scholarly journals Differentiated Integration and the Single Supervisory Mechanism: Which Way Forward for the European Banking Authority?

Author(s):  
Pierre Schammo
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martien Lubberink

This paper examines the association between discretionary capital buffers, capital requirements, and risk for European banks. The discretionary buffers are banks' own buffers, or headroom: the difference between reported and required capital. I exploit capital requirements data that banks started to disclose since the release of a 2015 European Banking Authority opinion. Results using detailed SREP and Pillar 2 data of the largest 99 European banks over 2013-2019 show that less headroom is associated with increased bank risk. An additional examination reveals a positive association between headroom and stress test results for banks subjected to the Single Supervisory Mechanism, a result that runs against supervisory requirements.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martien Lubberink

This paper examines the association between discretionary capital buffers, capital requirements, and risk for European banks. The discretionary buffers are banks' own buffers, or headroom: the difference between reported and required capital. I exploit capital requirements data that banks started to disclose since the release of a 2015 European Banking Authority opinion. Results using detailed SREP and Pillar 2 data of the largest 99 European banks over 2013-2019 show that less headroom is associated with increased bank risk. An additional examination reveals a positive association between headroom and stress test results for banks subjected to the Single Supervisory Mechanism, a result that runs against supervisory requirements.


2020 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 325-342
Author(s):  
Valeria Ferrari

Based on the guidelines issued by the European Securities and Market Authority and by the European Banking Authority, the article deals with the legal qualification of blockchain-based crypto-assets under EU law. Focusing on crypto-assets that function as a) investment instruments (that is, investment tokens) and as b) electronic money (that is, payment tokens), the work outlines shortages and drawbacks in the applicability and enforcement of existing EU legal frameworks regulating investment activities and payment services. With such analysis, the article seeks to inform the ongoing debate within European institutions on the need of regulatory intervention in this area, and it points out pressing questions to be tackled by further research.


2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 35-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mária Širaňová

In this paper we discuss the topological properties of the European banking network and its evolution over time based on the BIS consolidated banking statistics data exploiting information from complex network analysis. Our conclusions are discussed in light of the soon-to-be-launched Single Supervisory Mechanism that takes into account, among other things, the significance of cross-border activity as a precondition for specifying the systemically important European credit institutions. According to our results, the banking network of the EU13 economic space can be characterized as highly asymmetric with a tendency to create clusters based on geographic distance and cultural and social similarities. Additionally, the highly exposed countries are usually dependent on a small number of major creditors while creditor countries tend to spread their power over dependent countries more equally. We advocate that the presence of heterogeneity and asymmetry in the network and a decrease in the level of foreign banking across Europe could be mitigated by the introduction of SSM, and from this perspective it should be viewed as a positive step towards greater financial stability.


Author(s):  
Olivares-Caminal Rodrigo ◽  
Douglas John ◽  
Guynn Randall ◽  
Kornberg Alan ◽  
Paterson Sarah ◽  
...  

This chapter considers the response to the European banking and sovereign debt crisis, which resulted in the introduction of the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive (BRRD). It also considers the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) and a Single Resolution Mechanism (SRM) which will be implemented to facilitate the supervision and resolution of certain financial institutions in the Eurozone. The chapter looks at the consequences of these reform measures and explains the salient features of the new framework of supervisory and resolution intervention. It also looks separately at the EBA technical standards and guidance where necessary to assist the interpretation of the provisions in the directive.


2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 113-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Coen ◽  
John-Paul Salter

AbstractFollowing the 2007–9 financial crisis, the EU strengthened its institutional apparatus for bank regulation, creating a trio of sectoral bodies, including the European Banking Authority (EBA). Various aspects of this new system have been studied, but to date, little is known about how banks engage with their new supranational regulator. We argue that such engagement fosters an interdependence between banks and regulators, thus contributing to the efficiency and robustness of the overall regulatory regime; but also that it is contingent on the regulator exhibiting the qualities of credibility, legitimacy, and transparency. These qualities are grounded in the domestic regulatory governance literature, but we suggest that they are rendered problematic by the complexities of the EU's multilevel system and, in particular, the overlap in competences between the EBA and the European Central Bank. We examine the EBA in the light of these criteria and find that banks’ engagement remains pitched towards established national regulators and the EU's legislative arena. This poses concerns for the efficacy of agency governance in the EU's regulatory regime for banking.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document