The Advisory Scientific Committee of ESRB published a report that discusses how excessive regulatory complexity can contribute to systemic risk and possible ways to address the issue. The report establishes seven broad principles that would help make financial regulation more robust—adaptability, diversity, proportionality, resolvability, systemic perspective, information availability, and non-regulatory discipline.
The report starts with an explanation of the recent perceived increase in regulatory complexity and tries to identify the factors behind it. It then presents the channels through which regulatory complexity can contribute to systemic risk and the downsides of a simple regulatory framework. While it does not question the need for, or extent of, financial regulation, the report considers that the observed degree of complexity in financial regulation may limit its effectiveness in dealing with systemic risk. Some actions to address the current degree of regulatory complexity are presented in the last section of the report. To address systemic risk optimally, the report concludes that current financial regulation should be made more robust to uncertainty.
The report argues that complex regulation is not necessarily the best response to the complexity of the financial system. However, it calls for cost-effective and robust financial regulation rather than deregulation or overly simple regulation. Addressing regulatory complexity by promoting overly simple regulation would not generate an optimal outcome in terms of systemic risk. The regulatory framework would not be able to capture the inherent complexity of the financial system and would place excessive focus on reducing the regulatory burden, possibly at the expense of improving the incentive structure of regulated entities. In the long term, this could increase the societal costs of systemic crises. The report contributes to the ongoing debate on the optimal form of financial regulation, taking an approach focused on addressing systemic risk in the whole financial system within the context of a continuously evolving environment.
Keywords: Europe, EU, Banking, Insurance, Securities, Regulatory Complexity, Systemic Risk, Proportionality, Resolvability, ESRB
Previous ArticleNick Cook of FCA on Moving from Innovation Hub to Innovation Culture
BCBS Finalizes Revisions to Credit Valuation Adjustment Risk Framework
PRA published a statement to insurers that clarifies the approach to application of the matching adjustment during COVID-19 crisis.
EBA published a report on the implementation of selected COVID-19 policies within the prudential framework for banking sector.
EC launched a consultation to revise the network and information systems (NIS) Directive (2016/1148), which was adopted in July 2016 and is the first horizontal internal market instrument aimed at improving the resilience of the EU against cybersecurity risks.
PRA published a statement that outlines its view on the implications of LIBOR transition for contracts in scope of the “Contractual Recognition of Bail-In” and “Stay in Resolution” parts of the PRA Rulebook.
PRA published the policy statement PS15/20 to reflect additional resilience associated with higher macro-prudential buffers in a standard risk environment with a reduction in Pillar 2A capital requirements.
BCBS published the eighteenth progress report on implementation of the Basel III regulatory framework in member jurisdictions.
FCA announced proposals that would provide continued support for certain consumer credit products to users, who are facing a financial impact because of the exceptional circumstances arising from the COVID-19 pandemic.
ACPR published a draft version of taxonomy RAN 1.4.0_PWD1, along with the related documentation, for Solvency II reporting.
BCBS amended the guidelines on sound management of risks related to money laundering and financing of terrorism (ML/FT).