Brussels, 18 April 2024
MEPs adopted a proposal for the first stage of a European Deposit Insurance Scheme, operating as a liquidity scheme and providing loans to participating deposit insurance schemes.
The Economic and monetary affairs committee adopted the text with 26 votes to 18, with 3 abstention is a clear signal that MEPs want to complete the Banking Union and make progress towards a full insurance scheme across the EU. In the first stage, deposit guarantee schemes (DGS) would be shielded against local shocks while the loss covering European Deposit Insurance Scheme EDIS remains the goal for a later stage.
The new rules would only apply to banks, which are members of participating DGSs.In order to limit the liability for the European Deposit Insurance Fund and to reduce moral hazard at the national level, assistance from the Deposit Insurance Fund can only be requested if the participating DGS has raised ex-ante contributions as required under the directive on deposit guarantee schemes.
Deposit Insurance Fund
The Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) is an essential element of the EDIS I proposal, it would provide liquidity support, where the available financial means of a DGS are used for payout, in the event of a bank’s resolution, for preventive or alternatives measures. The proposal also establishes the powers of the Single Resolution Board (Board) for using and managing the DIF, which would be financed from transfers by participating DGSs. The target level of the DIF should reach 50% of the target level of the national DGS after three years.In order to ensure fair and harmonised contributions for participating banks and provide incentives to operate under a less risky model, both contributions to EDIS I and to participating DGS should be calculated on the basis of covered deposits and a risk-adjustment factor per bank.
How it would work
In cases where the DIF funds are insufficient to provide the amount of liquidity support to a participating DGSs, all other participating DGSs should be obliged to lend to the DIF upon request from the Board. This mandatory lending would be capped at 30% after the 3-year build-up period of the DIF.The liquidity support provided by the DIF would have to be paid back by a DGS within six years, according to repayment plan. No interest would be charged for any liquidity support up to DGS contributions to the DIF. However, to ensure incentives for repayment an interest is charged and progresses for amounts exceeding these contributions.
The Board should ensure that the contributions are transferred and spread out in an evenly manner. In the case that a participating DGS does not have sufficient financial means, the Board could defer the transfer of contributions to the DIF in six years at the most. It would be the legal responsibility of the participating DGS to meet and maintain both the target level of the DGS and the DIF.In order to ensure availability of liquidity support from the entry into force of the rules, MEPs proposed that a proportionally higher amount of funds in participating DGSs should be available for mandatory lending during the 3-year build-up period of the DIF. They also want the member states to develop ways of enhancing the borrowing capacity of the DIF, including from financial markets.
Finally, MEPs expect that the Commission should review the appropriateness of extending EDIS I from providing liquidity support to a full insurance scheme with loss coverage and make associated legislative proposals which would result in the final completion of the Banking Union.
Quote
Othmar Karas (EPP, AT) the lead MEP said: “The report aims to make deposits of all European citizens safer. More security, protection and resilience in a crisis-proof financial sector make funds available for necessary future investments. We hereby send a strong political signal to advance on completing our long-overdue Banking Union. Without Banking Union, there is no Capital Markets Union.”
Next steps
The file will be followed up by the new Parliament after the 6-9 June European elections.
Further information
As EU Parliament breaks nine-year deadlock over European Deposit Insurance, S&Ds warn against another wasted decade
The European Parliament’s committee on economic affairs today adopted a report on the European Deposit Insurance Scheme, the third pillar of the European banking union designed to protect all deposits below €100,000 across the euro zone.
The Socialists and Democrats welcome today’s vote that breaks a nine-year deadlock over this essential but controversial file. The Parliament’s committee has done its job; the ball is now in the court of EU member states. They should not waste another decade, urge the S&Ds.
The European Deposit Insurance Scheme (EDIS) was proposed by the European Commission in 2015 to complement the first and the second pillar of the banking union – the Single Supervisory Mechanism and the Single Resolution Mechanism respectively.
The banking union was the EU’s response to the euro crisis that over a decade ago threatened the existence of the single currency. The plan was to restore trust in banks by ensuring that taxpayers’ money would no longer be used for rescuing failing banks.
While the common supervision and insolvency resolution systems were set up relatively quickly, the common protection of deposits has proven to be much more demanding, with the challenge of striking a delicate balance between debt reduction and debt mutualisation at the core of the debate.
Jonás Fernández, S&D spokesperson on economic affairs and negotiator on the European Deposit Insurance Scheme, said:
“The adoption of the report on EDIS by the committee on economic affairs is one of the most positive achievements of this mandate. With today’s vote, we have overcome a nine-year blockade by right-wing parties that has prevented the completion of the banking union.
“The agreement contains solutions that are key for the Socialists and Democrats. First, it defines that – in the first phase – EDIS will provide liquidity to institutions in need when national funds are about to run out.
“Secondly, it establishes an initial four-year phase when the current resources of the national funds will be migrated to the European fund, bringing the European national liability to 50%. In addition, during that period, the amounts transferred to the European fund will be at the disposal of national insurers at no additional cost and in case more resources are needed, they will come from the European fund.
“Thirdly, the agreement avoids reinsuring national insurers, so that the fund will be fed by the banks themselves and not by contributions from national insurers. This detail is crucial, as it will allow EDIS to continue to evolve towards a mutualised loss-absorbing fund. Along these lines, after four years, the Commission will be obliged to evaluate the operability of EDIS in order to present a new legislative proposal that will allow progress towards the second phase of EDIS.
“This is, therefore, a key achievement. Attention must now turn to EU member states. They must unblock the negotiations on this file as soon as possible, just as the Parliament has done. At stake is the credibility of one of the most useful tools we have put in place after the financial crisis – the banking union. Although, with more delay than we would have liked, the Parliament’s committee on economic affairs has responded. Let us hope that EU member states do not need another 10 years to follow suit.”
Source – S&D Group
EU-Abgeordneter Markus Ferber (EVP/CSU) kritisiert Schritt in die falsche Richtung
„Der Vorschlag zur Vergemeinschaftung der europäischen Einlagensicherung lag aus guten Gründen für fast ein Jahrzehnt auf Eis – es wäre gut gewesen, wenn man es dabei belassen hätte. Zwar stellt der abgestimmte Text eine deutliche Verbesserung gegenüber dem Kommissionsvorschlag vor, er bleibt aber ein Schritt in die falsche Richtung“, so der CSU-Europaabgeordnete und wirtschaftspolitische Sprecher der EVP-Fraktion im Europäischen Parlament, Markus Ferber, anlässlich der heutigen Abstimmung im Wirtschafts- und Währungsausschuss über einen Vorschlag zur Schaffung eines europäischen Einlagensicherungssystems (EDIS).
Bankenunion nicht mit Vergemeinschaftung der Einlagensicherung gleichsetzen
Für Ferber ist klar: „Es ist ein Fehler, die Bankenunion mit der Vergemeinschaftung der Einlagensicherung gleichzusetzen. Was die Integration des europäischen Bankenmarktes angeht, stellt ein fehlendes EDIS das geringste Problem dar. Mit den hohen gemeinsamen Standards, die bereits heute gelten, sind Einleger bestens abgesichert – eine Vergemeinschaftung der Risiken macht die Bankeneinlagen nicht sicherer. Im Gegenteil: wenn andere haften, führt das in der Regel zu schlechterem Risikomanagement – das gilt umso mehr, wenn Risiken zuvor nicht hinreichend abgebaut wurden.“
Nur noch Liquiditätsausgleichssystem
Positiv bewertet Ferber den Umstand, dass der Rechtsakt zur Schaffung eines europäischen Einlagensicherungssystems gegenüber dem ursprünglichen Kommissionsvorschlag deutlich abgeändert wurde: „Im Vergleich zum Vorschlag von 2015 wurde EDIS deutlich abgespeckt. Es geht nicht mehr um gemeinsame Verlusthaftung, sondern nur noch um einen kurzfristigen Liquiditätsausgleich. Es droht aber die Gefahr, dass bei der nächsten Überprüfung die gemeinsame Haftung wieder auf den Tisch kommt.“
Risikoreduzierung in den Fokus nehmen
Der CSU-Europaabgeordnete fordert, dass eine Reduzierung von Bankenrisiken Vorrang vor deren Vergemeinschaftung haben muss: „Wir müssen zunächst bestehende Risiken abbauen, bevor wir überhaupt über weitere Schritten nachdenken. Dafür braucht es einerseits den politischen Willen, andererseits aber auch einfach mehr Zeit.“ Als Beispiel für ungelöste Probleme nannte Ferber etwa die fehlende Eigenkapitalunterlegung von Staatsanleihen sowie die noch immer nicht verabschiedete über einen neuen Mechanismus für die außergerichtliche Durchsetzung zur Mindestanforderungen in Bezug auf außergerichtliche Mechanismen zur Verwertung von Sicherheiten aus besicherten Krediten (AECE), der für den Abbau von ausfallgefährdeten Krediten zentral wäre.
Quelle – EVP/CSU