EU consults on Sepa migration deadlines
Europe's banks face operational risks and compliance headaches as the European Commission mulls over end-dates for Sepa migration
BRUSSELS - The European Commission is looking to reset deadlines for complete migration to the Single Euro Payments Area (Sepa), which is still mired in its implementation process and lacks enthusiastic compliance from the payments industry.
The Commission's new consultation document considers setting new end-dates for Sepa migration of existing payment products - credit transfers were introduced on January 28, 2008 and the November 2 direct debit deadline is fast approaching.
"Significant progress has been made on the road to Sepa since 2002, but migration remains slow," said internal market commissioner Charlie McCreevy. "We should therefore assess whether some deadlines should be defined for the migration to the new Sepa credit transfers and direct debits."
One of Sepa's aims - passed through its legislative vehicle the Payment Services Directive - is to open up the European Union's internal market to increased competition by making cross-border payments free and fast.
The Commission's paper says the European Payments Council (EPC) initially expected a critical mass of credit transfers and direct debits transactions would migrate to Sepa before 2011.
In March, credit transfers represented 2.9% of the total of credit transfers in euros in the eurozone - revealing Sepa-compliant methods are only being used for cross-border payments.
"One of the main reasons for this slow uptake is the lack of a Sepa end-date," says Richard Davies, director of payments products at UK IT firm Logica. "Most banks are still running both Sepa and domestic operations, and opt for quick-fix solutions rather than a long-term strategy for gaining competitive advantage through a modern, flexible and compliant payments architecture."
Overhauling industry infrastructure to allow Sepa-compliant payments will require huge investment by banks, which will need to make systems compatible with technical requirements by whatever end-date is decided upon.
By setting a fixed end-date to migration, the EU is effectively turning the heat on those banks refusing to confront the costs of Sepa and resisting complete migration.
"Banks failing to provide competitive Sepa offerings will quickly find themselves losing their corporate clients," says Davies at Logica. "Institutions that can offer a range of value-added services for Sepa direct debits, however, will be best placed to win a lucrative share in the corporate market."
Reputational risks of falling behind also exist. Those banks ahead of the field can outsource their successful Sepa-compliant services to smaller firms unable to comply, increasing their market share.
Those firms caught in non-compliance will ultimately confront the biggest costs. "The costs of constantly updating, running and maintaining separate systems should not be underestimated," says Davies. "Most importantly, dated systems are not designed to cope with shifting regulations such as Sepa."
"Ultimately, it's up to the EU and the EPC to define the Sepa end-date," he says. "Outlining the full conversion to Sepa instruments will move things forward, ramping up the chances of the initiative's success, and supporting the banks in creating a stable and transparent payments environment.
"It's important for banks to bear in mind, however, that resources and suitable solutions in the marketplace are finite; if they leave their compliance obligations to the last minute, they will struggle to meet the deadline."
The Commission says it wants feedback from all relevant stakeholders by August 3 before setting final migration deadlines.
Click here to read the consultation document.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Printing this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. Copying this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Risk, portfolio margin, regulation: regtech to the rescue
A white paper outlining the complexity of setting the course for risk, margin and regulation
Prop shops recoil from EU’s ‘ill-fitting’ capital regime
Large proprietary trading firms complain they are subject to hand-me-down rules originally designed for banks
Revealed: the three EU banks applying for IMA approval
BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank and Intesa Sanpaolo ask ECB to use internal models for FRTB
FCA presses UK non-banks to put their affairs in order
Greater scrutiny of wind-down plans by regulator could alter capital and liquidity requirements
Industry calls for major rethink of Basel III rules
Isda AGM: Divergence on implementation suggests rules could be flawed, bankers say
Saudi Arabia poised to become clean netting jurisdiction
Isda AGM: Netting regulation awaiting final approvals from regulators
Japanese megabanks shun internal models as FRTB bites
Isda AGM: All in-scope banks opt for standardised approach to market risk; Nomura eyes IMA in 2025
CFTC chair backs easing of G-Sib surcharge in Basel endgame
Isda AGM: Fed’s proposed surcharge changes could hike client clearing cost by 80%
Most read
- Industry urges focus on initial margin instead of intraday VM
- For a growing number of banks, synthetics are the real deal
- Did Fed’s stress capital buffer blunt CCAR?