Nos derniers articles

The paper investigates whether Global Systemically Important Banks (G-SIBs) engage in stronger window-dressing practices than other banks. It finds evidence that G-SIBs reduce exposures such as assets, debt, and derivatives more sharply at year-end and then increase them again in the following quarter, creating a “V-shape” pattern. This behavior is more pronounced for G-SIBs near regulatory thresholds or with higher surcharges, suggesting attempts to lower capital requirements. The study highlights potential market implications and questions the effectiveness of the G-SIB framework, suggesting reforms such as using average exposures rather than year-end figures.

These responses from Insurance Europe to various consultations by EIOPA concerning the Insurance Recovery and Resolution Directive (IRRD) outline the insurance industry's feedback on guidelines for identifying critical functions, removing impediments to resolvability, criteria for pre-emptive recovery planning and market share determination, and the content of both recovery and resolution plans, as well as resolvability assessments. A recurring theme across these responses is the industry's call for proportionality, flexibility, and reduced administrative burden, emphasizing that the IRRD's application should consider the unique characteristics of the insurance sector, distinguishing it from banking. The responses also frequently highlight concerns about duplication with existing DORA and Solvency II requirements and the lack of quantitative cost assessments for proposed regulations.

This Financial Stability Paper proposes enhancements to its analytical framework, focusing on three key areas: 𝗱𝗲𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗼𝗯𝗷𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗶𝘃𝗲𝘀, 𝗶𝗺𝗽𝗿𝗼𝘃𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗸 𝗮𝘀𝘀𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁, and 𝗲𝗻𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗮 𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘆𝘁𝗶𝗰𝘀. The paper suggests a more quantitative approach to the Financial Policy Committee's goals, a systematic way to identify and model financial shocks, and the development of a 𝗺𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗹𝗮𝗿 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗮𝗰𝗵 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝗰𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗼 𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘆𝘀𝗶𝘀 to improve policy evaluation. This framework is intended to prepare for future challenges and serve as a basis for further discussion.

This article argues that there is an increasing erosion of the traditional public-private divide, which is a key principle of liberalism and the rule of law. The authors identify a gradual shift, starting with the "responsibilization" of private actors and progressing to risk-based regulation like the GDPR. They contend that the DSA and AI Act represent a new milestone, as they delegate regulatory powers to private companies, effectively turning them into regulators of their TPSPs. This “privatization of public action” is seen as a serious threat to the rule of law because it removes public action from public scrutiny. To address this, the authors suggest connecting the rule of law more closely with democracy, which could help set boundaries for the legislative conferral of regulatory powers to private entities.

AI is not just an incremental improvement but a "paradigm shift" in regulatory compliance. By automating KYC, AML, and transaction monitoring, financial institutions can achieve unprecedented levels of efficiency, accuracy, and risk management. However, this transformative potential comes with significant responsibilities regarding data governance, ethical considerations, and maintaining human oversight. Success in this evolving landscape will hinge on strategic AI implementation, continuous adaptation to regulatory changes, and strong collaboration across the industry and with regulatory bodies. The long-term goal is a more "secure and resilient financial ecosystem."

On 12 August 2025, the European Banking Authority (EBA) published a report on the use of supervisory technology (SupTech) in anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing (AML/CFT) oversight. It draws on a November 2024 survey of 31 competent authorities across 25 EU member states (plus three outside) and a January 2025 workshop with the European Commission’s AMLA Task Force.
Global Regulation Tomorrow
. The report notes that 47 % of SupTech tools are already in production, 38 % are under development, and 15 % are exploratory. Benefits include improved data quality, analytics, efficiency and collaboration, while challenges involve limited resources, governance issues, legal uncertainties and organizational readiness.
.

The draft strengthens governance arrangements, clarifies management body roles, and enhances oversight of internal control, risk management, and compliance functions. It incorporates ICT and security risk management in line with DORA, requiring institutions to integrate digital operational resilience into governance frameworks. The revisions also address anti-money laundering, conflicts of interest, and gender-neutral remuneration. Stakeholders can submit feedback until October 2025, with final guidelines to replace the 2017 version.

There is an increasing AI use in insurance—50% in non-life, 24% in life. To address emerging risks, undertakings must clarify supervisory responsibilities, maintain full accountability, and implement proportionate governance. Risk managers should conduct impact-based assessments, emphasizing data sensitivity, consumer impact, and financial exposure. Strong governance includes fairness, data quality, transparency, cybersecurity, and human oversight. Oversight extends to third-party providers, with contractual safeguards required. AI systems must align with existing frameworks like ERM and POG, ensuring traceability, explainability, and resilience throughout their lifecycle. Supervisory convergence across the sector remains a key regulatory goal.

The position paper underscores insurance’s central role in financial resilience, noting that roughly 90% of EU consumers hold at least one insurance product. It urges that the new Agenda:
• formally recognize insurance as a strategic enabler of economic and social stability;
• simplify and align regulation to insurance’s specific characteristics;
• support innovation in digitalization and AI with coherent rules;
• streamline consumer disclosures and enhance financial and insurance literacy to aid informed decision‑making.

This Final Report (EBA/RTS/2025/03) presents draft Regulatory Technical Standards (RTS) under the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR) III. It addresses three mandates:
• An operational risk taxonomy with Level 1 event types, Level 2 categories and supplementary attributes (including ESG and ICT risks), to standardise how institutions classify loss events.
• Criteria for deeming the annual‑operational‑risk loss calculation “unduly burdensome” for certain institutions, allowing temporary waivers.
• Rules for adjusting loss‑data sets when firms merge or acquire entities, including currency conversion, re‑classification and fallback proxies.