4 Amendments of Alfred SANT related to 2021/0341(COD)
Amendment 94 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The provision of banking services in the Union is conditional upon the credit institution’s having previous authorisation and a physical presence through a legal person or a branch in its territory. Only in that way credit institutions may be subject to effective prudential regulation and supervision that are necessary to minimise the risk of failure and, when it occurs, to manage that failure in order to prevent it from spreading in a disorderly manner and leading to the collapse of the financial system (contagion risk by e.g. a bank run or a bank failure triggered by imprudent lending). The provision of banking services in the Union without such physical presence would increase the presence and prevalence in the financial markets where credit institutions are closely involved of risk segments not subject to Union’s prudential regulation and supervision, that may eventually threaten the financial stability of the Union or of its individual Member States. The financial crisis of 2008-2009 is the latest historical precedent, which underlines how small market segments may become the source of significant threats to the financial stability of the Union and its Member States if left outside the scope of prudential regulation and supervision. Hence, it is necessary to lay down an explicit requirement in Union law that undertakings established in a third country and seeking to provide banking services in the Union should at least establish a branch in a Member State and that such branch be authorised in accordance with Union legislation, unless the undertaking wishes to provide banking services in the Union through a subsidiary in which it has a proven financial and operational control. However, that requirement to establish a branch should not apply to cases of reverse solicitation of services, as in this case it is the customer that approaches the undertaking in the third country to solicit the provision of the service.
Amendment 116 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 37
Recital 37
(37) Members of the management body may undergo the suitability assessment only after a significant time after their appointment or, in the case of key function holders, not at all. Thus, members of the management body who do not meet the suitability criteria may have exercised their duties for a long time, which is problematic especially for large institutions. Moreover, cross-border institutions must navigate through a wide diversity of national rules and processes, which does not make the current system efficient. The existence of different requirements as regards the suitability assessment across the Union is a particularly acute issue in the context of the Banking Union. As a result, it is important to provide a set of rules at Union level to put in place a consistent and predictable “fit-and-proper” framework. This will foster supervisory convergence, enabling further trust between competent authorities and give more legal certainty to institutions. Having a robust “fit-and- proper” framework for assessing the suitability of members of the management body and key function holders is a crucial factor to ensure that institutions are adequately run and their risks appropriately managed. Such a framework should be introduced step by step, in a graduated basis cumulatively, taking into full account the particular features applying within national financial systems, not least those of the smaller Member States.
Amendment 123 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) In light of the role of the suitability assessment for the prudent and sound management of institutions, it is necessary to provide competent authorities with new tools, such as statements of responsibilities and a mapping of duties, to assess the suitability of members of the management body and key function holders. Those new tools will also support the work of competent authorities when reviewing the governance arrangements of institutions as part of the supervisory review and evaluation process. Notwithstanding the overall responsibility of the management body as a collegial body, institutions should be required to draw up individual statements and a mapping that clarify the duties held by members of the management body, senior management and key function holders. Their individual duties are not always clearly or consistently laid down and there may be situations where two or more roles overlap or where areas of duties are overlooked because they do not fall neatly under the remit of a single person. The scope of each individual’s duties should be well defined and no areas of duties should be left without ownership. Those tools should ensure further accountability of the members of the management body, senior management and key function holders without inhibiting the operational flexibility of institutions required to face changing competitive realities.
Amendment 132 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 46
Recital 46
(46) To enable the timely and effective activation of the systemic risk buffer it is necessary to clarify the application of the relevant provisions and simplify and align the applicable procedures. Setting a systemic risk buffer should be possible for designated authorities in all Member States to enable the recognition of systemic risk buffer rates set by authorities in other Member States and to ensure that authorities are empowered to address systemic risks in a timely, proportionate and effective manner. Recognition of a systemic risk buffer rate set by another Member State should require only a notification from the authority recognising the rate. To avoid unnecessary authorisation procedures where the decision to set a buffer rate results in a decrease or no change from any of the previously set rates, the procedure laid down in Article 131(15) of Directive 2013/36/EU needs to be aligned with the procedure laid down in Article 133(9) of that Directive. The procedures laid down in Article 133(11) of that Directive should be clarified and made more consistent with the procedures applying for other systemic risk buffer rates, where relevant.