ECB published its opinion (CON/2019/2) on CBM’s supervision of credit reference agencies and its oversight of payment services. The opinion was issued in response to a request from CBM for an opinion on a draft law amending the CBM Act and on a draft Directive No 15 on the supervision of credit reference agencies. CBM also informed ECB that it intends to amend Directive No 14 on the Central Credit Register, along with the draft law amending the CBM Act and the draft directive on credit reference agencies, collectively referred to as the “draft law.”
The ECB opinion focuses on certain areas of the draft law of interest to ECB, including CBM's oversight of payment services (Section 3), its new supervisory powers with respect to credit reference agencies (Section 4), and its access to the Central Credit Register (Section 5). Finally, the opinion examines the new tasks conferred on CBM against the prohibition of monetary financing (Section 6). The definition of credit reference agencies pursuant to the draft law falls outside the scope of Credit Rating Agencies Regulation (Regulation No 1060/2009) because this regulation does not apply to credit scores, credit scoring systems, or similar assessments related to obligations arising from consumer, commercial, or industrial relationships. As credit reference agencies fall outside the scope of this regulation, ESMA would not have supervisory powers over such entities. In the vast majority of member states, credit reference agencies remain unregulated, except for data protection aspects.
ECB welcomes the provisions of the draft law extending access to the Central Credit Register to Union institutions, which create databases comparable to the Register and conclude reciprocity arrangements with CBM, and any other institution as CBM may consider necessary. ECB welcomes that the draft law provides that CBM may provide access to the information held in the Central Credit Register to any other institution that CBM may consider necessary. ECB considers that, if necessary for the fulfillment of its tasks, this provision could give ECB an additional legal basis for accessing the Register.
ECB notes that the draft law does not confer genuinely new tasks on CBM, but rather extends CBM’s powers to facilitate the exercise of a task already assigned to it. ECB underlines that a proposed conferral of new tasks on a national central bank of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB) must be assessed against the criteria for determining what constitutes a government task from the perspective of the monetary financing prohibition laid down in Article 123 of the Treaty. While the new task conferred on CBM regarding the supervision of credit reference agencies is not among the tasks conferred on ECB and national central banks by the Treaty and the Statute of ESCB, this task is not atypical of the national central bank tasks in those member states that have chosen to regulate and supervise credit reference agencies with respect to their credit scoring. Moreover, it is common for national central banks to be involved in activities related to the management of credit risk. As CBM’s new task is furthermore not discharged on behalf of, and in the exclusive interest of, the government, CBM’s new supervisory task in relation to credit reference agencies does not constitute a government task.
Keywords: Europe, Malta, Banking, Securities, Credit Reference Agencies, Opinion, Central Credit Register, CBM Act, CON/2019/2, CBM, ECB
Previous ArticleECB Paper on Principles for Fallback Provisions for Cash Products
EIOPA submitted—to the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union, and EC—its 2020, fifth, and last annual report on long-term guarantee measures and measures on equity risk.
The BIS Innovation Hub Swiss Centre, SNB, and the financial infrastructure operator SIX announced the successful completion of a joint proof-of-concept (PoC) experiment as part of the Project Helvetia.
EBA published the final draft regulatory technical standards for calculation of own funds requirements for market risk, under the standardized and internal model approaches of the Fundamental Review of the Trading Book (FRTB) framework.
EIOPA published discussion paper on a methodology for the potential inclusion of climate change in the Solvency II (sometimes also written as SII) standard formula when calculating natural catastrophe underwriting risk.
EU published, in the Official Journal of the European Union, corrigenda to the Directive and the Regulation on the prudential requirements and supervision of investment firms.
MAS proposed amendments to certain regulations, notices, and guidelines arising from the Banking (Amendment) Act 2020.
PRA published a statement that explains when to expect further information on the PRA approach to transposing the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD5), including its approach to revisions to the definition of capital for Pillar 2A.
RBNZ launched consultations on the scope of the Insurance Prudential Supervision Act (IPSA) 2010 and on the associated Insurance Solvency Standards.
SRB published the work program for 2021-2023, setting out a roadmap to further operationalize the Single Resolution Fund and to achieve robust resolvability of banks under its remit over the next three years.
EIOPA is consulting on the relevant ratios to be mandatorily disclosed by insurers and reinsurers falling within the scope of the Non-Financial Reporting Directive as well as on the methodologies to build these ratios.