Search results

1

Should Non-Euro Area Countries Join the Single Supervisory Mechanism?

100%

Darvas Z., Wolff G. B.

DANUBE: Law and Economics Review

|

2013

|

vol. 4

|

issue 2

141-163

EN

Irrespective of the euro crisis, a European banking union makes sense, including for non-euro area countries, because of the extent of European Union financial integration. The Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) is the first element of the banking union. From the point of view of non-euro countries, the draft SSM regulation as amended by the EU Council includes strong safeguards relating to decision-making, accountability, attention to financial stability in small countries and the applicability of national macroprudential measures. Non-euro countries will also have the right to leave the SSM and thereby exempt themselves from a supervisory decision. The SSM by itself cannot bring the full benefits of the banking union, but would foster financial integration, improve the supervision of cross-border banks, ensure greater consistency of supervisory practices, increase the quality of supervision, avoid competitive distortions and provide ample supervisory information. While the decision to join the SSM is made difficult by uncertainty surrounding other elements of the banking union, including possible burden sharing, we conclude that non-euro EU members should stand ready to join the SSM and be prepared for negotiations on the other elements of the banking union.

2

Europejska unia bankowa jako element nowego ładu gospodarczego Unii Europejskiej

100%

Szypulewska-Porczyńska A.

Unia Europejska.pl

|

2015

|

issue 4

29-35

PL

W odpowiedzi na zjawiska kryzysowe, które wystąpiły w ostatnich latach w Unii Europejskiej, wprowadzane są w tym ugrupowaniu reformy przekształ-cające dotychczasowe ramy zarządzania gospodarczego. Jednym z filarów no-wego ładu jest Europejska unia bankowa. W artykule omówione zostały główne elementy tego projektu oraz jego znaczenie dla Polski. W szczególności podjęto próbę odpowiedzi na pytanie o spójność i możliwe skutki istnienia w UE dwóch ścieżek integracji, tj. w ramach unii bankowej i w ramach rynku wewnętrznego.

EN

In response to crisis developments which took place in the European Union in recent years, reforms are being launched changing its framework of economic governance. One of the pillars of this new order is the European Banking Un-ion. The objective of the paper is to examine main elements of the project and assess their importance to Poland. One question has been addressed, especially. It is integrity and possible consequences of the existence of two paths of inte-gration in the EU, i.e. within the banking union and within the internal market.

3

Struktura i funkcjonowanie jednolitego mechanizmu restrukturyzacji i uporządkowanej likwidacji w europejskiej unii bankowej

88%

Junevièius A., Puidokas M.

International Business and Global Economy

|

2014

|

vol. Volume 33

77–88

EN

The recent financial crisis showed that the institutions of the European Union (EU) and its member states are poorly prepared for solving current problems of banks, which are experiencing financial difficulties in European markets. In order to be able to further provide services for citizens and companies, member states’ governments had to support banks with public finances and provide guarantees on an unprecedented scale. It did help to avoid a collapse of banks and a disturbance of the economy, but only by putting the burden on taxpayers and thereby causing deterioration in public finances. An agreement about the right course of action in the face of these difficulties experienced by cross-national banks has not been reached either. The major situation changer should be the European Banking Union (EBU), also called the Integrated Financial System, which is in the process of being created. The foundations for it have been laid during Lithuanian presidency of the Council of the EU in the second half of 2013. For Lithuania and all other EU member states, joining the banking union will mean handing over important national state powers to the European Union institutions.

4

Granice europeizacji regulacji i nadzoru nad rynkiem finansowym Unii Europejskiej

88%

Nadolska A.

Zeszyty Prawnicze BAS

|

2016

|

issue 1(49)

44-55

EN

There are taking place fundamental changes in the architecture of financial market supervision (ESFS, EUB, CMU) in the European Union. These changes are associated with respect for prudential rules. Such situation in fact is a return to the era of once criticized interventionism and the maximum state regulation. The most frequently cited nowadays objectives of the rules related to the single EU financial market (e.g. financial stability, consumer protection and the prevention of market abuse) come down to establish uniform rules of conduct for all with consideration of general welfare (according to principle: the single market = unified supervision = uniform regulations). However the only problem is that the strong integration of the legal systems of EU member states may restrict competition (their economies), inhibit innovation and increase systemic risk that constitutes a denial implemented since 2000 the idea of European financial market integration. The process of Europeanisation of regulation and supervision of the EU financial market is inevitable, nevertheless it requires a constant search for equilibrium point between efficiency and wider security and not from the point of view of euro zone, but a common European system.

5

Unia Bankowa – korzyści i zagrożenia dla Polski

88%

Pera J.

Krakowskie Studia Międzynarodowe

|

2013

|

issue 4

49-69

EN

The Banking Union will change the face of Europe. It will significantly deepen integration in what is arguably the key sector of the economy. For the Member States that join the Banking Union, this will mean signing up for ‘more Europe’. This will raise not only technical questions as to how Banking Union will actually work, but also political questions. These relate to how that deeper Europe should be governed and how the Banking Union will fit within the EU as a whole. Banking union consists of five elements: Regulation, Supervision, Deposit guarantees, Resolution and Liquidity provision from the Central Bank. All need to work together. Just as one needs a blueprint for the entire building before laying the foundation, so too would it be helpful to have a sense of Banking Union in its entirety before initiating the Single Supervisory Mechanism as the first instalment. Otherwise one runs the risk that Banking Union will remain partial, and that this will make things worse, not better.

6

Europejski model nadzoru finansowego – kierunki rozwoju

75%

Szpringer W.

Zeszyty Prawnicze BAS

|

2016

|

issue 1(49)

9-43

EN

The complexity and uncertainty in the application of the European system of financial supervision is due to the fact that its particular concepts were implemented at different times. First, it was the system of European financial supervisors (EBA, EIOPA, ESMA), which was primarily aimed at coordination of national activities. Then, the European Banking Union was established, comprised of the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM), and the Single Resolution Mechanism (SRM), as well as the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) which must also be seen in the context of assistance to troubled banks. Difficulties of interpretation are further compounded by a lack of consistency in approach to the institutions subject to examination. Should they include only the euro zone, or the whole EU, only the banks or other institutions as well? If you take into account the SSM, SRM or ESM, it is often not very clear who and when should act what tools should be applied, For example, when the ECB may, and should, correct decisions of national supervisors and what, in the context of increasing involvement of the ECB in the banking union, is the role of the ESRB; whether and when banks can possibly challenge decisions eg. on establishing a capital buffer or inclusion on the SIFI list, etc. Also unclear is the role of the EBA and ESMA in the context of the creation of a banking union, SSM, SRM and ESM and delegation of regulatory powers of ECB and the Commission to regulatory agencies (Meroni doctrine) or creation of regulatory agencies beyond the Treaty (Pringle doctrine).

7

Źródła regulacji i nadzoru nad bankami funkcjonującymi na rynku finansowym Unii Europejskiej

51%

Nadolska A.

Bezpieczny Bank

|

2017

|

issue 1 (66)

9-31

PL

W odpowiedzi na kryzys finansowy Unia Europejska i państwa członkowskie rozpoczęły gruntowny przegląd systemu regulacji i nadzoru nad rynkiem finansowym. UE zapoczątkowała wiele reform w sektorze bankowym, aby zwiększyć odporność banków i ograniczyć skutki ich ewentualnej upadłości. W tym celu powołano m.in. Europejski System Nadzoru Finansowego (ESNF) oraz Europejską Unię Bankową (EUB), zaprojektowano Unię Rynków Kapitałowych (CMU), jak też rozpoczęto prace nad single rulebook. Wszystkie te zmiany dotyczą jednak wyłą?cznie sfery zewnętrznej funkcjonowania instytucji kredytowych, które w większości są too big too fail. Tymczasem już w 2012 r. w sprawozdaniu grupy ekspertów wysokiego szczebla, pod przewodnictwem E. Liikanena, wskazano na konieczność przeprowadzenia reformy strukturalnej sektora bankowego w Unii, sięgając tym samym do sfery wewnętrznej jego bytu prawno-gospodarczego. Propozycja reformy strukturalnej sektora bankowego jest pierwszą, która bezpośrednio dotyczy działalności banków, tj. instytucji odpowiedzialnych za „szerokość i głębokość” ostatniego kryzysu gospodarczego. Jednocześnie jest istotnym uzupełnieniem Europejskiej Unii Bankowej, dlatego też powinna być skoordynowana z wcześniej przyjętymi na rynku europejskim regulacjami.

Refine search results

2 Zeszyty Prawnicze BAS

1 Bezpieczny Bank

1 DANUBE: Law and Economics Review

1 International Business and Global Economy

1 Krakowskie Studia Międzynarodowe

1 Unia Europejska.pl

2 Nadolska A.

1 Darvas Z.

1 Junevièius A.

1 Pera J.

1 Puidokas M.

1 Szpringer W.

1 Szypulewska-Porczyńska A.

1 Wolff G. B.

1 2017

2 2016

2 2015