22 Amendments of Denis NESCI related to 2024/2055(INI)
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas a strong and competitive banking sector is key to delivering economic growth, financing small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and start-ups and ensuring the digital transition to a green and digital economy; whereas targeted frameworks within the Banking Union are needed to ensure EU banks can efficiently channel funds to SMEs and start-ups while balancing risk management obligations;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Calls on the Commission to develop targeted frameworks within the Banking Union to enhance access to finance for SMEs and start-ups, recognising their role as the backbone of the EU economy; emphasises the need to ensure that these frameworks allow for efficient capital allocation while maintaining robust risk management practices, thereby contributing to economic growth and the EU's strategic autonomy;
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Expresses its concern that, while financial institutions are committed to increasing investments in infrastructure to promote payment and digital services and the exchange of financial data, other, unregulated entities are able to operate without being bound by the same obligations on protecting investors, transparency and preventing fraud;
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that the creation of a separate jurisdiction for EU banks with substantial cross-border operations13w could be seen as helping to complete the BU; _________________ 13 Draghi report, p. 61., although it could lead to a dualism that results in unequal treatment for banks and affects the consolidation of the banking sector, making an in-depth assessment necessary;
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Recognises that in order to address new challenges and the rising competition from third countries, there is a growing need for funding instruments; in this regard, a review of the securitisation framework to enhance European markets and the introduction of European secured notes as a dual-recourse funding instrument for long-term SME financing are essential;
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the adoption by co- legislators of the new banking package implementing Basel III standards in the EU; stresses that the Commission should evaluate thoroughly whether a delay in implementation is necessary to maintain the competitiveness of EU banks; welcomes, in this regard, the delegated act postponing the date of application of the new market risk framework by one year to 1 January 2026look out for any repercussions that the transposition of the Basel III standards in Europe might have on competitiveness, given that other regions have not yet adopted this framework; welcomes, in this regard, the delegated act postponing the date of application of the new market risk framework by one year to 1 January 2026; beyond this postponement, it could be assessed whether measures targeting these rules would be helpful to mitigate the impact of the FRTB on all banks;
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Notes that the banking packages include a significant number of mandates for the EBA; calls on the EBA to respect these mandates to avoid worsening the impact on banks' capacity to lend to SMEs and households;
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that the non-performing loans ratio has remained stable at 2.30 % and, which reflects the considerable efforts that Member States have made to reduce their NPL stock, and notes the liquidity coverage ratio at 159.39 %;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Notes the lack of progress on the proposal for a directive on credit servicers, credit purchasers and the recovery of collateral, which intends to provide banks, under certain conditions, with a mechanism for accelerating the value recovery from secured loans via extrajudicial enforcement of procedures in order to further develop secondary markets for non-performing loans; calls for more thought to be given to the setting-up of a European guarantee scheme designed to facilitate any disposal of non-performing loans;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Notes that the current framework unduly increases the exposures of banks classified as non-compliant, thus impacting debtors facing temporary difficulties; points out that the mandate that the banking package confers on the EBA provides a window of opportunity to tackle this issue;
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that the current levels of banking sector profitability maycould provide an opportunity for some Member States to implement additional targeted increases in macroprudential buffers and help to preserve banking sector resilience; calls, on the other hand, on the Commission to carefully consider ways of reforming the macroprudential framework to preclude a hike in capital requirements, bearing in mind the level playing field with other jurisdictions;
Amendment 186 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Highlights the importance of preserving shareholders’ primary trust and creditors’ primary responsibility for bearing losses in the event of a bank’s failure, which is still a key facet of the lesson learned from the global financial crisis; stresses that the bail-inout of shareholders and creditors must remain the main source ofor resolution financing before any recourse is made to industry-funded sources; nonetheless believes that in certain circumstances public intervention could be viewed as a last resort, as is provided for in other areas of jurisdiction;
Amendment 196 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls that a sufficient minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities is crucial for a credible resolution framework and for ensuring that resolution authorities have sufficient flexibility to effectively apply the resolution strategies needed in a specific crisis situation; warns that reductions in this minimum requirement, resulting from specific resolution strategies in the resolution planning phase, could hamper thebank resolvability of banks; stresses, as an alternative, that the resolution framework must prevent an unjustified increase in the MREL and disproportionate payments to the SRF;
Amendment 203 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Highlights that liquidity support in resolution should not, in principle, be based on any additional public funds; notesand that any relianceapportioning onf taxpayer money for the resolution of banking crises should be avoided;
Amendment 217 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Welcomes the fact that the Single Resolution Fund has now been built up; calls for the full ratification of the Amending Agreement to the ESM Treaty by all Member States, including the establishment of a common backstop to the Single Resolution Fund;
Amendment 223 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Highlights the need for additional efforts to ensure full resolvability for all banks falling underin crisis within the scope of resolution; recalls that achieving resolvability cannot be considered a ‘moving target’ and therefore calls for more standardisation and harmonisation of the resolvability assessments; nevertheless emphasises the significant part that the national resolution authorities play in the resolvability assessment;
Amendment 259 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Recalls that breaksevering the link between bank and sovereign risk remains a challenge for the BU; emphasises that the risk on banks’ balance sheets can be reduced further through the regulatory treatment of sovereign exposuresis still an area that merits further reflection at international level;
Amendment 269 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Welcomes the progress made by the ECB on the digital euro and its dialogue with Parliament; while acknowledging benefits such as payment autonomy and financial inclusion, expresses concern over offline functionality owing to high costs, prolonged development times and minimal benefits for users; given that offline transactions reduce visibility and make preventing financial crime more complicated, dual offline capabilities should be limited to temporary back-up measures for preventing abuses;
Amendment 272 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25 a. Stresses that the completion of the Banking Union requires the establishment of all three planned pillars: supervision, resolution, and deposit insurance; warns that the absence of any of the three pillars undermines the coherence and functionality of the system, potentially requiring a fundamental reassessment starting with the resolution mechanism;
Amendment 274 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 b (new)
Paragraph 25 b (new)
25b. Stresses that the digital euro is intended to complement, not replace, cash and private payment methods, safeguarding investment in the industry and preventing the dominance of non- European suppliers;
Amendment 276 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 c (new)
Paragraph 25 c (new)
25c. Highlights the need for fair compensation for financial institutions' implementing costs; the system should balance privacy with practicality and include holding and transaction limits;
Amendment 278 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 d (new)
Paragraph 25 d (new)
25d. Stresses the importance of the prevention of competitive imbalances in payment services in the EU, like the cap on inter-regional exchange fees suggested by the United Kingdom, which could entail higher costs or disruptions in service for European consumers;