What changed between the draft committee report and the plenary report

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

9 unchanged paragraphs

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions as regards requirements for securitisation exposures

(COM(2025)0825 – C100119/2025 – 2025/0825(COD))

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

– having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2025)0825),

– having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C100119/2025),

– having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

– having regard to the opinion of the European Central Bank of 11 November 2025,

– having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee of 18 September 2025,

Added:– having regard to the report of 9 September 2024 by Mario Draghi entitled ‘The future of European competitiveness’,

Added:– having regard to the report of 17 April 2024 by Enrico Letta entitled ‘Much More Than A Market’,

– having regard to Rule 60 of its Rules of Procedure,

Changed:– having regard to the report of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A100000/2025),(A10-0137/2026),

1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Change 1

Removed:Recital 5: (5) To provide for more risk sensitivity in the securitisation framework, while maintaining a prudent regulatory treatment, it is necessary to adjust, under the SEC-IRBA approach, the formula for the (p) factor to reduce the floor and to reduce the scaling factor, and to introduce a cap to the (p) factor, mainly for the senior securitisation positions. For the same reason, under the SEC-SA approach, it is necessary to reduce the (p) factor, for senior securitisation positions. Changes to the (p) factor for non-senior securitisation positions should be minimal, to prevent undercapitalisation of these positions.

Added:AMENDMENTS BY THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT*

Removed:Recital 6: (6) Synthetic senior securitisation positions are resilient if the securitisation satisfies a set of eligibility criteria at the origination date. This set of eligibility criteria ensures the protection of the synthetic senior securitisation position and mitigates agency and model risks. Such resilient synthetic securitisation positions, as well as traditional securitisation positions, should benefit from additional reductions to the risk weight floors and to the (p) factor, compared with synthetic securitisation positions that do not satisfy the eligibility criteria.

Added:to the Commission proposal

Removed:Recital 11 a (new): (11a) To ensure coherence in the prudential framework following the recalibration of capital requirements for high-quality securitisations, the treatment of covered bonds should be adjusted accordingly. Covered bonds exhibit a consistently robust risk profile due to their structural safeguards and regulatory framework. Maintaining an appropriate balance between the prudential treatment of covered bonds and securitisations is necessary to avoid unintended market distortions and to preserve the functioning of the covered bond market as a key source of stable funding.

Added:---------------------------------------------------------

Removed:Regulation (EU) No 575/2013

Added:2025/0825 (COD)

Removed:Regulation (EU) No 575/2013

Added:Proposal for a

Removed:Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a, Article 242 – point 6: deleted / (deleted)

Added:REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

Removed:The amendment introducing K(IRB) and K(A) as thresholds should be removed, as it would reclassify many senior securitisation positions as non-senior, increase risk weights disproportionately, and create inconsistencies between regulatory treatment and transaction documentation, severely impacting the European securitisation market.

Added:amending Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions as regards requirements for securitisation exposures

Removed:Regulation (EU) No 575/2013

Added:(Text with EEA relevance)

Removed:Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b a (new), Article 243 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new): (ba) in paragraph 2, the following subparagraph is added: / ‘In the case of trade receivables, point (a) of the first subparagraph shall not apply where the credit risk of those trade receivables is fully covered by eligible credit protection in accordance with Chapter 4, provided that the protection provider is an institution, an investment firm, an insurance undertaking or a reinsurance undertaking.’

Added:THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Removed:(Regulation (EU) No 575/2013)

Added:Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 114 thereof,

Removed:There is no reason why this exception only applies for ABCP. Banks which finance such position over their own balance-sheet take exactly the same risk, should be treated equally and hence the same exception should apply.

Added:Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

Removed:Regulation (EU) No 575/2013

Added:After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments,

Removed:Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c, Article 243 – paragraph 3 – introductory part: 3. A senior position in an STS securitisation shall be eligible for the treatment set out in Article 260(2) and Article 262(2) where the securitisation is a traditional securitisation, including ABCP positions, or a synthetic securitisation fulfilling the following requirements at the origination date:

Added:Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee,

Removed:The classification should be made at the time of structuring or at the beginning of the transaction's term. A continuous reassessment during the life of the transaction could lead to significant volatility in the capital requirements of the senior tranche, thereby substantially reducing the incentive to make use of this category.

Added:Having regard to the opinion of the European Central Bank,

Removed:Regulation (EU) No 575/2013

Added:Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions,

Removed:Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c, Article 243 – paragraph 3 – point a: deleted

Added:Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure,

Removed:Regulation (EU) No 575/2013

Added:Whereas:

Removed:Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c, Article 243 – paragraph 3 – point b: deleted

Added:(1) Securitisation transactions are an important part of well-functioning financial markets as they help to diversify credit institutions' funding sources and enable the release of regulatory capital which can then be reallocated to support additional lending. Furthermore, securitisations provide credit institutions and other market participants with additional investment opportunities with specific risk-return trade-offs. This makes possible both greater portfolio diversification and the redistribution of risk in the wider financial system. It also facilitates the flow of funding to businesses and individuals both within Member States and on a cross-border basis throughout the Union.

Removed:Regulation (EU) No 575/2013

Added:(2) The Union needs significant investment to remain resilient and competitive. The securitisation framework can contribute to a more diversified financial system and greater risk-sharing. However, there are material impediments to the issuance of and investment in securitisations. These impediments weigh on the development of the securitisation market. The regulatory capital requirements laid down in Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council for institutions originating, sponsoring or investing in securitisations are not sufficiently risk sensitive▌. The current requirements fail to accurately recognise the good credit performance of Union securitisations and the risk mitigants that have been implemented in the Union’s regulatory and supervisory frameworks for securitisation. These frameworks have significantly reduced the agency and model risks embedded in securitisation transactions.

Removed:Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c, Article 243 – paragraph 3 – point c: deleted / (deleted) / (deleted)

Added:(3) Capital requirements for securitisations under Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 should be amended to increase the risk sensitivity ▌by better aligning the capital treatment with the underlying risks. In addition, targeted amendments should be introduced to mitigate undue discrepancies between the capital requirements under two different approaches: the securitisation internal ratings-based approach (SEC-IRBA) and the securitisation standardised approach (SEC-SA). Such mitigation should increase the participation of smaller and medium-sized credit institutions that make use of the standardised approach.

Removed:Regulation (EU) No 575/2013

Added:(4) Risk weight floors are minimum risk weights that credit institutions must apply to their ▌securitisation exposures, even where the capital calculations suggest a lower risk weight could be applied. Risk weight floors for senior positions of securitisations should be made more risk sensitive, making it possible to reflect the riskiness of the underlying pool of exposures of each specific securitisation. Senior securitisation positions of securitisation of low-risk portfolios should be allowed to benefit from lower risk weight floors than senior securitisation positions in securitisations of higher-risk portfolios. This new approach, which would mean that risk weight floors for senior securitisation positions are calculated based on a specific formula, should replace the existing approach for senior positions where risk weight floors are set at flat levels, irrespective of the credit quality of the underlying pool of exposures. The new formula should make it possible to reflect the simple, transparent and standardised (STS) or non-STS status of a securitisation. To avoid excessive reductions of the capital requirements, a minimum threshold to the risk weight floors should be introduced.

Removed:Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c, Article 243 – paragraph 3 – point d: deleted