13 Amendments of Fabio Massimo CASTALDO related to 2020/2036(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)
Citation 2 a (new)
- having regard to Article 31 of Directive (EU) 2019/2162 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2019 on the issue of covered bonds and covered bond public supervision and amending Directives 2009/65/EC and 2014/59/EU, pursuant to which the European Commission shall adopt a report on the possibility of introducing a dual-recourse instrument named ‘European Secured Notes’ (ESNs),
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 a (new)
Citation 5 a (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 4 July 2017 on Towards a pan-European covered bonds framework, which called on the European Commission to include in the new directive on covered bonds specific references to a legal framework for ESNs, such as dual recourse, special public supervision, bankruptcy remoteness and transparency requirements,
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Calls for the removal of barriers, including the simplification of legislation when possible without undermining companies’ obligations with respect to transparency, accountability and data protection, to diversify funding sources for SMEs, in order to promote SMEs’ ability to access equity markets, and to reduce the existing debt bias; points out that the current situation makes SMEs more fragile and vulnerable;
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Calls on the Commission to draft a legislative proposal on 'European Secured Notes' (ESNs), as a new dual-recourse funding instrument for banks which could help improve access to financing for SMEs across the EU; recalls that ESNs could be targeted to specific objectives, such as supporting SMEs in the transition to a more sustainable economy and in channelling funding to the real economy;
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Recalls that, under the current treatment of minority interest of subsidiaries, the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR) de facto discourages listing on the stock markets, reduces investments held by parent companies in their subsidiaries, all the above turning into a reduction of banks’ ability to finance the real economy; calls on the Commission to amend the CRR in order to increase the amount of minority interests included in the consolidated Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) capital;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls for the acceleration of the development of EU venture capital (VC) and private equity markets by increasing the availability of funding for VC investments, developing larger late-stage VC funds, tax incentive schemessimplification of bureaucracy where possible for VC and business angel investments, and active IPO markets for VC-backed companies;
Amendment 186 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Recalls that the Solvency 2 Directive requires a review by the end of 2020 and that the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) will provide technical advice to the Commission after consultations with different stakeholders; requests the Commission and EIOPA to consider adjusting the capital requirements for investments in equity and private debt, in particular of SMEs, also through the internal model approach;
Amendment 190 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. In implementing the finalised Basel III standards, calls on the Commission to pay due attention to (i) provisions affecting market making by banks and non-banks and (ii) risk weights applicable to bank’s investment in equity, especially of long-term SME equity;
Amendment 229 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Recalls that the low retail investors’ engagement with financial markets might be a consequence of the regrettable financial fraud cases that took place during the last decade in some Member States through the sale of risky products in bad faith, as the European Parliament deplored in 2015; highlights that the strengthening of retail investors’ confidence is a key factor for a fair and efficient functioning of financial markets; in this respect, aims the EU authorities and institutions to further strengthen and harmonise the legislation on retail investors’ protection from fraud and misleading information.
Amendment 237 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Emphasises that access to financial markets should be possible for all enterprises under the ‘same business, same rules’ principle; nonetheless, to achieve this objective, takes the view that it is important to simplify the criteria to consider professional investors upon request, which is also linked to quantitative requirements related to the size of the enterprises;
Amendment 246 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Recalls the existence of different shortcomings in the legislation on packaged retail investment and insurance products (PRIIPs) that should be addressed in the next review; expects that Level 2 PRIIPs legislation on the Key Investor Document to respect level 1, in particular in relation to the performance scenarioorder to improve the methodologies related to the performance scenarios and to ensure comparability among different investment products; regrets the delays in the adoption of Level 2 PRIIPs legislation that will overlap with the first review of PRIIPs, and which increases legal uncertainty and costs for stakeholders;
Amendment 255 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Urges the Commission to make clear the differentiation between professional and retail investors on all levels of MIFID, making it possible to tailor the treatment of clients according to their knowledge and experience on the markets; requests that the Commission consider the introduction of a category of semi-professional investors to better respond to the reality of participation on the financial markets; considers, however, that the application of this new category of clients should be left to the discretion of the investment firms, which should be free to include (or not) semi-professional clients in their own service model, and could involve taking certain appropriate measures;
Amendment 263 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19