23 Amendments of Markus FERBER related to 2017/2072(INI)
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the stock of non- performing loans of significant institutions (SIs) stood at EUR 865 billion at the end of March 2017 and remains at an unacceptably high level across the Banking Union as a whole;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the 2017 banking cases have shown that the move from bail-out to bail-in has yet to be finalised and the rules on banking recovery and resolution are being insufficiently applied;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas in carrying out its supervisory activities the European Central Bank has so far failed to take sufficient account of the proportionality principle;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
Recital E b (new)
Eb. whereas the ECB needs some flexibility in carrying out its supervisory activities, but far-reaching decisions of principle must ultimately be left to the European legislator;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Reiterates its concerns about the high level of non-performing loans (NPLs) in certain jurisdictions; agrees with the Commission that ‘Member States and banks themselves have a primary responsibility in tackling non-performing loans’4; welcomes, nonetheless, the work done by different EU institutions and bodies on this issue; calls on these actors and the Member States to duly and swiftly implement the Council conclusions of 11 July 2017 on the action plan to tackle non-performing loans in Europe; _________________ 4 Commission communication on completing the Banking Union, 11 October 2017, p. 15 (COM(2017)0592).
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that there are risks associated with sovereign debt and sovereign bonds should therefore be covered by equity capital; notes that in some Member States financial institutions have overly invested in bonds issued by their own governments, constituting excessive ‘home bias’; takes note, in this respect, of the Commission’s ongoing work on the idea of so-called sovereign bond-backed securities (SBBS);
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the work done by the ECB to assess the adequacy of internal models, including its new guide to the TRIM, with a view to addressing the variability in risk-weights applied to risk- weighted assets of the same class across credit institutions; calls for a rapidn appropriate conclusion of negotiations on output floors within the BCBS;
Amendment 185 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Stresses that the proposals made by international bodies should be translated into European law in such a way as to take due account of the specific characteristics of the European banking sector;
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Stresses that the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) standards in particular should not be enacted wholesale into European law without taking proper account of the specific characteristics of the European banking system and of the proportionality principle;
Amendment 202 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the banking reform package proposed by the Commission in November 2016;stresses that this package is not in itself a sufficient response to the concern about risk reduction; underlines the importance of the fast-track procedure for the phasing- in of International Financial Reporting Standard (IFRS) 9 in order to avoid cliff effects on the regulatory capital of credit institutions; supports the efforts made to reduce the reporting burden for smaller banks; is concerned, however, about the proposed amendments to the waivers in Articles 7 and 8 of the CRR, and more generally, about the proposed shift in the home-host balance;
Amendment 228 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Takes note of the proposals on the review of the European system of financial supervision (ESFS); calls on the Union legislators to find an appropriate equilibrium between the tasks and powers of the national competent authorities (NCAs) and the ESAs; emphasises that the core task of the ESFS is to establish supervision arrangements that are consistent;
Amendment 243 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. emphasises that the proportionality principle, in particular, has not, thus far, been sufficiently taken into account in the supervision arrangements;
Amendment 248 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Draws attention to the division of responsibilities between the ECB and the European Banking Authority (EBA);stresses that the ECB should not become the de facto standard-setter for non-SSM banks;
Amendment 249 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 c (new)
Paragraph 10 c (new)
10c. stresses that, in the processes of monitoring and assessment under the banking supervision arrangements, the ECB may not impinge in any way upon the prerogatives of the EU legislature; stresses that decisions under the supervision arrangements as to lending institutions' appropriate capital requirements should be taken on a bank- by-bank basis;
Amendment 271 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes that, while the concern about the mismatch between state aid rules and Union legislation as expressed in the previous report5 related to the ability of deposit guarantee schemes (DGSs) to participate in resolution as provided for in the BRRD and DGSD, the 2017 banking cases brought to light other areas of mismatch, in particular the possibility for Member States to avoid being subject to the discipline of the BRRD by paying ‘liquidation aid’; stresses that both the inconsistencies addressed in the previous report and those that have recently come to light need to be tackled as a matter of urgency; _________________ 5 European Parliament, Resolution of 15 February 2017 on ‘Banking Union – Annual Report 2016’, paragraph 38.
Amendment 291 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the SRB’s prioritisation of enhancing resolvability of credit institutions, as well as the progress made in developing minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL) targets in the framework of institution- specific resolution strategies; stresses that EU proposals on MREL should in no way lag behind internationally agreed standards;
Amendment 323 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Notes the ongoing technical work by the Council on a common fiscal backstop for the Single Resolution Fund (SRF); emphasises that this work may in no way undermine the principle that taxpayers should not be liable for banks' risk;
Amendment 327 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Calls on the Commission to bring forward a proposal, on the basis of the provision in Recital 27 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/63 for reviewing the calculation of contributions to resolution financing arrangements, for an amendment to the delegated regulation so as to ensure that better account is taken, when contributions to resolution financing arrangements are being calculated, of the lower risk profile of less complex institutions;
Amendment 345 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Asks the Commission to shed light on the applications for a target level lower than 0.8 % of covered deposits as received and approved by it in accordance with Article 10(6) of the DGSD; draws attention to the implications of the availability of such an exception for the potential design of an EDIS; points out that the absence of a proper impact assessment of the EDIS proposal is fundamentally at odds with the principles of sound regulation;
Amendment 359 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Recalls that deposit protection is a common concern for all EU citizens; is currently debating the proposal on an EDIS at committee level; notes, in this respect, the Commission’s moreat a reinsurance scheme would constitute a proportionate ‘new approach’ to an EDIS as put forward in its communication of 11 October 2017;
Amendment 379 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Notes the potential benefits and the likelyIs concerned about the substantial risks related to the introduction of an EDIS; considers, therefore, that the implementation of credible and effective risk reduction measures to beis an essential building blocks laying the fouand non-negotiable pre-condaitions for discussion of an EDIS;
Amendment 389 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Points out that there are still significant doubts regarding the appropriate legal basis for the establishment of both the EDIS and the DIF;