The Next Generation EU (NGEU) as a catalyst for the promotion of the international role of the euro

E-print/Working paper (2023)

Recent developments in the global arena such as the COVID-19 pandemic and stresses in energy markets, made it clear that it is critical for the EU to ensure its strategic autonomy in the macroeconomic ... [more ▼]

Recent developments in the global arena such as the COVID-19 pandemic and stresses in energy markets, made it clear that it is critical for the EU to ensure its strategic autonomy in the macroeconomic field. Strengthening the international role of the euro is one of the key elements in this regard. Through timely analysis of the changes stemming from the establishment of the Next Generation EU (NGEU), we seek to understand to what extent the NGEU can serve as a catalyst for the promotion of the international role of the euro. While it is implausible that the euro will overcome the primacy of the US dollar, we center our analysis around the transformation of the EU’s presence in capital markets. Following massive issuances of green bonds under the NGEU, the EU became the largest issuer of green bonds and has the potential to progress from a small supranational issuer to a sovereign size issuer. This means that the pool of highly rated euro-denominated safe assets will expand significantly. That is where we focus our analysis and where we see the opportunity of the NGEU for unleashing the potential of the euro and boosting its international role. [less ▲]

Banche e stabilità finanziaria: i criteri di idoneità per il top management

in Agenda Treccani (2022)

Chapter 3. Judicial consequences for the enforcement of administrative decisions in multilevel regulatory systems: The case of the Single Resolution Mechanism

in Ligeti, Katalin; Brodersen, Kei Hannah (Eds.) Studies on Enforcement in Multilevel Regulatory Systems (2022)

The impact of Brexit on “bail-inable” liabilities under English law

in Queen's Law Journal (2021), (1), 22

Several years have passed since 29 March 2017, the date when the United Kingdom (UK) triggered Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). This date has become well-known for paving the way to ... [more ▼]

Several years have passed since 29 March 2017, the date when the United Kingdom (UK) triggered Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). This date has become well-known for paving the way to multiple legal and political issues, most of which depend on the agreement setting the conditions for the future relations between the European Union (EU) and the UK. In reference to the resolution of a credit institution established in the EU in a state of imminent crisis, Brexit might negatively affect its shareholders and bondholders who were called upon to contribute by absorbing losses and recapitalising the bank through the bail-in instrument. In particular, when the bail-in converts or writes down liabilities previously established under English law. To date, the EU legal framework for the resolution of credit institutions envisages a provision for the direct recognition of liabilities governed under any of the EU Member States’ law. This means that, due to Brexit, English law liabilities are no longer directly recognised at the EU level. However, the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive (BRRD), one of the pillars of the EU legislation relating to resolution, leaves to each EU Member State the duty to require financial entities to include “resolution-proof” clauses in the contracts establishing such liabilities or, alternatively, to conclude a binding agreement with the relevant third country. This creates issues concerning both the recognition of English law liabilities established pre-BRRD and to post-BRRD liabilities not compliant with the contractual requirement. By analysing the EU and UK legal frameworks, this paper aims to address possible solutions to ease a future resolution procedure involving the use of the bail-in instrument towards English law liabilities. The purpose is to ease both the determination of the Minimum Requirement for own fund and Eligible Liabilities (MREL) and the resolution process for the relevant authority in charge of the resolution procedure, since an orderly bail-in of those problematic liabilities could improve the effectiveness of the instrument and the success of the whole resolution procedure. [less ▲]

The Flow of Information Among Authorities Involved in the Banking Union’s Resolution Procedure: The Case of the SRB and the ECB

E-print/Working paper (2020)

The flow of information is vital for the smooth functioning and certainty of the successful outcome of a resolution procedure during resolution planning and execution. As a result, the exchange of ... [more ▼]

The flow of information is vital for the smooth functioning and certainty of the successful outcome of a resolution procedure during resolution planning and execution. As a result, the exchange of relevant information has become highly influential in current debates. This article will focus on the exchange of information between the Single Resolution Board (SRB) and the European Central Bank (ECB). Firstly, the Authorities decided to arrange the rules for sharing information bilaterally in the form of a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). While this framework of cooperation and exchange of information between the SRB and the ECB constitutes an obligation under Article 30(7) of the Single Resolution Mechanism Regulation (SRMR), it was drafted in the non-binding form of an MoU. The general purpose of an MoU is to establish the basis for cooperation and convergence of intentions. Such foundations aim to strengthen the resolution procedure by joining forces to obtain more accurate and complete data with better coordination of tasks and resources in order to achieve the most solid result possible within a tighter timeframe. [less ▲]