FPMI-Pressemitteilungen [en]

fpmi: Introduction of tax on securities turnover detrimental to all

Mon, 27 Apr 2009 10:00:00 +0200

Munich Financial Center Initiative has come out strongly against the reintroduction in Germany of the tax on securities turnover, which had been abolished in 1991.

Old DM bills and coins: still eligible for being exchanged

Tue, 14 Apr 2009 09:32:00 +0200

The amount of DM bills and coins still in Germans’ possession is large. These bills and coins can be exchanged into euros at all offices of Deutsche Bundesbank during their office hours, points out Munich Financial Center Initiative (fpmi). The Deutsche Bundesbank’s office in Munich is at Leopoldstraße 234. The bank also has offices in Bavaria in Augsburg, Bayreuth, Nuremberg, Regensburg and Würzburg. A listing of all the Bundesbank’s offices and their contact details are to be found here.

You can also mail your DM bills and coins to
Deutsche Bundesbank
Mainz Office
Hegelstr. 65
D-55122 Mainz

The office will exchange the DM for euros, provided that the sender has filled out and sent along a form telling the bank where to deposit or dispatch the euros. The form is available here (PDF 71,8 kB).

Munich Financial Center Initiative comes out for insurance against natural hazards

Thu, 05 Mar 2009 13:40:00 +0100

Munich Financial Center Initiative expressly supports the campaign to convince Bavaria’s citizens to secure coverage against natural hazards.

Just launched by the state government, the associations of the state’s communities, the association of Germany’s insurance industry, the associations of Bavaria’s banks, and the league for “Homes and properties in Bavaria”, the campaign has two, inter-meshed thrusts. The first is to raise the citizens’ awareness of the risks posed by such natural disasters as heavy rainfall, floods, massive accumulations of snow, and landslides. The second comprises the appeal to secure insurance adequately protecting homes against such risks. “Today, only some 6% of the buildings in Bavaria are covered by insurance policies against such natural hazards, in the broadest sense of the term,” emphasized Christine Bortenlänger, mfci’s speaker. She added: “In view of climate change and the extreme weather it is causing, this percentage is far too low.”

Martin Zeil, Bavaria’s economics minister, pointed out that, as a basic rule, the government is only prepared to provide assistance on an immediate basis “to those individuals who did not have the capability of securing such coverage. This fact makes it even more important for each homeowner to secure an adequate amount of insurance coverage for his or her house or apartment.”

The campaign’s targets are both real estate owners and tenants, for whom Bavaria-based insurers have created products meeting their needs.

Visit www.elementar-versichern.bayern.de to get in-depth information on the new campaign, which goes by the name “Plan ahead - get insurance against natural hazards now”. The Website also provides briefings on the various kinds of disasters, on how insurance policies cover the costs ensuing from them, and on other ways of arranging protection.

Financial crisis` lesson: enact stronger regulations

Wed, 21 Jan 2009 13:40:00 +0100

Munich, January 21, 2009 – Urgently needed to prevent the reoccurrence of financial crises is
the remedying of gaps manifesting themselves in the regulation and supervision of financial markets. This is the finding of a position paper formulated by Munich Financial Center Initiative (fpmi) and containing the comprehensive package of measures designed to achieve these objectives. These measures will impart a greater accountability and consistency to the valuation of illiquid financial instruments, will create a single, internationally applicable procedure for the disclosure of risks, and will set up transnational bodies with greater capability of supervision and regulation.

In its paper, fpmi gives high marks to a number of public sector initiatives. It notes, however, that demands for a stricter body of regulations, though entirely justified, should not give rise to a sprawl of rules which saps the willingness to take risks, and which thus diminishes the entrepreneurial spirit. This, in turn, would be to the detriment of customers.

No unilateral actions by Europe and regarding the IFRS

fpmi`s position paper takes a detailed look at the methods of valuation and accounting prescribed by the IFRS. The paper calls for a reformulation which would lead to these regulations showing more accountability, clarity and consistency in the valuation of illiquid financial instruments (through the publication of the processes used to valuate these assets). One object of this thrust: off-balance sheet special purpose entities. fpmi is also calling for a single and universally applicable process of disclosing risks, and for a recalibration of fair value accounting making common (business) sense. The initiative has also come out against the European Union`s carving out its own version of the IFRS.

fpmi takes a basically positive view of the proposal made by the EU`s commission to set up colleges of supervisors. These would be responsible for supervising banking groups which operate in two or more member states. These colleges could, however, have a flaw. Their need for consultation – greater than that of today – could cause frictions and delays of operation when considering such important topics as capital adequacy.

The initiative views plans to reform the solvency regulations (Solvency II) as being an important step towards improving structures of supervision. In addition to creating rules more closely connecting the amounts of capital adequacy with those of risk (by also taking into account the risks arising from the objects into which the capital has been invested), Solvency II`s thrust is the setting up of group-encompassing bodies of supervision for internationally-operating providers of insurance and other financial services. In a change from today`s system, in which such supervision is a complement to national-based bodies, the new approach would be consolidated in scope. The key advantage of the change: financial institutions would be provided with a single point of contact, one responsible for dealing with all supervision-related issues. This new structure of supervision would thus accord to those of the management running the companies being monitored.

Ban uncovered short-selling

The topic of short-selling has made the headlines during the past few weeks. fpmi is calling for the enacting of international-scope regulations. These should include a general ban on purely speculative short-selling. This ban would enable the retention of the potentially positive effects of such practices. It would also preclude extreme cases of manipulation of markets and thus of an avalanche-like snowballing of trends. A further proposal of fpmi in this area is the setting up of a system capable of consistently supervising hedge funds. This system could be modeled on those existing for investment funds. It would include a capital adequacy requirement adapted from Basel II`s stipulations.

A further proposal advanced by fpmi: impart a greater degree of accountability and clarity to rating agencies` operations and methods of valuation. The initiative’s proposal calls for IOSCO, the international organization of security exchange supervisory agencies, beefing up the standards applying to the agencies. Doing such would provide a greater degree of protection from conflicts of interest arising from the reciprocal dependencies existing between agencies and issuers of investment vehicles.

fpmi takes a critical view of the advertising campaign currently being conducted by the German federal government`s agency of financing. This campaign showcases the so-called day bonds as being a new object of investment for consumers. The initiative`s criticism: the financial crisis is impairing a large number of banks` access to refinancing. These day bonds will exacerbate this problem. The campaign is also giving consumers a counterproductive message, as it plays upon their uncertainties and even fears about the security and stability of the banking sector, and does so solely to sell the agency`s financial products. Crisis

Further Information

> Position Paper Financial Market

fpmi supports EU’s reform of deposit insurance

Fri, 19 Dec 2008 15:10:00 +0100

Munich, December 19 2008 – Munich Financial Center Initiative (fpmi) supports the directive proposed by the EU’s Commission and resolved by the EU Parliament, and containing alterations of the system governing the insurance of deposits in the European Union. The alterations will strengthen the trust held by investors in Europe’s banking system, foresees fpmi.

The new directive mandates as of January 1, 2009 the legally guaranteeing of the security of all banking deposits of up to €50,000 each. This ceiling is to be raised to €100,000 by January 1, 2010. fpmi views this Europe-wide raising of this ceiling to be an important step. This move will, however, not impact upon Germany, in which guarantees exist for virtually all amounts deposited in banks, thanks to the institutional scheme set up by the country’s savings banks and credit unions, and to the deposit security system maintained by Germany’s private banks.

The Munich Financial Center Initiative
Munich and the rest of Bavaria form one of Europe’s major financial communities. To keep
Munich and the rest of Bavaria at the forefront of international financial services development,
Bavaria’s economic ministry initiated fpmi’s founding seven years ago.
The initiative’s members are Bavaria’s leading financial corporations, associations, institutes,
and scientific and municipal institutions. One thrust of fpmi’s work is to voice the positions and
concerns of Bavaria’s financial community at national and international levels.

Contact:
Munich Financial Center Initiative, c/o Börse München, Hopfenstraße 4, 80335 München,
E-Mail: kontakt@fpmi.de
Telephone: bw media ++49 89 51 46 98-0

Munich: Finance Summit 2008 – Better rather than excessive regulation

Fri, 07 Nov 2008 11:32:00 +0100

Munich, November 7, 2008 – ‘Learning the proper lessons from the international financial crisis’ was the focal point of the Bavarian Finance Summit, staged this year for the second time by the Bavarian Finance Center (BFC), availing itself of the support provided by Munich Financial Center Initiative. While hailing the measures undertaken by governments to alleviate the crisis, speakers at the Summit also warned against instituting excessively-strict regulations.

The speeches made at the second Bavarian Finance Summit and the interviews conducted with several of the speakers and participants are available online, as videostreams.

Taking this stance was Paul Atkins, who has just completed his term as Commissioner of the SEC. “We need a more intelligent system of financial market supervision,” he noted, adding that the regulatory bodies have to do a better job of handling their responsibilities. The management of risk has to remain, on the hand, the province of those corporations bearing it. The transferring of this responsibility would cause companies “to become dependent upon regulatory bodies”. In remarks at the Summit, Nikolaus von Bomhard, chairman of the executive board of Munich Re, called upon supervisory bodies to exercise both a sense of proportion and decisiveness in making full use of the powers contained in their codes.

Martin Zeil, Bavaria’s minister for economic affairs, addressed the need to put an end to the division of responsibility in Germany - between BaFin (Germany’s dedicated authority) and the Bundesbank - in the area of financial market supervision. Zeil’s proposal: put everything in the hands of the latter. “By doing this, we will get a supervisory body with the requisite brief and with the staff optimally capable of meeting it,” Zeil added.

Zeil also issued a generally-applicable warning against “rushing to return to the bad old days of over-regulation”. In his opinion, in-market operations yield the requisite, growth-ensuring efficiency unachievable by governmental measures, their putative substitute. Such measures have, further, the potential to choke this growth. Zeil added: “The government does have to take those measures ensuring that the financial sector shows an adequate amount of prudence when entering into risks.” To achieve this, the next step is to further develop the rules under which financial institutions operate, stated the minister. “A large number of sensible measures have been considered, including, for instance, those leading to the efficient monitoring of rating agencies and to a more efficacious supervision of the finances of international-level groups. Primarily requisite are those measures imparting more sustainability to financial market growth, determining which risks are worth running, and giving rise to greater international-level accountability.“

Christine Bortenlänger, CEO of the Munich Stock Exchange, took a searching look at the optimal way of configuring the supervision of banks. In her remarks, she called for the taking into account of the differences prevailing among banks’ business models and target clientele. In her opinion, there is no denying the differences existing between institutions which are active on the regional and those on the international level. Summing it up, she stated “We need better rather than excessive regulation.”
The confidence crisis can’t solely be mastered by the financial sector.

The speakers at the Finance Summit gave thumbs up to the measures undertaken to resolve the crisis. ‘The financial sector is not capable of overcoming the confidence crisis on its own. It requires support from the government.’ This view was shared by von Bomhard and by Rolf Friedhofen, HypoVereinsbank’s CFO.

Friedhofen had another message: ‘Don’t make the financial sector into the scapegoat for the current crisis. It is not solely responsible for it’. “Mistakes were made by each and every bank-and by the other players in the financial system,” Friedhofen added. Such players include the world’s central banks, rating agencies and investors. By way of an example: the Fed, whose cheap money policies were one of the main causes of the crisis. “Lehman Brothers was an in-situation experiment which turned out to be one of the most serious miscalculations made in the area of financial policy-making during the last few decades,” noted Friedhofen critically. His view was echoed by Paul Atkins: “Letting Lehman Brothers collapse was a major mistake.”

Best execution in securities trading not implemented in best interests of investors

Tue, 08 Jul 2008 12:49:00 +0200

Munich, July 8, 2008 – Forming part of the MiFID financial markets directive, the EU Commission’s best execution requirements were enacted to ensure investors of having optimal access to securities traded on exchanges. Munich Financial Center Initiative (fpmi) considers these EU-wide regulations as not having achieved this objective. The regulations have, instead, led to distortions of competition. These in turn have been to the detriment of investors. To be expected is that the current practices of implementation of the directive will also in the long run encumber the operations of exchanges primarily serving their regions. Much of their clientele, in turn, stems from the private investor segment. These encumbrances will therefore foster situations in which a single exchange holds a quasi-monopoly on securities trading in its country of operation.

MiFID’s best execution requirements were implemented in Germany by the enacting of the Securities Trading Act. The requirements’ key provision is the stipulation that securities dealers – an example would be a bank – have to take measures ensuing their clients of achieving the best possible results when engaging in the sale or purchase of securities on exchanges. To this end, the dealers have to take into consideration the following indicators:

the security’s stock exchange quote
trading fees – the costs arising from the security’s purchase/sale
the speed of execution on the exchange of the client’s order
the degree of completion of execution – the question whether or not the order can be completely or only partially executed.

Contrary to the legislators’ intentions, the dealers have narrowed down their best execution practices to focusing nearly exclusively on trading fees. They thereby disregard other indicators.

The divergences shown in models of calculating them notwithstanding, the fees actually levied for the trading in securities on exchanges are usually pretty much the same. The differences amount as a rule to less than one tenth of one percent. Unless an investor explicitly demands otherwise, banks automatically relay customer orders to the exchange ostensibly charging the lowest fees for securities trading – despite the fact that other exchanges guarantee greater speeds or volumes of execution, and are thus offering packages which, viewed as a whole, are much more advantageous to investors. This practice is causing distortions in the competition for business among exchanges. For investors, this practice translates into greater costs of trading.

This practice is also countervailing a beneficial trend. The introduction of such packages by such region-serving exchanges as Munich and Stuttgart over the last few years unleashed a highly productive and intense competition for business among Germany’s exchanges. The packages also enabled the regional exchanges to establish themselves as platforms offering private investors attractive conditions. This productive competition is now being impaired by the best execution policies being implemented by a large number of credit institutes. According to fpmi, the ultimate effect of these policies could be the fostering of a monopoly in Germany on the securities trading market. This would, however, contravene the thrusts of the best execution directive, as a lack of competition among securities exchanges would give rise to disadvantageous developments of trading fees, of order processing speeds and of services provided to private investors. The realism of this scenario has been borne out in the large number of countries in which such monopolies exist. Urgently required to protect the interests of private investors is an implementation by securities dealers of the best execution requirements in their entirety. This would entail their relinquishing of the mistaken assumption that the each of the exchanges offers the same quality of services, and that the only difference among them is that of fees. This assumption is actually a converse of the real situation.

Click here for further information.

Ratings and risk valuations need to become more transparent and comparable

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 13:06:00 +0200

fpmi presents EU Commissioner Joaquín Almunia with a set of measures designed to prevent financial crises

Munich/Brussels, June 11, 2008 – “With ‘AAA’ ratings, what you see is not always what you get,” noted Emilia Müller, Bavaria’s Economics Minister, at a panel discussion held today in Brussels. Hosted by Munich Financial Center Initiative, the discussion took a searching look at the world’s financial crisis, and featured a keynote speech by Joaquín Almunia, the EU’s Commissioner for Economic and Monetary Affairs.

As Müller pointed out: “To prevent reoccurrences of today’s financial crisis, we need ratings which truly indicate value. We also need a method of evaluating risks which is applied throughout Europe and the rest of the world, and which enables comparisons.”

Speaking at the discussion, panel member Franz-Christoph Zeitler, Deutsche Bundesbank Vice President, had words of praise for the recently-issued Basel capital adequacy regulations: “Basel II has not yet taken full effect. It was just introduced in Europe and will not come into force in the USA until 2009. Still, there is no doubt that this new set of regulations marks a decisive step forward. Any possible review of the capital adequacy regulations should be very limited and should for instance focus on regulations for credit lines which currently require no underpinning by own funds. We do not need a “Basel III”. What we do need are adequate structures of incentives that restore confidence in the financial sector.”

The panel discussion formed part of fpmi’s annual talks with high-ranking EU representatives. Led by Müller, the delegation’s 27 members include executive board members of Bavaria’s leading financial companies and senior representatives of business associations, chambers, scientific institutes and of public authorities, with these including Bundesbank Vice President Zeitler.

Making ratings more transparent and accountable
At the meetings, the delegation called for more transparency and integrity in the process of rating financial products. As case in point, the participants cited the vast difference in quality and track records between subprime CDOs and German mortgage bonds, both of which may bear the same AAA ratings. To avoid such situations, product-specific risks have to be made more visible. In addition, rating agencies should disclose their evaluation procedures. fpmi also sees the need to enact measures precluding conflicts of interest, which could arise from the rating agencies’ independence being endangered by their offering issuers wide-ranging consulting services complementing their core activities.

These measures could be modeled upon the EU’s directive establishing the operating independence of official auditors (Art. 22, 25, 29, 40 of EU Directive 2006/43/EU).

Making the evaluation of risk more transparent
fpmi is also calling for greater transparency of off-balance sheet risks and of valuation methods for illiquid financial instruments. The ways in which such instruments are valuated show great, country-by-country dissimilarities. A first and important step would be to eliminate these divergences in Europe. Substantial improvement could be achieved through the regulations implementing Basel II. These regulations should be beefed up in selected areas, explained fpmi members in Brussels. They also called upon supervisory authorities to continue their efforts to establish a uniform application of IFRS regulations on illiquid financial instruments, so as to ensure European-wide transparency and comparability.

In fpmi’s view, banks’ risk management practices themselves need to be scrutinized. The deficiencies need to be alleviated by further developments in the risk management systems affecting liquidity and credit risk.

The Initiative also sees a great need for improvements of such systems’ incorporation of off-balance sheet items. One key step in the right direction would be to encompass off-balance sheet items by imposing capital adequacy requirements, as foreseen by Basel II. In addition, fpmi supports a focused review of Basel II. Improvements could for instance be achieved by requiring own funds’ to underpin lines of credits furnished to conduits. This requirement would have curtailed the rapid escalation of the financial market crisis.

fpmi does not, on the other hand, see any need for alterations of the regulations governing the loan provision process. In contrast to those of the USA, the EU’s regulations yield a high quality of player accountability and supervision.

EU-wide convergence of supervisory procedures
In their discussion with Commissioner Almunia, fpmi’s members also raised the issue of the development of the supervisory systems in the banking and insurance sector. This discussion’s topicality derives from the financial market crisis, from the EU-wide introduction of Basel II, and from the plans to promulgate the Solvency II Framework Directive for the insurance sector.

fpmi favors a further development of today’s institutional structures, as it can be achieved without a full-scale overhauling of supervisory systems. “Our primary objective has to be a strengthening of the working relationships among nationallevel supervisory authorities. This will lead to an EU-wide convergence of supervisory procedures and will give rise to a pan-European culture of financial market supervision,” stated Michael Kemmer, CEO of BayernLB. As he pointed out, such a culture would preclude ‘competition’ among these authorities.

fpmi voiced its support for the cooperative group supervision approach foreseen in Solvency II’s framework directive. As Jörg Schneider, CFO of Munich Re put it: “As a risk-based system of supervision, Solvency II should use the opportunities arising from a fresh start and set a new standard of group supervision. The core idea is to adapt supervisory structures to the actual management of insurance groups. The appointment of a group supervisor would substantially enhance the effectiveness of supervision. In today’s complex world, only a group supervisor is able to adequately assess and evaluate the overall risk position of an international insurance group and its member companies.”

Further Information

> Position Paper – Financial Market Crisis
> Position Paper – Consumer Protection
> Programme
> List of Participants
> Speech by Joaquín Almunia, European Commissioner for Economic and Monetary Policy

Sales of credits: the position taken by associations of banks

Wed, 23 Jan 2008 15:10:00 +0100

„Munich, January 23, 2008“
The German government is considering enacting regulations on the sales of credits by banks. These possible regulations would be partially counterproductive, as they would yield no net benefits to either the issuers or to the recipients of credits. This is the position (PDF, 206 kB) (in German) taken by the associations of banks participating in the Munich Financial Center Initiative (fpmi).

The draft currently being considered would limit risks by obliging banks to offer credits whose contractual conditions preclude their sale to third parties. The position jointly taken by Bavaria’s Association of Banks, the Association of Bavaria’s Cooperative Banks and Credit Unions, and the Association of Bavaria’s Savings Banks points out that this obligation would be superfluous, for the simple reason that the country’s banks already offer such non-transferable credits. As this statement details, the draft foresees a beefing up of the protection against callings-in enjoyed by mortgagees. This extension would prohibit those banks issuing such credits, which customarily require a one percent amount of annual repayment, from calling in delinquent loans for periods of some twelve months. According to the associations, this prohibition would cause rises in the amounts of non-performing loans. Viewed on an individual basis, these rises in indebtedness “would hurt rather than help the debtors’ financial situations” state the associations.

The draft also grants mortgagees the right to complete repayment of their loans prior to term without being obliged to pay any recompense for such acceleration of repayment. According to the associations, this right would prevent banks from merging or restructuring. The promulgation of such a provision would have hindered such rescue operations as the merging of Sachsen LB, whose financial difficulties stemmed from the subprime crises, into Landesbank Baden-Württemberg.

The associations maintain that a position paper (PDF, 33,4 kB) (in German) formulated at the end of October 2007 under the leadership of Emilia Müller, Bavaria’s economics minister, and containing input from fpmi offers a practicable way of re-regulating sales of credit-based receivables. One of the paper’s key proposals would require the pursuing of credit-based receivables according to a step-by-step procedure equitably protecting the interests of both the recipients and issuers of the credits.

The Munich Financial Centre Initiative
Munich and the rest of Bavaria form one of Europe’s major financial communities. To keep
Munich and the rest of Bavaria at the forefront of international financial services development,
Bavaria’s economic ministry initiated fpmi’s founding seven years ago.
The initiative’s members are Bavaria’s leading financial corporations, associations, institutes,
and scientific and municipal institutions. One thrust of fpmi’s work is to voice the positions and
concerns of Bavaria’s financial community at national and international levels.
Contact:
Munich Financial Centre Initiative, c/o Börse München, Hopfenstraße 4, 80335 München,
E-Mail: kontakt@fpmi.de
Telephone: bw media ++49 89 51 46 98-0

Munich Financial Centre Initiative: keep affordable lines of credit and mortgages in the EU

Wed, 27 Jun 2007 13:23:00 +0200

fpmi proposes changes in consumer credit guidelines at meeting with EU Commissioners Kuneva and McCreevy

Munich, June 27, 2007

High-ranking representatives of the Munich Financial Centre Initiative (fpmi) met today in Brussels with Meglena Kuneva, EU Commissioner for consumer protection, and with her colleague Charlie McCreevy, Commissioner for Internal Market and Services.

The meetings focused on the EU’s plans to revamp its consumer credit directive, and on other policies in this area. Among the other major issues discussed were the insufficient accountability displayed by hedge funds and Solvency II, which is intended to achieve a single, Europe-wide code of insurance supervision.

The consumer credit directive requires major rewriting, contends fpmi.
“We believe that the revamping of the consumer credit directive as now foreseen by the Council of the EU will make lines of personal credit significantly more expensive and difficult to manage. This development would be especially detrimental to the low-income segment of the population, which directly profits from this form of credit’s ease of use,” criticized Erwin Huber, Bavaria’s economics minister and head of the fpmi delegation visiting Brussels.

A similar development could well take place in the mortgage sector, apprehends fpmi, which has identified a serious flaw in the ongoing integration of Europe’s markets for mortgages. These products are generally provided in Germany at conditions which remain in force throughout the term of contract. These conditions and this term, in turn, ensure that consumers get financing at very advantageous rates.

There is, however, a proposal to grant consumers in the EU the right to repay their mortgages at any time. This would make this form of financing substantially more expensive in the long run, points out fpmi, as the banks providing the mortgages would have to secure more costly refinancing.

No IAS/IFRS for SMEs
At its meeting with Commissioner McCreevy, the fpmi also voiced its opposition to a proposal being considered by the International Accounting Standards Board: to require of SMEs that their financial reporting accord to the IAS/IFRS standards formulated for this segment. The fpmi’s view of these standards: too complicated, expensive and unnecessary for SMEs.

At this meeting, fpmi also pushed for the enacting of measures making hedge funds less volatile and more accountable. Among the proposals advanced by fpmi was one requiring the funds’ managers to secure registration from national financial supervisory authorities. Other measures: the funds should be required to publish balance sheets, and to commit themselves to a code of conduct.

Big step in the right direction
fpmi sees progress being made in Solvency II, which is designed to create a code of supervision applying uniformly to all of the EU’s insurance industry. In its meetings in Brussels, fpmi welcomed the identification of the risk-based economic approach as the principle guiding the directive’s central tenet. The initiative is pushing for the approach’s full-scale incorporation into the legislation being formulated first at the EU and subsequently at the national level. To ensure that the Solvency II principles, which are strictly based on economic calculations, are uniformly applied throughout the EU, fpmi voiced its support of efforts to define all of the essential stipulations of this code in the so-called Level One of the Lamfalussy process. In addition, as regarding the supervision of corporate groups, fpmi backs a clearly defined sharing of responsibility between local and group supervisors, with the latter to be granted an especially large role.

The fpmi delegation is comprised of a total of 30 people. They include Erwin Huber; a large number of members of the executive boards of financial corporations; members of the European Parliament, of the Bundestag (Germany’s parliament), and of Bavaria’s state parliament; and senior representatives of leading financial institutions and of the municipality of Munich.

Further Information

> List of Participants
> Position Paper - Munich Financial Center Initiative 1
> Position Paper - Munich Financial Center Initiative 2
> Speech by Erwin Huber, Bavarian State Minister of Economic Affairs, Infrastructure, Transport and Technology
> Speech by Erhard Gschrey, Managing Director, Vice Chairman Association of Bavaria’s Cooperatives
> Notes for speech by Dr. Jörg Schneider, Member of the Board of Management of Munich Reinsurance Company CFO of the Munich Re Group