Sittings · Compare
What changed
DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION
on the Council position at first reading with a view to the adoptionproposal offor a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulations (EU) No 1092/2010, (EU) No 1093/2010, (EU) No 1094/2010, (EU) No 1095/2010, (EU) No 806/2014, (EU) 2021/5231095/2010 and (EU) 2024/16202021/523 as regards certain reporting requirements in the fields of financial services and investment support
(07377/1/2025(COM(2023)0593 – C100196/2025C90383/2023 – 2023/0363(COD))
(Ordinary legislative procedure: secondfirst reading)
The European Parliament,
– having regard to the CouncilCommission positionproposal atto firstParliament readingand (07377/1/2025the –Council C100196/2025),(COM(2023)0593),
– having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 114 of the opinionTreaty on the Functioning of the European CentralUnion, Bankpursuant ofto 21which Junethe 2024,Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C90383/2023),
– having regard to theArticle opinion294(3) of the European EconomicTreaty andon Socialthe CommitteeFunctioning of 14the FebruaryEuropean 2024,Union,
– after consulting the Committee of the Regions,
– having regard to the opinion of the European Central Bank of …,
– having regard to its position at firstthe readingopinion onof the Commission proposal toEuropean ParliamentEconomic and theSocial CouncilCommittee (COM(2023)0593),of …,
– having regard to ArticleRule 294(7)59 of the Treaty on theits FunctioningRules of the European Union,Procedure,
– having regard to the provisional agreement approvedreport byof the committee responsible under RuleCommittee 75(4)on ofEconomic itsand RulesMonetary ofAffairs Procedure,(A90000/2023),
– having regard to Rule 68 of its Rules of Procedure,
1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;
– having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A100000/2025),
2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;
1. Approves the Council position at first reading;
3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.
2. Notes that the act is adopted in accordance with the Council position;
Amendment 1
3. Instructs its President to sign the act with the President of the Council, in accordance with Article 297(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;
Proposal for a regulation
4. Instructs its Secretary-General to sign the act, once it has been verified that all the procedures have been duly completed, and, in agreement with the Secretary-General of the Council, to arrange for its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union;
Recital 1
5. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.
Or. en
SHORT JUSTIFICATION
Amendment 2
The Council position at first reading reflects the agreement reached between Parliament and the Council in interinstitutional negotiations at early second reading stage, after legal-linguistic verification. Since the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON), in its vote on 19 March 2025, already confirmed the outcome of those interinstitutional negotiations, as your rapporteur, I propose that ECON recommends that the Plenary confirms the position of the Council at first reading without amending it.
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Or. en
Amendment 3
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Or. en
Amendment 4
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
Or. en
Amendment 5
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 b (new)
Or. en
Amendment 6
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 c (new)
Or. en
Amendment 7
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Or. en
Amendment 8
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 a (new)
Or. en
Amendment 9
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)
Or. en
Amendment 10
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 b (new)
Or. en
Amendment 11
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010
Article 15 – paragraphs 1 to 7
Or. en
(32010R1092)
Justification
In order to facilitate the detection, monitoring, prevention and mitigation of systemic risks to financial stability, the ESRB should have access to relevant information from the ESAs and the ECB by default. This way, systematic risks could be better detected ex-ante, as opposed to ex-post due to more rigorous request and sharing procedures.
Amendment 12
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010
Article 15 – paragraph 8
Or. en
Justification
The conditions for the exchange of information should not be too restrictive. Therefore, mandates relating to the mission, objectives, tasks and powers of the ESRB are added in addition to specific mandates for reporting requirements in sector-specific legislation (i.e. "other relevant Union law").
Amendment 13
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010
Article 15 – paragraph 8 a (new)
Or. en
Justification
As the Commission proposal foresees exchange of information between authorities only upon request from other authorities, the conditions for requesting such exchange of information need to be clarified. Point (b) therefore would imply a consistent enforcement of the "report once" principle.
Amendment 14
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010
Article 15 – paragraph 8b (new)
Or. en
Justification
The proposal by the European Commission includes in the scope of this Amending Regulation only the ESRB, the ESAs as well as the respective competent authorities in the Member States. In order to foster exchange of information across the entire financial sector, it is necessary to widen the scope of this Amending Regulation to also include anti-money laundering authorities, resolution authorities and supervisory functions of central banks.
Amendment 15
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010
Article 15 – paragraph 10
Or. en
Justification
The reference to other authorities is adapted to align it with the increased scope of authorities.
Amendment 16
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010
Article 15 – paragraph 11
Or. en
Justification
The use of MoUs will be vital to ensure a smooth process in the exchange of information. Therefore, all authorities should enter into MoU. The reference to other authorities is adapted to align it with the increased scope of authorities. The reference to other paragraphs is adapted to align it with new provisions foreseen.
Amendment 17
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010
Article 15 – paragraph 12
Or. en
Justification
The reference to other authorities is adapted to align it with the increased scope of authorities.
Amendment 18
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010
Article 15 – paragraph 13
Or. en
Justification
The information exchange provision in paragraph 13 is not consistent with the information exchange provisions in paragraph 8. The conditions for the information exchange between authorities is dealt with in paragraph 8. The conditions for the information exchange with the Commission is dealt with in paragraph 13 and adapted to ensure a degree of autonomy in the decision to exchange such information.
Amendment 19
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010
Article 15 – paragraph 14 a (new)
Or. en
Justification
As pointed out by management of the ESRB and the ESAs, there are still many legal obstacles in sectoral regulations that make it impossible to exchange information. Therefore, these obstacles should be reported to the Commission in order to remove these while simultaneously respecting intellectual property rights, professional secrecy and data protection.
Amendment 20
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010
Article 15 a (new)
Or. en
Justification
Building on the work by the Commission and authorities on integrated reporting systems, the authorities should be mandated to establish a Single Integrated Reporting System. This should include a data dictionary for common coding and understanding of data, a joint repository enabling a common overview of requested and obtained data, a central data collection point for efficient data exchange as well as a single reporting point to enable entities to identify double, obsolete or redundant reporting and disclosure. The financial implications need to be accounted for.
Amendment 21
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 16a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Or. en
(32010R1093)
Justification
In order to foster a reduction of redundant or obsolete reporting and disclosure requirements, the Authority should provide opinions not only on ongoing, but also on concluded legislative procedures. These opinions could provide input on potential reduction of vertical inconsistencies in reporting and disclosure requirements ("gold plating"), horizontal inconsistencies across sector-specific as well as cross-sector legislation, as well as the adequacy of the degree of proportionality.
Amendment 22
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point d
Or. en
Justification
The common supervisory culture of the Authority should be expanded to allow for the review of unproportionate, redundant or obsolete reporting and disclosure requirements and minimise costs.
Amendment 23
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 30 – paragraph 3 – point e
Or. en
Justification
Integrating the convergence of reporting and disclosure requirements in peer reviews with the competent authorities is vital to reduce excess reporting and disclosure with respect to "gold plating" on Member State level.
Amendment 24
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 35 – paragraph 4
Or. en
Justification
The reference to other authorities is adapted to align it with the increased scope of authorities.
Amendment 25
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 1
Or. en
Justification
The conditions for the exchange of information should not be too restrictive. Therefore, mandates relating to the mission, objectives, tasks and powers of the Authority and competent authorities are added in addition to specific mandates for reporting requirements in sector-specific legislation (i.e. "other relevant Union law").
Amendment 26
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 1 a (new)
Or. en
Justification
As the Commission proposal foresees exchange of information between authorities only upon request from other authorities, the conditions for requesting such exchange of information need to be clarified. Point (b) therefore would imply a consistent enforcement of the "report once" principle.
Amendment 27
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 1b (new)
Or. en
Justification
The proposal by the Commission includes in the scope of this Amending Regulation only the ESRB, the ESAs as well as the respective competent authorities in the Member States. In order to foster exchange of information across the entire financial sector, it is necessary to widen the scope of this Amending Regulation to also include anti-money laundering authorities, resolution authorities and supervisory functions of central banks.
Amendment 28
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 2
Or. en
Justification
In order to ensure that the reduction of administrative burden for companies does not result in an equal increase in the administrative burden for authorities, informing on the exchange of information should be limited to relevant financial institutions, only when the exchanged information does not cater for a degree of anonymisation.
Amendment 29
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 3
Or. en
Justification
The reference to other authorities is adapted to align it with the increased scope of authorities.
Amendment 30
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 4
Or. en
Justification
The use of MoUs will be vital to ensure a smooth process in the exchange of information. Therefore, all authorities should enter into MoU. The reference to other authorities is adapted to align it with the increased scope of authorities. The reference to other paragraphs is adapted to align it with new provisions foreseen.
Amendment 31
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 5
Or. en
Justification
The reference to other authorities is adapted to align it with the increased scope of authorities.
Amendment 32
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 6
Or. en
Justification
The information exchange provision in paragraph 6 is not consistent with the information exchange provisions in paragraph 1. The conditions for the information exchange between authorities is dealt with in paragraph 1. The conditions for the information exchange with the Commission is dealt with in paragraph 6 and adapted to ensure a degree of autonomy in the decision to exchange such information.
Amendment 33
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 7a (new)
Or. en
Justification
As pointed out by management of the ESRB and the ESAs, there are still many legal obstacles in sectoral regulations that make it impossible to exchange information. Therefore, these obstacles should be reported to the Commission in order to remove these while simultaneously respecting intellectual property rights, professional secrecy and data protection.
Amendment 34
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 35 b (new)
Or. en
Justification
Building on the work by the Commission and authorities on integrated reporting systems, the authorities should be mandated to establish a Single Integrated Reporting System. This should include a data dictionary for common coding and understanding of data, a joint repository enabling a common overview of requested and obtained data, a central data collection point for efficient data exchange as well as a single reporting point to enable entities to identify double, obsolete or redundant reporting and disclosure. The financial implications need to be accounted for.
Amendment 35
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4 b (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 36 – paragraph 2
Or. en
(32010R1093)
Justification
The Article related to the relationship with the ESRB is adapted to cater for the changes proposed in Article 15(1) to (5) in Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010.
Amendment 36
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 54 – paragraph 2 – indent 7
Or. en
Justification
The cross-sectoral consistency of reporting and disclosure requirements should be included in the tasks of the JC.
Amendment 37
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 70 – paragraph 3
Or. en
Justification
The reference to other authorities is adapted to align it with the increased scope of authorities. The reference to other paragraphs is adapted to align it with new provisions foreseen.
Amendment 38
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 16a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Or. en
(32010R1094)
Justification
In order to foster a reduction of redundant or obsolete reporting and disclosure requirements, the Authority should provide opinions not only on ongoing, but also on concluded legislative procedures. These opinions could provide input on potential reduction of vertical inconsistencies in reporting and disclosure requirements ("gold plating"), horizontal inconsistencies across sector-specific as well as cross-sector legislation, as well as the adequacy of the degree of proportionality.
Amendment 39
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point d
Or. en
Justification
The common supervisory culture of the Authority should be expanded to allow for the review of unproportionate, redundant or obsolete reporting and disclosure requirements and minimise costs.
Amendment 40
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 30 – paragraph 3 – point e
Or. en
Justification
Integrating the convergence of reporting and disclosure requirements in peer reviews with the competent authorities is vital to reduce excess reporting and disclosure with respect to "gold plating" on Member State level.
Amendment 41
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 35 – paragraph 4
Or. en
Justification
The reference to other authorities is adapted to align it with the increased scope of authorities.
Amendment 42
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 1
Or. en
Justification
The conditions for the exchange of information should not be too restrictive. Therefore, mandates relating to the mission, objectives, tasks and powers of the Authority and competent authorities are added in addition to specific mandates for reporting requirements in sector-specific legislation (i.e. "other relevant Union law").
Amendment 43
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 1a (new)
Or. en
Justification
As the Commission proposal foresees exchange of information between authorities only upon request from other authorities, the conditions for requesting such exchange of information need to be clarified. Point (b) therefore would imply a consistent enforcement of the "report once" principle.
Amendment 44
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 1b (new)
Or. en
Justification
The proposal by the Commission includes in the scope of this Amending Regulation only the ESRB, the ESAs as well as the respective competent authorities in the Member States. In order to foster exchange of information across the entire financial sector, it is necessary to widen the scope of this Amending Regulation to also include anti-money laundering authorities, resolution authorities and supervisory functions of central banks.
Amendment 45
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 2
Or. en
Justification
In order to ensure that the reduction of administrative burden for companies does not result in an equal increase in the administrative burden for authorities, informing on the exchange of information should be limited to relevant financial institutions, only when the exchanged information does not cater for a degree of anonymisation.
Amendment 46
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 3
Or. en
Justification
The reference to other authorities is adapted to align it with the increased scope of authorities.
Amendment 47
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 4
Or. en
Justification
The use of MoUs will be vital to ensure a smooth process in the exchange of information. Therefore, all authorities should enter into MoU. The reference to other authorities is adapted to align it with the increased scope of authorities. The reference to other paragraphs is adapted to align it with new provisions foreseen.
Amendment 48
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 35a, –paragraph 5
Or. en
Justification
The reference to other authorities is adapted to align it with the increased scope of authorities.
Amendment 49
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 6
Or. en
Justification
The information exchange provision in paragraph 6 is not consistent with the information exchange provisions in paragraph 1. The conditions for the information exchange between authorities is dealt with in paragraph 1. The conditions for the information exchange with the Commission is dealt with in paragraph 6 and adapted to ensure a degree of autonomy in the decision to exchange such information.
Amendment 50
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 7 a (new)
Or. en
Justification
As pointed out by management of the ESRB and the ESAs, there are still many legal obstacles in sectoral regulations that make it impossible to exchange information. Therefore, these obstacles should be reported to the Commission in order to remove these while simultaneously respecting intellectual property rights, professional secrecy and data protection.
Amendment 51
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 35a a (new)
Or. en
Justification
Building on the work by the Commission and authorities on integrated reporting systems, the authorities should be mandated to establish a Single Integrated Reporting System. This should include a data dictionary for common coding and understanding of data, a joint repository enabling a common overview of requested and obtained data, a central data collection point for efficient data exchange as well as a single reporting point to enable entities to identify double, obsolete or redundant reporting and disclosure. The financial implications need to be accounted for.
Amendment 52
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 4 b (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 36 – paragraph 2
Or. en
(32010R1094)
Justification
The Article related to the relationship with the ESRB is adapted to cater for the changes proposed in Article 15(1) to (5) in Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010.
Amendment 53
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 54 – paragraph 2 – indent 7
Or. en
Justification
The cross-sectoral consistency of reporting and disclosure requirements should be included in the tasks of the JC.
Amendment 54
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 70 – paragraph 3
Or. en
Justification
The reference to other authorities is adapted to align it with the increased scope of authorities. The reference to other paragraphs is adapted to align it with new provisions foreseen.
Amendment 55
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 16a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Or. en
(32010R1095)
Justification
In order to foster a reduction of redundant or obsolete reporting and disclosure requirements, the Authority should provide opinions not only on ongoing, but also on concluded legislative procedures. These opinions could provide input on potential reduction of vertical inconsistencies in reporting and disclosure requirements ("gold plating"), horizontal inconsistencies across sector-specific as well as cross-sector legislation, as well as the adequacy of the degree of proportionality.
Amendment 56
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point d
Or. en
Justification
The common supervisory culture of the Authority should be expanded to allow for the review of unproportionate, redundant or obsolete reporting and disclosure requirements and minimise costs.
Amendment 57
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 30 – paragraph 3 – point e
Or. en
Justification
Integrating the convergence of reporting and disclosure requirements in peer reviews with the competent authorities is vital to reduce excess reporting and disclosure with respect to "gold plating" on Member State level.
Amendment 58
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 35 – paragraph 4
Or. en
Justification
The reference to other authorities is adapted to align it with the increased scope of authorities.
Amendment 59
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 1
Or. en
Justification
The conditions for the exchange of information should not be too restrictive. Therefore, mandates relating to the mission, objectives, tasks and powers of the Authority and competent authorities are added in addition to specific mandates for reporting requirements in sector-specific legislation (i.e. "other relevant Union law").
Amendment 60
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 1 a (new)
Or. en
Justification
As the Commission proposal foresees exchange of information between authorities only upon request from other authorities, the conditions for requesting such exchange of information need to be clarified. Point (b) therefore would imply a consistent enforcement of the "report once" principle.
Amendment 61
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 1 b (new)
Or. en
Justification
The proposal by the Commission includes in the scope of this Amending Regulation only the ESRB, the ESAs as well as the respective competent authorities in the Member States. In order to foster exchange of information across the entire financial sector, it is necessary to widen the scope of this Amending Regulation to also include anti-money laundering authorities, resolution authorities and supervisory functions of central banks.
Amendment 62
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 2
Or. en
Justification
In order to ensure that the reduction of administrative burden for companies does not result in an equal increase in the administrative burden for authorities, informing on the exchange of information should be limited to relevant financial institutions, only when the exchanged information does not cater for a degree of anonymisation.
Amendment 63
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 3
Or. en
Justification
The reference to other authorities is adapted to align it with the increased scope of authorities.
Amendment 64
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 4
Or. en
Justification
The use of MoUs will be vital to ensure a smooth process in the exchange of information. Therefore, all authorities should enter into MoU. The reference to other authorities is adapted to align it with the increased scope of authorities. The reference to other paragraphs is adapted to align it with new provisions foreseen.
Amendment 65
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 5
Or. en
Justification
The reference to other authorities is adapted to align it with the increased scope of authorities.
Amendment 66
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 6
Or. en
Justification
The information exchange provision in paragraph 6 is not consistent with the information exchange provisions in paragraph 1. The conditions for the information exchange between authorities is dealt with in paragraph 1. The conditions for the information exchange with the Commission is dealt with in paragraph 6 and adapted to ensure a degree of autonomy in the decision to exchange such information.
Amendment 67
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 35a – paragraph 7a (new)
Or. en
Justification
As pointed out by management of the ESRB and the ESAs, there are still many legal obstacles in sectoral regulations that make it impossible to exchange information. Therefore, these obstacles should be reported to the Commission in order to remove these while simultaneously respecting intellectual property rights, professional secrecy and data protection.
Amendment 68
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 35a a (new)
Or. en
Justification
Building on the work by the Commission and authorities on integrated reporting systems, the authorities should be mandated to establish a Single Integrated Reporting System. This should include a data dictionary for common coding and understanding of data, a joint repository enabling a common overview of requested and obtained data, a central data collection point for efficient data exchange as well as a single reporting point to enable entities to identify double, obsolete or redundant reporting and disclosure. The financial implications need to be accounted for.
Amendment 69
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 4 b (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 36 – paragraph 2
Or. en
(32010R1095)
Justification
The Article related to the relationship with the ESRB is adapted to cater for the changes proposed in Article 15(1) to (5) in Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010.
Amendment 70
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 54 – paragraph 2 – indent 9
Or. en
Justification
The cross-sectoral consistency of reporting and disclosure requirements should be included in the tasks of the JC.
Amendment 71
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 70 – paragraph 3
Or. en
Justification
The reference to other authorities is adapted to align it with the increased scope of authorities. The reference to other paragraphs is adapted to align it with new provisions foreseen.
Amendment 72
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 806/2014
Article 34 a (new) and Article 34 b (new)
Or. en
Justification
The proposal by the Commission includes in the scope of this Amending Regulation only the ESRB, the ESAs as well as the respective competent authorities in the Member States. In order to foster exchange of information across the entire financial sector, it is necessary to widen the scope of this Amending Regulation to also include anti-money laundering authorities, resolution authorities and supervisory functions of central banks.
Amendment 73
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 b (new) – paragraph 1 – point 1
Council Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013
Article 10a (new) and Article 10b (new)
Or. en
Justification
The proposal by the Commission includes in the scope of this Amending Regulation only the ESRB, the ESAs as well as the respective competent authorities in the Member States. In order to foster exchange of information across the entire financial sector, it is necessary to widen the scope of this Amending Regulation to also include anti-money laundering authorities, resolution authorities and supervisory functions of central banks.
Amendment 74
Article 4 c (new) – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) …/… establishing the Anti–Money Laundering Authority
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point d (new)
Or. en
Justification
Mutual assistance in AML/CFT supervisory system by the Authority should be expanded to allow for the review of unproportionate, redundant or obsolete reporting and disclosure requirements and minimise costs.
Amendment 75
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 c (new) – paragraph 1 – point 2
Regulation (EU) …/… establishing the Anti–Money Laundering Authority
Article 16 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Or. en
Justification
This provision is added to the AMLA regulation to also reduce the duplication of reporting and disclosure requirements in AML provisions. The reference to other authorities is adapted to align it with the increased scope of authorities.
Amendment 76
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 c (new) – paragraph 1 – point 3
Proposal for Regulation (EU) …/… establishing the Anti–Money Laundering Authority
Article 16 a (new)
Or. en
Justification
The proposal by the Commission includes in the scope of this Amending Regulation only the ESRB, the ESAs as well as the respective competent authorities in the Member States. In order to foster exchange of information across the entire financial sector, it is necessary to widen the scope of this Amending Regulation to also include anti-money laundering authorities, resolution authorities and supervisory functions of central banks.
Amendment 77
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 c (new) – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) …/… establishing the Anti–Money Laundering Authority
Article 16 b (new)
Or. en
Amendment 78
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 c (new) – paragraph 1 – point 5
Regulation (EU) …/… establishing the Anti–Money Laundering Authority
Article 44 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Or. en
(52021PC0421)
Justification
In order to foster a reduction of redundant or obsolete reporting and disclosure requirements, the Authority should provide opinions not only on ongoing, but also on concluded legislative procedures. These opinions could provide input on potential reduction of vertical inconsistencies in reporting and disclosure requirements ("gold plating"), horizontal inconsistencies across sector-specific as well as cross-sector legislation, as well as the adequacy of the degree of proportionality.
EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
Your Rapporteur welcomes the European Commission’s Reporting Reduction and Data Sharing proposal, amending the ESRB, ESAs und InvestEU regulations, with its objective to reduce, rationalise and simplify reporting obligations and bureaucracy without compromising the associated policy objectives. This important revision on cutting red tape in the financial sector and in the context of InvestEU, gives the opportunity to show both citizens and businesses that the European Union is always working to reduce unnecessary bureaucracy and inefficient duplication of reporting and disclosure requirements.
For your Rapporteur it was essential to invite the European Commission, the ESRB and the ESAs to share their views on the Reporting Reduction and Data Sharing Package during the first Shadows Meeting held on 5 December 2023. Their opinions, suggestions and recommendations have been duly considered in your Rapporteur’s Draft Report.
While the European Commission’s proposal goes in the right direction, your Rapporteur is convinced that further changes are necessary to significantly improve the impact of the intended effects on the entire financial sector. Against this background, your Rapporteur proposes the following amendments:
Expanding the scope to the entire financial sector
In order to foster exchange of information across the entire financial sector, your Rapporteur is of the opinion that the scope of this amending omnibus regulation should be enlarged. While the European Commission proposes to amend only the ESRB and ESAs regulations, your Rapporteur proposes to capture also anti-money laundering authorities, resolution authorities and the supervisory functions of central banks. Thereby, similar amendments are proposed to amend Council Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013, Regulation (EU) No 806/2014 as well as the Regulation establishing the Anti–Money Laundering Authority.
Introducing the “report once principle” by default
Across the financial sector in the Union, entities are often required to report similar or even identical information to various supervisors, either at Member State and EU level, or to various supervisors responsible for the supervision of different sub-sectors. Therefore, your Rapporteur is of the opinion that the “report once principle” should be more consistently enforced in the Union. While the European Commission’s proposal foresees exchange of information between authorities only “upon request” from other authorities, your Rapporteur suggests that authorities should only request information from entities, if they have not already reported this information to other authorities. If information has already been reported to an authority, other authorities should be able to request this information from that authority directly, thereby put an end to so-called “double reporting” phenomenon.
Avoiding “Gold plating”, cross-sector inconsistencies and ensuring proportionality
The exchange of information between authorities responsible for supervision in the financial sector will only have limited impact regarding the reduction of so-called “gold plating”, cross-sector inconsistencies and enhancing the degree of proportionality in reporting. While the European Commission proposes that the ESAs should review level-II measures in this respect, your Rapporteur suggests a broader mandate. In this regard, the authorities responsible for supervision in the financial sector should provide opinions not only on ongoing, but also on concluded legislative procedures on level-I. These opinions could provide input on potential reduction of these vertical inconsistencies in reporting and disclosure requirements ("gold plating"), horizontal inconsistencies across sector-specific and cross-sector legislation, as well as the adequacy of the degree of proportionality.
Establishment of a Single Integrated Reporting System
Over the past years, the European Commission and the ESAs have made significant progress in exploring the possibilities of establishing integrated reporting systems. Such innovative reporting systems are necessary to reap the benefits of more data sharing between authorities responsible for supervision in the financial sector. Therefore, in line with the mandate in Article 430 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, your Rapporteur mandates the respective authorities in the Union to establish a Single Integrated Reporting System by 31 December 2026. This system should include a common data dictionary for coding and understanding of data, a joint repository enabling a common overview of requested and obtained data, a central data collection point for efficient data exchange as well as a single reporting point to enable entities to identify double, obsolete or redundant reporting and disclosure requirements.
Removal of legal obstacles for data exchange
As pointed out by the ESRB and the ESAs, there are still various legal obstacles in sectoral regulations that make it impossible for these authorities to exchange information. Therefore, your Rapporteur proposes to include a mandate to all authorities responsible for supervision in the financial sector to report these legal obstacles to the European Commission by 31 December 2024. The European Commission should, by 30 June 2025, propose a legislative proposal to remove the legal obstacles while simultaneously respecting intellectual property rights, professional secrecy and data protection.