Progress: Procedure completed
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | ECON | KOVAŘÍK Ondřej ( Renew) | BERGER Stefan ( EPP), HEINÄLUOMA Eero ( S&D), KRAH Maximilian ( ID), JAKELIŪNAS Stasys ( Verts/ALE), EPPINK Derk Jan ( ECR), GUSMÃO José ( GUE/NGL) |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 47
Legal Basis:
RoP 47Subjects
Events
The European Parliament adopted by 542 votes to 63, with 89 abstentions, a resolution containing recommendations to the Commission on Digital Finance: emerging risks in crypto-assets - regulatory and supervisory challenges in the area of financial services, institutions and markets.
Members reiterated that digital finance, which plays a key role in developing financial activities, shall be integral to the success of the Capital Markets Union (CMU) through increasing financing options for companies and citizens, as well as investment options. They stressed the increased need for a review of measures relating to the regulation of digital finance, taking particular account of the growing importance of this sector in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Taking action at EU level
Parliament welcomed the adoption by the Commission of the Digital Finance Package including two legislative proposals on crypto-assets and operational resilience. However, it regretted that the Commission did not properly address the problems related to money laundering, terrorism financing and criminal activity associated with crypto-assets, which remain largely unresolved.
Given the intergovernmental nature of digital finance, Parliament called on the Commission to coordinate closely with international fora and regulatory bodies in the development of international standards.
It stressed that any measures taken at Union level in the area of digital finance shall reflect the following principles:
- the same activities and services and their associated similar risks should be subject to the same rules;
- proportionality and technology neutrality;
- an approach based on risk, transparency and accountability;
- respect for the fundamental rights, specifically the protection of privacy and personal data, as guaranteed by Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union;
- high levels of consumer and investor protection;
- a level playing field;
- an innovation-friendly approach.
Recommendations
Parliament made a series of recommendations to the Commission on the actions to be proposed:
(1) Define a framework for crypto-assets
The term ‘crypto-assets’ is used to refer to a wide variety of digital assets, including virtual currencies and tokens. At present, crypto-assets are neither issued nor guaranteed by a central bank or public authority in the Union, and can have a variety of uses, including as a means of exchange, for investment purposes, and in order to access a good or service.
Members considered that developing a comprehensive pan-European taxonomy for new products such as crypto-assets is a necessary step towards fostering a common understanding, facilitating collaboration across jurisdictions and providing greater legal certainty for market participants operating cross border.
Parliament recommended the presentation of a legislative proposal on crypto-assets, which would provide legal certainty with regard to the treatment of crypto-assets, while ensuring a high level of consumer and investor protection, market integrity and financial stability. This legislative proposal shall:
- provide guidance on the applicable regulatory, supervisory and prudential processes and treatment of crypto-assets;
- adopt specific rules on market transparency and integrity at least equivalent to those of MiFID II for issuers or sponsors of crypto-assets;
- address the regulatory gaps in existing Union legislation as regards to crypto-assets, for example, classifying certain crypto-assets as ‘transferable securities’ under MiFID II;
- create a bespoke regulatory regime for new and evolving crypto-asset activities, such as initial coins offerings or initial exchange offerings, and any crypto-assets which do not fall under the existing regulatory framework, ensuring that they are regulated in a harmonised manner on the Union level;
- address the environmental impact of crypto-mining and the need for solutions aimed at mitigating the ecological footprint of mainstream crypto-assets.
Parliament also recommended: (i) moving towards stronger regulatory and supervisory convergence; (ii) developing a legislative framework for stablecoins; (iii) presenting a proposal for a common Union framework for a pan-European sandbox for digital financial services; (iv) strengthen the implementation of the anti-money laundering and anti-terrorist financing framework with regard to crypto-assets.
(2) A common strategy for cyber-resilience in the financial sector
Parliament recommended that a legislative proposal on cyber-resilience be put forward which ensures consistent standards of ICT and cyber security across the Union financial sector, taking into account international standards. Such a framework shall be future-oriented and focus on modernising the current rules applicable concerning cyber resilience, while also closing any regulatory loopholes and gaps, which may put businesses, investors and consumers at risk.
The proposed legislative changes in the area of cybersecurity requirements shall focus on: (i) modernising ICT governance and risk management and ensuring compliance with international standards; (ii) aligning reporting rules for ICT incidents; (iii) a common framework for penetration and operational resilience testing across all financial sectors; and (iv) monitoring and applying minimum standards to critical third-party ICT providers.
(3) Data
The EU's traditional role as a global standard setter regarding data calls for an ambitious regulatory approach to the management of data by financial entities, with consumer protection at its centre. The Commission was invited to:
- propose a framework for digital onboarding. Such a framework should comply with relevant Union legislation such as Anti-Money Laundering provisions, data protection and privacy norms and aim to ensure a common understanding of digital financial identities across the single market, while fostering the harmonisation of cross-border onboarding;
- work to enhance accountability, explicability and transparency with regards to algorithms, data processing and analytics.
Documents
- Decision by Parliament: T9-0265/2020
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A9-0161/2020
- Committee report tabled for plenary: A9-0161/2020
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE654.084
- Committee draft report: PE650.539
- Committee draft report: PE650.539
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE654.084
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A9-0161/2020
Votes
A9-0161/2020 - Ondřej Kovařík - Am 9 #
A9-0161/2020 - Ondřej Kovařík - Am 5 #
A9-0161/2020 - Ondřej Kovařík - Am 6 #
A9-0161/2020 - Ondřej Kovařík - Am 7 #
A9-0161/2020 - Ondřej Kovařík - Am 1 #
A9-0161/2020 - Ondřej Kovařík - Am 2 #
A9-0161/2020 - Ondřej Kovařík - Am 3 #
A9-0161/2020 - Ondřej Kovařík - Am 10 #
A9-0161/2020 - Ondřej Kovařík - Am 11 #
A9-0161/2020 - Ondřej Kovařík - § 40 #
A9-0161/2020 - Ondřej Kovařík - § 58 #
A9-0161/2020 - Ondřej Kovařík - Am 4 #
A9-0161/2020 - Ondřej Kovařík - Am 12 #
A9-0161/2020 - Ondřej Kovařík - Am 13 #
A9-0161/2020 - Ondřej Kovařík - Am 8 #
A9-0161/2020 - Ondřej Kovařík - Résolution #
Amendments | Dossier |
365 |
2020/2034(INL)
2020/07/08
ECON
365 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 1 a (new) – having regard to Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 2 e (new) – having regard to the Final report of the Directorate-General for Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union (European Commission) ‘Governance for a DLT/Blockchain enabled European electronic Access Point (EEAP)’ of October 2019,
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P l (new) Pl. whereas anti-money laundering is a critical danger to be prevented into the digital finance environment; whereas digital finance improves financial inclusion, still a strong regime of KYC and AML should be in place; whereas cryptocurrencies can be used for illegal activities, their regulatory status as means of payment, instead of means of exchange, can improve the monitoring and prevention of financial crime;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P m (new) Pm. whereas the role of custodian electronic wallet providers is equally instrumental in digital finance services; whereas there is no clear framework regarding the custodians in the EU; whereas a clear framework should be designed for the functioning and licensing of crypto-exchanges as well as Crowdfunding platforms listing and promoting tokens; whereas the regulatory fragmentation in this space is dangerous in terms of lack of supervision, fraud prevention, and consumer/investor protection and a unified EU regulatory approach is necessary;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P m (new) Pm. whereas current failures of FinTech companies (e.g. Wirecard) indicate the need for a holistic perspective of the risks associated to failures in financial reporting, fraud and solvency procedures;
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P o (new) Po. whereas the technological improvements in the digital environment as well as the recent pandemic, indicated inefficiencies in the supervision of financial markets; whereas advanced technologically financial services require also advanced supervisory technologies and skilled personnel both in the ESAs and the national supervisory authorities; whereas there is no EU provision for a European RegTech (regulatory technology) and SupTech (supervisory technology);
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P p (new) Pp. whereas transaction data protection of the citizens as well as their financial data should be strictly safeguarded by the financial service providers as they are property of the consumers/investors; whereas digital finance entails new data protection risks and FinTech companies just like legacy financial service providers should have the highest standards in protecting their data pools and have in place solid data governance frameworks;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P q (new) Pq. whereas increased connectivity, the Internet of Things and the interaction of humans and machines can create better financial service experiences but also entail new risks regarding the quality of the interaction, the operational risk management and cyber-security challenges;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P r (new) Pr. whereas financial service providers who employee smart contracts or machine learning instruments can enhance their operational efficiency, however optimality does not always coincide with robustness in the financial markets and significant errors may occur with strong social impacts, for example exclusion of certain social groups from the financial services; whereas algorithmic failures should be immediately addressed when they occur;
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P s (new) Ps. whereas the EU should be a global model for financial services; whereas technology transfer mechanisms should be accelerated in the financial innovation strategies with strengthening of sandboxes policy and the development of vibrant innovation hubs;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P t (new) Pt. whereas a FinTech-specific passporting strategy is critical for an harmonised financial environment for the EU increasing homogeneity, legal certainty, reduce complexity and increase scalability for the European FinTech firms;
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P u (new) Pu. whereas the scalability of European FinTech solutions is critical for the competitiveness of the EU vis-à-vis global competitors that already operate in the European markets controlling transactions and transferring transaction data abroad;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 2 f (new) – having regard to the study of the European Commission on the application of the Interchange Fee Regulation,
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the commitment of the Commission to finalising an Action Plan on FinTech by Q3 of 2020; considers that a
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the commitment of the Commission to finalising an Action Plan on FinTech by Q3 of 2020; considers that a Commission proposal on crypto-assets, as well as a cross-sectoral financial services act on operational and cyber resilience, are timely and necessary due to recent developments in the markets, both European and Global; requests that the Commission submit on the basis of Article 114 respective proposal following the recommendations set out in the Annex hereto;
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the commitment of the Commission to finalising an Action Plan on FinTech by Q3 of 2020; considers that a Commission proposal on crypto-assets, as well as a cross-sectoral financial services act on operational and cyber resilience, are timely and necessary due to recent developments in the markets; requests that the Commission submits on the basis of Article 114 respective legislative proposal following the recommendations set out in the Annex hereto;
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Considers that FinTech which consists of the use of new technologies to enable and enhance activities of the financial sector and thus plays a key role in developing financial activities, will be integral to the success of the Capital Markets Union (CMU) and encourages the Commission to consider how to
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Considers that FinTech will be integral to the success of the Capital Markets Union (CMU) and encourages the Commission to consider how to harness the benefits of FinTech in driving forward capital market integration in the Union; whilst at the same time addressing at regulatory and supervisory level the specific risks that FinTech, namely crypto-assets, pose;
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Considers that FinTech will be integral to the success of the Capital Markets Union (CMU)
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Considers that FinTech will be
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Considers that FinTech will be integral to the success of the Capital Markets Union (CMU) and encourages the Commission to consider how to harness the benefits of FinTech in driving forward capital market integration in the Union, in particular, the participation of retail investors;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 2 g (new) – having regard to the Final Report of the High Level Forum of the European Commission on the Capital Markets Union: A New Vision for Europe’s Capital Markets of June 2020,
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Considers that FinTech will be integral to the success of the Capital Markets Union (CMU) and encourages the Commission to consider how to harness the benefits of FinTech in driving forward capital market integration and retail investor participation in the Union;
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Considers that FinTech will be integral to the success of the Capital Markets Union (CMU) and encourages the Commission to consider how to harness the benefits of FinTech in driving forward capital market integration in the Union and elevating its magnitude globally;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Considers that FinTech will be integral to the success of the Capital Markets Union (CMU) and encourages the Commission to consider how to harness the benefits of FinTech in
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Is further concerned about the recent Wirecard scandal as well as the role and potential shortcomings of Germany's financial supervisory authority BaFin in this case; notes that the classification of this FinTech company as a ‘technology’ company instead of as a payments service provider played a central role in the regulatory failures and calls on the Commission to address this problem urgently by ensuring payments companies are classified correctly; notes that while the major responsibility for this regulatory scandal lies with the failure by BaFin and the Bundesbank to properly supervise and regulate the Wirecard group, many EU institutions also have a role in supervising and regulating the various actors involved in this case, including the ECB, ESMA, EIOPA, and the European Commission; calls on the EU and national competent authorities to start an inquiry on the €1.9 billion missing and the potential impact of the group’s insolvency on pensions in the EU; demands that ESMA open an investigation into the failure by regulators to identify and stop fraudulent activity and market manipulation committed by Wirecard in its EU companies, including those based in Germany and Ireland;
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Emphasises the increased importance of monitoring and reviewing measures relating to the regulation of digital finance, particularly bearing in mind the increasing relevance of this sector as the world deals with the COVID- 19 pandemic;
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Encourages the relevant authorities in the Union to assess the impact of the risks and benefits of the potential global use of the DCEP and its interdependency with China's national blockchain platform;
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Highlights the importance for the Commission to closely align its work with international fora and regulatory bodies in developing international standards given the cross-jurisdictional nature of digital finance; recalls in particular the need to ensure interoperability of the EU’s regulatory framework with internationally agreed principles from the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision and the Financial Stability Board;
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Highlights the importance for the Commission to closely align its work with international fora and regulatory bodies in developing international standards given the cross-jurisdictional nature of digital finance, without prejudice to the EU ability to adopt stronger regulatory and supervisory provisions;
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3.
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 2 h (new) – having regard to the public consultation of the Commission on ‘Review of the regulatory framework for investment firms and market operators’,
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Considers that the development of many technologies is still in its infancy and that regulation should therefore only be considered once a new technology has been widely adopted and any potential risks to customers and the financial system have been carefully assessed;
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 b (new) Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 c (new) 3c. Requests that any proposed legislation be outcome-focused and based on principles rather than prescriptive rules, in order to ensure that the regulatory framework stays relevant to future innovation, regulatory flexibility, and adaptability over time;
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Calls on the Commission to deploy a proportionate, cross-sectorial and holistic approach to its work on FinTech, and focus on not smothering innovation with overregulation and red tape;
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Calls on the Commission to deploy a proportionate, risk-based, cross-sectorial and holistic approach to its work on FinTech;
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Calls on the Commission to deploy a concerted, proportionate, cross-sectorial and holistic approach to its work on FinTech;
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. C
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Commission to act as first mover in order to create a favourable environment for European FinTech hubs
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Commission to act as first mover in order to create a favourable environment for European FinTech hubs and firms to scale up, for example by exempting such hubs and firms from the increasingly harmonised tax regulation at EU level;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 3 a (new) – having regard to the European Parliament resolution of 16 February 2017 with recommendations to the Commission on Civil Law Rules on Robotics (2015/2103(INL)),
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Commission to act as first mover in order to incentivize an accelerated take-up of innovative technologies by the EU financial sector and create a favourable environment for European FinTech hubs and firms to scale up;
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Commission to act as first mover in order to create a favourable environment for European FinTech hubs and firms to scale up and boost the EU's position vis-à-vis its international competitors;
Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Commission to act as first mover in order to create a favourable environment for European FinTech hubs and firms as well as the established financial industry using FinTech to scale up;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Commission to act as first mover in order to create a
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Considers in this respect that FinTech should be considered as an essential and effective tool for European Small and Medium enterprises, able to provide real-time and fast solutions adapted to their financing needs; believes that FinTech has the potential to help closing the SME financing gap;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Considers in this respect that FinTech should be considered as an essential and effective tool for European Small and Medium enterprises, able to provide real-time and fast solutions adapted to their financing needs; believes that FinTech has the potential to help closing the SME financing gap;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 – introductory part 6. Stresses that
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 – introductory part 6. Stresses that law and supervision
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 – introductory part 6. Stresses that any update of law and supervision in the area of FinTech should
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 – introductory part 6. Stresses that
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 3 b (new) Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 – point a a. the same services and their associated similar risks should be subject to the same rules, without prejudice to certain technological issues addressed by related legislative framework;
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 – point a a. the same activities and services and their associated similar risks should be subject to the same rules;
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 – point a a (new) aa. ensuring financial stability and a high level of consumer protection;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 – point b b. proportionality and technology neutrality;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 – point c c. a risk-based approach based on transparency and accountability;
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 – point c a (new) ca. respect for the fundamental rights to privacy and data protection, as guaranteed by Articles 7 and 8 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights;
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 – point c a (new) ca. preferential treatment of technologies developed in the EU and financed by EU sources;
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 – point c a (new) ca. high consumer and investor protection standards;
Amendment 159 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 – point c b (new) cb. an innovation and competitive friendly approach;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 3 c (new) – having regard to the European Parliament resolution of 3 October 2018 on distributed ledger technologies and blockchains: building trust with disintermediation (2017/2772(RSP)),
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Recalls its commitment to privacy and data protection rights in the EU, in line with Articles 7 and 8 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights; stresses that these rights need to be integral to any changes in the financial regulatory framework;
Amendment 161 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Points out that the Union le
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Points out that Union level
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Points out that Union level measures should not stifle opportunities for businesses to grow and develop within the Union; highlights that well-considered and consistent regulation creates the legal certainty and predictability needed to encourage investment in long-term innovation;
Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Points out that Union level measures should not stifle opportunities for businesses to grow and develop within the Union so that the set framework should in no way serve as a barrier to entry for innovative openings especially by young entrepreneurs in the digital sector;
Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Points out that Union level
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Points out that Union level measures should not stifle opportunities for businesses to grow and develop within the Union, but should nonetheless strive to achieve comparable standards and outcomes across the Union;
Amendment 168 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Points out that Union level measures should not stifle opportunities for businesses to grow and develop within the Union; specially SMEs, as they are the main drivers of the EU economy and labour market;
Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Points out that Union level measures should be uniform and not stifle opportunities for businesses to grow and develop within the
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 3 d (new) – having regard to the European Parliament legislative resolution of 27 March 2019 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on European Crowdfunding Service Providers (ECSP) for Business (COM(2018)0113 – C8- 0103/2018 – 2018/0048(COD)),
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Points out that Union level measures should not stifle opportunities for businesses, and particularly SMEs, to grow and develop within the Union;
Amendment 171 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Points out that
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Points out that regulatory sandboxes and innovation hubs can be useful tools for FinTechs to test out innovative financial products, financial services or business models in a controlled environment and to allow competent authorities to gain a better understanding of such activities and develop regulatory expertise in emerging technologies;
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Notes the continually evolving methods used for money laundering and terrorist financing; emphasises, therefore, the need for the Commission’s approach to digital finance to be cognisant of this and sufficiently robust to combating ML/TF;
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Highlights the potential of EU- wide regulatory sandboxes in promoting innovation and competitiveness as well as facilitating dialogue and understanding between firms and regulators;
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 b (new) 7b. Notes that many FinTechs struggle with passporting issues and thus with scaling their business beyond their home market;
Amendment 176 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Highlights the importance of the triangle of trust, identity and data in order to ensure that operators, consumers and supervisors are able to have confidence in digital finance;
Amendment 177 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Highlights the importance of the triangle of
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Highlights the importance of the triangle of trust, identity
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Highlights the importance of the triangle of trust, identity and data in order to ensure that operators, investors, consumers and supervisors
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 3 e (new) – having regard to the study requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs ‘Crypto-assets: Key developments, regulatory concerns and responses’ of April 2020,
Amendment 180 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Stresses the need for European and national supervisory authorities to overcome their differences; calls for changes to the ESMA Regulation ensuring that ESMA can swiftly and decisively step in when national supervisory authorities fail to act in preventing serious threats to the orderly functioning and integrity of financial markets or the stability of the financial system in the Union; strongly calls on the Commission to present as an ambitious reform of the governance of ESMA, including the appointment of independent Directors in the Management Board, with enhanced powers of direct supervision and on the prevention against serious threats to the orderly functioning and integrity of financial markets or the stability of the financial system in the Union; notes that the limited impact of supervisory convergence in promoting a common European model, should lead to empowering ESMA, EIOPA and EBA, with a stronger role in reducing the existing obstacles to cross-border financial operations;
Amendment 181 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Points out that the financial supervisory framework across Member States is currently structured on four different approaches: institutional, functional, and integrated and Twin Peaks, which results in major fragmentation and lack of convergence in the EU financial regulatory and supervisory architecture; in order to address this issue and reduce regulatory and supervisory arbitrage opportunities, calls on the Commission to launch a new consultation on the review of the European system of financial supervision with a main goal to create a Twin Peaks- based, efficient and harmonised supervisory framework;
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Considers that Digital Finance can improve the quality and efficiency of financial services in the EU; Highlights that solid financial markets are inclusive, democratic as well efficient in the allocation of capital and the distribution of risk; Notes that the digital finance has the properties that will allow better allocative efficiency, reduce the concentration of risk, increase transparency and comparability in the pricing of financial services and reduce financial exclusion;
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Agrees with the ECB on the importance of physical money as legal tender; stresses that progress in the field of virtual currencies must not lead to restrictions on retail cash payments or to the abolition of cash;
Amendment 184 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Calls on the Commission to develop new rules only for new services and new products and to adapt and amend existing rules for products and services which are subject to changed processes
Amendment 185 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Calls on supervisors to keep pace with technological developments and not inadvertently become a barrier to financial services innovation;
Amendment 186 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Calls for the risk of speculation on these virtual currencies to be monitored;
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 b (new) 8b. Considers digital finance as a strong market mechanism that can remedy many of the malfunctions of the existing financial system, especially when legacy financial service providers exploit their oligopolistic status to impose in a non-transparent way increases in transaction fees and hidden costs to the consumers;
Amendment 188 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 b (new) 8b. Calls for a structured dialogue between supervisors on financial, anti- money laundering, data privacy and cyber security challenges and opportunities;
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 c (new) Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 3 f (new) – having regard to the study requested by the European Parliament's Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection ‘Consumer Protection Aspects of Financial Services’ of February 2014,
Amendment 190 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 d (new) 8d. Considers technological neutrality and business model neutrality as critical principles for the regulator for the achievement of an efficient, strong and globally competitive European digital finance framework; Highlights that the regulator should not discriminate based on the technology used by the financial service provider, as long as technology-specific risks are addressed and same regulation for same risk applies; highlights that the regulator should not favour legacy business models over innovative ones and maintain a clear, institutionally certain approach based on principles that ensure a level playing field for everybody;
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 e (new) 8e. Considers that an innovative financial system has strategic, societal and growth implications for the Union and supports the acceleration of technology transfer to the financial sector to make sure that emerging technological options coming from data analytics, big data, machine learning, blockchain, IoT, hyper-performance computing, and enhanced connectivity can improve the quality, resilience and sustainability of Union financial services;
Amendment 192 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 3 Defining a Regulatory Framework for Crypto-Assets
Amendment 193 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 3 Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Considers that developing a pan- European taxonomy for new products such as crypto-assets is desirable as a step towards fostering a common understanding, facilitating collaboration across jurisdictions and providing greater regulatory certainty for market participants engaged in cross border activity; recommends taking into account the importance of international cooperation and global initiatives as regards frameworks for crypto-assets, bearing in mind in particular their borderless nature; cautions, however, that developing an open-ended taxonomy template may be more appropriate for this evolving market segment; emphasises that consumer- focused startups are often building innovative financial services to the benefit of EU citizens and companies, and that any legislation should be designed with a view to empower more innovation and consumer-choice in financial services;
Amendment 195 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Considers that developing a comprehensive pan-
Amendment 196 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Considers that developing a pan- European taxonomy for crypto-assets is desirable as a step towards fostering a common understanding, facilitating collaboration across jurisdictions and providing greater regulatory certainty for market participants engaged in cross border activity; recommends taking into account the importance of international cooperation and global initiatives as regards frameworks for crypto-assets, bearing in mind in particular their borderless nature; cautions, however, that developing an open-ended taxonomy template may be more appropriate for this evolving market segment;
Amendment 197 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Considers that not all crypto-assets can be regulated in the same way, solely on the basis of the fact that they are digital; considers, therefore, that developing a pan-
Amendment 198 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Considers that
Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Considers that developing a pan- European taxonomy for crypto-assets is desirable as a step towards fostering a common understanding, facilitating collaboration across jurisdictions and providing greater
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 1 b (new) – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation)1a, _____________________ 1a OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1.
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 5 a (new) – having regard to the European Supervisory Authorities joint report ‘FinTech: Regulatory sandboxes and innovation hubs’ of 7 January 20191a, _________________ 1a JC 2018 74.
Amendment 200 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Considers that developing a pan- European taxonomy for crypto-assets is desirable as a step towards fostering a common understanding, facilitating collaboration across jurisdictions and providing greater regulatory certainty for market participants engaged in cross border activity; recommends taking into account existing national regulatory and supervisory frameworks and the importance of international cooperation and global initiatives as regards frameworks for crypto-assets, bearing in mind in particular their borderless nature;
Amendment 201 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Considers th
Amendment 202 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Considers that developing a pan- European taxonomy for crypto-assets is desirable as a step towards fostering a common understanding, facilitating collaboration across jurisdictions and providing greater regulatory certainty for market participants engaged in cross border activity; recommends taking into account the importance of international cooperation and global initiatives as regards frameworks for crypto-assets, bearing in mind in particular their borderless nature;
Amendment 203 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Notes that in the absence of a common EU regulatory approach for crypto-assets, Member States have already started adopting unilateral legislative and supervisory actions and face increasing pressure to act due to consumer protection concerns; points out that divergent interpretations and an uncoordinated approach across Member States can lead to market fragmentation, increase legal uncertainty, undermine the level playing field and provide opportunities for regulatory arbitrage;
Amendment 204 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Emphasises that such an open taxonomy must be based on common understandings of the various crypto- assets involved; requests, therefore that the definitions of crypto-assets and their subclasses be harmonised across EU and member states;
Amendment 205 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Reminds the importance of digital financial education which contributes to the stability of financial system and promotes transparency and duties of information of financial institutions;
Amendment 206 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 b (new) 9b. Stresses that any definition of crypto-assets must take into account future evolution of the crypto-asset market;
Amendment 207 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 c (new) 9c. Points out that, at this stage, the use of stablecoins is not yet prominent within the Union; highlights the need for any future stablecoin-specific framework to be born out of the coming crypto-asset framework, representing an evolution of the legislation with the aim of offering the similar level of security as existing means of payments; believes that before any framework for stablecoins is developed, the architecture of this form of crypto- asset must be examined thoroughly;
Amendment 208 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Believes, therefore, that any further categorisation should be based on feedback from European and global market intelligence, should be balanced and flexible in order to give space for innovation in the sector while ensuring that risks can be identified at an early stage;
Amendment 209 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Believes, therefore, that any further categorisation should be
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 5 b (new) – having regard to the European Supervisory Authorities joint report ‘FinTech: Regulatory sandboxes and innovation hubs’ of 7 January 20191a, __________________________ 1a JC 2018 74.
Amendment 210 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Believes
Amendment 211 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Believes, therefore, that any further categorisation should be balanced
Amendment 212 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Believes, therefore, that any further categorisation should be cautious, restrained, balanced and flexible in order to give space for innovation in the sector while ensuring that
Amendment 213 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Believes, therefore, that any further categorisation should be balanced and flexible in order to give space for innovation and competitiveness in the sector while ensuring that risks can be identified at an early stage;
Amendment 214 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Believes, therefore, that any further categorisation should be balanced and flexible in order to give space for innovation in the sector while ensuring that risks can be identified and mitigated at an early stage;
Amendment 215 #
10a. Expresses concern about the serious carbon footprint attached to the use and dissemination of crypto-assets; calls on the Commission to take this into account in any forthcoming regulatory initiative, having in mind the EU’s commitment to the Sustainable Development Goals and to the necessary transition to a climate-neutral society by 2050 at the latest;
Amendment 216 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 b (new) 10b. Is concerned about the findings of a recent research1a demonstrating that half of the crypto-assets transactions is linked to illegal activities, like the buying or selling of illegal goods or services (weapons, drugs transactions), money laundering and, payments in ransomware attacks; highlights recent findings which suggests that 76 billion dollars of illegal activity per year involves Bitcoins; _________________ 1a Electronicallyavailable via https://ssrn.com/abstract=3102645.
Amendment 217 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11.
Amendment 218 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Further stresses that clear guidance on the applicable regulatory and prudential processes is needed in order to provide regulatory certainty regarding crypto- assets; notes that such guidance from the Commission and from ESMA could lead to establishing a transitional pilot regime, limited in time and in scope, with targeted regulatory exemptions for crypto-assets applying existing sectorial legislation, subject to enhanced supervision from relevant national supervisory authorities and from the joint ESAs committee;
Amendment 219 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Further stresses that cl
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 12 Amendment 220 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Further stresses that clarification and clear guidance on the applicable regulatory and prudential
Amendment 221 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Further stresses that clear guidance on the applicable regulatory and prudential processes is needed in order to provide regulatory certainty regarding crypto- assets, as well as to enhance transparency and consumer protection;
Amendment 222 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Further stresses that clear guidance on the applicable regulatory and prudential processes is needed in order to provide regulatory and prudential certainty regarding crypto-
Amendment 223 #
11a. Considers that until a EU taxonomy is available, regulated and licensed financial institutions should be subject to a temporary ban of crypto- assets related activities in consideration of the high risks to consumer and investors protection, financial stability, and market integrity and reputation, with the exception of small-scale or prototype activities subject to the approval of competent authorities; points out that once such taxonomy is established in EU law, such institutions should carry out activities related to high-risk crypto-assets only subject to strong safeguards and tight limits, based on an assessment of the potential risk of the activities under the most conservative assumptions;
Amendment 224 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Further stresses that clear guidance is needed on the applicability of existing regulatory and prudential processes to crypto-assets which qualify as financial instruments as far as EU legislation is concerned, in order to provide regulatory certainty regarding crypto-assets; stresses that this guidance must be provided consistently at the EU level, to avoid different practices of qualification and supervision by national authorities, which creates an un-level playing field, forum shopping and regulatory arbitrage in the internal market;
Amendment 225 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 b (new) 11b. Considers that all agents and participants entering into transactions above a 'de minimis' threshold in crypto- assets related activities outside of the scope of the regulated and licensed financial institutions should be subject to the standards of the existing regulatory framework including AML/CFT, KYC, MiFID, Market Abuse Regulation, PSD, Short Selling Regulation, Prospectus Regulation, Central Securities Depositories Regulation, EMIR and UCITS, as applicable;
Amendment 226 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 c (new) 11c. Stresses that risks related to holdings and exposures to crypto-assets should be fully integrated in the supervisory review and evaluation process (SREP) once the taxonomy is available; highlights in this regard the need for adequate and standardised disclosure requirements of any material exposures or services related to crypto-assets;
Amendment 227 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Points out that applying existing regulations to previously unregulated crypto-assets will be necessary, as will creating bespoke and stringent regulatory regimes
Amendment 228 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Points out that applying existing regulations to previously unregulated crypto-assets will be necessary, as will creating bespoke regulatory regimes for evolving crypto-asset activities, such as initial coin offerings; Stresses that initial coin offerings have potential in funding SMEs, innovative start-ups and scale-ups, can accelerate technology transfer, and can be an essential part of the Capital Markets Union;
Amendment 229 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Points out that applying existing regulations to previously unregulated crypto-assets will be necessary, as will creating bespoke regulatory regimes for evolving crypto-asset activities, such as initial coin offerings; points out that certain types of crypto-assets could indeed fit well into the existing regulatory framework, e.g. as ‘transferable securities' as defined in MiFID II;
Amendment 23 #
– having regard to the consultative document by the Financial Stability Board 'Addressing the regulatory, supervisory and oversight challenges raised by “global stablecoin” arrangements' of 14 April 2020,
Amendment 230 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Points out that a
Amendment 231 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Points out that applying the objectives in existing regulations to
Amendment 232 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Points out that applying existing regulations to previously unregulated crypto-assets will be
Amendment 233 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. Calls on the Commission to assess the advantages of proposing legislative framework for initial coin offerings and initial exchange offerings to increase legal certainty, investor and consumer protection, raise warnings, and reduce risks stemming from asymmetric information, fraudulent behaviour and illegal activities; Stresses however that wider regulation of crypto-assets and related activities may have trade-offs, such as risking legitimising crypto-assets and encouraging wider adoption; Highlights therefore that it will also require further supervisory resources and in-house technological know-how for supervisors;
Amendment 234 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. Points out that, in a single market for capital, diverging national supervisory practices can have significant drawbacks and this is particularly true for highly mobile crypto-assets; calls, therefore, for crypto-asset related activities to fall within the regulatory remit of the European Central Bank;
Amendment 235 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 b (new) 12b. Takes the view that, if a wide legislative framework is proposed, the “same services, same rules” principle must apply while being subject to the necessary adaptations; stresses that, where appropriate, strict fit and proper tests should be applied to those who issue the assets and that in order to increase investor protection and transparency, a standardised and regulated whitepaper should be published at the time of issuance; Highlights that a harmonised regulatory framework only makes sense , if supervision is coordinated at the EU level; notes, in particular, the need to oversee the work of national innovation facilitators, such as innovation hubs and regulatory sandboxes, and ensure that they do not undermine the level playing field in the internal market, and that mechanisms for cooperation and coordination are put in place.
Amendment 236 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 Amendment 237 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Highlights that a common Union framework on crypto-assets should help
Amendment 238 #
13. Highlights that a common Union framework on crypto-assets should
Amendment 239 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Highlights that a common Union framework on crypto-assets should help increase consumer and investor protection, enhance the application of anti-money laundering provisions, such as know your customer (KYC) obligations, and improve oversight of the underlying technology;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 17 a (new) – having regard to the Financial Action Task Force’s ‘Guidance for a Risk-Based Approach to Virtual Assets and Virtual Asset Service Providers’ of June 2019,
Amendment 240 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Highlights that a common Union framework on crypto-assets should help
Amendment 241 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Highlights that a common Union framework on crypto-assets
Amendment 242 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13a. Underlines that existing gaps in the anti-money laundering (AML) framework for crypto-assets such as in the application of the KYC principle, lead to an uneven playing field between different types of financial activity; considers that AML/CTF provisions for providers of services related to crypto-assets should be enforced also for foreign providers offering their services in the Union; highlights that a comprehensive definition of ‘virtual assets’ is needed to better reflect the nature and function of crypto- assets for the purpose of AML/CTF; points out that the definition of terrorist financing shall also be updated to ensure that crypto-assets are adequately covered;
Amendment 243 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13a. Notes that the introduction of any central bank developed digital currency goes along with significant challenges and risks (e.g. financial stability risks, deposit protection, implications for transmission of monetary policy, implication on credit intermediation, substitution of other means of payments, crowding out of private market participants etc.) that could easily outweigh the perceived benefits of CBDCs;
Amendment 244 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13a. Points out that crypto-assets present a heightened risk of money laundering or terrorist financing; notes, however, that the AMLD V framework in the European Union is now outdated when compared to the current international AML/CFT standards for crypto-assets;
Amendment 245 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13a. Underlines that crypto-assets consist significant technological advances that can improve the landscape of payments and financing of entrepreneurial activities especially where the private market financing instruments are weak;
Amendment 246 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 b (new) 13b. Calls further on the Commission to expand the scope of obliged entities under the AML/CTF framework, in line with the recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) and ESMA, to ensure that all activities involving crypto-assets, with regards to providers of virtual-to-virtual exchanges, other categories of wallet providers and initial coin offerings, are subject to the same AML/CTF obligations;
Amendment 247 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 b (new) 13b. Notes that some of the perceived shortcomings of the European payment system, could be remedied with gradual improvements of the existing regime such as an increased roll-out of cost-efficient instant payments;
Amendment 248 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 b (new) 13b. Notes that the classification of tokens can be subject to strong but agile criteria including (i) the nature of the issuer, (ii) the underlying asset, and (iii) the underlying economic function;
Amendment 249 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 c (new) 13c. Considers that Virtual Assets Service Providers (VASP) operating in the EU should be subject to mandatory registration or licensing requirements with the competent authorities before conducting business within the EU, including the obligation to appoint a resident executive director and have substantive management presence in the jurisdiction of registration; underlines further that, in line with FATF Guidelines, the VASP’s shall be required to seek prior approval by the competent authorities for substantive changes in shareholders, business operations and structures, to prevent criminals from owning or holding a significant controlling interest or management function in a VASP and ensure the fitness and properness of directors, managers and shareholders;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 17 b (new) – having regard to the Financial Action Task Force’s Recommendations as updated in June 2019, in particular Recommendation 16 on wire transfers,
Amendment 250 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 c (new) 13c. Stresses that cryptocurrency is a type of crypto-asset usually without known originator that can be used as a means of payment but not always as a store of value due to increased price fluctuations; stablecoins are means of payment that derive their price stability from a portfolio of underlying assets that are comparatively stable in their fluctuations; stresses that cryptocurrencies and stablecoins have significant unique properties, including the tracking back of illegal payments on the ledger as well as the capacity the payments to be encoded in smart contracts;
Amendment 251 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 c (new) 13c. Notes that a so called "trigger solution", i.e. a suitable interface allowing for a DLT-based settlement of a transaction triggering a payment via the conventional payment system, might be a conceivable alternative to CBDCs1a; invites central banks to further explore this line of reasoning; _________________ 1a cf. Deutsche Bundesbank Monthly Report July 2019 "Crypto tokens in payments and securities settlement"
Amendment 252 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 d (new) 13d. Highlights that cryptocurrencies and stablecoins bring important challenges in the European payments system; A unified approach toward these instruments is critical for the integration of the European payments system in terms of efficiency, data privacy and AML; Highlights that the ECB should explore the utility of a crypto-Euro and its competitive impact in the global markets;
Amendment 253 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 d (new) 13d. Reiterates the need to establish a European Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) to effectively address the AML/CTF risks arising from cross-border activities and new technologies, in particular those posed by crypto-assets;
Amendment 254 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 e (new) Amendment 255 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 f (new) 13f. Calls on the Commission to update the existing Crowdfunding Platforms Regulation so as to include into its scope Platforms for Security Tokens Offerings (STOs) in the spirit of technological and business model neutrality;
Amendment 256 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 g (new) 13g. Calls on the Commission to propose a coherent framework for the functioning of custodian e-wallet providers and crypto-exchanges; Notes that the EC’s report on the “30 Recommendations for financial Innovations” admits that there is no existing framework for the custodian e- wallet providers; Notes that according to AMLD5 (Art.47) the Member States shall ensure that providers of exchange services between virtual currencies and fiat currencies, and custodian e-wallet providers, are registered or licensed, but there is a very weak adoption so far from the Member States;
Amendment 257 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 h (new) 13h. Notes the update of the existing Recommendation 16 of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) regarding the Traveling Rule for the Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASPs) and calls on the Commission to explore its implications for the crypto-exchange and e-wallet providers within the framework of the AMLD5;
Amendment 258 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 i (new) 13i. Advanced Technological Solutions Stresses the importance of Machine Learning applications in the financial services and their significance in improving financial operations; Highlights that the increase in efficiency should be accompanied by ethical, social and humanistic parameters as algorithmic financial decision making can generate inefficiencies and probabilistic errors that are not random but rather concentrated around specific social groups generating thus social exclusions;
Amendment 259 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 j (new) 13j. Advanced Technological Solutions Calls on the Commission to take into account the provisions of GDPR as well as the Policy Papers of about the EU AI Strategy, the EU Data Strategy and the EU Paper on the Liability of AI, Robotics and IoT and propose a dedicated regulatory framework on the uses of AI by the Financial Sector;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas digital finance is a consistently evolving and booming area of the financial sector which
Amendment 260 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 k (new) 13k. Advanced Technological Solutions Calls on the Commission to explore the potential of Smart Contracts in the financial sector, identify benefits and risks and provide recommendations about the uses of smart contracts by the financial sector;
Amendment 261 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 l (new) 13l. Advanced Technological Solutions Calls on the Commission to explore the possibility of "securities on the blockchain" (aka smart financial assets), their benefits in increasing liquidity, access to capital, reduction of the financial transaction costs and increase in the transparency in the issuance of securities; call on the commission to explore operational and financial risks of smart financial assets;
Amendment 263 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Points out that with the increasing
Amendment 264 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Points out that
Amendment 265 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Points out that with the increasing digitalisation of financial services, as well as outsourcing to external IT solution or maintenance providers, such as cloud providers, the exposure of financial institutions and markets to disruption caused by internal failures or external attacks is becoming more pronounced and thereby that operational risks need to be thoroughly assessed in such evolving landscape to take into account and stress test plausible, but extreme scenarios;
Amendment 266 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Points out that with the increasing digitalisation of financial services, as well as outsourcing to external IT solution or maintenance providers, such as cloud providers, the exposure of financial institutions and markets to disruption caused by internal failures or external attacks is becoming more pronounced; underlines that those risks are particularly relevant in cases of outsourcing to third country services providers;
Amendment 267 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Points out that with the increasing digitalisation of financial services, as well as outsourcing to external IT solution or maintenance providers, such as cloud providers, the exposure of financial institutions and markets to disruption caused by internal failures, or external attacks or as a consequence of financial distress (resolution) is becoming more pronounced;
Amendment 268 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Points out that with the increasing digitalisation of financial services, as well as outsourcing to external IT solution or maintenance providers, such as cloud providers, the exposure of financial institutions and markets to disruption caused by internal failures or external attacks by foreign powers is becoming more pronounced;
Amendment 269 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Takes note of the fact that while the total costs of cyber incidents are notoriously hard to establish, industry estimates range from USD 45 billion to USD 654 billion for the global economy in 2018; highlights that the financial sector has traditionally been a key target for cybercriminals looking for financial gain; is concerned by the ESRB analysis which shows that it is indeed conceivable that a cyber-incident could evolve into a systemic cyber crisis that threatens financial stability1a; _________________ 1a ESRB publishes a report on systemic cyberattacks in February 2020 (https://www.esrb.europa.eu/news/pr/date/ 2020/html/esrb.pr200219~61abad5f20.en. html)
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A a (new) Aa. whereas the Union's internal market is characterised by open competition, a regulatory framework, reliance on international standards and supervisory cooperation; whereas the Union’s digital finance strategy should therefore be based on the same principles;
Amendment 270 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) Amendment 271 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Recalls that supervisory authorities have issued consumer warning regarding ICOs with reference to crypto, as lack of appropriate transparency and disclosure requirements can cause potential and serious risks for investors;
Amendment 272 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Calls on the Commission to propose legislative changes in the area of ICT and cyber security requirements for the Union financial sector in order to address any inconsistencies, gaps and loopholes that are found to exist in relevant law; in this regard, calls on the Commission to consider the need to have a supervisory overview of the ICT providers, noting the concentration and contagions risks that can be posed by a heavy reliance by the financial services sector on a small number of ICT and cloud computing providers;
Amendment 273 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Calls on the Commission to propose legislative changes in the area of ICT and cyber security requirements for the Union financial sector in order to address any inconsistencies, gaps and loopholes that are found to exist in relevant law; notes that over reliance on non-EU ICT services providers, and on ICT products and services offered by non-EU market participants, is a particular area of concern;
Amendment 274 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Calls on the Commission to propose legislative changes in the area of ICT and cyber security requirements for the Union financial sector, taking into account international standards, in order to address any inconsistencies, gaps and loopholes that are found to exist in relevant law;
Amendment 275 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Calls on the Commission to propose legislative changes in the area of ICT and cyber security requirements for the Union financial sector in order to address
Amendment 276 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Calls on the Commission to propose
Amendment 277 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 – introductory part 16. Considers that
Amendment 278 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 – point a a. modernisation and compliance with international standards, such as the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision Standard 239;
Amendment 279 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 – point a a. modernisation and compliance with international standards regarding risk assessment and reporting;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A a (new) Aa. whereas the financial sector is under extreme pressure by the ultra-low interest rate environment dictated by the ECB to cut costs and find new and innovative ways to work more efficiently, including through digital finance;
Amendment 280 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 – point a a. modernisation of ICT governance and risk management;
Amendment 281 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 – point d d. oversight of and minimum standards for critical ICT third-party providers;
Amendment 282 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 – point d a (new) da. risk management and governance in the area of ICT;
Amendment 283 #
da. data integrity and security;
Amendment 284 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Stresses the need for further information sharing, in particular on incidents, and enhanced coordination between relevant regulatory and supervisory authorities, taking into account that building resilience and preparedness to deal with large scale cyber and operational incidents requires effective cooperation not only cross- borders but also across various sectors;
Amendment 285 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Stresses the need for further information sharing and enhanced coordination among regulatory and supervisory authorities, in particular on cyber incidents,
Amendment 286 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Stresses the need for further information sharing, in particular on incidents, and enhanced coordination between relevant regulatory and supervisory authorities; asks the Commission to explore ways to facilitate and encourage information sharing;
Amendment 287 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 a (new) Amendment 288 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 a (new) 17a. Calls on the Commission to enhance cooperation at international fora in order to facilitate the development of international standards as regards cloud computing and out-sourcing; points out that international standards developed in these areas could then be adopted into an EU-specific framework in order to bring oversight of cloud computing and outsourcing into line with the level of oversight of legacy systems;
Amendment 289 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 a (new) 17a. Regrets that the supervisory negligence preceeding the downfall of Wirecard suggests that FinTechs profit from preferential treatment by supervisory authorities; regrets that the European institutions, including the European Parliament, has contributed in creating a hype around FinTechs; calls on national and European authorities to curb their enthusiasm when promoting FinTech;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A a (new) Aa. whereas there is a general trade- off in regulating FinTechs between encouraging innovation and ensuring a high degree of investor protection and financial stability;
Amendment 290 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 a (new) 17a. Stresses that the resilience of the financial system requires a strong technological framework for the supervision of advanced technological applications in financial services; underscores the need for a concrete strategy that enhances the use of regulatory technology (RegTech) and supervisory technology (SupTech);
Amendment 291 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 a (new) 17a. Calls on the Commission, in the absence of traditional forms of supervision, safeguards and regulatory protection and given the potential high volatility of virtual currencies and the risk of speculative bubbles, to introduce monitoring of some kind;
Amendment 292 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 b (new) 17b. Underscores that not all the European and National supervisory authorities are in the same technological level regarding their sophistication in addressing advanced technological challenges; advices EC to create a framework that addresses these gaps by assisting National Authorities to modernize their operations and improve the skills of their personnel; notes that collaboration between national authorities can be enhanced with digital applications both horizontally between the member states and vertically in cases of dual- supervision within a member state;
Amendment 293 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 b (new) 17b. Stresses the need, in order to enhance operational resilience and market integrity, for establishing clear requirements for trading platforms, as regards in particular, depending on the nature and size, robust governance arrangements, including risk-based capital requirements and adequate processes and controls against hacking or theft, due diligence requirements, assets segregation, adequate complaints handling and redress procedures to deter market abuses, as well as screening processes against the risk of fraud and manipulation;
Amendment 294 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 b (new) 17b. Calls on the Commission and supervisors to put in pace non-legislative actions to bolster the operational preparedness in the financial sector to deal with large-scale cyber and operational incidents, through joint exercises, operational protocols (“playbooks”), secure collaboration tools and investments in reinforcements of critical infrastructures and European redundancy capacities; highlights the need for supervisors to have in-house expertise and adequate resources to carry out such exercises and supervisory actions;
Amendment 295 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 b (new) 17b. Calls on the Commission to assess and monitor the risk of trading opportunities on the ‘black market’ emerging, and of money laundering, the financing of terrorism, tax fraud and evasion and other criminal activities;
Amendment 297 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Recalls that the collection and analysis of data play a central role for FinTech, and therefore highlights the need for consistent, technology-neutral application of existing data laws; highlights that Artificial Intelligence is one of the key technologies as regards enhancing the Union's competitiveness on a global level;
Amendment 298 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Recalls that the collection and analysis of data play a central role for FinTech, and therefore highlights the need for consistent
Amendment 299 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Points out that the Union is the global standard setter as regards personal data protection; highlights that the transfer and use of personal and non-personal data in the financial services sector should
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 1 c (new) – having regard to Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation)1a, ___________________ 1a OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1.
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A a (new) Aa. whereas one key lesson from the financial crisis is that regulation must keep pace with financial innovation, otherwise new systemic risks may emerge;
Amendment 300 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Points out that the Union is the global standard setter as regards personal data protection; highlights that the transfer and use of personal and non-personal data in the financial services sector should
Amendment 301 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19a. Stresses that the free flow of data within the EU is needed to scale up innovative finance; points out that cross- border data flows, including to and from third countries, must be monitored and governed by EU legislative principles on data privacy and data protection;
Amendment 302 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19a. Concerns about the lack of a proper EU framework for data providers. Enhance to take actions to avoid EU suffering a non-EU data providers’ oligopolistic concentration due to its data dependency;
Amendment 303 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Requests, in this regard, that the Commission examines how to ensure that digital finance entities can access on an equitable basis relevant and useful data to help ensure that innovative FinTech businesses can grow within the Union and beyond; calls on the Commission to monitor the offering of financial services by “BigTech” firms, and also how the competitive advantages inherent to these operators may distort competition in the market, harm the interests of consumers and innovation;
Amendment 304 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Requests, in this regard, that the Commission examines how to ensure that digital finance entities can access on an equitable basis relevant and useful data to help ensure that innovative FinTech businesses can grow within the Union and beyond; points out though that the Commission should refrain from price regulation for access to private data streams;
Amendment 305 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Requests, in this regard, that the Commission examines how to ensure that digital finance entities can access on an equitable basis relevant and useful data to help ensure that innovative FinTech businesses can grow within the Union and beyond, guaranteeing the protection of its consumers’ data on EU territory;
Amendment 306 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Requests, in this regard, that the Commission examines how to ensure that digital finance entities can access on an equitable basis relevant and useful data, to
Amendment 307 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Requests, in this regard, that the Commission examines how to ensure that digital finance entities can access on an equitable basis relevant and useful data to help creating more customer value and ensure that innovative FinTech businesses can grow within the Union and beyond;
Amendment 308 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Requests, in this regard, that the Commission examines how to ensure that digital finance entities can access on an equitable basis relevant, reliable and useful data to help ensure that innovative FinTech businesses can grow within the Union and beyond;
Amendment 309 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas the term ‘crypto-assets’ is used to refer to a wide variety of digital assets, including but not limited to virtual currencies and tokens, which have a range of uses and purposes and can be issued and traded in a number of ways;
Amendment 310 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20a. Calls on the Commission to actively promote open-source software and their role in cyber resilience, especially for their inherently high levels of transparency;
Amendment 311 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 b (new) 20b. Calls on the Commission to actively promote use of open source hardware and to actively work in promoting European autonomy in producing software with transparent features; underlines that European reliance on third party hardware manufacturers is a long term security liability, especially in connection with digital finance;
Amendment 312 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Requests that the Commission consider a framework for digital onboarding and the use of digital financial identities, which would aim to harmonise these measures across the Union insofar as necessary; highlights the importance of and potential benefit from enabling the use of digital financial identities across all sectors and Member States, while taking appropriate and proportionate measures to avoid data or identity incidents;
Amendment 313 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Requests that the Commission consider a framework for digital onboarding and the use of digital financial identities, which would aim to harmonise these measures across the Union insofar as necessary, highlights the need in this framework to balance greater data- sharing and transparency with data security and consumer privacy;
Amendment 314 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Requests that the Commission consider a framework for digital onboarding and the use of digital financial identities, which would aim to a harmonise
Amendment 315 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Requests that the Commission consider a framework for digital onboarding and the use of digital financial identities, which would aim to harmonise these measures across the Union insofar as necessary and facilitates compliance with the relevant anti-money laundering provisions;
Amendment 316 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Requests that the Commission consider
Amendment 317 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Requests that the Commission considers a framework for digital onboarding and the use of digital financial identities, which would aim to harmonise the
Amendment 318 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21a. Points out that for KYC processes legal requirements for retail onboarding by financial institutions are different in every member state and therefore cross border onboarding with existing data sets are often not possible, which is also valid for onboarding of corporate clients and its related KYC/KYB (know your business) process; calls on the Commission to address this issue and foster the harmonisation of the KYC data required by member states;
Amendment 319 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21a. Acknowledges that interoperability between digital entities on national and European level is key in order to reach the desired market acceptance;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas the term ‘crypto-assets’ is used to refer to a wide variety of digital assets, including but not limited to virtual currencies and tokens but sometimes excluding certain forms of stablecoins or certain tokens such as security tokens;
Amendment 320 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Points out that customer data or “big data” is being increasingly used by financial institutions; re
Amendment 321 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Points out that customer data or “big data” is being increasingly used by financial institutions; recalls the provisions of Article 71 of the GDPR and calls on all stakeholders to increase efforts to guarantee the enforcement of the rights therein; believes that GDPR requirements should be stricter for non-EU financial institutions and intermediaries buying, selling, compiling and analysing big data;
Amendment 322 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Points out that customer data or “big data” is being increasingly
Amendment 323 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Points out that customer data or “big data” is being increasingly used by financial
Amendment 324 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 a (new) 22a. Considers that a self-sovereign identity (SSI) based on distributed ledger technologies (DLT) can be a key element in developing a range of new services and platforms for the digital single market, independent from data aggregators and avoiding intermediaries, while at the same time providing high security and data protection standards for individual EU citizens;
Amendment 325 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Believes that the lack of accessible data and information regarding FinTech and crypto-assets related activities can be a detriment to
Amendment 326 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Believes that both the lack of accessible data and information regarding FinTech activities as well as overburdening enterprises, supervisors and regulators with elaborate reporting requirements, like we have seen following the implementation of MiFID II, can be a detriment to growth; advocates for increased transparency and e
Amendment 327 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Believes that the lack of accessible data and information regarding FinTech activities can be a detriment to growth; advocates for increased transparency and enhanced reporting of FinTech activity so as to reduce asymmetries and risks in particular regarding incumbent big data operators that may draw disproportionate benefits from increased access to data;
Amendment 328 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Believes that the lack of sufficient investments and upgrades in critical IT-infrastructure and software platforms and the lack of accessible data and information regarding FinTech activities can be
Amendment 329 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Believes that the lack of access
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) Amendment 330 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 a (new) 23a. Points out that in this context standards play a key role in further promoting data management, sharing and exchange, including data interoperability and portability. It also requires a trustworthy and legally secure infrastructure as well as a sound legal framework with regard to data pooling and sharing that give businesses confidence in data cooperation on a cross-company or even cross-industry basis;
Amendment 331 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Calls for effective oversight of ’big data’ analytics in a way that addresses the opacity of models while ensuring that there is sufficient access to relevant and quality data; emphasises the need for much greater algorithmic accountability and transparency with regard to data processing and analytics as an essential tool to guarantee that the individual is appropriately informed about the processing of their personal data; calls on the Commission to assess which initiatives, legislative and non-legislative, can be taken in this regard;
Amendment 332 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 a (new) 24a. Calls for a workable regulatory approach to data processing and management, where consumer protection is a priority for legislators, while adapting European Data protection law to the requirements of a modern data economy that puts data sovereignty into reality;
Amendment 333 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 a (new) 24a. Calls for efforts focused on preserving a level playing field based on cross-borders data access, and a high level of consumers’ data protection and privacy, converging EU a framework with high standards of cybersecurity;
Amendment 334 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 a (new) 24a. Calls for data collected and generated with public funds to be considered open data and be made available in a standardised and comparable format unless GDPR provisions prohibit doing so;
Amendment 335 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 a (new) 24a. Calls for transparency of algorithms used by the financial sector, as appropriate, and supervisory disclosure of these;
Amendment 336 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 b (new) 24b. Economic, environmental and social implications Highlights the challenges and risks for financial stability and monetary transmission posed by the emergence of stablecoins with potential for global reach and mass adoption, including shifting the control of monetary policy from central banks to private companies without any accountability; welcomes in this regard the commitment of the Commission and the Council, in line with the actions taken at international level, to identify and address the legal, regulatory and oversight challenges and potential systemic risks posed by global stablecoins and other similar arrangements, before such projects can commence their operations in the EU;
Amendment 337 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 c (new) 24c. Economic, environmental and social implications Is concerned about the high environmental impact of crypto-mining based on proof of work protocols, such as Bitcoin; points out that, according to a benchmarking study presented by the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance, the energy consumption used by Bitcoin equals that of the whole country of Switzerland; stresses the need for new solutions aimed at mitigating the ecological footprint of mainstream crypto- assets and to ensure the shift towards energy efficient solutions, including the reuse of heat generated for other uses;
Amendment 338 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 d (new) 24d. Economic, environmental and social implications Points out that, despite the original promise of leading to decentralisation, democratisation and reducing economic inequalities, crypto-assets have been, on the contrary, associated with high levels of wealth concentration, while most crypto-assets trading occurs on centralized exchanges vulnerable to hacking and frauds;
Amendment 339 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 e (new) 24e. Economic, environmental and social implications Underlines the potential benefits of introducing a Euro virtual currency to provide cheaper, faster and more secure transactions to European citizens, while ensuring that competent authorities are equipped with the adequate tools to prevent illegal activities; invites the ECB to consider to undertake a comprehensive impact assessment regarding the possibility of introducing a Euro virtual currency;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) Ba. whereas the ultra-accommodative policies of the ECB cast doubt on a sustainable future for the common currency, which stresses the importance of cryptocurrencies and crypto-assets as reliable stores of value and as a hedge against monetary insecurity;
Amendment 340 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 a (new) 25a. Stresses that the challenge of big data and data analytics is the distinct characteristic of digital finance; Underlines the importance of Open Banking in improving the quality of payments services by the inclusion of new market participants that provide increased operational and price efficiency to the consumers;
Amendment 341 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 b (new) 25b. Underlines that a transition from Open Banking to Open Finance – the inclusion of financial services other than payments, is a strategic priority for an inclusive and holistic approach in the European markets that is expected to improve efficiency, reduce concentration risks, enhance financial inclusion and democratize finance;
Amendment 342 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 c (new) 25c. Notes that the financial data belong to the citizens and cannot be sold or used by the financial service providers without the explicit consent of the consumer; Strong penalties should be imposed when violations on data privacy occur;
Amendment 343 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 d (new) 25d. Highlights that the scalability of the European financial services requires the flow of data between the financial service providers if the consumer requires so; Legacy financial service providers should cooperate with innovative FinTech firms in the flow of financial and transaction data subject to the consent of the customer; Calls to the commission to ensure that this flow of data will be possible in a frictionless and efficient way;
Amendment 344 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part A – point 1 1. To set the groundwork for a future- oriented approach to
Amendment 345 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part A – point 2 2. To
Amendment 346 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part A – point 2 2. To ensure that digital finance
Amendment 347 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part A – point 2 a (new) 2a. To ensure that activities from the field of digital finance that are economically similar to regulated activities under the current legislative framework are held to the same standards, thereby minimising the potential for regulatory arbitrage and facilitating competition on a level playing field;
Amendment 348 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part A – point 2 a (new) 2a. To ensure that the classification of FinTech companies and payment companies is correct;
Amendment 349 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part A – point 3 3. To foster a common understanding of the key issues concerning digital finance and en
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas the two most common components of crypto-assets adopted are (i) the private nature of the
Amendment 350 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part A – point 3 3. To foster a common understanding of the key issues concerning digital finance and encourage the harmonisation of relevant provisions,
Amendment 351 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part A – point 4 4. To increase data sharing, data integrity and security in accordance with Union principles in order to
Amendment 352 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part A – point 4 4. To increase data sharing in accordance with Union principles in order to stimulate innovation. The aim should be to facilitate access to
Amendment 353 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part B – point -1 (new) -1. To ensure that until a EU taxonomy is available, regulated and licensed financial institutions should be subject to a temporary ban of crypto- assets related activities with the exception of small scale or prototype activities subject to approval by competent authorities, in consideration of the high risks to consumer and investors protection, financial stability, and market integrity and reputation; points out that once such taxonomy is established in EU law, such institutions should carry out activities related to high-risk crypto-assets only subject to strong safeguards and tight limits, based on an assessment of the potential risk of the activities under the most conservative assumptions. Meanwhile, all agents and participants entering into transactions above a 'de minimis' threshold in crypto-assets related activities outside of the scope of the regulated and licensed financial institutions should be subject to the standards of the existing regulatory framework including AML/CFT, KYC, PSD2, MiFID, Market Abuse Regulation, Short Selling Regulation, Prospectus Regulation, Central Securities Depositories Regulation, EMIR and UCITS, as applicable;
Amendment 354 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part B – point 1 1. To put forward a legislative proposal for Crypto-Assets, which provides legal certainty for the treatment of Crypto- Assets while ensuring high standards of consumer and
Amendment 355 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part B – point 1 1. To put forward a legislative proposal for Crypto-Assets, which provides legal certainty for the treatment of Crypto- Assets while ensuring consumer and investor protection
Amendment 356 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part B – point 1 1. To put forward a legislative proposal for Crypto-Assets, including stablecoins, which provides legal certainty for the treatment of Crypto-
Amendment 357 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part B – point 1 1. To put forward a legislative proposal for Crypto-Assets, which provides legal certainty for the treatment of Crypto- Assets while ensuring
Amendment 358 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part B – point 1 a (new) 1a. To strengthen the application of the AML/CTF framework to crypto-assets and close the existing loopholes, in particular: (a) adopt a comprehensive definition of crypto-assets; (b) update the definition of terrorist financing to also include assets or property within the scope; (c) incorporate under AML/CTF obligations other categories of crypto- assets service providers, namely providers of virtual-to-virtual exchanges, other categories of wallet and ICOs;
Amendment 359 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part B – point 1 a (new) 1a. To ban all cryptocurrencies from the Union, given their highly speculative nature and the risks they pose to the stability of the financial system;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas the two most common components of crypto-assets adopted are (i) the private nature of the asset, and (ii) the use of cryptography and distributed ledger technology (DLT) or similar technology to underpin exchanges of the asset and its inherent or perceived value;
Amendment 360 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part B – point 2 2. To make a legislative proposal on cyber resilience, which ensures consistent standards of ICT security across the Union financial sector. Such a framework should be future-oriented and focus on modernising the current rules applicable
Amendment 361 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part B – point 2 2. To make a legislative proposal on cyber resilience, which ensures consistent standards of ICT security across the Union financial sector. Such a framework should be future-oriented and focus on modernising the current rules applicable concerning cyber resilience, while also closing any regulatory loopholes and gaps, which may put businesses, investors and consumers at risk. Such a proposal should take due account of the risk of concentration and contagion stemming from the over reliance on a small number of ICT service providers, particularly cloud computing providers;
Amendment 362 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part B – point 2 2. To make a legislative proposal on cyber resilience, which ensures consistent standards of ICT security across the Union financial sector. Such a framework should be future-oriented and focus on modernising the current rules applicable concerning cyber resilience, while also closing any regulatory loopholes and gaps, which may put businesses, investors and consumers at risk. Such a framework should aim to limit over reliance on non- EU ICT services providers, and on ICT products and services offered by non-EU market participants;
Amendment 363 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part B – point 2 2. To make a legislative proposal on cyber resilience, which ensures consistent standards of ICT security across the Union financial sector. Such a framework should be future-oriented and focus on modernising the current rules applicable concerning cyber resilience, while also closing any regulatory loopholes and gaps, which may put taxpayers, businesses, investors and consumers at risk;
Amendment 364 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part B – point 3 3. To propose a framework for digital onboarding. Such a framework should comply with relevant Union legislation such as Anti-Money Laundering provisions and anti-terrorist financing, and aim to ensure a common understanding of digital financial identities across the single market.
Amendment 365 #
Motion for a resolution Annex I – part B – point 3 a (new) 3a. To assess the potential impact of vulnerabilities caused by financial institutions' growing use of new technologies and the rapid evolution of the crypto-asset market;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C a (new) Ca. whereas, at present, crypto-assets are neither issued nor guaranteed by a central bank or public authority in the Union, and can have a variety of uses, including as a means of exchange, for investment purposes, and in order to access a good or service;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C b (new) Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas stablecoins exhibit similar features to crypto-assets and do not take the form of any specific currency, but rely on a set of tools which aim to minimise fluctuations of their price as denominated in a currency; whereas some crypto-assets, including stablecoins and their associated technologies, have the potential to increase efficiencies, competition and transparency and to bring substantial opportunities and benefits to society, since some of them could lead to cheaper and faster payments and offer new funding sources for SMEs;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 1 d (new) – having regard to Directive (EU) 2015/2366 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2015 on payment services in the internal market, amending Directives 2002/65/EC, 2009/110/EC and 2013/36/EU and Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, and repealing Directive 2007/64/EC1a, __________________ 1a OJ L 337, 23.12.2015, p. 35.
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas stablecoins exhibit similar features to crypto-assets and do not take the form of any specific currency, but rely on a set of tools which aim to minimise fluctuations of their price as denominated in a currency; whereas the set of tools aiming to minimise price fluctuations has not been tested in situations when significant numbers of transactions are being carried out with stablecoins;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D a (new) Da. whereas public debate about privately launched stablecoins has highlighted certain shortcomings of the Union's payments landscape;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D a (new) Da. whereas stablecoins have the potential to become a widely used means of payment;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) mis
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E a (new) Ea. whereas the People’s Bank of China is trialling a central bank digital currency (the DCEP); highlights that the potential global use of the DCEP could have implications for international trade and consumer protection;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F F. whereas possible initiatives for
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F a (new) Fa. whereas the ECB has euro cash as the sole legal tender;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G G. whereas digital finance has a strong cross-border element, which goes beyond the Union level and therefore international cooperation as well as an efficient and effective Union supervision in this field is essential;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G G. whereas digital finance has a strong cross-border element, which goes beyond the Union level and therefore international cooperation and standard-setting in this field is essential;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G a (new) Ga. whereas digital finance has a strong capital flows element which attracts cross-border investments; therefore digital finance can contribute to Union competitiveness on global markets;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 1 e (new) Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Recital H H. whereas, according to market 1a data , a
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Recital H a (new) Ha. whereas, according to market data, stablecoins have reached a total market capitalisation of EUR 10 billion in June 2020 from 1.5 billion in January 2018 and, despite their still limited reach compared to other cryptocurrencies, have the potential to rapidly reach a global scale and a wide mass user base, especially if adopted by big tech companies exploiting their networks;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Recital H b (new) Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I I. whereas experts of the European Central Bank (ECB) noted in their publication of 20193, that even though crypto-assets are highly speculative, they do not represent an immediate threat to financial stability; whereas the International Monetary Fund (IMF), in its 2018 global financial stability report, and the Financial Stability Board (FSB), in its July 2018 report, reached the same conclusions, although in the FSB’s opinion the situation should still be monitored, given how quickly changes occur on these markets; _________________ 3
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I I. whereas experts of the European Central Bank (ECB) noted in their publication of 20193 , that even though crypto-assets are highly speculative, they do not represent an immediate threat to
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I I. whereas experts of the European Central Bank (ECB) noted in their publication of 20193
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I a (new) Ia. whereas, as pointed out in the EBA report, financial institutions are currently engaging in relatively limited crypto-assets related activities, but their interest is likely to grow particularly in the context of the increasing use of DLT- based solutions; whereas such activities include holding or gaining exposure to crypto-assets, underwriting ICOs, or offering services in relation to crypto- assets such as providing custody wallet or exchanges; whereas the current prudential rules are not well suited to capturing the high volatility and high risks of crypto-assets;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I a (new) Ia. whereas recent research suggests that crypto-assets are mainly used as a speculative investment, rather than as a means of payment for goods or services offered by a legal merchant; whereas the ESAs have highlighted that crypto-assets which do not qualify as financial instruments within the coverage of Union financial regulation pose specific risks, namely in terms of investor and consumer protection as well as to market integrity; whereas specific risks highlighted include fraud, cyber-attacks, money laundering, operational resilience and market manipulation;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I a (new) Ia. whereas the shadow banking sector, which includes investment funds, money market funds, FinTechs and other financial intermediaries, has been growing in the Union and poses significant risks to the stability of the financial system, given its high degree of interconnectedness with insurance companies and pension funds, its procyclical nature and its lack of regulation;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 2 a (new) – having regard to the Communication from the Commission of 19 February 2020 entitled ‘A European Strategy for Data’1a, ___________________ 1a COM(2020)0066.
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I a (new) Ia. whereas in its report on decentralised transaction networks (DLT), published in January 2017, ESMA concluded that it was too early for regulatory measures because the technology in the financial markets was still in its early stages;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I a (new) Ia. whereas crypto-assets may increase the risks of money laundering, fraudulent practices, tax evasion and external attacks ;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I a (new) Ia. whereas the adoption of new technologies can make a significant contribution to allowing financial services companies to meet their ongoing supervisory and compliance obligations;
Amendment 63 #
Ib. whereas within the range of crypto-assets which qualify as financial instruments under Union law, the classification as such relies on the national competent authorities applying the national implementation of Union law, which creates discrepancies in the supervisory and regulatory approach, harming consistency and a level playing field in the Union; whereas such classification and integration within the Union legislative framework is not without difficulties, since different crypto- assets present different features, which may change over time;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I b (new) Ib. whereas initial coin offerings (ICOs) could provide an alternative source of funding for innovative businesses and start-ups at the early phase of their developments, but they also expose investors to high risks of losses due to their highly speculative nature and vulnerability to frauds; whereas the BIS Annual Economic Report 2018 found that at least 22,5% of ICOs have turned out to be fraudulent Ponzi schemes;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I b (new) Ib. whereas ESMA expects, according to its report on decentralised transaction networks (DLT), that the new technology will bring various advantages, but also challenges in terms of control, data protection, cross-system interoperability, the application of common standards and access to central bank balances;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I c (new) Ic. whereas crypto-assets have the potential to reduce transactions costs in a safe manner in an increasingly digitally surveyed world if subject to a stringent, fit for purpose and risk-based regulatory regime;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Recital J Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Recital J Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution Recital J a (new) Ja. whereas large technology firms and global digital platforms are increasingly offering financial services; where those large operators in the digital sector benefit from competitive advantages such as economies of scale, vast cross-border user networks, easy access to financing and the ability to harvest large swaths of data provided by users through data processing technologies such as ‘big data analytics’, which generate tremendous added value in a variety of ways; whereas the presence of ‘Big Tech’ firms in the FinTech markets has the potential to harm fair competition and innovation;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 2 b (new) Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Recital J a (new) Ja. whereas the Wirecard scandal highlights the high risks for consumer investor protection and financial fraud posed by using sandboxes and by light oversight and regulation in order to foster innovation in the area of FinTech;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution Recital J a (new) Ja. whereas the COVID-19 outbreak has, to a varying extent across Member States, demonstrated the potential that digital finance offers to both consumers and the economy;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution Recital J a (new) Ja. whereas the share of non-cash- based payments has increased significantly over the past years;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution Recital J b (new) Jb. whereas an improved framework for cashless transactions is not intended to undermine cash as a means of payment;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Recital K a (new) Ka. whereas the application of new technologies in the financial sector may create new risks that need to be regulated and monitored in order to safeguard financial stability, the integrity of the internal market and consumer protection;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution Recital L L. whereas the increased use of artificial intelligence in financial services will lead to a need for stronger operational resilience
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution Recital M M. whereas operational problems, particularly ICT and security risks, can generate systemic risks for the financial sector
Amendment 77 #
M. whereas new operational problems, particularly ICT and security risks, can generate systemic risks for the financial sector; such new risks to be addressed by appropriate regulation;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution Recital M M. whereas operational problems, particularly ICT and security risks, especially hacking by foreign powers, can generate systemic risks for the financial sector;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution Recital O Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 2 c (new) – having regard to the White Paper on Artificial Intelligence - A European approach to excellence and trust1a, _____________________ 1a COM(2020)0065.
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P P. whereas cyber resilience is an integral part of the work on the operational resilience of financial institutions carried out by authorities on a
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P a (new) Pa. whereas the Wirecard scandal reveals the shortcomings of a supervisory model primarily based on national supervisory authorities since national authorities are more likely to turn a blind eye to the failings of their own supervisees; whereas the ongoing ESMA investigation on the Wirecard scandal should identify areas where direct supervision at Union level would have prevented this failure; whereas adaptations to the Union supervisory architecture for financial reporting, financial innovation, payments, and related areas including audit and anti- money laundering/countering terrorism financing, are becoming an urgent necessity in light of the Wirecard scandal;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P a (new) Pa. whereas a functioning, sustainable and resilient Union financial market should have strong allocative efficiency of capital and risk and the widest financial inclusion of citizens within financial services; whereas digital finance promises to improve both the efficient allocation of capital and allow better distribution of financial risk as well as strong potential for the democratisation of the financial markets as it enables wider financial inclusion;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P a (new) Pa. whereas the use of cloud computing services can offer significant advantages regarding operational resilience and efficiency for financial services providers compared to legacy on- site solution, but comes with additional challenges in relation to security of sensitive financial data and processes, business continuity in case of outages and general vulnerability in relation to cyber crimes;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P a (new) Pa. whereas a level playing field between financial services firms and technology firms is needed to ensure all firms compete on equal footing, following the principle of ‘same risk, same activity, same regulation’;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P a (new) Pa. whereas the Wirecard scandal has shown that supervisory authorities have once more failed to keep track with the level of complexity of the financial sector;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P a (new) Pa. whereas the downfall of Wirecard and the scandal which ensued, show important deficiencies in the supervision of digital financial service providers;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P b (new) Pb. whereas experience of the improvements in financial technologies over the course of economic history show that the economic benefits of those improvements are mainly captured by financial service providers and do not trickle down to consumers; whereas digital finance allows for more cost efficient financial services;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P b (new) Pb. whereas the introduction of digital financial services should neither lead to regulatory arbitrage, nor to lower customer protection, reduced safety or financial stability risks;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P b (new) Pb. whereas many large Union financial institutions rely on third-country providers for cloud computing services;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 2 d (new) – having regard to the answer given by Vice-President Dombrovskis on behalf of the Commission E-001130/2017 of 10 April 2017,
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P c (new) Pc. whereas improvements to financial technology have not so far remedied the structural problem of concentration risk in the systemic level intensifying thus the ‘too big to fail’ problem; whereas digital finance has the strong potential to allow market entrance by new, more agile and less systemically risky financial service providers allowing thus wider distribution of risk over the financial markets;
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P c (new) Pc. whereas the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) has an important role to play in helping companies understand their GDPR compliance obligations;
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P d (new) Pd. whereas 37 million economically active Union citizens remain un-bankable, or excluded by the mainstream financial services (data of 2016); whereas digital finance can remedy that problem enabling wider democratisation of the financial services and financial inclusion;
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P e (new) Pe. whereas a vibrant financial market for the Union moves financial services to a more systematic use of data, data analytics and emerging technological solutions like artificial intelligence, blockchain, IoT, hyper-performance computing; whereas the technological neutrality principle - the non- discrimination of a financial service provider subject to the technology he uses, and the principle of “same regulation for same risk” is instrumental for an innovation friendly regulation, it is of paramount importance to identify technology specific risk and take them into account and prevent market failures, advance consumer and investor protection and safeguard the resilience of the market;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P f (new) Pf. whereas technological neutrality is a strong starting point it cannot deliver efficient innovation-friendly regulation by itself; whereas the regulator should be also business model neutral and do not discriminate in favour of legacy financial service providers using legacy business and operational models over innovative ones;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P g (new) Pg. whereas the PSD2 is by itself a strong argument in favour of Open Banking allowing the access to data to innovative financial service providers – subject to the consent of the customers regarding their payments, it is of paramount importance in a robust EU digital finance environment to move forward to the extension of this facility to financial services beyond the payments; whereas the transition from Open Banking to Open Finance will allow the development of holistic financial solutions for the consumers and investors;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P h (new) Ph. whereas open banking and open finance are instrumental for the transparency in the financial sector, allowing thus the accountability of the banks when they charge the consumers transaction fees, allow the consumers to avoid hidden fees and other suboptimal banking practices that derive from oligopolistic and monopolistic pricing behaviours; whereas these pricing behaviours of banks are subject of an ongoing consultation by the Competition Policy Authorities of the EU as indicated by the EU study on the application from the banks of the Regulation No 2015/751 regarding the interchange fees;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P i (new) Pi. whereas cryptocurrencies, and especially stablecoins with strong systemic impact revealed the inefficiencies of the European payments market; whereas digital finance solutions can improve efficiency and help to the creation of a unified European payments system;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P j (new) Pj. whereas cryptocurrencies do not have usually a known originator and they do not create financial claim to an underlying asset, contrary to the stableblecoins, security tokens and commodity tokens that all have a known originator;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P k (new) source: 654.084
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
committees/0/shadows/5/group |
Old
Confederal Group of the European United Left - Nordic Green LeftNew
The Left group in the European Parliament - GUE/NGL |
docs/0/docs/0/url |
Old
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE650.539New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ECON-PR-650539_EN.html |
docs/1/docs/0/url |
Old
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE654.084New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ECON-AM-654084_EN.html |
docs/3 |
|
events/0/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament |
events/1/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee |
events/2/type |
Old
Committee report tabled for plenary, single readingNew
Committee report tabled for plenary |
events/3/docs |
|
events/4 |
|
events/4 |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
procedure/Other legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
docs/3 |
|
events/3 |
|
events/4 |
|
forecasts |
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Parliament's voteNew
Procedure completed |
forecasts/0/date |
Old
2020-10-05T00:00:00New
2020-10-07T00:00:00 |
forecasts/1 |
|
docs/2 |
|
events/2 |
|
forecasts/0/title |
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single readingNew
Debate in plenary scheduled |
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament's vote |
events/1 |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
forecasts |
|
docs/1/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE654.084
|
committees/0/shadows/2 |
|
docs/1 |
|
committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
docs |
|