2018年-CEPS欧洲政策研究中心_European_Supervisory_Authorities_still_playing_second_fiddle_to_national_financial_regulators_10页_911kb

Summary of the Document: European Supervisory Authorities Still Playing Second Fiddle to National Financial Regulators

Core Content

This document discusses the challenges faced by the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) in terms of financial and human resources, highlighting their limited capacity compared to national financial regulators. It emphasizes that the ESAs, including the European Banking Authority (EBA), European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), and European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA), have not been effective in fulfilling their responsibilities due to insufficient funding and staffing.

The ESAs are responsible for coordinating micro-prudential supervision and preparing secondary and tertiary legislation, but they lack the flexibility and size of resources to act independently and efficiently at the EU level. This is in contrast to national regulators, which often combine supervisory and non-supervisory activities and have significantly larger budgets and staff numbers.

Main Points

• Resource Limitations: The ESAs have limited financial and human resources compared to national regulators, which affects their ability to perform their duties effectively.
• Operational Focus: The ESAs primarily focus on policy-making and coordination, whereas national supervisors are responsible for direct supervision, which is more labor-intensive.
• Budget Comparison: In 2016, the total operating expenses of the ESAs amounted to €97 million, while the European Central Bank (ECB) had €954 million, and the Single Resolution Board (SRB) had €34 million.
• Staffing Shortages: The total number of employees in the ESAs was 532, while the national financial authorities in countries like Germany, Italy, and the UK had much larger staff numbers.
• Relative Power: The ESAs employ only 0.7% of all staff in national and European financial authorities, indicating a significant imbalance in power and independence.
• EU Budget Contribution: The ESAs' budget is largely funded by the EU and member states, with some industry contributions for ESMA's direct supervision.
• Proposed Solutions: The EU Commission proposed increasing the budget of the ESAs through industry contributions to enhance their effectiveness and independence, but this may not be fully supported by member states in the Council.
• Obstacles to EU Single Market: The lack of resources and independence hinders the creation of a true EU single market for financial services with consistent rules, implementation, and enforcement across all member states.

Key Information

• Staff Numbers (2016):
  • EBA: 189
  • ESMA: 204
  • EIOPA: 139
  • Total ESAs: 532
  • SRB: 107
  • ECB (SSM): ~3,200
  • National Authorities (e.g., Germany, Italy, UK): Over 3,000 employees each
• Operating Expenses (2016):
  • Total ESAs: €97 million
  • ECB: €954 million
  • SRB: €34 million
  • National Authorities (e.g., Germany, Italy, UK): Over €2 billion each
• Resource Share:
  • The ESAs have only 0.7% of the total financial resources available to national and European financial authorities.
  • The SRB's budget is lower than that of smaller national authorities like Latvia or Croatia.
• Challenges:
  • Inflexible and insufficient funds prevent the ESAs from performing their roles effectively.
  • Limited staffing affects their capacity to execute tasks.
  • National supervisors often have greater independence and authority over financial institutions.

Conclusion

Despite their role in promoting a single financial market, the ESAs remain under-resourced and understaffed compared to national financial regulators. This has led to a lack of independence and effectiveness, which is a major obstacle to achieving a unified and stable financial system across the EU. While the EU Commission has proposed increasing funding through industry contributions, the support from member states is uncertain, and immediate budget growth is unlikely to significantly change the current imbalance of power. As a result, the ESAs are expected to continue operating in a secondary role to national financial authorities.