دانلود کتاب بانک‌های DORA و LSI

In recent years, the density of regulation in the European financial sector has reached a level that is increasingly being critically examined, particularly by the supervisory authorities themselves. In his plea for a regulatory practice aimed at simplification, the President of the Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (BaFin) emphasizes the structural disadvantage faced by smaller institutions due to the current complexity of the financial market, thereby highlighting a barrier for new market entrants. According to Branson, a streamlining and removal of overlaps in European regulations is necessary, without compromising the underlying level of security. This assessment reflects a reality that small and medium-sized credit institutions have been facing for years.2 The focus here is on complex regulatory requirements arising from the interaction between various capital regimes. These include the CRR/CRD, the governance requirements of MaRisk, the technical minimum standards of BAIT, as well as additional requirements in the areas of sustainability reporting and anti-money laundering. The multi-layered regulatory burden results in increased financial expenditure and a growing need for personnel and technical resources. Often, however, there is a mismatch between the administrative effort and the institution-specific risk profile. The implementation of the DORA Regulation (EU 2022/2554) could further intensify this tension with regard to ICT risks. Establishing a uniform minimum standard for all financial market participants is both consistent and necessary in terms of European market integration and in light of increasing threats in the areas of cybersecurity, data integrity, and digital dependency on service providers. According to the ECB and EBA, the number of incidents has risen significantly in recent years, and the potential systemic impacts can be considerable. It should be noted that despite the proportionality principle anchored in Art. 4, DORA does not provide for a profound systematic differentiation based on institutionspecific characteristics such as size, complexity, or business model. Rather, the requirements apply to all supervised institutions, regardless of whether they are a systemically important large institution or a locally operating LSI (Less Significant Institution). An international comparison shows that in the United States, for example under the “Tailoring Rule” approach, regulatory relief for smaller institutions is increasingly being discussed even in the area of IT and compliance requirements.3 The EU, on the other hand, is pursuing a far-reaching harmonization and expansion of regulatory obligations with DORA. As a result, LSIs in particular are faced with the challenge of implementing highly complex requirements that have so far been discussed primarily in the context of large, highly interconnected institutions.