BETA

29 Amendments of Markus FERBER related to 2021/0341(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 32

(32) The unprecedented scale of transition towards a sustainable, climate- neutral and circular economy will have considerable impacts on the financial system. In 2018, the Network of Central Banks and Supervisors for Greening the Financial System50 acknowledged that climate-related risks are a source of financial risk. The Commission’s Renewed Sustainable Finance Strategy51 emphasises that environmental, social and governance (ESG) risks, and risks steaming from the physical impact of climate change, biodiversity loss and the broader environmental degradation of ecosystems in particular, pose an unprecedented challenge to our economies and to the stability of the financial system. Those risks present specificities such as their forward-looking nature and their distinctive impacts over short, medium and long-term time horizons. __________________ 50 Launched at the Paris One Planet Summit on 12 December 2017, is a group of Central Banks and Supervisors willing, on a voluntary basis, to share best practices and contribute to the development of environment and climate risk management in the financial sector and to mobilise mainstream finance to support the transition toward a sustainable economy. 51 COM(2021) 390 final, 06.07.2021.deleted

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 33

(33) The long-term nature and the profoundness of the transition towards a sustainable, climate-neutral and circular economy will entail significant changes in the business models of institutions. The adequate adjustment of the financial sector, and of credit institutions in particular, is necessary to achieve the objective of net-zero greenhouse gas emissions in the Union’s economy by 2050, while maintaining the inherent risks under control. Competent authorities should, therefore, be enabled to assess this process and intervene in cases where institutions’ manage climate risks, as well as risks stemming from environmental degradation and biodiversity loss, in a way that endangers the stability of the individual institutions, or the financial stability overall. Competent authorities should also monitor and be empowered to act, when there is a misalignment of institutions’ business models and strategies with the relevant Union policy objectives and broader transition trends towards a sustainable economy, resulting in risks to their business models and strategies, or to the financial stability. Climate and, more broadly, environmental risks, should be considered together with social risks and governance risks under one category of risks to enable a comprehensive and coordinated integration of these factors, as they are often intertwined. ESG risks are closely linked with the concept of sustainability, as ESG factors represent the main three pillars of sustainability.deleted

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 35

(35) ESG risks can have far-reaching implications for the stability of both individual institutions and the financial system as whole. Hence, competent authorities should consistently factor those risks into their relevant supervisory activities, including the supervisory evaluation and review process and the stress testing of those risks. The European Commission, via its Technical Support Instrument, has been providing support to national competent authorities in developing and implementing stress testing methodologies and stands ready to continue to provide technical support in this respect. However, the stress testing methodologies for ESG risks have so far mainly been applied in an exploratory manner. To firmly and consistently embed stress testing of ESG in supervision, the EBA, European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) and the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) should jointly develop guidelines to ensure consistent considerations and common methodologies for stress testing ESG risks. Stress testing of those risks should start with climate and environment- related factors, and as more ESG risk data and methodologies become available to support the development of additional tools to assess their quantitative impact on financial risks, competent authorities should increasingly assess the impact of those risks in their adequacy assessments of credit institutions. In order to ensure convergence of supervisory practices, EBA should issue guidelines regarding the uniform inclusion of ESG risks in the supervisory review and evaluation process (SREP).deleted

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 36

(36) The provisions in Article 133 of Directive 2013/36/EU on the systemic risk buffer framework may already be used to address various kinds of systemic risks, including risks related to climate change. To the extent that the relevant competent or designated authorities, as applicable, consider that risks related to climate change have the potential to have serious negative consequences for the financial system and the real economy in Member States, they should introduce a systemic risk buffer rate for those risks where they consider the introduction of such rate effective and proportionate to mitigate those risks.

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 38

(38) The purpose of assessing the suitability of members of management bodies is to ensure that those members are qualified for their role and are of good repute. Having the primary responsibility for assessing the suitability of each member of the management body, institutions should carry out the suitability assessment, followed by a verification by the competent authorities that may perform it before or after the member of the management body takes up the position. However, due to the risks posed by large institutions resulting in particular from potential contagion effects, unsuitable members of management body should be prevented from influencing the running of such large institutions with potential serious detrimental effects. It is therefore appropriate that, safe in exceptional circumstances, the competent authorities assess the suitability of members of the management body of large institutions before those members exercise their duties.

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 39

(39) Not only members of the management body, but also key function holders have a significant influence in ensuring the sound and prudent management of an institution on a day-to- day basis. Because Directive 2013/36/EU does not currently define key function holders, Member States have diverging practices across the Union, which impedes an effective and efficient supervision and prevents a level playing field. It is therefore necessary to define key function holders. In addition, the responsibility for assessing the suitability of key function holders should primarily belong to institutions. However, due to the risks posed by the activities of large institutions, the suitability of the heads of internal control functions and the chief financial officer in such large institutions should be assessed by competent authorities before those persons take up their positions.

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Recital 46 a (new)

(46 a) When drafting regulatory technical standards, guidelines and Q&As, the European Banking Authority should pay due attention to the principle of proportionality and ensure that those legal acts can also be transposed by small and non-complex institutions without undue effort;

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)

Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 2 – paragraph 5 – point 5

(1 a) in Article 2(5), point( 5) is replaced by the following: ‘(5) in Germany, the ‘Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau’, ‘Landwirtschaftliche Rentenbank’, ‘Bremer Aufbau-Bank GmbH’, ‘Hamburgische Investitions- und Förderbank’, ‘Investitionsbank Berlin’, ‘Investitionsbank des Landes Brandenburg’, ‘Investitionsbank Sachsen- Anhalt’, ‘Investitionsbank Schleswig- Holstein’, ‘Investitions- und Förderbank Niedersachsen – NBank’, ‘Investitions- und Strukturbank Rheinland- Pfalz’, ‘Landeskreditbank Baden- Württemberg – Förderbank’, ‘LfA Förderbank Bayern’, ‘NRW.BANK’, ‘Saarländische Investitionskreditbank AG’, ‘Sächsische Aufbaubank – Förderbank’, ‘Thüringer Aufbaubank’, undertakings which are recognised under the ‘Wohnungsgemeinnützigkeitsgesetz’ as bodies of State housing policy and are not mainly engaged in banking transactions, and undertakings recognised under that law as non-profit housing undertakings; ~~https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A02013L0036-20220101~~’ Or. en

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point a

Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 8 a

(8a) ‘management body in its management function’ means either of the following: a) in one-tier board regime: the management body acting in its role of directing effectively the institution and includes the persons who direct the business of the institution; b) in a two-tier board regime: a dedicated administrative structure which has the role of supervising the management body referred to in point (a);

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c

Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9a

(9a) ‘key function holders’ means ~~persons who have significant influence over the direction of the institution but are not members of the management body, including~~ the heads of internal control functions and the chief financial officer, where those heads or that officer are not members of the management body;

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive 2013/13/EU
Article 21c – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall require undertakings established in a third country as referred to in Article 47(1) and (2) to establish a branch in their territory and apply for authorisation in accordance with Title VI to commence or continue conducting the activities referred to in paragraph (1) of that Article in the relevant Member State. This requirement shall not apply to activities with professional clients within the meaning of Section I and II of Annex II of Directive 2014/65/EU.

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Directive 2013/13/EU
Article 47 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. This Chapter lays down ~~the rule~~minimum requirements concerning the carrying out in a Member State of:

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Directive 2013/13/EU
Article 47 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) any of the activities listed in Annex I ~~to this Directive~~, points (1) and (6) to this Directive and the activities listed in Annex I, point (2) to this directive, excluding factoring, by an undertaking established in a third country;

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Directive 2013/13/EU
Article 47 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) the activities referred to in Article 4(1), point (b), of Regulation (EU) 575/2013, by an undertaking established in a third country that fulfils any of the criteria laid down in points (i) to (iii) of that point.deleted

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Directive 2013/13/EU
Article 47 – paragraph 2

2. By derogation from paragraph 1, where the undertaking in the third country is not a credit institution or an undertaking that meets the criteria of paragraph 1, point (b), the carrying out of any of the activities listed in Annex I, points (4), (5), and (7) to (15), to this Directive by that undertaking in a Member State shall be subject to Title II, Chapter IV, of Directive 2014/65/EU.deleted

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9

Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 66 – paragraph 2 – point b – point ii

(ii) in the case of a natural person, periodic penalty payments of up to EUR 500 000 which, in the case of an ongoing breach, the natural person shall be obliged to pay per day of infringement until compliance with an obligation is restored, and which may be imposed for a period up to six months from the date stipulated in the decision requiring the termination of a breach and imposing the periodic penalty payment;deleted

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point b

Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 67 – paragraph 2 – point b – point ii

(ii) in the case of a natural person, periodic penalty payments of up to EUR 500 000 which, in the case of an ongoing infringement, the natural person shall be obliged to pay per day of infringement until compliance with an obligation is restored, and which may be imposed for a period up to six months from the date stipulated in the decision requiring the termination of a breach and imposing the periodic penalty payment;deleted

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12

Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 73 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Institutions shall have in place sound, effective and comprehensive strategies and processes to assess and maintain on an ongoing basis the amounts, types and distribution of internal capital that they consider adequate to cover the nature and level of the risks to which they are or might be exposed in the short, medium and long term time horizon, ~~including environmental, social and governance risks.~~’;”

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13

Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 74 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b

(b) effective processes to identify, manage, monitor and report the risks they are or might be exposed to in the short, medium and long term time horizon~~, including environmental, social and governance risks~~;

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point a

Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 76 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall ensure that the management body approves and at least every two years reviews the strategies and policies for taking up, managing, monitoring and mitigating the risks the institution is or might be exposed to, including those posed by the macroeconomic environment in which it operates and those in relation to the status of the business cycle~~, and those resulting from the current, short, medium and long-term impacts of environmental, social and governance factors.;~~.

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point b

Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 76 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

(b) in paragraph 2 the following subparagraph is added: Member States shall ensure that the management body develops specific plans and quantifiable targets to monitor and address the risks arising in the short, medium and long-term from the misalignment of the business model and strategy of the institutions, with the relevant Union policy objectives or broader transition trends towards a sustainable economy in relation to environmental, social and governance factors.;deleted

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 17

Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 87 a

~~(17) a new Article 87a is inserted: ‘Article 87a Environmental, social and governance risks [...]~~deleted

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20

Directive 2013/13/EU
Article 91 a to 91 d

~~(20) the following Articles 91a to 91d are inserted: [...]~~deleted

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 21 – point b a (new)

Directive 2013/13/EU
Article 92 – paragraph 3 a (new)

(ba) the following paragraph is added: "3a. Small and non-complex institutions as defined in point (145) of Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No575/2013 do not have to apply Articles 92(2) and (3), 94 and 95, as far as the variable remuneration of none of the staff members exceeds EUR 50 000 and does not represent more than one third of the staff member’s total annual remuneration. For the purpose of this paragraph, the variable remuneration referred to in the first subparagraph shall not include severance payments."

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 24

Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 100 – paragraph 4

4. EBA, EIOPA and ESMA shall, through the Joint Committee referred to in Article 54 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010, develop guidelines to ensure that consistency, long-term considerations and common standards for assessment methodologies are integrated into the stress testing of environmental, social and governance risks. Stress testing of environmental, social and governance risks by competent authorities should start with climate-related factors. EBA, EIOPA and ESMA shall, through the Joint Committee referred to in Article 54 of Regulations (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010 and (EU) No 1095/2010, explore how social and governance related risks can be integrated into stress testing.;deleted

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25 – point a – point ii

Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 104 – paragraph 1 – point m

(m) require institutions to reduce the risks arising from the institutions’ misalignment with relevant policy objectives of the Union and broader transition trends relating to environmental, social and governance factors over the short, medium and long term, including through adjustments to their business models, governance strategies and risk management.;deleted

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 26 – point b

Directive 2013/13/EU
Article 104 a – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

6. Where an institution becomes bound by the output floor, the following shall always apply:

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 26 a (new)

Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 104 b – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 a (new)

~~https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A02013L0036-20220101~~(26a) in Article 104b, (2), the following subparagraph is added: ‘Competent authorities may waive the supervisory stress test referred to in Article 100 and the individual determination of additional own funds requirements for small and non-complex institutions as defined in point 145 of Article 4 (1) of Regulation 575/2013, provided that the institution's Common Equity Tier 1 ratio exceeds the own funds requirements as defined in point (a) of Article 92(1) of Regulation 575/2013, the additional own funds requirements as defined in Article 104a of this Directive and the combined capital buffer requirement by at least two percentage points.’ Or. en

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 26 b (new)

Directive 2013/13/EU
Article 104 b – paragraph 4 a (new)

(26b) In Article 104b, the following paragraph is inserted: ‘4a. Where an institution becomes bound by the output floor, its competent authority shall review its guidance on additional funds communicated to the respective institution to make sure that its calibration mains appropriate.’;

2022/08/22
Committee: ECON