‘How regulations and the supervision model affect the competitiveness of the Polish capital market. What changes are desired by market participants?’. This was the title of a discussion panel attended by Jacek Jastrzębski, Chair of the KNF, during the jubilee 25th Capital Market Conference of the Chamber of Brokerage Houses (IDM), held in Bukowina Tatrzańska.

Main statements and focal points from Jacek Jastrzębski’s speech:

• The UKNF listens to the voice from the market and works to improve and streamline supervisory practices related, among other things, to prospectus approval. In this regard, we have it agreed with Mr Tomasz Bardziłowski (GPW CEO) that we will hold a working session with representatives of the brokerage industry to implement reasonable improvements, in particular if they can be introduced without any changes to legislation.
• The supervisory authority recommends that before initiating a prospectus approval procedure, companies and their advisers meet with representatives of the UKNF to agree on a planned timeline of the transaction and a date by which the prospectus should be approved for the transaction to be carried out as planned. It is crucial that the timeline of the offer be agreed and that both parties meet the deadlines and milestones set.
• Our experience with good companies, using experienced brokers and advisers, shows that it is possible to agree on the timeline of the offer and proceed with it efficiently. For this reason, the UKNF is ready to say: ‘We are ready for a check call.’ I encourage good issuers, as well as brokers and advisers who work with them, to approach us with their plans regarding the offers that require the approval of offer documents. I am convinced that with an adequate level and quality of cooperation, we will be able to agree on the timeline for such offers together, and then successfully proceed with them.
• I acknowledge arguments raised in our discussion in support of streamlining certain proceedings carried out by the supervisory authority, in particular with respect to prospectuses, indicating that the responsibility to provide certain information rests on the issuer or its auditors. Theoretically, I agree with that, but I would like to draw your attention to the fact that in practice it is difficult for the UKNF to effectively get across, for example, when interacting with bodies that control the activities of the financial supervision authority, the idea that the accuracy of financial data is the responsibility of issuers and auditors, not of the KNF. Similarly, we needed to explain and clarify that approving a prospectus does not equate to ‘approving’ the issuer’s business model. This shows what we occasionally deal with when it comes to a public debate and how the role of the financial supervision authority is understood. In this regard, we recognise a specificity of the Polish market, in which it is typical to suppose that if the issuer experiences any solvency issues, it is the state to blame for the loss suffered by investors, with the state being embodied, for instance, by the financial supervision authority. Unfortunately, this affects supervisory practice and results in gold plating.