What's new

The European Commission’s Banking Competitiveness Report comes at a critical moment for Europe’s investment agenda. Closing Europe’s investment gap requires a banking sector able to mobilise capital at the scale the Savings and Investments Union demands. This is dependent on a Single Market that is not only competitive and integrated but open for all banks operating in the EU to act as facilitators of investment. The report provides a window of opportunity to anchor that openness at the centre of the competitiveness agenda.

The report correctly identifies a set of barriers holding back Europe’s banking competitiveness, both in the regulatory framework and in the way that framework is supervised. Undue complexity and divergent national implementation continue to raise the cost of financing for European households and businesses, underlining the need for an ambitious banking omnibus that simplifies rules and delivers greater consistency across the EU. At the same time, the report is right to call for a more proportionate, risk-focused supervisory culture that examines whether burdensome practices are weakening the attractiveness of Europe’s banking ecosystem. A new banking competitiveness agenda should build on both priorities: simpler, more coherent rules and supervision that enables internationally active banks to support investment.

Internationally active banks, including third-country groups with a substantial European footprint, are central to delivering this agenda. These institutions channel global capital to European companies, underpin the liquidity and depth of EU capital markets and help international investors finance opportunities in Europe. Europe remains a strategic market for these firms, and their investment demonstrates confidence in European growth, European companies and European opportunity.

The test of genuine integration is whether a banking group can serve customers across the Single Market without rebuilding its operations in each Member State. The report recognises that divergent national application of EU rules discourages banks from offering pan-European services and consequently results in costly duplication and regulatory burden across jurisdictions. A more competitive framework would enable European and international institutions to thrive in Europe, offering clients choice and a full suite of payment and banking services across the Single Market.

Coherent implementation will determine whether these reforms enhance competitiveness. Where the framework adapts international standards to EU specificities, the test should be whether the result preserves a level playing field for banks competing in global markets and remains consistent with the standards those banks apply across jurisdictions.

The Draghi report highlights how economic growth has stagnated in the EU due to structural weaknesses that risk undermining the EU’s global competitiveness. To bolster the EU’s attractiveness and competitiveness, lawmakers should pursue a coherent pro-growth tax reform agenda. A pro-growth tax reform agenda in the EU27 can be evaluated through five principles: (a) economic efficiency, including low distortion of economic decisions and low administrative and compliance costs; (b) consideration and strong discipline across the entire lifecycle of tax policy reform: initial decision making process, legal design and implementation; (c) evidence-based accountability through clear objectives, rigorous impact assessment, meaningful consultation and ex post review; (d) strengthening the Single Market rather than adding cross-border frictions; and (e) neutrality and fair competitive conditions across sectors, countries and business models.

These principles are mutually reinforcing: growth is supported not only by sound and coherent statutory design, but by the full tax system including law, administration and taxpayer interaction. AmCham EU has prepared a framework for EU lawmakers to use while designing, implementing and evaluating tax policy based upon our members’ experiences operating in every EU Member State and almost every country around the world.

The EU’s sustainable finance rules should help investors understand where their money is going and support Europe’s transition. The Commission’s proposal improves the current system, but some changes are still needed.

The new Transition category should focus on whether companies are cutting emissions, not on the sector they operate in. The 70% threshold should stay. The rules should also work with MiFID II and the EU Taxonomy.

Companies need 24 months to prepare. Firms that fall outside the new scope should stop reporting as soon as the rules enter into force.

Read the paper to learn how SFDR 2.0 can direct more capital towards Europe’s transition.

Europe’s carbon market must cut emissions without cutting industrial production. In some industries, emissions have fallen alongside output and plant closures. The EU ETS revision should ensure that progress towards 2050 comes from investment and technology, not deindustrialisation. 

The Linear Reduction Factor should be adjusted after 2030 so allowances remain available through 2050. ETS revenues should support decarbonisation projects, while free allocation should continue where alternatives are not available at scale. 

For aviation and maritime transport, EU rules should align with international frameworks. Data centres should be removed from the scope where emissions come mainly from backup generators. These changes would link emissions reductions to investment while limiting the relocation of production outside Europe. 

On Tuesday, 14 July, AmCham EU hosted Csaba Kontor, Policy Assistant, Cabinet of European Commissioner Olivér Várhelyi, for a discussion on strengthening Europe’s competitiveness in the life sciences sector. Moderated by Katerina Valkova (Bristol Myers Squibb), Chair, Healthcare Committee, AmCham EU, the exchange explored how policy decisions can support investment through research and innovation while ensuring patients in Europe can access health innovation. Participants also discussed the importance of resilient EU-US supply chains and regulatory cooperation, as well as the need to avoid divergence and provide the scale and predictability required to sustain Europe’s position as a leading destination for life sciences investment.