(fra kommisjonsforordningen)

(1) Fees that the European Securities Market Authority (ESMA) is to charge to external reviewers of European Green Bonds should fully recover all costs ESMA incurs for the registration, recognition and supervision of external reviewers, including direct and indirect cost. Indirect cost should consist of a reasonable apportionment of ESMA’s fixed and variable overheads related to supervisory activities under Regulation (EU) 2023/2631. 

(2) Fees charged for ESMA’s activities related to external reviewers should be set at a level such as to avoid a significant accumulation of deficit or surplus. Where there is a recurrent significant surplus or deficit, the level of fees should be revised. 

(3) Registration fees for external reviewers should be set at a level that is appropriate to reflect the cost incurred by ESMA when assessing the applications and to ensure consistency with its comparable direct supervision mandates. The fees for external reviewers that, post registration, apply for authorisation as an endorsing external reviewer of a third-country external reviewer should take into account that they are have already been assessed and registered by ESMA. 

(4) Third-country external reviewers can offer services under Regulation (EU) 2023/2631 on the basis of registration based on an equivalence regime, on the basis of recognition, or on the basis of the authorisation of an endorsement by an external reviewer established in the Union that is registered with ESMA. The fees to be paid to ESMA should reflect the different extent of supervisory effort and hence cost associated with each of these options. The fees for third-country external reviewers applying for registration under an equivalence regime should thus take into account the lower supervisory effort and cost as they are already registered and thus assessed and supervised in a third country. Third-country external reviewers applying for recognition should pay the same fee as Union based external reviewers to reflect the fact that the supervisory effort and cost are the same. 

(5) To prevent the creation of barriers to market entry for small external reviewers, it is necessary to introduce a turnover threshold below which external reviewers are not subject to annual supervisory fees for the three years following their registration or recognition. 

(6) Pursuant to Article 66(3) of Regulation (EU) 2023/2631, the threshold should be based on the annual turnover at group level. The annual turnover should be determined on the basis of consolidated financial statements drawn up pursuant to Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council. To ensure proportionality in the long term, it is necessary to introduce a cap on fees measured as a share of applicable turnover. To ensure a degree of predictability of fee collection for ESMA, it is also necessary to set a minimum fee for all external reviewers above the threshold. This minimum fee should be set at a level that ensures consistency with ESMA’s comparable direct supervisory mandates. 

(7) National competent authorities incur costs when assisting ESMA in its supervisory tasks and, in particular when those national competent authorities assist ESMA pursuant to Article 55(4) and Article 56(5) of Regulation (EU) 2023/2631. The fees ESMA charges external reviewers of European Green Bonds should therefore also cover those costs. To avoid national competent authorities incurring a loss or profit from carrying out delegated tasks or from assisting ESMA, ESMA should reimburse only the actual costs incurred by that national competent authority. 

(8) ESMA has been consulted on the content of this Regulation pursuant to Article 66(4) of Regulation (EU) 2023/2631,