21 Amendments of Jakob von WEIZSÄCKER related to 2015/2106(INI)
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is concerned about the increased complexity, reflected in the greater amount, detail and number of layers of regulation and supervision with requirements at international, European and national level of regulation with requirements at international, European and national level and therefore calls for strengthening of the Banking Union, streamlining national exemptions;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that a sound and robust CMU has to acknowledge the interdependencies with other financiexplore additional market based sources of funding for the real sectors and has to be based ononomy complementing well-established existing structures; stresses the need for a holistic view of EU financial services regulationthe risks in the financial sector and their potential fiscal and macro- economic consequences;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that an effective and efficient EU financial services regulation should be coherent, consistent (also on a cross- sectoral basis), proportionate, and free of superfluous complexity; believes that it should enable intermediarieseffectively address threats to financial stability and to the taxpayer, not least owing to systemic risks and too-big-to-fail institutions; believes that it should specifically enable capital market based capital allocation effectively to fulfil theirits role in funding the real economy and serve savers and investors, enhance the risk sharing capacity of the financial markets with the common currency and serve savers and investors without endangering financial and fiscal stability; considers that it should contribute to the single market and focus on goals better achievable at European level;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls for a dramatic reduction of the debt-equity bias to enhance economic resilience and capital allocation;
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines the need to take stock of the financial services framework not least in order to identify any remaining threats to financial stability and loopholes in the regulatory framework; notes that similar exercises are being undertaken in other jurisdictions, notably in the US;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Suggests a gradual further increase in capital requirements in order to reduce exposure to far from perfect risk models while improving capital allocation, financial stability and the protection of taxpayers;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Believes that a single market for financial services serves businesses, but ultimately has to benefit customers and investors; insists that barriers to cross- border access, marketing and investment have to be analysed and addressed; underscores the fact that a more efficient allocation of capital within the EU need not always lead to higher cross-border capital flows; reminds that the build-up of real-estate bubbles in some Member States before the crisis was to some extent fuelled by too much capital flowing in;
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Recalls that reduced barriers to capital flows can only be safely predicted to enhance long-term growth prospects if the overall incentives for companies are set right; highlights that this is at present not the case in a number of areas - not least with regards to corporate taxation - and that the rectification of such destructive incentives therefore must be treated as an integral part of the capital market union agenda;
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Believes that consumer protection does not necessarily entail large volumes of information, but precise information clearly disclosing the entire risk a consumer is exposed to; is concerned that the multiplicity of customer information might not ultimately serve real customer needs; points to the necessity of a European initiative for more and better financial education; encourages further digitalization of information;
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Highlights the benefits of asset diversification; emphasises that the purpose of prudential regulation is not to favour certain asset classes; calls for a risk- based approach to regulation, with the same rules being applied to the same risks; believes that a more granular categorisation of asset classes is appropriate, in particular by establishing categories such as infrastructure employing robust and standardised risk measures and complementing them with regulation that does not rely on risk measures such as a the leverage ratio;
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Notes the possible unintended consequences of multipleat capital, liquidity and leverage requirements on maturity transformatineed to complement one and othe provision of long- term financing;r and asks the Commission, in cooperation with the supervisors, to analyse these conseque extent to which the complementarity of such thresholds might be further enhancesd for banking and insurance as a matter of priority;
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the diversity of business models; calls for a differentiation incomprehensive regulationory and supervisionory regardingime fully taking into account the nature, size, riskiness and complexity of the entities in question;
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls for an appropriate division of competences between EU and national level, bearing in mind that national supervisors have more knowledge of local market characteristicsreduced regulatory fragmentation, ensuring a seamless and streamlined division of labour between EU and national level; is concerned about the effeimpact of a one-size-fits-all supervisory approach on smaller and primarily nationally active entities within the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM)supervisory fragmentation on the effectiveness of the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) and the level playing field for financial institutions;
Amendment 198 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes the achievements in establishing a banking union; stresses that the next step has to be its full implementation, including full capitalisation of national Deposit Guarantee Schemes (DGS) and the Single Resolution Fund (SRF); emphasises the aim of avoiding moral hazard and ensuring that risk-takers bear the costs when their risks materialise; calls for the completion of banking union including a common mechanism for deposit insurance and effective bank structural reform regulation based on the Liikanen report;
Amendment 282 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Demands a stronger focus on the global competitiveness of the EU financial sectors when making policyEmphasises that an effective financial sector is a necessary condition for efficient capital allocation on dynamic growth while observing that there can be too much finance which has been empirically shown to tend to reduce growth prospects;
Amendment 297 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Supports attempts to harmonise accounting standards, including the definition of non-performing loans in the Union; stresses the need for a harmonised insolvency regime; points out that fragmentation in the area of accounting and insolvency laws is associated with enormous costs, inefficiencies and regulatory arbitrage which have the potential to hamper growth and distort the internal market;
Amendment 372 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Reminds the ESAs that technical standards, guidelines and recommendations are bound by the principle of proportionality; calls on the ESAs to adopt a restrictive approach to the extent and number of guidelines, particularly where they are not explicitly empowered in the basic act; notes that such a restrictive approach is also required in view of the ESAs’ resources and the need to prioritise their taskspoints out that the practical limits of effective supervision must not be set by budgetary constraints; encourages a comparison of ESAs’ funding with US agencies in the field, including the US Consumer Financial Protection Bureau;
Amendment 385 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Calls on the Commission and ESAs to conduct regular (at least annual) proportionalityeffectiveness checks, particularly with regard to the requirements applicable for small and medium-sized market participants and on every draft legislative actintended to address threats to financial stability stemming from large financial intermediaries, and to dedicate resources to this activity;
Amendment 394 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Stresses that the impact of individual legislative measures differs from their cumulative impact; calls on the Commission services, in corporation with the ESAs, SSM and ESRB, to conduct a comprehensive quantitative and qualitative assessment every five years of the cumulative impact of the EU financial services regulation at EU and Member State level in order to identify shortcomings and loopholes;
Amendment 410 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43 – indent 2 a (new)
Paragraph 43 – indent 2 a (new)
– the actual common equity tier 1 to total asset ratios in financial institutions and their development over time,
Amendment 419 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43 – indent 4 a (new)
Paragraph 43 – indent 4 a (new)
– the actual amount of subsidies to financial institutions stemming from explicit or implicit government guarantees,