16 Amendments of Michael THEURER related to 2016/2247(INI)
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)
Citation 14 a (new)
- having regard to its resolution of 12 April 2016 on the EU role in the framework of international financial, monetary and regulatory institutions and bodies (2015/2060(INI)),
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas no non-euro area country has yet expressed a willingnessall Member States, with the exception of one having a derogation, are committed to joining the euro and therefore to joining the Banking Union;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes the high level of non- performing loans (NPLs) in some jurisdictioncountries; considers that this issue is crucial and has yet to be solved; welcomes the work of the SSM and its draft guidance on this issue; looks forward to the results of the work on a minimum EU insolvency framework; calls on Member States to improve their insolvency legislationwelcomes the Commission proposal on insolvency and restructuring; calls on Member States to improve their insolvency legislation and more generally their legal framework concerning the restructuring of debt, and to stimulate growth in order to tackle NPLs;
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that there are risks associated with sovereign debt; notes, however, that government bonds play a critical role as a source of high-quality, liquid collateral and that modifying its prudential treatment could have a significant effect on both the financial and the public sector, which calls for caution in reform efforts; awaits with interest theconsiders that, in the end, a better resgults of theatory framework, be it European or international, work on this issueill be needed; considers that, in the end, a better regulatory framework, be it European or international, will be neededEuropean framework should enable market discipline in delivering sustainable policies and providing safe assets for the financial sector and safe liabilities for governments;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers it essential to ensure the comparability of risk-weighted assets across institutions in order to allow for effective supervision; welcomes the work done internationally to streamline the resort to internal models and to re-establish the credibility of internal models, as well as the introduction of a leverage ratio to act as a backstop; recalls, however, that the regulatory changes planned should not result in significantunjustified increases in capital requirements, nor harm the ability of banks to finance the real economy, in particular SMEs;
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Points out that guidance provided by international fora should be used in order to avoid the risk of regulatory fragmentation; stresses the importance of the role of the Commission, the European Central Bank and the European Banking Authority to engage in the work of the BCBS and provide the European Parliament and the Council with transparent and comprehensive updates on the status of the development of the BCBS discussions; considers that the EU should work on having an appropriate representation in the BCBS and notably for the euro area; calls for a stronger visibility of this role during ECOFIN meetings, as well as enhanced accountability towards the ECON Committee in the European Parliament with a regular de-brief by EU representatives party to the discussions;
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. SNotes that there are very different banking models within the Banking Union but stresses that national options and discretions are hindering the creation of a level playing field between Member States and the comparability of the financial reporting by banks to the public; welcomes the ECB guidance and regulation harmonising the exercise of some of these within the Banking Union; looks forward to the upcoming amendments to the CRR as a means of closing the most significant oneto keep only the ones strictly necessary because of the diversity of banking models;
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Stresses that there has been a natural learning phenomenon for all the members of the Supervisory Board since the creation of the SSM to deal with a variety of different business models and entities of different sizes, which needs to be supported and accelerated;
Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that the ‘'too-big-to-fail’' issue still needs to be addressedis being addressed; recalls the words of Mark Carney, Chair of the Financial Stability Board, that agreement on proposals for a common international standard on total loss-absorbing capacity for G-SIBs is a watershed in ending "too big to fail" banks; stresses that these agreements, once implemented, will play important roles in enabling globally systemic banks to be resolved without recourse to public subsidy and without disruption to the wider financial system; notes that TLAC will complement EMIR's mandatory requirement to centrally clear and the capital surcharge for G-SIBs;
Amendment 220 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Underlines that the creation of the SSM has been accompanied by an increase of influence for the European Union on the international stage compared to the pre-existing situation;
Amendment 230 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls the need to find, in the exercise of supervision, a balance between the need for proportionality and the need for a consistent approach; invites the SSM to reduce as much as possible the supervisory fees; points out that all banks should be subject to an appropriate level of supervision; reminds that an appropriate supervision is key to monitor all risks whatever the size of the banks;
Amendment 236 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Underlines that the safety and soundness of a bank cannot be captured by a point-in-time assessment of its balance sheet alone, as they are ensured through dynamic interactions between the bank and the markets, and affected by various elements in the entire economy; underlines therefore that a sound framework for financial stability and growth should be comprehensive and balanced to cover dynamic supervisory practices and not focus merely on static regulation with mainly quantitative aspects;
Amendment 298 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Takes note of the differences between the FSB TLAC standard and the MREL; stresses, however, that both standards share the same objective: to make sure that banks have enough regulatory capital and loss-absorbing liabilities to make bail-in an effective instrument in resolution (without causing financial instability and without needing public money); concludes therefore that a holistic approach to loss-absorption can be reached by combining the two; highlights that due consideration should be given to retaining the two criteria of size and risk- weighted assets;
Amendment 320 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses that it is crucial to harmonise the hierarchy of claims in bank insolvency across Member States in order to make the implementation of the BRRD more consistent and effective; welcomes the Commission's proposal on this subject;
Amendment 341 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. reminds that bail-in instruments should only be sold to appropriate investors in the first place which can absorb potential losses without being threatened in their own sound financial standing and considers it fundamental to address the mis-selling of bail-in instruments to retail investors; asks the Commission to carefully assess the EU Investor Protection Framework and to present proposals if necessary;
Amendment 350 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Regrets that the Commission did not allow for more time to assess the implementation of the DGSD before proposing the EDIS and did not conduct a proper impact assessment of the proposal; stands ready, however, to seize the opportunity generated by the proposal to discuss the DGSD and address some of the options and discretions it includes; takes note of the Commission services' non- paper of a supplementary analytical report on the effect of the proposal;