AFM Enforcement Actions

Key dates

12 November 2025

- AFM issues an instruction to Euronext Amsterdam for breach of CSDR Article 53(1) open access rules and sets a period for remediation

13 May 2026

- AFM publishes the instruction decision after it becomes irrevocable and confirms that Euronext has remediated by withdrawing the restrictive conditions and confirming continued and new access for CSDs

Suggested considerations

• Trading venues must review settlement models, CSD linkage arrangements and related policies to ensure that all conditions for CSD access to transaction feeds are non‑discriminatory, transparent, and fully aligned with Article 53(1) of CSDR.
• Compliance and legal teams must identify and remove any contractual or operational provisions that directly or indirectly favour a linked or in‑house CSD over independent or alternative CSDs in terms of access to transaction feeds.
• Trading venues must implement internal governance and change‑management controls to ensure that future settlement model changes, including the introduction of a preferred CSD, are subject to ex‑ante compliance review against CSDR open access obligations.
• Market infrastructure firms must establish documented criteria and procedures for handling CSD access requests, ensuring these criteria are objective, transparent, and applied consistently to linked and non‑linked CSDs.
• Compliance functions should conduct periodic audits of access arrangements, transaction feed connectivity, and any associated fees or technical requirements to confirm that no indirect barriers to CSD access exist.

What changed

• - Trading venues subject to CSDR must ensure that access for central securities depositories to transaction feeds is provided on a non‑discriminatory and transparent basis as required by Article...
• Conditions or criteria attached to the designation of an alternative CSD (other than a venue’s preferred or “linked” CSD) that have the effect of limiting access to transaction feeds are treated as a...
• AFM has clarified, through enforcement, that settlement model changes and associated contractual or operational conditions are within the scope of supervisory scrutiny for compliance with CSDR open...
• Euronext has withdrawn three announced conditions that restricted access for certain CSDs and has confirmed continued access for CSDs with existing connectivity to its transaction feeds.
• Euronext has also confirmed access for other CSDs that requested access to act as alternative CSDs, establishing a practical expectation that trading venues respond positively to reasonable access...

Key dates

28 June 2025

- The European Accessibility Act came into force, and Dutch national measures began applying to covered new products and services

Coming months (TBD, est. late 2026) Deadline

- AFM will conduct an accessibility compliance review of the sector, focusing on WCAG compliance, especially level A criteria

23 April 2026 Deadline

- AFM published its third EAA update and announced a forthcoming sector compliance review

Suggested considerations

• Firms should map all consumer-facing digital services and identify which websites, apps, and digital documents fall within EAA/WCAG scope.
• Firms should assign a named internal owner for accessibility compliance, monitoring, remediation tracking, and regulatory notifications.
• Firms should document accessibility risks and remediation plans for each in-scope digital service, including the precise pages, functions, or documents affected.
• Firms should embed accessibility checks into design, development, testing, and change-management processes so compliance is monitored continuously.
• Firms should review EAA non-compliance notifications and make them more specific, including the exact accessibility issues, affected locations, and remediation status.

What changed

• - AFM expects financial institutions to identify accessibility risks in their digital services and implement improvements that meet the required WCAG criteria.
• AFM expects firms to embed and monitor accessibility through internal processes, rather than treating accessibility as a one-off remediation project.
• AFM is emphasizing clear accountability for safeguarding digital accessibility, which means firms should be able to show who owns accessibility compliance, monitoring, and remediation internally.
• AFM says EAA notifications of non-compliance must be more specific, because current submissions often do not describe the exact accessibility issues or where they are located.
• AFM has published further instructions on how to answer certain questions in the EAA notification form, indicating a stronger supervisory focus on the quality of regulatory reporting.

Key dates

July 2020

– Start of the period in which Arrowstreet’s incorrect calculation methodology led to systematically incorrect net short position notifications to AFM and underdisclosures to the public

November 2024

– End of the period during which Arrowstreet violated short selling rules through inaccurate notifications and disclosures of its net short positions in Just Eat Takeaway.com and Galapagos

20 April 2026

– AFM imposes an administrative fine of €297,000 on Arrowstreet Capital, LP for the systematic incorrect notifications and underdisclosures of net short positions

22 April 2026

– AFM publishes the enforcement notice stating that the case has been settled via a simplified procedure and is closed

Suggested considerations

• Review and document the firm’s methodology for calculating net short positions in EU‑listed shares, ensuring alignment with the EU Short Selling Regulation and AFM’s thresholds and definitions, including aggregation rules and treatment of derivatives.
• Perform a comprehensive back‑testing and reconciliation of historical and current net short position calculations against trade data, positions and corporate actions to identify any systemic discrepancies or underreporting risks.
• Implement or enhance controls that validate short position calculations prior to submission, including independent second‑line checks, exception reporting, and automated variance checks for large movements or threshold breaches.
• Map all AFM short selling notification and disclosure thresholds and timing requirements into the firm’s surveillance and reporting systems, ensuring automated alerts when positions reach, exceed or fall below relevant levels.
• Establish robust governance over short selling reporting, including clear ownership between trading, operations, risk and compliance, formal sign‑off procedures, and regular reporting to senior management on short‑selling compliance.

What changed

• - AFM has reaffirmed strict enforcement of notification and disclosure obligations for net short positions in shares admitted to trading on Euronext Amsterdam, including the expectation of accurate...
• The case confirms AFM’s interpretation that systematic underreporting (wrong figures in 101 notifications) and underdisclosure to the public (wrong figures in 85 cases) constitutes a material breach...
• AFM emphasises that net short positions must be notified promptly and accurately, and that disclosures above the public threshold are a key tool for market participants to understand negative...
• AFM demonstrates that self‑reporting, prompt correction, full cooperation and remediation can result in a reduced fine and simplified settlement, signalling a clear incentive structure for firms to...
• The publication reinforces that AFM will use the short selling register and underlying notifications to monitor for market abuse, market distortion and systemic risks, increasing scrutiny on firms...