Opinion of the European Central Bank of 20 October 2023 on the establishment of a macroprudential committee (CON/2023/32)
OPINION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK of 20 October 2023 on the establishment of a macroprudential committee (CON/2023/32) Introduction and legal basis
On 22 September 2023 the European Central Bank (ECB) received a request from the Italian Ministry of Economy and Finance for an opinion on a draft legislative decree implementing Recommendation ESRB/2011/3 on the macroprudential mandate of national authorities and implementing Articles 23-ter (7) and 28(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1011, as amended by Regulation (EU) 2021/168 (hereinafter the ‘draft decree’). The ECB’s competence to deliver an opinion is based on Articles 127(4) and 282(5) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and the third and sixth indents of Article 2(1) of Council Decision 98/415/EC , as the draft decree relates to the Banca d’Italia and rules applicable to financial institutions insofar as they materially influence the stability of financial institutions and markets. In accordance with the first sentence of Article 17.5 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Central Bank, the Governing Council has adopted this opinion.
1. Purpose of the draft decree
1.1 The draft decree establishes a Macroprudential Policy Committee (hereinafter the ‘Committee’). The Committee is without legal personality and is established as an independent authority designated under Recommendation ESRB/2011/3 of the European Systemic Risk Board . In pursuing its objectives, the Committee acts independently. 1.2 The Committee is to be comprised of the Governor of the Banca d’Italia, who chairs the Committee, the President of the Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa (CONSOB, National Companies and Stock Exchange Commission), the President of the Istituto per la vigilanza sulle assicurazioni (IVASS, Institute for Insurance Supervision) and the President of the Commissione di vigilanza sui fondi pensione (COVIP, Commission for the Supervision of Pension Funds), representing the respective authorities. The Director-General of the Treasury participates in the
Committee’s meetings, without the right to vote. The Committee Chair, also on a proposal from the other participants, may invite third parties to attend meetings for advisory purposes, with regard to specific items on the agenda. 1.3 The Banca d’Italia acts as the secretariat of the Committee. 1.4 The Committee meets at least twice a year. The Chair convenes the Committee, sets its agenda and proposes its activities and tasks. The decisions and minutes of the Committee are to be made public unless the Committee considers that this entails risks to financial stability. 1.5 Recommendations, and opinions and reports issued on the Committee’s own initiative are approved with the consent or abstention of the authority to which the recommendation is addressed, or of the authority which has specific competence in the area which is the main subject of the report or opinion. 1.6 The Committee may inter alia identify, analyse, classify, monitor and assess risks to the stability of the financial system as a whole; share with the authorities the data and information necessary for the exercise of their tasks; define indicators for monitoring systemic risk and for using macroprudential tools; define and pursue intermediate strategies and objectives in relation to events threatening financial stability, as well as the prevention of systemic risks, thereby promoting a sustainable contribution from the financial sector to economic growth; issue warnings in relation to systemic risk which are to be made public; address recommendations to the Banca d’Italia, CONSOB, IVASS and COVIP, each of which is required to explain when and why these recommendations have not been implemented; issue reports to the Parliament, Government, other authorities, public bodies and State bodies whose purpose is to adopt measures, including legislation, and express opinions, where requested or on its own initiative, on draft legislative acts relevant to its objectives; develop methodologies and procedures to identify systemically important financial institutions, without prejudice to the relevant powers of the individual authorities participating in the Committee under their respective sectoral regulations. 1.7 The Committee has the power to request all necessary data and information from private and public entities carrying out, individually or together, economic activities relevant to financial stability. 1.8 The draft decree stipulates that entities supervised by the Banca d’Italia, CONSOB, IVASS and COVIP that fail to comply with the obligation to provide information, and in accordance with the respective sector-based legislation, will be subject to financial administrative penalties . For nonsupervised entities that fail to comply with the obligation to provide the information required , the
Banca d’Italia will apply a financial administrative penalty ranging from EUR 5,000 to EUR 5 million . 1.9 The Committee cooperates with the European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB) and the ECB in exercising its macroprudential tasks and with macroprudential authorities from other EU Member States, including through the exchange of information, to facilitate their respective tasks. 1.10 Data and information acquired by the Committee are to be covered by the obligation of professional secrecy. Professional secrecy, however, does not prevent the sharing of data and information among the Committee and its participants. 1.11 The Committee must submit to the Government and the Chambers an annual report on its activities by 31 March of the year following the reference year. 1.12 Article 2 of the draft decree provides that IVASS may exercise its supervisory powers for macroprudential purposes on the basis of recommendations issued by the Committee.
2. General observations
2.1 The ECB welcomes that the draft decree establishes a national macroprudential Committee in which all the relevant authorities and institutions involved in macroprudential policy are represented, and that it defines the Committee’s objectives, mission and powers in line with the guiding principles expressed in Recommendation ESRB/2011/3 and Recommendation ESRB/2013/1 of the European Systemic Risk Board . 2.2 The ECB notes that the legal basis for the draft decree is Law No 127 of 4 August 2022 on European Delegation (hereinafter the ‘Law on European Delegation’) , empowering the Government to implement Recommendation ESRB/2011/3, on which the ECB was not consulted. 2.3 The Law on European Delegation contains principles and criteria on the Government’s exercise of the legislative power – such as on the Committee’s tasks and the leading role of the Banca d'Italia – together with more detailed rules, such as on how the Committee is to function. 2.4 On the basis of the Law on European Delegation, the draft decree completes the institutional framework to allow the oversight of systemic risk at national level, especially in respect of financial markets and pension funds, since CONSOB and COVIP do not currently have substantive macroprudential powers.
3. Role of the Banca d’Italia as macroprudential authority
3.1 Central banks should play a leading role in macroprudential oversight, given their expertise and existing responsibilities in the area of financial stability . This is particularly true in the case of the
Banca d’Italia, which has the power to use macroprudential tools as provided for in the
Consolidated Banking Law. The ECB therefore welcomes the role envisaged for the Banca d’Italia,
although some rules of the draft decree raise concerns in that respect, as detailed in the following
paragraphs.
3.2 The ECB understands that the Banca d’Italia will continue to be the concerned authority in Italy for
the purposes of notification to the ECB by the national competent or designated authorities of
requirements for capital buffers to be held by credit institutions in addition to own funds
requirements and any other measures aimed at addressing systemic or macroprudential risks,
pursuant to Council Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 .
3.3 However, the leading role of the Banca d’Italia is likely to be undermined by the provisions of the
draft decree assigning a (de facto) veto power to each Committee member over the Committee’s
recommendations, reports and opinions (see paragraph 4). The ECB also notes that the draft
decree does not provide for the President of the Committee having a double (casting) vote, as
envisaged by the Law on European Delegation .
4. Voting arrangements
Under the draft decree, the Committee’s decisions are to be voted by the majority of the
participants at the meeting. However, any recommendation to the Banca d’Italia, CONSOB, IVASS
and COVIP and any report or opinion issued to the Parliament, Government, other authorities,
public bodies and State organisations on the advisability of adopting measures are to be approved
with the consent or abstention of the authority to which the recommendation is addressed or of the
authority which has specific competence in the area which is the main subject of the report or
member of the Committee a (de facto) veto power. This could cause a risk of paralysis in
macroprudential policy , especially in the areas supervised by CONSOB, COVIP and IVASS since
they would not be granted their own autonomous macroprudential powers . As already recommended by the ESRB, a central bank’s leading role should be ensured by the fact that the central bank accounts for the majority of representatives with voting power on the macroprudential authority’s board when decisions are taken on a majority basis, or that no veto power is conferred on other board members, as is the case when decisions are taken by consensus . In the light of the above, the ECB strongly recommends that the Italian legislator revisits the draft decree’s provisions concerning the Committee’s voting arrangements consistent with the guiding principles expressed in the ESRB’s follow-up report on Recommendation ESRB/2011/3 . Furthermore, the ECB also suggests that the Italian Government revisits the draft decree’s provisions concerning the Committee’s voting arrangements to ensure that, in the event of a tie, the President has a double (casting) vote, consistent with the provisions of the Law on European Delegation.
This opinion will be published on EUR-Lex.
Done at Frankfurt am Main, 20 October 2023.
[signed]
The President of the ECB
Christine LAGARDE
Fotnoter
- 1 Schema di decreto legislativo per il recepimento della raccomandazione CERS/2011/3 del Comitato europeo per il rischio sistemico, del 22 dicembre 2011, relativa al mandato macroprudenziale delle autorità nazionali, e per l’attuazione degli articoli 23-ter, paragrafo 7, e 28, paragrafo 2, del regolamento (UE) n. 2016/1011, come modificato dal regolamento (UE) n. 2021/168.
- 2 Council Decision 98/415/EC of 29 June 1998 on the consultation of the European Central Bank by national authorities regarding draft legislative provisions (OJ L 189, 3.7.1998, p. 42).
- 3 Recommendation of the European Systemic Risk Board of 22 December 2011 on the macroprudential mandate of national authorities (ESRB/2011/3) (OJ C 41, 14.2.2012, p.1).
- 4 These penalties are laid down in Article 144(1) of Legislative Decree No 385 of 1 September 1993 (hereinafter the ‘Consolidated Banking Law’, Testo unico delle leggi in materia bancaria e creditizia di cui al decreto legislativo 1 settembre 1993, n. 385); in Article 190(1) of the Consolidated Law on Financial Intermediation laid down in Legislative Decree No 58 of 24 February 1998 (Testo unico delle disposizioni in materia di intermediazione finanziaria di cui al decreto legislativo 24 febbraio 1998, n. 58); in Article 310(1) of the Private Insurance Code laid down in Legislative Decree No 209 of 7 September 2005 (Codice delle assicurazioni private di cui al decreto legislativo 7 settembre 2005, n. 209); and in Article 19-quater(2)(a) of Legislative Decree No 252 of 5 December 2005 regulating supplementary pension schemes (Disciplina delle forme pensionistiche complementari, decreto legislativo 5 dicembre 2005, n. 252).
- 6 Breaches of requests for information from the Banca d’Italia will be subject to Article 144-quater, Article 145 and Article 145-quater of the Consolidated Banking Law, in accordance with the implementing provisions adopted by the Banca d’Italia.
- 7 Recommendation of the European Systemic Risk Board of 4 April 2013 on intermediate objectives and instruments of macroprudential policy (ESRB/2013/1) (OJ C 170, 15.6.2013, p. 1).
- 8 Legge 4 agosto 2022, n. 127: Delega al Governo per il recepimento delle direttive europee e l'attuazione di altri atti normativi dell'Unione europea - Legge di delegazione europea 2021 pubblicata nella Gazzetta Ufficiale n. 199 del 26 Agosto 2022.
- 9 This is in line with recital 24 of Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 on European Union macroprudential oversight of the financial system and establishing a European Systemic Risk Board (OJ L 331, 15.12.21010, p. 1). This is also reflected, for example, in the fact that under Article 6(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010, the members of the General Board of the ESRB with voting rights include the President and the Vice-President of the ECB and the Governors of the national central banks of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB). As previously noted by the ECB, given their central role in macroprudential policy, the General Board should include representatives from all ESCB central banks. See paragraph 2.1 of ECB Opinion CON/2015/4. Recommendation ESRB/2011/3 envisages that the national macroprudential authority can be either a single institution or a board of authorities, but also recommends that Member States ensure that central banks play a leading role in macroprudential policy. See ESRB Recommendation on the macroprudential mandate of national authorities (ESRB/2011/3): Follow-up Report – Overall assessment, June 2014, available on the ESRB website at https://www.esrb.europa.eu; see also paragraph 4 of Opinion CON/2005/39; paragraph 2 of Opinion CON/2013/56; paragraph 2.1 of Opinion CON/2013/66; paragraph 2.1 of Opinion CON/2013/54; paragraph 2.1 of Opinion CON/2013/45; paragraph 2.1 of Opinion CON/2013/30; paragraph 5.2 of Opinion CON/2014/46; paragraph 2.3 of Opinion CON/2014/21; paragraph 3.1 of Opinion CON/2019/10; and paragraph 2.14.2 of Opinion CON/2019/19. All ECB opinions are published on EUR-Lex.
- 10 See Article 5 of Council Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 of 15 October 2013 conferring specific tasks on the European Central Bank concerning policies relating to the prudential supervision of credit institutions (OJ L 287, 29.10.2013, p. 63).
- 11 See Article 6(2)(d)(3) of the Law on European Delegation and Article 1(3) of the draft decree. It is understood that, when the act is addressed to an authority which is not a member of the Committee, the veto power may be exercised by the member authority which has competence in the area.
- 14 See paragraph 7 of Opinion CON/2014/46.
- 15 CONSOB and COVIP do not currently have substantive own macroprudential powers. The issue would also concern IVASS according to Article 188(3-ter) of Legislative Decree No 205 of 2009, as amended by Article 2 of the draft decree.
- 16 See ESRB Recommendation on the macroprudential mandate of national authorities (ESRB/2011/3): Follow-up Report – Overall assessment, June 2014, p. 28: a central bank’s leading role is ensured by the fact that: (i) the central bank is the macroprudential authority; (ii) the central bank accounts for the majority of representatives with voting power on the board when decisions are taken on a majority basis; or (iii) no veto power is conferred on other board members, as is the case when decisions are taken by consensus; (iv) the central bank conducts macroprudential analysis; (v) the central bank prepares the main documents to be discussed by the board; and/or (vi) the central bank is responsible for providing the board’s secretariat; and/or (vii) the central bank governor chairs the board and has a casting vote. See also paragraph 2.14.2 of Opinion CON/2019/19.
- 17 See paragraph 10.1 of Opinion CON/2014/46 and paragraph 2.1 of Opinion CON/2012/55.