This page has only limited features, please log in for full access.
The chapter aims to analyse the recent reform of the EU regulatory framework as regards insurance-based investment products (IBIPs). The current regime provided for IBIPs offers stronger protection to all customers, regardless of the channel of distribution. In line with the EU plan to provide consistent cross-sectorial investor protection across all Member States, many IDD provisions are based on the corresponding MiFID II rules, even though some differences remain and should be further elaborated in connection with the inconsistencies, overlaps and gaps in the investor protection as far as the distribution of the IBIPs is concerned. Furthermore, several Member States have exercised the discretions recognised by the IDD as regards IBIPs mainly to gold plate investor protection measures. However, such an uncoordinated approach undermines the internal market’s objectives. Therefore, the chapter advises EIOPA to use its powers to coordinate Member States’ measures and ensure transparency about National Competent Authorities’ measures in this respect.
Michele Siri. Insurance-Based Investment Products: Regulatory Responses and Policy Issues. AIDA Europe Research Series on Insurance Law and Regulation 2020, 113 -135.
AMA StyleMichele Siri. Insurance-Based Investment Products: Regulatory Responses and Policy Issues. AIDA Europe Research Series on Insurance Law and Regulation. 2020; ():113-135.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMichele Siri. 2020. "Insurance-Based Investment Products: Regulatory Responses and Policy Issues." AIDA Europe Research Series on Insurance Law and Regulation , no. : 113-135.
Building a common EU framework for sustainable finance undoubtedly implies the integration of sound and sustainable processes and skills across the whole structure and governance of financial institutions. Consequently, a new financial paradigm is going to be needed, which will require the strengthening of investor care and protection, so contributing to the restoration of trust in the financial sector. In particular, on 18 December 2018, the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) launched two public consultations on draft technical advice for the integration of sustainability risks and factors into the Directive on Markets in Financial Instruments (MiFID), the Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive (AIFMD), and the Undertakings for Collective Investment in Transferable Securities Directive (UCITS) regimes, with the aim to clarify the so-called fiduciary duties and to increase transparency in the financial services industry. However, the success of the EU initiatives on investor protection regulation may be seriously endangered by the existence of many challenges, weaknesses, and contradictions raised by economists and stakeholders in relation to the definition of sustainability, ESG data availability and reliability, the development of an EU taxonomy, conflicts of interest, product governance, and suitability assessment. This paper starts by briefly analyzing the recent developments of the regulation of sustainable finance at the global level, then offers a more detailed view on the establishment of a common regime on sustainable finance in the EU, with particular reference to the action plan ‘Financing Sustainable Growth’. Then, it examines the recent proposals for regulation on sustainable finance, specifically considering the barriers to the integration of sustainability risks and factors in the EU investor protection regulation—with particular reference to investment services—with respect to its four main dimensions: (1) disclosure of product information, (2) conduct of business (COB) rules, (3) product governance and intervention, and (4) financial education. The paper concludes that the EU reforming proposals, though admirable, risk oversimplifying a complex issue that cannot be easily solved without considering its practical implications on each category of financial operators in the performance of different financial services.
Michele Siri; Shanshan Zhu. Will the EU Commission Successfully Integrate Sustainability Risks and Factors in the Investor Protection Regime? A Research Agenda. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6292 .
AMA StyleMichele Siri, Shanshan Zhu. Will the EU Commission Successfully Integrate Sustainability Risks and Factors in the Investor Protection Regime? A Research Agenda. Sustainability. 2019; 11 (22):6292.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMichele Siri; Shanshan Zhu. 2019. "Will the EU Commission Successfully Integrate Sustainability Risks and Factors in the Investor Protection Regime? A Research Agenda." Sustainability 11, no. 22: 6292.
This chapter aims to define the current investor protection regime under European Union (EU) rules. The reforming process that involved the entire financial regulatory framework in the last decade clearly signed a shift towards a more ‘paternalistic’ approach, intended to prevent further episodes of financial misbehaviour. In particular, the objective of the recent cross-sectorial reforms can be identified in the attempt to establish an investor protection regime harmonised in all banking, investment and insurance sectors that encompasses the largest number of financial services and instruments. This paper analyses the main regulatory innovations concerning (1) the disclosure of product information, (2) conduct of business (COB) rules, (3) product governance and intervention and (4) financial education.
Michele Siri; Shanshan Zhu. EU Investor. Dictionary of Statuses within EU Law 2019, 209 -217.
AMA StyleMichele Siri, Shanshan Zhu. EU Investor. Dictionary of Statuses within EU Law. 2019; ():209-217.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMichele Siri; Shanshan Zhu. 2019. "EU Investor." Dictionary of Statuses within EU Law , no. : 209-217.
ExtractGuido Ferrarini Michele Siri Banks are at the core of the remuneration regime fixed at international and EU levels for the simple reason that they experienced the most serious problems in this area throughout the financial crisis and were also the target of the greatest financial stability concerns as a result of repeated crises both in the US and the EU. However, other institutions are not immune to the problems concerning employees’ remuneration and its impact on risk-taking, while the international principles on sound compensation practices apply to all financial institutions. The present chapter, therefore, includes also the EU provisions extending and adapting the remuneration regime to financial institutions other than banks, such as insurance undertakings, asset managers and investment firms. Policy documents issued after the crisis argue that the recourse to flawed remuneration structures, including the excessive use of short-term incentives for managers and other risk-taking employees, contributed to...
Guido Ferrarini; Michele Siri. A Cross-Sectoral Analysis of Remuneration Policy Provisions. European Financial Regulation 2019, 1 .
AMA StyleGuido Ferrarini, Michele Siri. A Cross-Sectoral Analysis of Remuneration Policy Provisions. European Financial Regulation. 2019; ():1.
Chicago/Turabian StyleGuido Ferrarini; Michele Siri. 2019. "A Cross-Sectoral Analysis of Remuneration Policy Provisions." European Financial Regulation , no. : 1.
This paper explores the Solvency II standards for EU supervision of insurance groups operating across borders as detailed by the guidelines issued by EIOPA. The EU legislator has preferred to reinforce the tool of the colleges of supervisors, which are multilateral platforms where national supervisors involved in the supervision of a single insurance group cooperate, instead of opting for a single EU supervisor. The paper analyses cooperation between supervisory authorities in the context of the colleges in order to clarify the fields covered by the colleges as well as those that are not. In this respect, the paper argues for including in the mandate of the colleges the task of defining and implementing a common principle of group interest to administer the governance system of cross-border insurance groups, and to extend the supervision of colleges to the distribution of insurance products.
Pierpaolo Marano; Michele Siri. Cross-Border Insurance Groups: Towards a Comprehensive Supervision Under Solvency II*. The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice 2018, 43, 594 -614.
AMA StylePierpaolo Marano, Michele Siri. Cross-Border Insurance Groups: Towards a Comprehensive Supervision Under Solvency II*. The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice. 2018; 43 (4):594-614.
Chicago/Turabian StylePierpaolo Marano; Michele Siri. 2018. "Cross-Border Insurance Groups: Towards a Comprehensive Supervision Under Solvency II*." The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice 43, no. 4: 594-614.
What directions is the regulation issued by the European Union on insurance taking? This is the common thread of the chapters of this book. The success of the international conference held at the Catholic University of the Sacred Heart in Milan in November 2015 convinced the editors to promote research to answer this question.
Pierpaolo Marano; Michele Siri. Introduction. Insurance Regulation in the European Union 2017, 1 -2.
AMA StylePierpaolo Marano, Michele Siri. Introduction. Insurance Regulation in the European Union. 2017; ():1-2.
Chicago/Turabian StylePierpaolo Marano; Michele Siri. 2017. "Introduction." Insurance Regulation in the European Union , no. : 1-2.
Under Solvency II, corporate governance requirements are a complementary, but nonetheless essential, element to build a sound regulatory framework for insurance undertakings and also to address risks not specifically mitigated by the sole solvency capital requirements. After recalling the provisions of the second pillar concerning the system of governance, the chapter is devoted to highlighting the emerging regulatory trends in the corporate governance of insurance firms. Among others, it signals the exceptional extension of the duties and responsibilities assigned to the Board of Directors, far beyond the traditional role of both monitoring the chief executive officer and assessing the overall direction and strategy of the business. However, a better risk governance is not necessarily built on narrow rule-based approaches to corporate governance.
Michele Siri. Corporate Governance of Insurance Firms After Solvency II. Insurance Regulation in the European Union 2017, 129 -177.
AMA StyleMichele Siri. Corporate Governance of Insurance Firms After Solvency II. Insurance Regulation in the European Union. 2017; ():129-177.
Chicago/Turabian StyleMichele Siri. 2017. "Corporate Governance of Insurance Firms After Solvency II." Insurance Regulation in the European Union , no. : 129-177.