FSI published a policy implementation insights paper that explores the frameworks in place in worldwide to regulate digital banks and fintech platforms. The paper provides a cross-country overview of the regulatory requirements for digital banking and fintech platform financing in 30 jurisdictions. It describes the range of licensing and ongoing regulatory requirements for digital banking, including transitional arrangements in the startup phase, and fintech platform financing, also offering considerations for financial authorities. The paper suggests that financial authorities will likely have to weigh a number of elements when assessing whether their regulatory framework is adequate or needs to be adjusted to account for new fintech activities.
The proliferation of new technology-enabled business models has raised questions about the regulatory perimeter. Authorities are assessing whether their existing regulatory framework needs to be adjusted. For digital banking, most jurisdictions apply existing banking laws and regulations to banks within their remit, regardless of the technology they apply. From these jurisdictions, a few have put in place initiatives that are intended to ensure that new banks find it easier to enter the market by allowing them time to complete their build-out or to meet the requirements of the prudential framework in full. The paper highlights that, in the few jurisdictions that have set specific regulatory frameworks for digital banks, the main licencing and ongoing requirements are similar to those for traditional banks.
The main difference between licensing requirements for traditional and digital banks is in technology-related elements and the aims of the business plan. Digital banks face restrictions on their physical presence and, in some cases, the market segments they are allowed to serve. Their fit-and-proper requirements tend to be more prescriptive in relation to board members’ expertise in technology; a satisfactory track record in operating a technology business; and assessments of technical infrastructure by independent third-party technical experts. In addition, some jurisdictions require digital banks to demonstrate a commitment in driving financial inclusion, particularly for under-served and hard-to-reach market segments. However, most surveyed jurisdictions have no specific regulatory framework for fintech balance sheet lending and many surveyed jurisdictions have introduced crowdfunding regulations.
The paper concludes that, in general, financial authorities will probably have to weigh a number of elements when assessing whether their regulatory framework is adequate or needs to be adjusted to account for new fintech activities. Authorities will need to assess not only potential risks of these new activities to consumers and investors, financial stability, and market integrity but also potential benefits for society in terms of strengthening financial development, inclusion, and efficiency. Based on this assessment, authorities will have to consider whether fintech-related risks are adequately dealt with under the existing regulatory framework and whether opportunities for regulatory arbitrage have opened up. Overall, the challenge for authorities will be to achieve a balance that encourages innovation without compromising the soundness of the financial system.
Keywords: International, Banking, Digital Banks, Fintech, Regulatory Framework, Prudential Framework, Bank Licenses, BIS, FSI
Previous ArticleFASB to Implement New Extensible Enumerations in 2021 Taxonomies
HM Treasury announced that the new Financial Services Bill has been introduced in the Parliament.
FCA proposed guidance on how firms should continue to seek to help customers who hold insurance and premium finance products and may be in financial difficulty because of COVID-19, after October 31, 2020.
EBA issued an opinion on prudential treatment of the legacy instruments as the grandfathering period nears an end on December 31, 2021.
PRA published the consultation paper CP17/20 to propose changes to certain rules, supervisory statements, and statements of policy to implement elements of the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD5).
US Agencies adopted a final rule that applies to advanced approaches banking organizations and aims to reduce interconnectedness in the financial system as well as to reduce contagion risks associated with the failure of a global systemically important bank (G-SIB).
US Agencies (FDIC, FED, and OCC) adopted a final rule that implements the net stable funding ratio (NSFR) for certain large banking organizations.
FSB finalized the toolkit of effective practices to assist financial institutions in their cyber incident response and recovery activities.
ECB published eleventh issue of the Macroprudential Bulletin, which provides insight into the ongoing work of ECB in the field of macro-prudential policy.
HM Treasury issued a call for evidence seeking views to reform the prudential regulatory regime—also known as Solvency II—of the insurance sector in UK.
ESRB responded to the EC consultation on review of Solvency II regime.