JUSTIÇA DE SÃO PAULO DETERMINA QUE O MUNICIPIO AUTORIZE A EXPEDIÇÃO DE NOTAS FISCAIS ELETRÔNICAS.
9 de fevereiro de 2024
Por que Rússia deve crescer mais do que todos os países desenvolvidos, apesar de guerra e sanções, segundo o FMI
18 de abril de 2024In life, global banks make profits internationally. In death, they cause cross-border problems. That is why EU legislators are wise to spend time designing a pan-European financial regulatory system.
Europe is committed to an integrated market in financial services. This is surely right. A vibrant open market benefits consumers. Competition drives down the cost of intermediation. The EU should continue to allow banks to offer services across national borders.
Such a liberal regime, however, makes it easier for the consequences of financial mistakes to sweep across the continent. The EU has no fiscal powers. The costs of any such misfortune therefore fall on to national exchequers, not the community as a whole.
There is, therefore, a trade-off to be negotiated. The EU’s admirable impulse to keep borders open is, to a degree, in conflict with the entirely noble wishes of regulators to shield their own taxpayers from the consequences of financial misadventure in other countries.
Managing this tension can be made easier. Europe needs cross-border resolution regimes, agreed by every country, so banks can fail without the need for public recapitalisation. The EU should also agree common rules on deposit insurance so that states are not forced to save depositors from mistakes made by foreign banks.
However, ensuring that every country has a robust resolution and deposit protection scheme is a full-time job. So too is making sure that countries do not slump into lax regulatory standards that imperil other nations. The continent also needs an arbiter to make judgments on which governments must do what in emergencies.
That is why a pan-European regulator is needed. If national governments are to retain the freedom to protect taxpayers, the continent needs rules and a referee to overcome its collective action problem.
If any state is concerned about another country’s banks, the supranational regulator should investigate whether the defendant country is breaching EU rules, and if so force remedies on it. If other states remain worried, it should allow countries to treat banks from the transgressor state as they would a bank from outside the EU.
As legislators draw up their plans, however, they must bear in mind that the aim is to prevent one country’s misregulation imposing losses on another state. This laudable goal must not become an excuse for protectionism; nor should it serve as an excuse for the EU to take over regulation of the whole financial system.