중동부유럽

The present document is an attempt at a comprehensive analysis of direct and indirect burdens imposed upon banks in 2015. The idea to present such factors — which are often extremely varied in nature — in a single study was born out of the fact that these factors are often considered separately, on the basis of various criteria, which causes them to be split into different groups. This approach results in a fairly common tendency for fragmentary assessment of their impact and, more importantly, in the adoption of piecemeal regulations which fail to take into account the full impact of the actions taken in different areas. This applies in equal measures to supervisory authorities, regulators, analysts, policymakers and the media, which means that, in a somewhat oversimplified sense, the above statement is applicable to the public at large. This situation can be most succinctly characterised in the manner presented below. In the aftermath of the crisis, banks require a new set of instruments to regulate the functioning thereof. This is because they are to become more stable, safe, less risk-prone and more customer-friendly. Each of these areas requires a separate set of regulatory instruments, along with the respective subgroups thereof. Oftentimes they are not synchronised with each other and are usually aimed at the implementation of a specific, particular goal to an excessive extent. In addition, there are also “special tasks” such as the reform of the Credit and Saving Unions (SKOK).