Europos Sąjungos viešosios politikos tendencijos bankų sektoriuje

LTBesibaigianti finansų krizė parodė, jog bankų priežiūros mechanizmai nėra pakankami užtikrinti finansinį stabilumą ir tvarų bankų sektoriaus augimą. Per krizę daugelis Europos Sąjungoje veikiančių bankų susidūrė su kapitalo pakankamumo ir kitomis problemomis, o kraštutiniu atveju tapo nemokūs. Kadangi valstybės narės neturėjo aiškių taisyklių, kaip spręsti bankų problemas, dažnai valstybės narės bankus pertvarkydavo savo lėšomis („gelbėdavo bankus“). Straipsnyje analizuojama, kaip, siekiant išvengti bankų finansavimo valstybės lėšomis, keičiasi Europos Sąjungos viešoji politika. Akcentuojama, kad, siekiant užtikrinti sisteminę viso Europos Sąjungos bankų sektoriaus priežiūrą, planuojama centralizuoti didžiųjų Europos Sąjungoje veikiančių bankų rizikos ribojimo priežiūrą. Straipsnyje siekiama įvertinti, kokia įtaka centralizavus bankų rizikos ribojimo priežiūrą ir sukūrus bankų pertvarkymo mechanizmą bus daroma valstybių narių nacionalinėms viešojo administravimo sistemoms. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Bendras priežiūros mechanizmas; Bankų gaivinimas; Pertvarkymo institucija; Pertvarkymo priemonės; Europos Centrinis bankas; Single supervisory mechanism; Bank recovery; Resolution authority; Resolution tools; European central bank.

ENOver the financial crisis, the ability of authorities to manage crises both domestically and in cross-border situations has been severely tested. The financial crisis exposed many problems within the global financial system and in the way it was regulated and governed. Financial market regulators did not accurately identified the risk of the banks taken in securitization procedures and did not estimated the losses that could appear in case of the systemic crisis. This led to chaotic bank crisis resolution and extraordinary financial cost suffered by Member States. Hence, the taxpayers were called upon billions of euro to recapitalize the banks in order to prevent the contagion risk. These failures of efficient prudential supervision and lack of regulation in banking restructuring and resolution has led to a need to create a banking union in the European Union which should assure the sufficient capital requirements of the banks and harmonized deposit guarantee scheme, also creation of the single supervisory mechanism and (single) banking recovery and resolution mechanism. Some of the legislative initiatives are agreed, others are under negotiation processes and an important single resolution mechanism proposal is still under in drafting process. As for public policy of the European Union the most important legislative procedures are single supervisory mechanism (SRM) and banking restructuring and resolution (RRD). The said proposals will centralize the prudential supervision in the hands of European central bank and provide harmonized approach on bank rcoery and resolution mechanisms. However, the centralization of the prudential supervision within euro-zone and non-euro zone member states that are willing to join the SSM will have a significant impact on the national public administration systems.Therefore, there is a need of scientific analysis of this phenomena. Hence, the article considers possible positive and negative the implications of the SSM and RRD on national public administration systems and stresses the main problematic issues (efficacy of centralized supervision, funding of the resolution, institutions that could be a resolution authority). The author stresses that in overall the RRD proposal will enforce the structured and also more efficient supervision and would definitely reduce the risk of spending taxpayers’ money in banks’ resolution. As regards to SSM, the author claims that the centralized model could be efficient only in cases where the domestic supervisory institution provides the sufficient know-how for the European central bank. [From the publication]

• Assessing the application of securitisation in Lithuania / Algirdas Miškinis, Eivilė Čipkutė. Ekonomika. 2012, t. 91 (3), p. 72-84.
• Contours of the banking union within the integrated Europe: the Lithuanian case / Algis Junevicius, Mindaugas Puidokas. Economic science for rural development. 2015, 37, p. 220-231.
• Komercinių bankų veiklos riziką ribojančių normatyvų vykdymo įžvalgos Bazelio III direktyvų kontekste / Angelė Lileikienė, Aušra Kovalčuk. Lietuvos aukštųjų mokyklų vadybos ir ekonomikos jaunųjų mokslininkų konferencijų darbai. 2014, 17, p. 97-106.
• The Single resolution mechanism of the European banking union: its structure and functioning / Algis Junevičius, Mindaugas Puidokas. International business and global economy. 2014, 33, p. 77-88.