Your browser does not support JavaScript!

Macroprudential framework review: main issues to be addressed

Day 1 Afternoon

Wednesday 25 March

Location :

ROOM 2

Speakers

Public Authoritiess
Anneli Tuominen
Member of the Supervisory Board, ECB Representative - Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM)
Francesco Mazzaferro
Head of Secretariat - European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB)
Jean Boissinot
Director, Research and Risk Analysis Directorate - Autorité de Contrôle Prudentiel et de Résolution (ACPR)
Jurand Drop
Undersecretary of State - Ministry of Finance, Poland
Industry Representativess
György Kiss-Haypál
Deputy Chief Executive Officer, Chief Risk Officer - Otp Bank
Martin Neisen
Partner - PwC Germany
Riina Salpakari
Head of Public Affairs Finland and Capital Advocacy - Nordea

Objectives

Objectives

The objective of this session is to assess whether the current EU framework remains fit for purpose. The discussion aims to identify sources of complexity and fragmentation, assess their impact on cross-border banking groups, examine proposals to simplify buffer architecture and improve calibration methodologies, and explore governance options to strengthen coordination. Ultimately, the session seeks to contribute to a more coherent, predictable and forward-looking macroprudential framework, capable of preserving resilience while supporting banking union, cross-border consolidation and EU competitiveness.

The session aims to take stock of the ongoing review of the EU macroprudential framework and to assess whether its current architecture remains fit for purpose in today’s financial environment. The discussion will explore whether growing complexity, methodological heterogeneity across national authorities and limited coordination may have weakened the clarity, usability and credibility of the capital stack — particularly for cross-border banking groups operating within the Banking Union.

More specifically, the session seeks to identify practical avenues to simplify buffer architecture, strengthen convergence in calibration practices and enhance coordination between national and EU-level authorities, while preserving national responsibility for financial stability. The objective is to contribute to a more coherent, predictable and forward-looking framework — one that safeguards resilience while also supporting cross-border integration, capital mobility and the EU’s broader competitiveness agenda.

Points of discussion

  1. To what extent has increasing complexity affected the effectiveness and credibility of the EU macroprudential framework?
  2. How far can the EU push convergence without undermining national sovereignty in financial stability?