II jaotis. Kõigile meetmetele kohaldatav kirjeldus

Impediments and relation to prudential requirements and structural separation requirements

• (a) Resolution authorities should consider applying measures to remove or reduce substantive impediments to resolvability resulting from the characteristics of the institution or from the interaction of these characteristics with external circumstances, including impediments arising in third countries. Impediments should be assessed regarding their impact on feasibility and credibility as specified in the regulatory technical standard on the content of resolution plans and the assessment of resolvability of a certain (preferred or variant) resolution strategy, including foreseeable impediments to the restauration of the long-term viability of an entity continuing critical functions of the institution under resolution.
• (b) Resolution authorities may apply the measures solely to address impediments to resolvability without any existing breach or likely breach of prudential regulation requirements by the institution being required.
• (c) Where existing prudential standards or requirements, in particular under Directive 2013/36/EU and Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, are not sufficient to ensure the feasibility and credibility of the resolution strategy for the individual institution or group, resolution authorities should consider taking appropriate measures to impose additional standards and requirements on the institution, following consultation with the competent authority. Where a structural separation of certain operations is required under applicable law or may be required by competent authorities, and the resolution authorities assess that this separation is not sufficient to ensure the feasibility and credibility of the resolution strategy, the resolution authorities should consider taking appropriate additional measures.

Proportionality

Each of the measures listed in Article 17(5) of Directive 2014/59/EU may be applied if they are suitable, necessary and proportionate to reduce or remove the impediments to the implementation of a certain resolution strategy, including impediments to liquidation, where an institution is likely to be liquidated in normal insolvency proceedings in the event of its failure.

• (a) A measure is suitable to reach the intended goal if it is able to materially reduce or remove the relevant impediment in a timely manner.
• (b) A measure is necessary to reach the intended goal if it is required to remove or materially reduce a substantive impediment to the feasible or credible implementation of the relevant resolution strategy, and if there are no less intrusive measures which are able to achieve the same objective to the same extent. The intrusiveness of the measure should be assessed by costs and negative effects on the institution and its owners and their right to conduct business, and on the soundness and stability of the ongoing business of the institution. In accordance with Article 10(3) of Directive 2014/59/EU, extraordinary public support must not be assumed to be a less intrusive measure.
• (c) A measure is proportionate to the threat that those impediments pose to financial stability in the event of a failure of the institution, if the overall benefits for making a liquidation in normal insolvency proceedings or resolution of the institution feasible and credible and for meeting the resolution objectives outweigh the overall costs and negative effects of removing the impediments to resolvability. Resolution authorities should also consider less intrusive measures when assessing proportionality.

Variant resolution strategies

The measures outlined in Article 17(5) of Directive 2014/59/EU by resolution authorities should aim to remove impediments to resolution with respect to the preferred resolution strategy in the first place. Where the resolution authority considers alternative or fall-back strategies in specific situations in the event that the preferred option does not achieve the objective to protect financial stability by maintaining critical functions or cannot be expected to be successfully implemented, in particular with respect to cross-border groups, impediments to the implementation of alternative options should be taken into account and removed where necessary. However, measures required to remove impediments to alternative variants should only be implemented if they do not impair the feasible and credible implementation of the preferred option.