BETA

11 Amendments of Thomas MANN related to 2010/2074(INI)

Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Calls on the Commission and Basel Committee to reconsider the scope of the deduction of investments in financial institutions to avoid serious unintended impacts which would prevent market making and liquidity in financial services shares;
2010/06/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Is concerned about the pro-cyclical effects of deducting Deferred Tax Assets (DTAs) from Tier 1 capital, particularly DTAs based on timing differences between tax and accounting systems;
2010/06/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
17. Urges the Basel Committee and the Commission to ensure that, in consolidated capital calculations, both risk and capital are taken into account in a balanced manner (i.e. minority interest); understands that the objective is to prevent artificially high minority stakes in low risk subsidiaries. Proposes the recognition of full Risk Weighted Assets (RWA), with minority interest being included in regulatory capital up to a ceiling based on a) the overall group capital ratio, or b) a pre-determined regulatory ratio. To the extent that the minority interest exceeds the threshold, the excess would not be available for regulatory capital recognition;
2010/06/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Emphasises the important role contingent capital played during the crisis; calls on the Commission and Basel Committee to recognise the role of flexible contingent capital in crisis situations and to monitor market acceptance of convertible instruments;
2010/06/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17b. Urges the Commission and Basel Committee to reconsider the role of hybrid capital in Tier 1 capital given the need for a broader investor base, and the already strict regulatory criteria around approval for exercising a call right in “innovative hybrids”;
2010/06/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Considers developing high quality liquidity standards to be a key part of the crisis response; however, is concerned that economic repercussions of not getting the liquidity elements of the framework right are far higher than for the capital elements and calls on the Commission and Basel Committee to be cautious in the timing and the harmonised implementation of the framework;
2010/06/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Urges the Basel Committee and Commission to reconsider the calibration of the liquidity and funding ratios; is concerned that the level of conservatism and proposed calibration of the proposed liquidity framework will significantly reduce banks’ ability to perform maturity transformation and would require an excessive increase in banks’ liquidity buffers in Europe;
2010/06/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Is concerned about the unintended consequences likely to arise from the requirement to hold high levels of government bonds;
2010/06/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 209 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28a. Is concerned that the current proposals ignore commonly applied netting rules and consequently greatly exaggerate the asset side of the balance sheet for many banks creating an unlevel playing field;
2010/06/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 220 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29a. Urges the Commission and Basel Committee to avoid setting a specific timeframe for migration of the leverage ratio to Pillar 1 from Pillar 2 so that the potential effects of that move can be monitored through a sufficiently long period in the economic cycle;
2010/06/15
Committee: ECON
Amendment 237 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)
31a. Is deeply concerned that the current design of the proposals around the capital charges for credit valuation adjustments (CVA) would have a severe impact on SMEs in Europe because of the limitation of hedging recognition to liquid hedges;
2010/06/15
Committee: ECON