2017/2253(INI) Relationships between the EU and third countries concerning financial services regulation and supervision
Lead committee dossier:
Progress: Procedure completed
| Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lead | ECON |
HAYES Brian ( PPE)
|
FERNÁNDEZ Jonás ( S&D),
FOX Ashley ( ECR),
JEŽEK Petr ( ALDE),
LAMBERTS Philippe ( Verts/ALE)
|
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54
Legal Basis:
RoP 54Events
2019/03/11
EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2018/09/11
EP - Results of vote in Parliament
Documents
2018/09/11
EP - Decision by Parliament
Details
The European Parliament adopted by 564 votes to 71, with 49 abstentions, a resolution on relationships between the EU and third countries concerning financial services regulation and supervision.
Relations with third countries since the crisis : since the financial crisis, more than 40 new pieces of EU financial legislation have been adopted, of which 15 include ‘third-country provisions’ that give the Commission, on behalf of the EU, discretion to unilaterally decide whether regulatory rules in foreign jurisdictions can be considered equivalent.
There is no single framework underpinning equivalence decisions, each legislative act sets out a targeted equivalence regime tailored to its policy objectives.
Members welcomed the increased regulatory and supervisory cooperation between the EU and third countries. They recognised that this has contributed to improving global consistency in financial regulation and has contributed to making the EU more resilient to global financial shocks.
In a context where international cooperation is becoming increasingly difficult due to diverging national interests, Members insisted that any framework for international regulatory and supervisory cooperation should preserve the Union's financial stability and respect its regulatory and supervisory regime and standards and their enforcement.
EU equivalence procedures : Parliament stressed that, through its relations with third countries in the regulation and supervision of financial services, the EU should strengthen tax cooperation with third countries in line with international and EU standards.
Equivalence decisions should in particular:
be made dependent on satisfactory third-country rules on fighting tax evasion , tax fraud, tax avoidance and money laundering; be objective, proportionate and risk-sensitive , while upholding high standards of EU regulation; be in the interest of the Union , its Member States and its citizens, having regard to the financial stability of the Union or one or more of its Member States, market integrity, investor and consumer protection and the functioning of the internal market.
Establishing a consistent structured framework : as things stand, Members considered that the EU’s process for granting equivalence would benefit from more transparency towards the European Parliament . They insisted that the process for granting equivalence to a third country in the area of financial services should be subject to appropriate scrutiny by Parliament and the Council and that, for purposes of greater transparency, such decisions should be taken by means of delegated acts, and where necessary facilitated by an early non-objection procedure.
Parliament called for the development of a consistent framework for ongoing supervision of an equivalent third-country regime involving regular information to Parliament on regulatory reviews and supervision undertaken by third countries. European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) should have the competence to advise the Commission and monitor regulatory and supervisory developments in third countries. Equivalence decisions should be continuously monitored by the relevant ESA and the result of this monitoring should be made public. ESAs should also carry out ad hoc assessments of developments in third countries on the basis of reasoned requests from Parliament, the Council and the Commission.
The Commission is urged to:
review and provide a clear framework for a transparent, coherent and consistent application of equivalence procedures which introduces an improved process for the determination, review, suspension or withdrawal of equivalence; assess the benefits of introducing an application process for granting equivalence for third countries; consider the current equivalence regime and to assess whether it contributes to achieving a level playing field between EU and third-country financial institutions, while preserving the financial stability of the Union; annually report to the European Parliament all decisions on equivalence, including equivalence granted, suspended and withdrawn, and to explain the rationale for those decisions.
Parliament underlined the importance of the EU’s active role in global standard-setting as a means of working towards international consistency in financial regulation. To that end, it called for the Joint EU-US Financial Regulatory Forum to be upgraded to include more regular meetings with the aim of a more frequent and consistent coordination.
Documents
2018/09/11
EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2018/09/10
EP - Debate in Parliament
Documents
2018/07/18
EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
Documents
2018/07/18
EP - Committee report tabled for plenary
Documents
2018/07/11
EP - Vote in committee
2018/05/04
EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2018/04/04
EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2017/12/14
EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament
2017/10/05
EP - HAYES Brian (PPE) appointed as rapporteur in ECON
Documents
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2018)829
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament: T8-0326/2018
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A8-0263/2018
- Committee report tabled for plenary: A8-0263/2018
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE621.121
- Committee draft report: PE619.408
- Committee draft report: PE619.408
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE621.121
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A8-0263/2018
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2018)829
Activities
- Brian HAYES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Barbara KAPPEL
- Miguel VIEGAS
Votes
A8-0263/2018 - Brian Hayes - Vote unique 11/09/2018 12:45:09.000 #
2018/09/11 Outcome: +: 564, -: 71, 0: 49
ENF
NI
EFDD
GUE/NGL| Amendments | Dossier |
| 231 |
2017/2253(INI)
2018/05/04
ECON
231 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 8 a (new) - having regard to the International Regulatory Strategy Group report on "The EU's Third Country Regimes and Alternatives to Passporting";
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) B a. whereas no trade agreement concluded by the EU has ever incorporated cross-border mutual access provisions on financial services;
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Emphasises that one of the key objectives for equivalence is to promote regulatory convergence on the basis of international standards, while maintaining the ability to safeguard the stability of EU financial markets;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Emphasises that one of the key objectives for equivalence is to promote regulatory convergence, financial stability and investor protection as well as upgrading supervisory cooperation on the basis of international standards;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Emphasises that one of the key objectives for equivalence is to promote regulatory convergence on the basis of international standards; recalls that other key objectives for equivalence is to maintain an open and globally integrated financial market in the EU;
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Emphasises that one of the key objectives for equivalence is to promote regulatory downward convergence on the basis of lowering international standards;
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8 a. Notes that regulatory convergence should be seen as outcomes based;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Considers that, as it stands, the EU’s process for granting equivalence lacks
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Considers that, as it stands, the EU’s process for granting equivalence
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Considers that,
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Considers that, as it stands, the EU’s process for granting equivalence
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Considers that, as it stands, the EU’s process for granting equivalence lacks
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas equivalence is a tool
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Considers that, as it stands, the EU’s process for granting equivalence lacks certainty and sufficient transparency
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Considers that, as it stands, the EU’s process for granting equivalence lacks
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Believes that equivalence decisions and international agreements should be
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Believes that equivalence decisions
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Believes that equivalence decisions
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Believes that equivalence decisions and
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Believes that equivalence decisions and international agreements should be objective, proportionate, risk-sensitive and be taken in the best interests of the Union, a
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Believes that equivalence decisions and international agreements should be objective, proportionate, risk-sensitive and be taken in the best interests of the Member States of the Union and
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Believes that equivalence decisions and international agreements should be objective, proportionate, risk-sensitive and be taken in the best interests of the Union and its citizens; points out that this is not merely a technical process, but a political one; stresses the need for the Union legislator to be involved properly in such decisions.
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) 10 a. Believes that equivalence decisions and international agreements should also explicitly adhere to a binding principle of non-discrimination in the same way as the approach followed and promoted by the World Trade Organisation; non- discrimination between third countries themselves, so that all are assessed on the same transparent basis and on the same timeframes and regularity; and between EU and third country firms, so that a higher standard should not be applied to comparable non-EU firms than would be required of EU firms, simply on the basis of nationality;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas equivalence is a tool to promote
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11.
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11.
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Questions the rationale behind equivalence decisions typically taking the form of implementing acts; insists that the process for granting equivalence to a third country in the area of financial services should always be scrutinised by
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Questions the rationale behind equivalence decisions typically taking the form of implementing acts; insists that the process for granting equivalence to a third country in the area of financial services should always be scrutinised by the European and National Parliaments and that, owing to their political nature, and for the purposes of greater transparency, these decisions should be taken by means of delegated acts;
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Questions the rationale behind equivalence decisions typically taking the form of implementing acts; insists that the process for granting equivalence to a third country in the area of financial services should
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Questions the rationale behind equivalence decisions typically taking the form of implementing acts; insists that the process for granting equivalence to a third country in the area of financial services should always be scrutinised by Parliament and that, owing to their political nature whereby different policy objectives are balanced, and for the purposes of greater transparency, these decisions should be taken by means of delegated acts;
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas equivalence is a tool to
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12.
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Notes
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Notes that the Commission’s decision of 21 December 2017 to grant equivalence to Swiss share trading venues – limited to a 12-month period with the possibility of an extension provided sufficient progress is made on a common institutional framework
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Notes that the Commission’s decision of 21 December 2017 to grant equivalence to Swiss share trading venues as part of the MiFID II/MiFIR equivalence procedure – limited to a 12- month period with the possibility of an extension provided sufficient progress is made on a common institutional framework – was primarily political, and used to gain leverage in a separate policy matter; deplores the fact that the European Parliament had no input into this decision; notes that this incident proves that equivalence procedures are not merely technical;
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13.
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Notes that the Commission has the right to withdraw equivalence decisions
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas equivalence is
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Notes that the Commission has the right to withdraw equivalence decisions, and believes that
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Notes that the Commission has the right to withdraw equivalence decisions, and believes that Parliament should be consulted in a timely manner before such a withdrawal decision is taken; calls for the introduction of clear procedures
Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Notes that the Commission has the right to withdraw equivalence decisions, and believes that the European and National Parliaments should be consulted in a timely manner before such a withdrawal decision is taken; calls for the introduction of clear procedures and timelines governing the adoption, withdrawal or suspension of equivalence decisions;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Notes that the Commission has the right to withdraw equivalence decisions, and believes that Parliament should be consulted in a timely manner before such a withdrawal decision is taken; calls for the introduction of clear procedures and timelines governing the adoption, withdrawal or suspension of equivalence decisions; calls for Parliament to retain the power of initiative, at any time, to request that an equivalence decision be withdrawn;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13 a. Notes that on the advice of the ESAs the Commission has the right to withdraw equivalence décisions; calls for the introduction of clear procedures and timelines governing the adoption, withdrawal or suspension of equivalence décisions; notes that for equivalence to be effective and relied upon notice periods must be of a suitable length as determined by research conducted by the ESAs;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Is concerned that there is no consistent framework for ongoing supervision of an equivalent third country’s regime; considers that the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) should be equipped with the power to monitor regulatory developments in third
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14.
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14.
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Is concerned that there is no consistent framework for ongoing supervision of an equivalent third country’s regime; considers that the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) should be equipped with the power and the appropriate resources to monitor regulatory developments in third countries and demands that Parliament should be kept informed of ongoing regulatory monitoring in third countries; welcomes the Commission proposals for the ESAs review which foresees that such ex post monitoring is not to be limited to regulatory issues but also extends to supervision and enforcement;
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Is concerned that there is no consistent framework for ongoing supervision of an equivalent third country’s regime; considers that the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) should be equipped with the power to monitor regulatory developments in third countries assess the effect such developments may have based on, inter alia, the interconnectedness of the third countries' financial system with that of the Union, and demands that Parliament should be kept informed of ongoing regulatory developments and monitoring thereof in third countries;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas equivalence is a tool to ensure a fair and equal treatment between EU firms and third country ones as well as to promote international regulatory convergence, which may lead to more competition in the EU on a level playing field, while preventing regulatory arbitrage, protecting consumers and investors, preserving the EU's financial stability and avoiding the fragmentation of its single market;
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Is concerned that there is no consistent framework for ongoing supervision of an equivalent third country’s regime; considers that the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) should be equipped with the power to monitor regulatory developments in third countries and demands that Parliament should be kept informed of ongoing regulatory monitoring in third countries by means of annual report presented by the respective ESAs to Parliament;
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14 a. Calls for the need for third countries who have been granted equivalence to discuss new regulations prior to implementation with ESAs to ensure that it is within the parameters of equivalence; notes that third countries should closely monitor developments in EU legislation to ensure they can adapt accordingly;
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14 a. Notes that third countries must keep the ESAs informed of any national regulatory developments; third countries must also stay informed of any regulatory updates from the union;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Calls on the Commission to
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Calls on the Commission to
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Calls on the Commission to adopt a legislative act establishing a clear framework for a transparent, coherent and consistent application of equivalence procedures
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Calls on the Commission to adopt a legislative act establishing a clear framework for a transparent, coherent and consistent application of equivalence procedures which
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Calls on the Commission to
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Calls on the Commission to adopt a legislative act establishing a clear framework for a transparent, coherent and consistent application of equivalence procedures which introduces a standardised process for the determination of equivalence that is based on similarity of outcomes and not on similarity of procedures;
Amendment 159 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Calls on the Commission to adopt a legislative act establishing a clear framework for a transparent, coherent and consistent application and regular monitoring of equivalence procedures which introduces a standardised process for the determination, suspension or withdrawal of equivalence;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D a (new) Da. whereas this concentration in a small number of global financial centres, facilitated by equivalence, mutual recognition and exemption regimes, is harmful to global financial stability and to the economic development of those states which have had their financial liquidity lured away by international financial centres;
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Calls on the Commission to adopt at least a set of guiding principles, and if appropriate, a legislative act establishing a clear
Amendment 161 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15 a. This framework should clearly provide the European Parliament with a strong scrutiny role of the decisions taken by the Commission, clear rules for granting, suspending or withdrawn of equivalence and a clear mandate for ESAs in the equivalence regime;
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 b (new) 15 b. Takes note that equivalence decisions are made based on a case-by- case assessment taking in consideration the relevant EU regulation and market specificities, which implies that some flexibility is needed;
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Calls for equivalence decisions to be
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Calls for equivalence decisions to be
Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Calls for equivalence decisions to be reviewed at least once
Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Calls for equivalence decisions to be reviewed at least once every t
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Calls for equivalence decisions to be reviewed
Amendment 168 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Calls for equivalence decisions to be reviewed at least once every three years, or in any case of changes in the third country’s regulatory framework which would call the equivalence decision into question, by the relevant ESA and for such reviews to be made public;
Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Calls for equivalence decisions to be reviewed at least once every three years or in case of significant changes in the third country's regulatory framework which would call the equivalence decision into question, by the relevant ESA and for such reviews to be made public;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D a (new) D a. whereas current third-country related provisions in EU financial legislation follow different approaches, ranging from substituted compliance to the imposition of EU rules on third country entities;
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Calls for equivalence decisions to be reviewed at least once every three years by the relevant ESA and for such reviews to be made public; highlights that such reviews should be based on, at least, the relevant legislation and its implementation, as well as the relevant supervisory practices in the third country concerned;
Amendment 171 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Calls for equivalence decisions to be reviewed at least once every three years by the relevant ESA and for such reviews to be made public; calls as proposed by the Commission in the context of the ESAs review process for streamlining cooperation agreements with third country supervisory authorities in order to provide regular notifications of changes regarding the relevant third country legal framework and its implementation;
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16 a. Regrets however that the Commission has not proposed as part of the ESA review any further scrutiny mechanism for the European Parliament and the Council, and intends to amend the legislative proposals accordingly;
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16 a. Calls furthermore on the Commission to make ad hoc assessments of equivalence provisions based on reasoned requests from the Parliament, Council, ESAs, and where relevant the ECB, NCAs and the ESRB;
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 Amendment 176 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 Amendment 177 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Calls on the Commission to
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Calls on the Commission to consider, in the definition of a framework for equivalence, the possibility of introducing an application process for granting equivalence which could be opened to third countries on a date specified in a given piece of legislation;
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Calls on the Commission to conduct
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D a (new) D a. whereas equivalence decisions should also adhere to the international principle of non-discrimination, between third countries themselves, and between EU and third country firms;
Amendment 180 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Calls on the Commission to conduct a
Amendment 181 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Calls on the Commission to conduct an in-depth review of all equivalence decisions taken, in order to determine the successes and failures of the current equivalence regime, and to assess whether the equivalence framework currently contained in EU legislative acts can lead to a more favourable treatment of third-country firms compared to that of EU firms;
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Calls on the Commission to conduct an in-depth review of all equivalence decisions taken, in order to determine the successes and failures of the current equivalence regime and derive implications for improvement;
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Calls on the Commission to conduct an in-depth review of all equivalence decisions taken, in order to determine the successes and failures of the current equivalence regime and to make such review public;
Amendment 184 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 a (new) 18 a. Insists that the process for granting equivalence to a third country in the area of financial services should always be scrutinised by the European Parliament for the purposes of greater transparency;
Amendment 185 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 b (new) 18 b. Calls on the Commission to, from the moment of adoption of this report, timely inform the European Parliament of the decisions of equivalence granted, suspended or withdrawn;
Amendment 186 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 c (new) 18 c. Asks that, at least once a year, the Commission provides the European Parliament with a list of the decisions on equivalence granted, suspended or withdrawn, explaining the rational supporting such decisions; in case of disagreement with any of the decisions taken the European Parliament shall ask that the Commission reviews such decision, providing the reasons for such request;
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 Amendment 188 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Stresses that
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19.
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E Amendment 190 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Stresses that close consideration should be given to the equivalence regime
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Stresses that close consideration should be given to the equivalence regime between the EU and
Amendment 192 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Stresses that
Amendment 193 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Stresses that close consideration should be given to the equivalence regime between the EU and high-impact third countries in order to develop stable and resilient regulatory relationships with those countries which have close financial links with the Union; points out that this should not lead to a two-tier equivalence regime and that the Union's standards must be upheld at all time;
Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19 a. Stresses the fact that the UK decision to leave the EU and not remain a EEA Member has huge implications on the relationship between the EU and the UK concerning financial services;
Amendment 195 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19 a. Calls for defining a consistent and transparent set of criteria for “high- impact”third countries.
Amendment 196 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 Amendment 197 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20.
Amendment 198 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Recalls th
Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Recalls the
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 8 a (new) - having regard to its resolution of 14 March 2018 on the framework of the future EU-UK relationship,
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas equivalence decisions
Amendment 200 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Recalls the
Amendment 201 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Recalls the importance of National Competent Authorities (NCAs) in the authorisation process for financial institutions that wish to delegate part of their portfolio management or risk management to service providers in third countries where the regulatory regime is comparable to that of the EU; considers that NCAs
Amendment 202 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Recalls the importance of National Competent Authorities (NCAs) in the authorisation process for financial institutions that wish to delegate part of their portfolio management or risk management to service providers in third countries where the regulatory regime is comparable to that of the EU; considers that NCAs have sufficient technical knowledge and expertise to properly assess delegation approval requests; encourages the ESAs to develop further cooperation between NCAs in order to share best practices concerning regulatory cooperation and activities with third countries, as well as challenges and problems experienced;
Amendment 203 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Recalls the importance of National Competent Authorities (NCAs) in the authorisation process for financial institutions that wish to delegate part of their portfolio management or risk management to service providers in third countries where the regulatory regime is comparable to that of the EU; considers that NCAs have sufficient technical knowledge and expertise to properly assess delegation approval requests; encourages the ESAs to develop further cooperation between NCAs in order to share best practice concerning regulatory cooperation and activities with third countries; considers that NCAs should be able to challenge and halt any granting of equivalence if it affects the interests of their national operators, financial stability and economic development; notes that the United States does nothing but behave in such a way and that the US Congress and federal agencies do not hesitate to call into question the enforceability of the international agreements signed by the United States;
Amendment 204 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Recalls the importance of National Competent Authorities (NCAs) in the authorisation process for financial institutions that wish to delegate part of their portfolio management or risk management to service providers in third countries where the regulatory regime is comparable to that of the EU; considers that NCAs have sufficient technical knowledge and expertise to properly assess delegation approval requests; encourages the ESAs to develop further cooperation between NCAs in order to share best practice concerning regulatory cooperation and activities with third countries; considers that Member States should be allowed to limit equivalence decisions in their own countries in order to ensure the stability of their financial systems and economies;
Amendment 205 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Recalls the importance of National Competent Authorities (NCAs) in the authorisation process for financial institutions that wish to delegate part of their portfolio management or risk management to service providers in third countries where the regulatory regime is comparable to that of the EU; considers that NCAs have sufficient technical knowledge and expertise to properly assess delegation approval requests; encourages the ESAs to develop further cooperation between NCAs in order to share best practice concerning regulatory cooperation and activities with third countries; stresses the need for the ESAs to ensure a consistent application of such practices;
Amendment 206 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20 a. Concurs with the ECB and with ESMA that the purpose of branches in third countries is to meet local needs and that the use of non-EU branches needs to be based on objective reasons linked to the services provided in the non-EU jurisdiction and should not result in a situation where such non-EU branches perform material functions or provide services back into the EU;
Amendment 207 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 b (new) 20 b. Emphasizes that absent applicable equivalence decisions or alternative international agreements governing the provision of services as per EMIR 2.2, service providers established in the UK would need to relocate into the EU in order to provide financial services across the internal market; underlines in that respect to the need to monitor closely outsourcing arrangements for preventing the establishment in the Union of “empty shells” aiming at bypassing the EU regulatory framework;
Amendment 208 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 3 Amendment 209 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Underlines the importance of the EU’s role in global standard-setting as a means of working towards
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas equivalence decisions
Amendment 210 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Underlines the
Amendment 211 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Underlines the importance of the EU’s role in global standard-setting as a means of working towards international consistency in financial regulation, maximising financial stability, reducing systemic risks, protecting consumers and investors and preventing regulatory loopholes between jurisdictions and developing an efficient international financial system;
Amendment 212 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21 a. Welcomes vice-president Dombrovski's comments on the international nature of our financial system and the importance of global co- operation in his Eurofi speech on 14 September 2017.
Amendment 213 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Calls for active involvement from the Commission, the Member States and ESAs in global standard-setting bodies in financial services;
Amendment 214 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Calls for active involvement from the Commission, the Member States and ESAs in global standard-setting bodies in financial services
Amendment 215 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Calls for active involvement from the
Amendment 216 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Calls for a
Amendment 217 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Calls for active involvement from the Commission, the Member States and ESAs in global standard-setting bodies in financial services; stresses the need for the
Amendment 218 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Calls for active involvement from the Commission, the European Parliament, the Member States and ESAs in global standard-setting bodies in financial services; stresses the need for the consistent implementation of international standards in order to achieve better regulatory cooperation with other jurisdictions and to improve global financial stability; recalls the requests made to the Commission in its report on the EU role in the framework of international financial, monetary and regulatory institutions and bodies;
Amendment 219 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Calls for active involvement from the Commission, the Member States and ESAs in global standard-setting bodies in financial services; stresses the need for all EU participants to coordinate positions effectively in order to achieve the optimum outcome; stresses the need for the consistent implementation of international standards in order to achieve better regulatory cooperation with other jurisdictions and to improve global financial stability;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E a (new) E a. whereas the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) play a vital role in the EU’s equivalence framework by providing technical assessments for equivalence decisions, by monitoring further developments that may affect such decisions, and by regularly reviewing those decisions;
Amendment 220 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 a (new) 22 a. Calls on the Commission to assess the impact of new technologies on financial services in a timely manner and to propose common European regulatory and supervisory strategies where appropriate; stresses that the EU should play a key role in setting international standards for new technologies in order to pave the way for such innovation, to ensure consumer protection and to safeguard financial stability.
Amendment 221 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 Amendment 222 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 Amendment 223 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Calls to that end, moreover, for the EU-US Joint Financial
Amendment 224 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Calls to that end, moreover, for the EU-US Financial Markets Regulatory Dialogue to be upgraded to include more regular meetings;
Amendment 225 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Calls to that end, moreover, for the EU-US Financial Markets Regulatory Dialogue to be upgraded to include more regular meetings;
Amendment 226 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Calls to that end, moreover, for the EU-US Financial Markets Regulatory Dialogue to be upgraded to include more regular meetings
Amendment 227 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Calls to that end, moreover, for the EU-US Financial Markets Regulatory Dialogue to be upgraded to include more regular meetings; stresses that the EU should
Amendment 228 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Calls to that end, moreover, for the EU-US Financial Markets Regulatory Dialogue to be upgraded to include more regular meetings; stresses that the EU should
Amendment 229 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Calls to that end, moreover, for the EU-US Financial Markets Regulatory Dialogue to be upgraded to include more regular meetings; stresses that the EU should push to have a financial services chapter as part of any potential future EU- US trade agreement, taking into account examples already in place, such as the upcoming EU–Singapore Free Trade Agreement, which comprises a chapter on financial regulation;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E a (new) E a. whereas the equivalence regime has been applied very successfully by the EU with its current biggest third-country partner, namely the United States, for the benefit of both parties;
Amendment 230 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 a (new) 23 a. Points out that improving financial services relations with third countries and strengthening EU capital markets must not be regarded as mutually exclusive; therefore stresses the need for progress on the Capital Markets Union project;
Amendment 231 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to EU chief Brexit negotiator, the Council and the Commission.
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E a (new) E a. whereas financial services passporting is available only to EEA Members;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E b (new) E b. whereas the Commission describes equivalence as “a key instrument to effectively manage cross-border activity of market players in a sound and secure prudential environment with third- country jurisdictions that adhere to, implement and enforce rigorously the same high standards of prudential rules as the EU”;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E b (new) E b. whereas the principle of financial stability is a matter of sovereignty;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E c (new) E c. whereas, following Brexit, UK will diverge from the single market;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E d (new) E d. whereas if the equivalence regime would need to evolve to take into account the principle of proportionality following the Brexit, it would imply more guarantees because of risk concentration;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F F. whereas
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 8 b (new) - having regard to the European Council (Art. 50) Guidelines of 23 March 2018,
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F F. whereas the forthcoming withdrawal of the UK from the EU will
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F F. whereas the forthcoming withdrawal of the UK from the EU will
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F F. whereas the forthcoming withdrawal of the UK from the EU will potentially have a significant impact on the regulation and supervision of financial services, given the close relationship that currently exists between the Member States in this area; whereas the positions taken by the UK government have made it very difficult to find pragmatic solutions;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F a (new) Fa. whereas it is important for the financial liquidity of the EU's continental states - which, because of passporting and, more generally, the harmonisation of European financial regulation, has been concentrated in London, to the great benefit of US financial and banking operators - to be able to be redistributed among the various Member States after Brexit;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F a (new) F a. whereas the UK does not intend to remain part of the EEA after Brexit it will not be able to make use of the financial services passport regime;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F a (new) F a. whereas the negotiations for the withdrawal of the UK from the EU are still ongoing;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F b (new) F b. whereas the existence of a transitional period for the UK withdrawal from the EU will allow for timely and well balanced equivalence decisions;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G G. whereas in its resolution of 19 January 2016 on stocktaking and challenges of the EU Financial Services Regulation, Parliament called on the Commission to ‘propose a consistent, coherent, transparent and practical framework for procedures and decisions on third-country equivalence, taking into account an outcome-based analysis and international standards or agreements’; whereas the Parliament stressed in the same resolution that capital markets in the Union remain fragmented; therefore, in order to make the CMU a success and to ensure that the financing of companies in the EU becomes less costly, underlines the need to elaborate a workable and effective equivalence regime given the fact the largest pools of European liquidity and capital still remains located in the UK;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G a (new) G a. whereas it is necessary for the purposes of the Union's financial stability to fully consider the interconnectedness between third country markets and the EU's single market;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Notes that since the financial crisis, the EU has developed its financial regulation through
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas since the financial crisis, more than 40 new pieces of EU financial legislation have been adopted, of which 15 include ‘third country provisions’ that give the Commission
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Notes that since the financial crisis, the EU has developed its financial regulation through wide-ranging reforms; welcomes the increased regulatory and supervisory cooperation between the EU and third countries; recognises that this has helped to improve
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Notes that since the financial crisis, the EU has developed its financial regulation through wide-ranging reforms and implementation of international standards; welcomes the increased regulatory and supervisory cooperation between the EU and third countries; recognises that this has contributed to improv
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Notes that since the financial crisis, the EU has developed its financial regulation through wide-ranging reforms; welcomes the increased regulatory and supervisory cooperation between the EU and third countries; recognises that this has improved global consistency in financial regulation and
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Notes that since the financial crisis, the EU has developed its financial regulation through wide-ranging reforms; welcomes the increased regulatory and supervisory cooperation between the EU and third countries; recognises that this has improved global consistency in financial regulation and has contributed to ma
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Considers that the EU should promote global financial regulatory reforms aimed at reducing systemic risk and should work towards a
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Considers that the EU should promote global financial regulatory reforms aimed at reducing systemic risk and
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Considers that the EU should promote global financial regulatory reforms aimed at reducing systemic risk and enhancing financial stability, and should work towards an open, integrated and resilient financial system that supports sustainable economic growth, job creation and investment
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Considers that the EU should promote global financial regulatory reforms aimed at reducing systemic risk and should work towards an open, integrated and resilient financial system that supports sustainable economic growth, job creation and investment; stresses that any framework of international regulatory and supervisory cooperation should safeguard financial stability in the Union and respect its regulatory and supervisory regime and standards and their application;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Considers that the EU should promote global financial regulatory reforms aimed at reducing systemic risk and should work towards an open, integrated and resilient financial system that supports sustainable and inclusive economic growth, job creation and sustainable investment;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Considers that the EU should promote global financial regulatory reforms aimed at reducing systemic risk and should work towards an open, integrated and resilient financial system that supports sustainable and socially- inclusive economic growth, job creation and investment;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas since the financial crisis, more than 40 new pieces of EU financial legislation have been adopted, of which 15 include ‘third country provisions’ that give the Commission, on behalf of the EU, the power to unilaterally decide whether regulatory rules in foreign jurisdictions can be considered equivalent;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Considers that the EU should promote global financial regulatory reforms aimed at reducing systemic risk and should work towards an open, integrated, efficient and resilient financial system that supports sustainable economic growth, job creation and investment;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Notes that the Member States may not always entirely support international cooperation owing to concerns about the protection of national interests
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3.
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Notes
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Notes that the Member States may not always entirely support international
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Notes that the Member States may not always entirely support international cooperation owing to concerns about the protection of national interests
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas equivalence
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Notes, at the same time, that Brexit risks once more to incite harmful regulatory downward competition as financial hubs in the EU27 scramble to attract business from London. To prevent this, the remaining Member States need to commit to strengthening common European financial regulatory standards and practices and to coordinating wherever possible in order to manage the challenges of Brexit;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Deplores the poor global coordination of financial regulation, which means that the United States often imposes its views and interests on the international community while exempting itself from implementing the rules it has imposed on others;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Regrets that post-crisis global financial coordination has been used as a pretext for the deconstruction of the banking model for financing European economies, to the benefit of market-based finance, which is more remote from economic operators, particularly small- scale ones; regrets that high-street banks are, allegedly for the purpose of financial stability, being replaced by international giants and market participants which are, more often than not, from the United States;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Notes that several EU legislative acts contain specific provisions for regulatory cooperation with third countries, including the possibility to conclude
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Notes that several EU legislative acts contain specific provisions for regulatory cooperation with third countries, including the possibility to conclude
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Notes that several EU legislative acts contain specific provisions for regulatory cooperation with third countries, including the possibility to conclude
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Stresses that
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Stresses that, in many cases, the granting of equivalence is a unilateral and discretionary decision taken by the EU
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Stresses that, in many cases, the granting of equivalence is a unilateral decision taken by the EU and
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas equivalence, passporting rights and
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Stresses that
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Stresses that,
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Stresses that, in many cases, the granting of equivalence is a unilateral decision taken by the EU and is not applied in a reciprocal manner by third countries;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Stresses that
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Stresses that, in many cases, the granting of equivalence is a unilateral decision taken by the EU and is not applied in a reciprocal manner by third countries; considers that international cooperation could be better advanced by dint of international agreements negotiated between the EU and third countries; notes that, unlike equivalence, international agreements can provide mutual access between the EU and third countries for financial institutions and for the mutual recognition of rules; points out that such international agreements would need to be designed in a way that protects the integrity of the Single Market, leaves no room for regulatory or supervisory arbitrage and would need to include provisions to ensure that high levels of harmonisation are maintained over time without curtailing the prerogatives of the Union legislator;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Stresses that, in many cases, the granting of equivalence is a unilateral decision taken by the EU and is not applied in a reciprocal manner by third countries; considers that international cooperation could be better advanced by dint of international agreements negotiated between the EU and third countries if these are designed in a way that prevents regulatory arbitrage and are continuously monitored by competent authorities with a view to ensuring a regulatory level playing-field; notes that, unlike equivalence, international agreements can provide mutual access between the EU and third countries for financial institutions and for the mutual recognition of rules;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Stresses that, in many cases, the granting of equivalence is a unilateral decision taken by the EU and is not applied in a reciprocal manner by third countries; considers that international cooperation could be better advanced by dint of international agreements negotiated between the EU and third countries; notes that, unlike equivalence, international agreements can provide mutual access between the EU and third countries for financial institutions and for the mutual recognition of rules; is nevertheless concerned about the pattern, systematically repeated, whereby international agreements are concluded by the US administration but never ratified by Congress, which results in a de facto unilateral disarmament by EU countries to the benefit of market penetration by the United States;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5 a. Underlines that any international agreements should include appropriate tax cooperation arrangements; as well as robust prudential carve-outs without being subject to necessity tests in order to legally guarantee European, national and local authorities’ rights to regulate in the public interest;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5 a. emphasises that the EU should encourage other jurisdictions to grant access to their financial markets to EU market participants;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Recognises that the EU’s equivalence regime is an integral part of its regulatory framework for financial services
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas equivalence decisions do not confer ‘passport’ rights to financial institutions established in third countries; whereas equivalence, passporting rights and mutual recognition are distinctly different concepts, providing different rights to and obligations for financial institutions and market participants;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Recognises that the EU
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Recognises that the EU’s equivalence regime is an integral part of its regulatory and supervision framework for financial services and can offer several benefits, such as: the stability in the EU financial system given the exposure to foreign risks, the removal of unnecessary regulatory barriers, increased competition, increased capital flows into the EU,
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Recognises that the EU’s equivalence regime is an integral part of its regulatory framework for financial services and can offer several benefits, such as: safeguard of financial stability, level playing field, the removal of unnecessary regulatory barriers, increased competition, increased capital flows into the EU,
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Recognises that the EU’s equivalence regime is an integral part of a number of the legislative acts forming its regulatory framework for financial services and can offer several benefits, such as: the removal of unnecessary regulatory barriers, increased competition, increased capital flows into the EU, and more instruments and investment choices for EU firms and investors;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Reiterates that equivalence decisions
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Reiterates that equivalence decisions do not grant financial institutions comparable rights to passport financial services throughout the EU
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Reiterates that equivalence decisions do not grant financial institutions established in third countries comparable rights to passport financial services throughout the EU, but
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Reiterates that, in most cases, equivalence decisions do not grant financial institutions comparable rights to passport financial services throughout the EU, but recognises that they
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Reiterates that, in some cases, equivalence decisions do not grant financial institutions comparable rights to passport financial services throughout the EU, but recognises that they may give third-country institutions
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. Underlines in contrast that the ‘EU passport’ gives undertakings the right to provide financial services throughout the EEA, under the license granted by their home country and under the home country supervision and that as such it is not available to financial institutions established in non-EEA countries as it relies on a set of prudential requirements harmonised under EU law; and on mutual recognition of licenses;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas equivalence, passporting rights and mutual recognition are distinctly different concepts, providing different rights to and obligations for financial institutions and market participants, the first one related to third-country regime, the others being used inside the internal market with the support of the EUCJ;
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 b (new) 7 b. Requests that any third country equivalence decision is subject to appropriate tax cooperation arrangements in order to ensure automatic exchange of information according to international standards and a positive pre-assessment of the third country provisions to fight tax evasion, tax avoidance and money laundering;
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 c (new) 7 c. Points out that EU financial services legislation provides for evolving models regarding providers incorporated in third countries involving differentiated authorisation procedures, supervisory and cooperation arrangements; welcomes in particular the ongoing work in the EMIR 2.2 proposals which foresee a recognition process of third country undertakings subject to dual supervision by national and EU authorities and binding supervisory arrangements; is of the opinion that the Commission should consider similar proposals for other market infrastructures and key market players, including third country regimes for credit rating agencies, trade repositories, benchmarks, and possibly trading venues, and data providers;
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Emphasi
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Emphasises that one of the key objectives for equivalence is to
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Emphasises that
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Emphasises that
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Emphasises that
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Emphasises that one of the key objectives for equivalence is to promote regulatory convergence on the basis of
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Emphasises that one of the key avowed objectives for equivalence is to promote regulatory convergence on the basis of international standards, whereas in reality it is a question of concentrating liquidity, collateral and, in general, the business of international financial giants in a minimum number of financial centres; stresses, furthermore, that artificially maintaining financial activity in a very small number of global centres in such a way harms the financial stability and economic interest of the Member States which have seen their financial liquidity disappear to the benefit of those international financial centres;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Emphasises that one of the key objectives for equivalence is to promote regulatory convergence on the basis of international standards while maintaining the integrity of the Single Market and maintaining the high standards agreed across the EU;
source: 621.121
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
2023-08-03Show (3) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/2 |
|
| events/2/summary |
|
| events/3/docs |
|
2021-12-18Show (12) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
| docs/0/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE619.408New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ECON-PR-619408_EN.html |
| docs/1/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE621.121New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ECON-AM-621121_EN.html |
| events/0/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament |
| events/1/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee |
| events/2 |
|
| events/2 |
|
| events/3/docs |
|
| events/5 |
|
| events/5 |
|
| procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
| procedure/Other legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
2020-01-19Show (3) Changes | Timetravel
| docs/2/body |
EC
|
| events/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2018-0263&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2018-0263_EN.html |
| events/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2018-0326New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2018-0326_EN.html |
2019-09-04Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
2019-07-06Show (14) Changes | Timetravel
| activities |
|
| commission |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| docs |
|
| events |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure/Modified legal basis |
Old
Rules of Procedure EP 150New
Rules of Procedure EP 159 |
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
ECON/8/11347New
|
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 54
|
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 52
|
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stageNew
Procedure completed |
| procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
2018-09-12Show (10) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/0/shadows/5 |
|
| activities/1 |
|
| activities/2 |
|
| activities/3 |
|
| activities/4/date |
Old
2018-09-10T00:00:00New
2018-09-11T00:00:00 |
| activities/4/type |
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in plenary scheduled |
| committees/0/shadows/5 |
|
| procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 150
|
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Old
Rules of Procedure EP 052New
Rules of Procedure EP 52 |
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage |
2018-04-24Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
| committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
2018-03-22Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1 |
|
2018-03-17Show (3) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
| committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
| procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052New
Rules of Procedure EP 052 |
2017-12-20Show (3) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0 |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
ECON/8/11347
|
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Preparatory phase in ParliamentNew
Awaiting committee decision |
2017-12-16Show (5) Changes
| activities |
|
| committees |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure |
|