The Financial Stability Institute (FSI) of Bank for International Settlements (BIS) published a paper that offers policy implementation insights on the regulatory initiatives developed in China, European Union, and the United States to address new challenges presented by big tech firms. The report focusses on five policy domains: competition, data, conduct of business, operational resilience, and financial stability. The report notes that there exists a compelling case to seek international consistency of policy developments.
The report highlights that the policy initiatives generally seek to achieve a balance between addressing the different risks posed by big tech firms and preserving the benefits they bring in terms of market efficiency and financial inclusion. Policy initiatives are addressing the operational resilience of big tech firms. These typically apply to big tech firms either as providers of financial services or as third-party service providers of financial firms. The recent initiatives constitute important steps in addressing risks posed by big tech firms, though additional regulatory responses might be needed. These will include the development of entity-based rules to address the unique combination of risks posed by big tech firms. These initiatives represent important steps in combating relevant risks posed by big tech firms. It seems likely at this stage that new policy developments may need to introduce further specific controls for big tech firms if they continue, as expected, gaining presence in the financial system either directly or through their engagement with financial institutions.
As big tech firms continue to gain prominence in the financial system, additional policy responses might be necessary. It is also very likely that new policy actions will largely need to follow an entity-based approach and require close cooperation between competition, data, and financial authorities. Moreover, given the cross-border scope of big tech activities, enhanced international regulatory cooperation is essential. There is already a compelling case to seek international consistency of policy developments. Given the cross-border scope of the activities performed by big tech firms, international regulatory cooperation seems essential. Several proposals have been put forward to enhance global collaboration on the design of policies aiming to address the challenges posed by digital technologies. There have also been efforts by international standard-setting bodies to ensure that existing financial regulation (particularly in the area of payments) properly covers the activity of new nonbank players. As the need for specific rules for big tech firms may gain ground in different jurisdictions, the availability of common international guidance on the matter should help contain the risk of regulatory fragmentation.
Keywords: International, Banking, Bigtech, Fintech, Operational Resilience, Regtech, Guidance, FSI, BIS
Previous ArticleFI to Ease Restrictions on Dividend Payments, Increase CCyB
The European Banking Authority (EBA) published four draft principles to support supervisory efforts in assessing the representativeness of COVID-19-impacted data for banks using the internal ratings based (IRB) credit risk models.
The European Council and the European Parliament (EP) reached a provisional political agreement on the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD).
The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) launched a consultation (CP6/22) that sets out proposal for a new Supervisory Statement on expectations for management of model risk by banks.
The European Commission (EC) published the Delegated Regulation 2022/954, which amends regulatory technical standards on specification of the calculation of specific and general credit risk adjustments.
The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) Innovation Hub updated its work program, announcing a set of projects across various centers.
The European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) published two consultation papers—one on the supervisory statement on exclusions related to systemic events and the other on the supervisory statement on the management of non-affirmative cyber exposures.
Certain members of the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs issued a letter to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
The European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) published a consultation paper on the advice on the review of the securitization prudential framework in Solvency II.
The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) published bulletins on lending in decentralized finance (DeFi) system, on blockchain scalability and fragmentation of crypto, and on extractable value and market manipulation in crypto and decentralized finance.
The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) issued a statement on PRA buffer adjustment while the Bank of England (BoE) published a notice on the statistical reporting requirements for banks.