General Information & Client Services
  • Americas: +1.212.553.1653
  • Asia: +852.3551.3077
  • China: +86.10.6319.6580
  • EMEA: +44.20.7772.5454
  • Japan: +81.3.5408.4100
Media Relations
  • New York: +1.212.553.0376
  • London: +44.20.7772.5456
  • Hong Kong: +852.3758.1350
  • Tokyo: +813.5408.4110
  • Sydney: +61.2.9270.8141
  • Mexico City: +001.888.779.5833
  • Buenos Aires: +0800.666.3506
  • São Paulo: +0800.891.2518
April 19, 2018

Dr. Andreas Dombret of Deutsche Bundesbank spoke at the 2018 Europe-U.S. Symposium of the Harvard Law School Program on International Financial Systems in New York. He highlighted that Brexit might set in motion fundamental changes that impact where banks do business and how international supervision works. In addition to discussing the ways in which Brexit will impact the future of cross-border finance, Dr. Dombret examined the potential negotiation outcomes in the current scenario.

While examining the feasibility of the Free trade Agreement (FTA) between the UK and EU, he emphasized that “supervisors cannot allow a foreign bank to provide financial services in their market without having the possibility to curb behavior that endangers financial stability.” This is keeping in mind that the UK government has chosen to leave the single market and the customs union and withdrawn from the associated regulatory framework. Thus, “… a chapter on financial services in a free trade agreement (FTA) would be very limited … .” Next, he discussed the possibility of implementing the equivalence agreement, similar to the one with the U.S. However, the EU approach is built on a law-by-law basis, where equivalence can only be granted when the specific piece of legislation has an explicit provision. There is, for example, no basis for an equivalence decision when it comes to the licensing of banks. The European Council has, therefore, asked EC and the Brexit negotiation team to analyze whether it would be prudent to enhance this approach. In this context, he highlighted the possibility of three potential negotiation outcomes: the enhanced equivalence option, the subsidiarisation option (establishment of independent subsidiaries in each other's market), and several potential combinations of limited financial services agreements plus a less ambitious revision of the equivalence regime (that is, an extension of the law-by-law approach to encompass other regulatory areas that are currently not out of scope). “None of the remaining options for financial services are ideal. So we will have to make do with complicated, second-best solutions,” said Dr. Dombret.

If one were to follow the preferences of industry groups, a new equivalence regime would ensure a high level of liberalization for financial services; regulatory equivalence would be managed by a technical committee of EU and UK supervisors, with independent arbiters dealing with cases of conflict. He added that he is skeptical about this mutual recognition approach and about similar approaches based on regulatory harmonization through technical committees and independent arbitration mechanisms. On the other hand, the subsidiarisation option would be well-suited to preserving financial stability and democratic accountability. It might also be less costly than a full-blown mutual recognition regime. “There is no ideal option on the table, nor is any one of the three second-best solutions clearly better than the others,” said Dr. Dombret. According to him, the key takeaways are that two sovereign regulatory jurisdictions will emerge, free cross-border trade in financial services will be limited, and the remaining options all require further analysis and thought. “No matter which direction we take, our decisions will have an indirect, albeit substantial impact on other third countries to the EU.”

Brexit could affect two avenues that give financial firms access to the EU market: namely, decisions of supervisory equivalence and the licensing process. A new equivalence framework could be more systematic. For third-country CCPs, this enhanced equivalence is attractive, as it makes the decision more predictable and transparent. However, for U.S. CCPs, this approach may not be appropriate or necessary because we already have a robust equivalence decision. Given the Bundesbankk's thorough process of mutual assessment, there is a case for sustaining this outcome—for example, through a bilateral U.S.-EU agreement on CCP equivalence. The second avenue via which Brexit could affect how financial firms gain access to the EU market are higher demands for licensing foreign bank branches and subsidiaries. Take, for example, the discussion about a draft law proposing to introduce EU intermediate parent undertakings (IPUs) for short. Similar to the U.S. intermediate holding companies, or IHCs, foreign banks would have to bring their EU operations under a single holding company. He added that Bundesbank will continue to advocate fair access for foreign banks. From the perspective of U.S. banks and those from other third countries, Brexit will impact on how they can do business in the EU single market. Both the new IPU requirements and a potential enhanced equivalence approach mean a more systematic approach to ensuring fair, transparent, and stable rules for the provisioning of cross-border financial services. While this may imply some new requirements, it might end up streamlining the rules and promoting clear supervisory dialog.

 

Related Link: Speech

Keywords: Europe, EU, US, Banking, Securities, Brexit, Passporting Regime, Equivalence, Licensing, Bundesbank, BIS

Related Insights
News

FSB Publishes the G-SIB List for 2018

FSB published the 2018 list of global systemically important banks (G-SIBs) using end-2017 data and an assessment methodology designed by BCBS.

November 16, 2018 WebPage Regulatory News
News

BCBS Publishes Additional Information on the 2018 G-SIB Assessment

BCBS published further information related to the 2018 assessment of global systemically important banks (G-SIBs), including additional details to help understand the scoring methodology.

November 16, 2018 WebPage Regulatory News
News

CBB Proposes and Finalizes Rulebook Modules for Banks in November 2018

CBB announced the issuance of new leverage ratio requirements under Module CA (Part 3) for Islamic (Chapter CA-10) and conventional bank licensees (Chapter CA-15).

November 15, 2018 WebPage Regulatory News
News

OFR on Financial Stability Risks in Its 2018 Annual Report to Congress

OFR released its 2018 Annual Report to Congress, which examines risks to the financial stability in the United States.

November 15, 2018 WebPage Regulatory News
News

SRB Sets Expectations on Resolvability of Banks in Context of Brexit

SRB published a position paper that presents its expectations about ensuring resolvability of banks in the context of Brexit.

November 15, 2018 WebPage Regulatory News
News

PRA Publishes Final Policy on Capital Framework for Securitization

PRA published the policy statement PS29/18, which provides feedback to responses to the consultation paper CP12/18 on the new EU framework and significant risk transfer for securitization.

November 15, 2018 WebPage Regulatory News
News

IAIS Publishes Drafts of Revised ICP 8, ICP 15, ICP 16, and ICP 20

IAIS published the drafts of revised Insurance Core Principles on Public Disclosure (ICP 20), Investments (ICP 15), Enterprise Risk Management for Solvency Purposes (ICP 16), and Risk Management and Internal Controls (ICP 8), along with a revised draft of the glossary on enterprise risk management (ERM).

November 14, 2018 WebPage Regulatory News
News

PRA Updates Final Policy and Reporting Form for Leverage Ratio in UK

PRA published the Policy Statement PS28/18, which provides feedback to responses to the consultation paper CP14/18 titled "UK leverage ratio: Applying the framework to systemic ring-fenced bodies and reflecting the systemic risk buffer."

November 14, 2018 WebPage Regulatory News
News

IASB Could Extend Effective Date for IFRS 17 and IFRS 9 for Insurers

IASB has voted to propose a one-year deferral—to 2022—of the effective date for the new insurance contracts standard IFRS 17. IASB also decided to propose extending to 2022 the temporary exemption for insurers to apply the financial instruments standard IFRS 9.

November 14, 2018 WebPage Regulatory News
News

MAS Amends Notice 637 on Capital Adequacy Requirements in Singapore

MAS published the final, revised Notice 637 on the risk-based capital adequacy requirements in Singapore.

November 13, 2018 WebPage Regulatory News
RESULTS 1 - 10 OF 2219