The European Commission’s single supervisory
mechanism (SSM) is either a raging success or an inflexible
failure depending on who you talk to. In the two and a half
years since it was granted the supervisory role to monitor the
financial stability of banks in participating member states it
has courted both controversy and praise.
In May this year the European Central Bank (ECB) won its
court battle against Landeskreditbank Baden-Wutrttenberg after
the German bank claimed it was not big enough to threaten
financial stability of the eurozone to justify being supervised
by the SSM.
And in early 2016, Latvian bank Trasta Komercbanka put the
SSM to the test when the ECB revoked its licence for compliance
failings. The decision, which was inconsistent with that taken
by local regulator, was disputed by the bank, and raised
questions over the ECB's indirect oversight of smaller
Similarly Italian and French banks have complained about the
SSM’s treatment in dealing with its beleaguered
institutions in times of crisis.
However, advocates say that the SSM was created to end the
apparently cosy relationship between banks and their national
regulators and improve the smoothness of filings – two
things it has undoubtedly achieved. It has rapidly staffed up
with 1200 regulators, while the ECB has been praised for its
clear communication too.
With this in mind, IFLR’s latest poll asks the
market whether the SSM is working, or if further improvements
could be made.
Vote now on the 'Quick Poll’ menu on the
right-hand side of IFLR’s
homepage. All votes and comments are anonymous. To
arrange an off-the-record interview to elaborate on your
response, email email@example.com
Results of past polls:
POLL: countering M&A
POLL: preventing EU clearing house