Activities of Miguel VIEGAS related to 2014/0017(COD)
Plenary speeches (1)
Transparency of securities financing transactions (A8-0120/2015 - Renato Soru) PT
Amendments (7)
Amendment 92 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The 2008 global financial crisis revealed important regulatory gaps, ineffective supervision, opaque markets and overly- complex products in the financial system. The Union has adopted a range of measures in order to render the banking system more solid and more stable, including strengthening capital requirements, rules on improved governance and supervision and resolution regimes. The progress made on the establishment of the banking union is also decisive in this context. However, the crisis also highlighted the need to improve transparency and monitoring not only in the traditional banking sector but also in areas where non-bank credit activities take place, called “shadow banking”, the scale of which is alarming, corresponding as it already does to half of the regulated banking system.
Amendment 98 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) A High-Level Expert Group chaired by Erkki Liikanen adopted a report on reforming the structure of the Union banking sector in October 2012. It discussed among other things the interaction between the traditional and the shadow banking systems. The report recognised the risks of shadow banking activities such as high leverage and pro- cyclicality, and it called for a reduction of the interconnectedness between banks and the shadow banking system, which had been a source of contagion in a system- wide banking crisis. The report also suggested certain structural measures to deal with remaining weaknesses in the Union banking sector, including complete separation of deposit services and investment activity.
Amendment 107 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Re-hypothecation is intended to provides liquidity and enables counterparties to reducinge funding costs. However, it creates complex collateral chains between traditional banking and shadow banking, posing financial stability risks. The lack of transparency on the extent to which financial instruments provided as collateral have been re-hypothecatused and the respective risks in case of bankruptcy can undermine confidence in counterparties and magnify risks to financial stability.
Amendment 109 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) This Regulation establishes information rules towards counterparties on re-hypothecation which should not prejudice the application of sectorial rules adapted to specific actors, structures and situationsseeks to establish stricter rules on information for counterparties on re-hypothecation. Therefore, the rules on re- hypothecation provided for in this Regulation should apply, for example, to funds and depositories only insofar as there are no more stringent rules on re-use foreseelaid down within the framework for investment funds constituting a lex specialis and taking precedence over the rules contained in this Regulation. In particular, this Regulation should be without prejudice to any rule restricting the ability of counterparties to engage in re- hypothecation of financial instruments that are provided as collateral by counterparties or persons other than counterparties.
Amendment 201 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the providing counterparty has granted its prior express consent as evidenced by the signature of the providing counterparty to a written agreement or an equivalent alternative mechanism explicitly setting out the forms of reuse of the financial instrument to be transferred.
Amendment 223 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point g
Article 20 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point g
(g) maximum administrative pecuniary sanctions of at least threen times the amount of the profits gained or losses avoided because of the breach where those can be determined;
Amendment 226 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point i
Article 20 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point i
(i) in respect of legal persons, maximum administrative pecuniary sanctions of at least 10% of the total annual turnover of the legal person according to the last available accounts approved by the management body or, alternatively, at least EUR 5 000 000 if the above amount is lower than this figure; where the legal person is a parent undertaking or a subsidiary of the parent undertaking which has to prepare consolidated financial accounts according to Directive 2013/34/EU16, the relevant total annual turnover shall be the total annual turnover or the corresponding type of income according to the relevant accounting regime according to the last available consolidated accounts approved by the management body of the ultimate parent undertaking. __________________ 16 Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p. 19).