Europaudvalget 2015-16
EUU Alm.del Bilag 890
Offentligt
1666419_0001.png
European Commission
DG Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union
Unit D2 – Banks and financial conglomerates
Spa 2 04/064
1049 Brussels
Belgium
MINISTER FOR BUSINESS AND
GROWTH
September 20, 2016
MINISTRY OF
Danish comments to the European Commission’s consultation on the
evaluation of the Financial Conglomerates Directive
I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the consultation on the evalu-
ation of the Financial Conglomerates Directive (FICOD).
The review of FICOD is part of the REFIT-programme. The Danish Gov-
ernment strongly supports initiatives aiming to make EU law simpler and
to reduce regulatory costs, while ensuring financial stability.
We support the review of FICOD, as the sectoral regulation on which
FICOD builds has undergone significant changes since the original adop-
tion of FICOD in 2002 as well as the revision in 2011. It is important to
ensure coherence across the financial regulation in order to avoid creating
unnecessary compliance costs for the financial sector as well as avoiding
possible circumvention of prudential requirements set out in sectoral
regulation.
The financial crisis has underscored the gravity and implications of so-
called group risks to financial stability. This has emphasized the im-
portance of adequately addressing such risks by supplementary supervi-
sion of links within financial groups and between the regulated entities.
Supervisors should have the appropriate tools and powers to be able to
detect the effects that changes in market structure have on the risk-taking
behaviour of financial groups.
Sectoral supervisory approaches are not always sufficient to cope with the
challenges that some complex group structures pose to supervision. In
these situations supplementary supervision provided by the FICOD is
needed to allow supervisors to look across sectors and to address cross-
sectoral risks for the stability of these groups and, in turn, the stability of
the financial system they operate in.
The Danish Government believes that the current regulatory framework
for financial conglomerates, together with the newly revised sectoral rules
(CRR/CRD IV and Solvency II), generally ensures a sound basis for su-
pervising financial groups.
BUSINESS AND GROWTH
Slotsholmsgade 10-12
1015 Copenhagen K
Denmark
Tlf.
+45 33 92 33 50
Fax.
+45 33 12 37 78
CVR-nr. 10092485
EAN nr. 5798000026001
[email protected]
www.evm.dk
EUU, Alm.del - 2015-16 - Bilag 890: Notat samt høringssvar vedr. evaluering af direktiv om finansielle konglomerater
1666419_0002.png
2/2
However, Denmark supports a possible revision of the FICOD in order to
ensure coherent regulation. Such a revision should be based upon thor-
ough analysis as well as dialogue with stakeholders and Member States.
For the purpose of the current consultation, we would like to highlight a
few issues from a Danish perspective.
Firstly, as the rules and provisions in FICOD are supplementary in nature
it is important that they do not duplicate requirements of the sectoral
frameworks. Due consideration should be taken to the newly revised sec-
toral rules in a possible revision of FICOD.
Where the sectoral requirements already cover all the types of risk that
may arise in a financial group, additional layers of supervision should be
avoided.
Secondly, ensuring proper supervisory judgement is important when de-
ciding to what extent supplementary supervision is needed for a specific
financial group. Supplementary supervision may not be warranted for all
financial conglomerates, especially for those small in size with simple and
transparent group structures that operate mainly domestically. Applying
supplementary supervision to these financial groups may not be propor-
tionate to the risks presented by the group and can have a negative impact
on the effective achievement of the underlying objectives of FICOD og
reducing group risk.
Thirdly, we have no evidence to support further requirements at the fi-
nancial conglomerate level. Introducing new requirements should have a
clear rationale and only be considered if this would bring added value,
including significantly reducing risk where warranted, and only after
thorough impact assessments.
The focus of a possible revision of FICOD should be on enhancing the
effectiveness of the already existing supplementary supervisory frame-
work of the FICOD. This could be done by means of e.g. soft law (guide-
lines etc.) describing the tools that supervisors can make use of to detect,
monitor, manage and control group risks in a financial conglomerate.
We stand ready to answer any question the Commission may have in rela-
tion to these comments.
Yours sincerely,
Troels Lund Poulsen