EBA欧洲银行-Amended-Recommendation-on-equivalence_MT_7页_242kb

Summary of EBA/REC/2018/01 - Recommendations on the Equivalence of Confidentiality Regimes

Core Content

The document EBA/REC/2018/01 is a set of recommendations issued by the European Banking Authority (EBA) regarding the equivalence of confidentiality regimes across different jurisdictions within the European Union (EU) and European Economic Area (EEA). It updates and amends the previous recommendations EBA/REC/2015/01, providing a detailed comparison of the legal frameworks in place for financial confidentiality.

Main Points

• The recommendations are based on Article 16(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, which requires competent authorities and financial institutions to take all necessary steps to comply with the recommendations.
• The EBA encourages competent authorities to notify it of their compliance status with the recommendations by 08/10/2018.
• Non-compliance or changes in compliance status must also be reported to the EBA.
• The recommendations are publicly available on the EBA's website.

Key Information

1. Obligations of Compliance and Reporting

• Competent authorities must notify the EBA of their compliance status with the recommendations.
• Any changes in compliance status must be reported to the EBA.
• The notification must be sent to compliance@eba.europa.eu with the reference 'EBA/REC/2018/01'.
• The notification must be made by a person with authority representing the competent authority.

2. Recipients

• The recommendations are addressed to competent authorities, as defined in Article 4(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.

3. Implementation

• The recommendations are applicable from a certain date, which is not explicitly mentioned in the text but is likely specified in the original document.
• The implementation is expected to be carried out by the competent authorities in accordance with their legal frameworks.

4. Amendments

• The recommendations EBA/REC/2015/01 have been amended.
• The amended table includes the evaluated authorities and the equivalence assessments for various principles:
  • Principle 1: Confidentiality Concepts
  • Principle 2: Requirements for Confidentiality
  • Principle 3: Restrictions on Disclosure of Confidential Information
  • Principle 4: Restrictions on Disclosure of Confidential Information
  • Additional Information: Commercial Secrets and Requirements for Disclosure of Confidential Information

5. Jurisdictions Covered

• The document includes comparative legal frameworks for the following jurisdictions:
  • Bailiwick of Guernsey
  • Uruguay
  • Republic of Korea

6. Legal References

• The recommendations include references to specific legal articles and regulations in each jurisdiction:
  • Bailiwick of Guernsey:
    • Principle 1: Articles 21 and 43 of the Financial Services Commission (FSC) Act
    • Principle 2: Articles 21 and 43 of the Financial Services Commission (FSC) Act
    • Principle 3: Sections 2(2) and 2(3) of the Financial Services Commission (FSC) Act, Article 34B of the Investment Protection Act, and Articles 80, 84, and 81A of the Insurance Act
    • Principle 4: Articles 34A of the Investment Protection Act, Articles 57 and 58 of the Insurance Act, and Articles 44 and 45 of the Financial Services Commission (FSC) Act
  • Uruguay:
    • Principle 1: Articles 8, 9, 10, and 11 of Law 18.381, and Articles 1, 2, and 3 of Resolution D-46-2016
    • Principle 2: Articles 20 and 21 of the Central Bank Organic Law, and Articles 163 and 302 of the Criminal Code
    • Principle 3: Articles 34 and 35 of the Central Bank Organic Law, and Articles 14–27 of Law 18.401
    • Principle 4: Articles 5–8 of Law 17.835, and Article 190(3) of the Civil Procedure Act
  • Republic of Korea:
    • Principle 1: Article 42 of the Bank Act, and Article 9 of the Official Information and Disclosure Act
    • Principle 2: Article 42 of the Bank Act, Article 34 of the Bank Act, and Article 4 of the Bank Act
    • Principle 3: Articles 1, 28, 42, 56–59, 64–65, 68–69, and 81 of the Bank Act
    • Principle 4: Article 94 of the Bank Act, and Article 20 of the Special Currency Transactions Act

Equivalence Assessments

• The equivalence of confidentiality regimes is assessed for each jurisdiction.
• The status of equivalence is noted as 'Ekwivalenti' for both the Bailiwick of Guernsey and the Republic of Korea.

Conclusion

This document outlines the updated recommendations of the EBA concerning the equivalence of confidentiality regimes for financial institutions. It emphasizes the obligation to report compliance status, provides detailed legal references, and outlines the applicable jurisdictions and their equivalence assessments. The EBA encourages competent authorities to implement these recommendations in accordance with their national legal frameworks.