There are some exciting insights to report:
– Business models and risk profiles of banks and NBFIs differ. Therefore, the principle ’same activity – same risk – same regulation‘ cannot apply without further consideration.
– All known crises were caused by banks. So far no scandals have emanated from the NBFI sector. The excess of leverage, however, can potentially cause
crises and needs to be supervised closely.
– Too little is known about what happens at the NBFIs. There is actually enough data, but the problem is that it is not so easily shared. A way should be found that allows all stakeholders to provide their data – or at least the most important data – in order to gain a better overview of the market.
– Large parts of the market are already neatly regulated and centrally supervised (AIFMD, MiFID, ECSPR, etc.). Others not yet at all. The question is whether it is not better to dry up the Grey Capital Market first before regulating the White Capital Market even more strictly?
– Due to the variety of regulations from AIFMD, MiFID, ECSPR & Co, there are often similar rules for the same problem. This may also be more efficient by some kind of horizontal approach.
– The great diversity among NBFIs is crying out for uniform European supervision.
Please find the consultation document here.