It is essential to clearly identify relevant contracts and their respective counterparties. Following a functional approach, entities accessing data held by trade repositories should be considered according to the competences they have and the functions they perform.

The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) should have access to all the transaction level data held by trade repositories, for the purpose of trade repository supervision, to be able to make information requests, take appropriate supervisory measures and also monitor whether registration as a trade repository should be kept or withdrawn.

The European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB), ESMA and the relevant members of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB), including some national central banks and relevant Union securities and markets authorities, have a mandate for monitoring and preserving financial stability in the Union, and should therefore have access to transaction data for all counterparties for the purpose of their respective tasks in that regard.

Supervisors and overseers of central counterparties (CCPs) need access to enable the effective exercise of their duties over of such entities, and should therefore have access to all the information necessary for such mandate.

Access by the relevant ESCB members serves to fulfil their basic tasks, most notably the functions of a central bank of issue, their financial stability mandate, and in some cases prudential supervision over some counterparties. Since certain ESCB members have different mandates under national legislation, they should be granted access to data in accordance to the different mandates listed in Article 81(3) of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012.

The relevant Union securities and market authorities have as a main duty investor protection in their respective jurisdictions and should be granted access to transaction data on markets, participants, products and underlyings covered under by their surveillance and enforcement mandates.

Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 only covers trade data and not pre-trade data such as orders to trade as required under Regulation (EU) No 1227/2011. Therefore, trade repositories should not be regarded as the appropriate source of information to ACER in that regard.

Under a functional approach for accessing data held by trade repositories, prudential supervision is an essential component. Similarly, different authorities might have a prudential supervisory mandate. Therefore, access to the transaction data on the relevant entities should be ensured to all authorities listed under Article 81(3) of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012.

Entities accessing trade repository data under Article 81(3) of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 should ensure that they keep and enforce policies in order to ensure that only the relevant persons access the information for a well-defined and legally founded purpose, also being clear on the possible other persons authorised to access such data.

The access to data should be considered within three aggregation levels. Transaction data should include individual trade details; position data should regard aggregate position data by underlying/product for individual counterparties; and aggregate notional data should correspond to overall positions by underlying/product with no counterparty details. Access to transaction data would also grant access to position level and aggregate data. Access to position data would also grant access to aggregate data, but not transaction level data. Conversely, access to aggregate notional data should be the less granular category and should not enable access to position or transaction level data.

This Regulation is based on the draft regulatory technical standards submitted by the European Securities and Markets Authority to the Commission.

In accordance with Article 10 of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010, ESMA has consulted the relevant authorities and the members of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB) before submitting the draft regulatory technical standards on which this Regulation is based. ESMA has also conducted open public consultations on these draft regulatory technical standards, analysed the potential related costs and benefits and requested the opinion of the ESMA Securities and Markets Stakeholder Group established in accordance with Article 37 of that Regulation,