Currently, UCITS (which are required to produce a UCITS KIID under the UCITS Directive) are exempted from producing a PRIIPs KID until at least 31 December 2019. The original rationale for this was to give enough time for the Packaged Retail and Insurance-Based Investment Products (PRIIPs) Regulation to be bedded-down and for the European Commission to review the impact of PRIIPs KIDs on other retail products before extending to UCITS or determining that the UCITS KIID should be replaced by or deemed equivalent to the PRIIPs KID. This review was to have been conducted by 31 December 2018 but is certain to be delayed. In the absence of corrective action, this would result in a burdensome, bureaucratic scenario whereby from 1 January 2020, UCITS would be required to produce both a UCITS KIID and a PRIIPs KID, containing seemingly conflicting information for retail investors who are intended to benefit from these documents. On 1 October 2018, the joint committee of the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) (i.e. ESMA, EBA and EIOPA) wrote to the European Commission indicating that overlap in disclosure documents could in fact deter investors from using these key information documents rather than facilitating important investment decision making. The ESAs are also not convinced that the UCITS KIID information can be "effectively articulated" together with the PRIIPs KID information. An example of where there might be confusion relates to risk factors; the PRIIPs summary risk indicator and UCITS synthetic risk reward indicator will result in different risk indications for a material number of PRIIPs. The ESAs are of the view that other solutions are needed, including legislative changes to avoid duplicate information requirements from 1 January 2020. The ESAs have indicated that they will conduct a public consultation to be launched in Q4 2018 with the aim of submitting proposed amendments to the PRIIPs delegated regulation in Q1 2019. This intervention by the ESAs is an important development for UCITS and other retail product promoters, as industry commentators have, for some time, been highlighting flaws in PRIIPs content (including regarding performance scenarios and transaction costs disclosures) and of the potential to damage the UCITS brand by extending current PRIIPs KID requirements to UCITS.