Featured Product

    Agustín Carstens of BIS Examines Global and EU Financial Integration

    September 12, 2019

    While speaking at the Eurofi Financial Forum, the BIS General Manager Agustín Carstens examined the status of financial integration at the global and EU levels. He highlighted that regulatory divergences are often mentioned as a major source of fragmentation and examined the policy characteristics that lead to such divergences. Mr. Carstens discussed cross-country cooperation as a desirable development to enable regulation to achieve a better return by promoting more financial integration. "In the future, what now looks desirable may become essential," he added.

    Adapting financial regulation to national specificities may help strengthen domestic financial systems, thus enhancing global financial stability. A case in point is the ring-fencing measures of internationally active firms. For instance, the TLAC standard aims to appropriately distribute loss-absorbing and recapitalization capacity within a group and provide for pre-positioning in material subsidiaries or subgroups. It has recently been proposed that consideration be given to replacing pre-positioning requirements with cross-border guarantees, under which parent companies commit to support subsidiaries in case of need, both in normal times and in resolution. That would, of course, weaken the rationale for ring-fencing and allow international groups to centrally manage a larger amount of resources, thereby supporting their efficiency and promoting market integration. However, work remains to be done to determine whether and how those guarantees could offer sufficient comfort to host authorities and, more broadly, to financial markets.

    Moreover, enhanced information exchange among authorities and better functioning of supervisory colleges and crisis management groups could reduce the need for extraterritorial and other unilateral actions to ensure financial stability and market integrity in all jurisdictions. Recent reports on market fragmentation by FSB and IOSCO have spelled out those ideas, together with a concrete action plan. Even in the sensitive area of ring-fencing, international cooperation may facilitate a better outcome. A fully cooperative solution that would remove any need for ring-fencing is not achievable. However, progress could undoubtedly be made within crisis management groups toward deciding on an allocation of resources within international groups that would strike a good balance between the need to protect stability in each host jurisdiction and the need to preserve sufficient flexibility for the management of the group as a whole.

    Mr. Carstens highlighted that within the European banking union, the existence of single supervisory and resolution authorities provides for consistent policy approaches for both crisis prevention and crisis management. Yet it seems that regulatory harmonization and the creation of the banking union have not yet delivered substantive results in terms of banking integration. One explanation for this could be the insufficient incentives for banking integration. Authorities within the euro area can still impose specific capital, loss absorption, and liquidity requirements on subsidiaries of pan-European firms beyond the obligations imposed at the group consolidated level. Ring-fencing of local subsidiaries could be seen as fundamentally inconsistent with a fully functioning banking union. Though it could also be a natural consequence of the still limited degree of financial integration within the euro area and the insufficiency of the existing risk-sharing mechanisms.

    Logically, progress in deepening the economic and monetary union and completing the banking union would strengthen the case for a full transfer of financial stability responsibilities to EU authorities. The availability of a common deposit guarantee scheme would provide arguments for reducing the current ring-fencing possibilities for the local subsidiaries of pan-European groups. In the European banking union, achieving such integration and removing ring-fencing is even more relevant than at the global level and it also looks more feasible. For instance, together with local authorities, both ECB and SRB are already involved in defining the requirements for banks' liquidity, capital, and loss-absorbing capacity at both the consolidated and the subsidiary level. That could reduce the need to pre-position large amounts of resources with the subsidiaries and help to achieve a balanced allocation of resources within pan-European groups, which would mitigate the potential impact of ring-fencing practices on the integration of the European banking industry. Regardless, he concluded that close international cooperation will become an essential element of any regulatory framework aiming to protect the integrity and stability of the financial system.

     

    Related Link: Speech

     

    Keywords: International, Europe, Banking, Financial Integration, Financial Stability, Market Fragmentation, Financial Stability, Ring Fencing, TLAC, Crisis Management, Banking Union, BIS, EU

    Featured Experts
    Related Articles
    News

    BaFin Publishes Submission Deadlines Under Solvency II

    BaFin published quarterly and annual submission deadlines on the Solvency II reporting page on its website.

    February 25, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    RBNZ to Address Cyber Risk Through Risk Management Guidance

    RBNZ announced that it is strengthening its efforts to enhance resilience of the financial system from cyber threats, including developing risk management guidance and promoting information-sharing in collaboration with industry and other public organizations.

    February 25, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    FSI Convened Meeting on Climate Risk Assessment in Financial Sector

    The Financial Stability Institute (FSI) of BIS issued a summary of the meeting held in Basel from February 20-21, 2020.

    February 24, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    BCBS Updates Basel III Monitoring Workbook in February 2020

    BCBS updated the workbook for Basel III monitoring to version 4.1.2, for the collection of December 2019 data.

    February 24, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    Bank of Finland Updates Validation Checks for AnaCredit Reporting

    Bank of Finland published Version 1.8 of the validation checks for credit data collection under the AnaCredit Regulation.

    February 24, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    APRA Plans to Assess Climate Risks and Develop Prudential Guidance

    APRA published a letter that outlines its plans to undertake a climate change vulnerability assessment and develop a prudential practice guide focused on climate-related financial risks.

    February 24, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    FDIC Publishes Guide to Help with Third-Party Risk Management

    The technology lab of FDIC (FDiTech) published a new guide to help financial technology, or fintech, companies and others partner with banks.

    February 24, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    PRA Removes References to LIBOR in SoP on Pillar 2 Capital and SS20/15

    PRA published a policy statement (PS3/20) that provides updates to certain supervisory statements (SS20/15, SS28/15, and SS35/15) and statements of policy (SoP).

    February 24, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    APRA to Transition to Annual Stress Testing of Large Banks in 2020

    APRA published key findings of the stress testing assessment conducted on authorized deposit-taking institutions.

    February 21, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    BoE Updates Version 1.1.0 of Taxonomy for Form AS and Form FV

    BoE published the statistical notice 2020/01 that provides an update to Version 1.1.0 of the taxonomy for forms AS (MFI holdings of securities collection) and FV (Financial Vehicle Corporations return) and the associated validation rules.

    February 21, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    RESULTS 1 - 10 OF 4729