Otsing

Teie tulemused

Näitab 10 / 42 tulemused

The IA underpins the proposal for the second revision of the Payment Services Directive with relevant internal and external expertise. Despite some weaknesses in the definition of objectives, it follows a clear intervention logic, based on four problem areas. To tackle these, 16 options and combinations of options are assessed, 12 of which are selected for the final package of preferred options. While the analysis is clear and logical overall, the details of the measures under the options and of ...

Open Financial Data implications

Briefing 17-11-2023

The impact assessment draws on a wide range of internal and external expertise, in particular work related to the European Data Market Study 2021-2023, and several stakeholder consultations. While the problem definition could have been more straightforward and distinct, the intervention logic – from problem drivers, to objectives, to policy options – is clear. The 12 policy options retained for analysis are mostly cumulative, and their assessment is qualitative, complemented by quantitative estimations ...

The impact assessment is based on extensive internal and external expertise, including several studies, tailored EBA advice and JRC input. In line with the 'evaluate first' principle, it builds on an evaluation and develops a consistent intervention logic. The options presented to address the problems identified are packages of legislative amendments, with increasing ambition to enhance application of the EU resolution framework and facilitate the decisions on the appropriate resolution tools. The ...

The IA is underpinned by solid internal and external expertise and based on integrated modelling coherent with the interlinked European Green Deal and the REPowerEU initiatives. It is transparent on methods, builds on specifically updated assumptions and addresses potential uncertainties with two sensitivity analyses. Despite slight weaknesses in the definition of the problems and objectives, the intervention logic of the initiative is clear. The IA's annexes contain a lot of relevant information ...

The Commission mobilised considerable time and resources to prepare this initiative, in an extensive 'back to back' (ex post evaluation and ex ante impact assessment) process that started in 2018 with the set-up of the Advisory Group on Vehicle Emission Standards. The IA draws on numerous external studies, stakeholder consultations, relevant data sources and approved modelling tools (SYBIL and COPERT). In spite of some weaknesses in the definition of the problems and objectives, the intervention ...

Based on a 2018 (REFIT) evaluation, the IA defines the main problems, the objectives and the policy options to address them with a clear intervention logic. It is based on solid internal and external expertise and various consultations to compensate for a considerable (and acknowledged) lack of data. While it is transparent about methods, uncertainties and limitations, additional quantification and/or substantiation would have been useful in some areas, namely when it comes to potential impacts on ...

The ex-ante analysis of this initiative, aimed at addressing impacts on the single market caused by a potential future crisis, implies major uncertainties and limitations, openly acknowledged by the IA (notably owing to a lack of data). Notwithstanding this important caveat, the IA develops a clear intervention logic, linking the problems with objectives to achieve through three policy options, without, however, fully complying with the Better Regulation Guidelines. It assesses the broad scope of ...

The IA is based on solid expertise, with ample information in 13 annexes, some of which form an integral part of the analysis (namely Annexes 5 and 12 for the problem definition and Annex 8 for the assessment of the options' impacts). The qualitative and quantitative assessment of the options is concise, balanced and logical. The IA is transparent regarding methods, assumptions and uncertainties in the analysis, which it addresses through a sensitivity analysis to ensure a robust evidence base. The ...

The IA is based on solid internal and external sources, in particular several ESMA review reports, and stakeholder consultations. However, the definitions of both the problems and the objectives lack consistency and coherence, as the lines between problems, their drivers and consequences are blurred and objectives seem to overlap (and shift). This weakens the IA's intervention logic. The policy options presented to tackle the problems are assessed against two baseline scenarios, which is unusual. ...

The IA supports the proposal for the review of the AIFMD in an overall effective and transparent manner. It is based on solid internal and external expertise, including an array of technical recommendations from the relevant EU and international bodies in charge of monitoring and supervising investment funds. While the intervention logic of the mostly qualitative IA is clear, some aspects could have been substantiated in a more precise way. The highly technical analysis would have been more accessible ...