Position of the European Financial Congress on the Supplementary Supervision of Financial Conglomerates
Abstract
This article presents the position of the European Financial Congress in relation to the European Commission’s consultation document on the supplementary supervision of credit institutions, insurance undertakings and investment firms in a financial conglomerate. From 9th June till 20th September 2016, the EC ran a public consultation on the evaluation of the financial conglomerate directive (FICOD), whether it delivers on its objective to identify and manage group risks, i.e. multiple gearing, excessive leveraging of capital, contagion, complexity management, concentration and conflict of interest. Financial conglomerates were originally represented by bancassurance. Over time financial institutions have expanded into investment banking, asset management and other financial activities, with separate segment supervisions. Now, they are getting bigger, more complex and international, expanding into the real economy, outsourcing critical processes to non-regulated external offshore companies. Moreover, manufacturing companies are developing competencies in banking area and traditional financial institutions are being challenged by expanding fintech projects. The evaluation of supplementary supervision shall lead to better regulation in terms of relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, coherence and added value. As a result, the legislation shall contribute to enhanced financial stability, safeguard creditors’ and policyholders’ interests, and promote the competitiveness of financial conglomerates within the EU and at international level. From the Polish perspective, FICOD shall protect the financial system from the import of group risks and lead to secure growth of local financial conglomerates, enjoying a level playing field in the EU. The EC consultation paper was addressed by representatives of different groups of stakeholders in the Polish financial market, including in particular: universal banks, auto loan companies, insurance undertakings, regulatory bodies, consulting firms and academia.
Download files
Citation rules
Licence

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Most read articles by the same author(s)
- Andrzej Dżuryk, European Secured Notes as a New Asset Class , Safe Bank: Vol. 84 No. 3 (2021)
- Marcin Borsuk, Kamil Kalupa, Testy warunków skrajnych jako metoda pomiaru ryzyka banków , Safe Bank: Vol. 64 No. 3 (2016)
- Andrzej Dżuryk, Development Perspectives of European Secured Notes , Safe Bank: Vol. 85 No. 4 (2021)
- Marcin Borsuk, Jakub Markiewicz, Specific credit risk determinants in cooperative and commercial banks , Safe Bank: Vol. 78 No. 1 (2020)
- Leszek Pawłowicz, Marcin Borsuk, Temporary Funding in the Resolution Process , Safe Bank: Vol. 65 No. 4 (2016)
- Andrzej Dżuryk, Influence of Hybrid Recapitalization Obligations on Stability of the Financial System , Safe Bank: Vol. 82 No. 1 (2021)
- Andrzej Dżuryk, The business case of European Secured Notes , Safe Bank: Vol. 88 No. 3 (2022)
- Marcin Borsuk, Kamil Klupa, Legal and Structural Challenges in Implementing BRR Directive to National Law with Regard to Bail-in Mechanism , Safe Bank: Vol. 81 No. 4 (2020)
- Andrzej Dżuryk, Shaping the European Secured Notes (ESN) market , Safe Bank: Vol. 93 No. 4 (2023)
- Andrzej Dżuryk, The position of Polish experts in European Commission consultations on covered bonds , Safe Bank: Vol. 62 No. 1 (2016)
Vol. 65 No. 4 (2016)
Published: 2016-12-18
10.26354

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Język Polski
English