal, supporting group-level criteria and direct supervision of all central securities depositories (CSDs) and significant crypto-asset service providers (CASPs). Austria's Harald Waiglein agreed on scope but pushed for stronger NCA involvement and opposed changes to the consolidated tape. France's Roland Lescure endorsed the E6 initiative, preserving group criteria and a short transition. Italy's Giancarlo Giorgetti called for proportionate, data-driven criteria and joint supervision with NCAs, stressing crisis management balance. Czechia's Alena Schillerová preferred removing group criteria for CASPs, setting a 15-million-user threshold, and supported JSTs. Malta's Clyde Caruana argued significance should be entity-level, not group-based, and CASPs should stay national unless truly systemic.
group-level criteria (backed by Commission, ECB, France) versus entity-level (Malta) or threshold-based (Czechia). NCA involvement ranges from strong (Austria, Italy) to minimal (ECB). Transition length also splits ministers, with France favouring short and others cautious. The Council aims for a progress report and position by autumn 2026.
Trading venues and CSDs face higher compliance costs if group-level supervision expands, but benefit from harmonised rules. CASPs could see lighter oversight under entity-level or threshold approaches, reducing regulatory burden. NCAs risk losing authority under direct ESMA supervision, while retail investors gain from stronger market integrity but may face higher costs passed on by firms.