Nos derniers articles

This is a consultation on revising joint guidelines for assessing the suitability of management body members and key function holders at EU banks and investment firms. Open until 25 May 2026, it is part of a broader “Suitability Package” that includes draft Regulatory Technical Standards on documentation requirements. The revisions aim to harmonize suitability assessments across the EU, reflect new Capital Requirements Directive requirements, clarify controls for third-country branches, link assessments with anti-money-laundering frameworks, and introduce simplification measures.
A public hearing is scheduled for 15 April 2026.

Ce retour sur la réunion de Place sur les Entreprises d'investissement (EI) détaille les exigences réglementaires et les modalités de supervision imposées par l'ACPR aux établissements financiers, en mettant l'accent sur la gouvernance interne et la gestion des risques. Il définit une séparation stricte entre les organes de surveillance et de direction, tout en exigeant une transparence totale sur l'actionnariat et les fonds propres.
Un volet majeur concerne la mise en conformité avec le règlement DORA, incluant la tenue d'un registre des services technologiques et des tests de résilience numérique. Le retour précisen également les protocoles de reporting via le portail OneGate et les critères d'évaluation de l'ICARAP pour garantir la solvabilité. Enfin, l'autorité souligne l'importance de la protection des fonds de la clientèle à travers des dispositifs de cantonnement rigoureux.

This report evaluates how competent authorities have implemented previous recommendations regarding ICT risk assessment within the Supervisory Review and Evaluation Process (SREP). The document highlights a significant shift in the regulatory landscape due to the application of DORA, which establishes a unified framework for financial sector resilience. According to the findings, supervisors have made notable progress by forming specialized ICT teams, enhancing technical expertise, and adopting automated monitoring tools. Furthermore, the report details the integration of ICT-specific guidelines into broader operational risk assessments to ensure a more cohesive supervisory approach. While most authorities have successfully adopted benchmarking and horizontal analysis, the EBA emphasizes that maintaining supervisory convergence remains an ongoing priority as technology evolves. Overall, the report confirms that the EU is moving toward a more harmonized and robust regime for managing digital risks in banking.

This document presents the formal evaluation of proposed simplifications to the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). While the EBA supports the overall goal of reducing the reporting burden for companies, it expresses significant concern that certain permanent reliefs and data omissions could lead to long-term information gaps. The authority argues that a lack of high-quality, quantitative sustainability data may hinder risk management, facilitate greenwashing, and ultimately threaten financial stability. To address these risks, the EBA recommends implementing time-limited transitions for specific disclosure exemptions to ensure companies eventually provide comprehensive metrics. Additionally, the EBA emphasizes the need for interoperability with global standards and calls for the retention of key indicators, such as greenhouse gas emissions intensity, to support informed investment decisions.

These EIOPA guidelines establish a framework for identifying critical insurance functions and removing resolvability impediments to protect policyholders and maintain financial stability. The sources evaluate whether to assume a "complete stop" or a more flexible "partial stop" of services when assessing a firm's failure, ultimately preferring the latter to better reflect economic reality. Authorities are empowered to address structural issues, such as complex group organizations or insufficient loss-absorption mechanisms, that might hinder orderly resolution. Furthermore, regulators may restrict new business lines or products, particularly those under third-country laws, if they complicate the enforcement of resolution powers. National authorities must integrate these standards into their regulatory frameworks to ensure a harmonized level playing field across the European Union. Implementation of these rules aims to safeguard public funds by reducing the necessity for extraordinary financial support during an insurance crisis.

This document presents an official opinion from EIOPA regarding the European Commission’s efforts to simplify and streamline the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). While the authority generally supports reducing the regulatory burden for companies, it expresses specific concerns that excessive reporting reliefs could decrease the quality and comparability of essential data. EIOPA emphasizes that maintaining high-quality disclosures is vital for insurance and pension sectors to accurately assess sustainability risks and fulfill their roles as institutional investors. The text highlights the importance of interoperability with international standards, such as IFRS, and ensures that new reporting rules remain consistent with existing EU legislation like Solvency II and the SFDR. Ultimately, the source advocates for a balanced approach where simplification does not compromise the transparency or stability of the financial system.

Cette stratégie érige la cybersécurité en moteur de la **souveraineté numérique** et de la puissance industrielle française. Elle s'articule autour de trois axes majeurs :

1. Innovation et Défense : La cybersécurité est désignée secteur prioritaire. Des programmes comme « Pionniers de l’IA » soutiennent des projets de rupture (ex. : ARKANE), tandis que des investissements massifs (Helsing) renforcent l'IA de défense. La sécurité s'étend également au domaine civil via le projet éducatif OpenEdIAG.
2. Architecture Institutionnelle : L'État structure un cadre de confiance technique. L'**INESIA**, sous l'égide de l'ANSSI et en lien avec l'AMIAD, définit des protocoles d'évaluation rigoureux pour garantir la robustesse des modèles et prévenir les fuites de données en production.
3. Rayonnement International : La France ambitionne d'imposer ses standards lors de sa présidence du **G7 en 2026**, en luttant contre les détournements malveillants. Parallèlement, des initiatives comme celles de la fondation Current AI favorisent l'accès à des outils de sécurité ouverts.

En conclusion, la maîtrise des normes d'évaluation et la sécurisation des systèmes d'IA deviennent des avantages compétitifs, assurant l'intégrité nationale et l'influence diplomatique de la France.ce française du G7 en 2026 concernant la régulation de l'IA ?

L’AMF présente les résultats d’une campagne de contrôles menée auprès de cinq sociétés de gestion afin d’évaluer leurs dispositifs de gestion des risques opérationnels (organisation, procédures, suivi des incidents, couverture et reporting). L’étude souligne que ces sociétés disposent généralement de fonctions dédiées et de procédures structurées, mais identifie des lacunes dans l’évaluation de la gravité des incidents, la formalisation des pertes ou la qualité des données déclarées. Le régulateur rappelle l’importance de dispositifs robustes pour protéger les investisseurs, décrit des bonnes et mauvaises pratiques, et note que certains acteurs ont engagé des améliorations de leurs processus internes.

This consultation paper investigates how natural catastrophe insurance within the Solvency II framework can better account for climate change adaptation measures. The document distinguishes between macro-level protections, such as public flood defenses, and micro-level interventions implemented by individual property owners to reduce vulnerability. By analyzing perils like floods, earthquakes, and windstorms, the report evaluates whether the standard formula for capital requirements should be adjusted to reward these risk-reduction efforts. The text explores several regulatory options, including the use of undertaking-specific parameters and internal models, to ensure that insurers have the financial incentive to promote resilience. Ultimately, the paper seeks to bridge the protection gap by aligning prudential capital charges with the actual physical improvements made to insured assets.

EIOPA’s article reports results from a survey of 347 insurance undertakings in 25 European countries on generative AI adoption. It describes that many insurers are increasingly using generative AI, with nearly two-thirds actively deploying tools, mainly for internal productivity tasks, while customer-facing applications remain at proof-of-concept stage. Respondents cited efficiency, cost reduction, customer experience and decision support as drivers. The summary notes challenges including data privacy, security, regulatory compliance and skill gaps, and highlights risks such as inaccurate outputs and third-party reliance. It also describes growing development of dedicated AI governance and risk policies.