to the point: financial regulation | 09/2025

·    The European Fund and Asset Management Association (EFAMA) has published its call for reform of the digital assets framework, specifying that obliged entities active in capital markets, particularly asset managers, funds and financial market infrastructures, will need to prepare for a regulatory shift that integrates Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) into core market operations at scale. The proposals mean that these entities should expect broader use of tokenisation in issuance, trading and settlement, and that regulatory barriers, such as restrictions under CSDR and limitations of the temporary DLT Pilot Regime, may be lifted or transformed to allow wider participation and competition. For funds, the changes would open the door to using MiCA-compliant stablecoins and e-money tokens as both investments and payment instruments, which would require adjustments to portfolio management, compliance processes and risk management frameworks. Market infrastructures would face new obligations to adapt systems for interoperability with DLT registers, unbundling services traditionally controlled by central securities depositories, and competing in a more open and disintermediated market environment. Overall, the reforms would demand that obliged entities invest in technology, adapt to expanded reporting and compliance requirements, and adjust business models to operate effectively in a DLT-driven financial ecosystem.

·    ESMA has published the Amendment to the European Single Electronic Format (ESEF) Regulatory Technical Standard (RTS) to incorporate the 2025 IFRS taxonomy, which introduces changes that obliged entities, particularly listed issuers, need to prepare for. The update brings in taxonomy elements for the upcoming IFRS 18 and IFRS 19, allowing issuers to begin testing and familiarising themselves with the new reporting structure before it becomes mandatory, thereby easing the transition. Obliged entities must adapt their reporting processes and systems to accommodate both the current IAS 1 taxonomy and the future IFRS 18 taxonomy, as well as prepare for the digitalisation benefits offered by IFRS 19. From a practical perspective, the 2025 taxonomy will become mandatory for financial years starting on or after 1 January 2026, with optional early application for 2025 reports. Compliance will require close monitoring of the EU's endorsement of IFRS 18 and IFRS 19 to ensure correct application once formally approved.

·    On 9 September 2025, the Governing Council of the European Central Bank (ECB) adopted an Amendment  to Regulation (EU) 2015/534 on reporting of supervisory financial information (ECB FINREP Regulation), introducing nine new data points into the FINREP reporting framework. This means that less significant institutions (LSIs) subject to this framework will face expanded reporting obligations starting with the December 2025 reference date. For these obliged entities, the change requires adapting their systems and processes to capture and submit the additional data points, ensuring consistency with the revised methodology for the Supervisory Review and Evaluation Process. While LSIs will still have more limited reporting obligations compared to larger institutions thanks to the proportionality regime, they will nonetheless need to prepare for the enhanced requirements, implement the updated templates once the new taxonomy is published, and ensure timely compliance with the broader credit risk information now demanded by supervisors.

·    The European Banking Authority (EBA) has issued its Final report on final draft ITS amending the ITS on reporting of MREL decisions. As obliged entities, resolution authorities will now have to submit their MREL decisions to the EBA semi-annually rather than annually, which increases the frequency and timeliness of their reporting obligations. They will also be required to provide more detailed information on the discretionary elements they apply when setting MREL, ensuring greater transparency and comparability across jurisdictions, while at the same time adapting to streamlined templates and data fields designed to ease some of the administrative load. In practice, this means resolution authorities must enhance their internal systems to handle the new reporting cadence, maintain more granular documentation of their decision-making processes, and align with recent legislative updates such as those introduced by the "Daisy Chain Directive", thereby tightening both operational discipline and regulatory consistency in MREL reporting.

·    On 29 September 2025, the Financial Analytical Office (FAO) issued an Amendment to Methodological Guideline No. 9 – Client Verification (Czech version only), which it supplemented, together with the Czech National Bank (CNB), with clarifying notes on the obligations of obliged entities when monitoring transactions related to high-risk third countries. It is now emphasised that the term "connection" must be interpreted in the broadest sense, meaning that obliged entities must apply enhanced client identification and verification measures to every transaction that in any way involves a high-risk country, whether through the client, the subject of the transaction or financial flows. At the same time, however, the methodology clarifies that ex-ante monitoring of transactions is not mandatory for each individual operation if the transactions correspond to the client's pre-determined profile and risk settings, which gives obliged entities the opportunity to adapt the scope of monitoring to their own risk management procedures.

·    In response to the Supreme Court's resolution ref. no. 27 Cdo 1368/2024-56 (Czech version only) of 25 August 2025, the Financial Analytical Office (FAO) confirms in its General interpretative opinion on the issue of compliance with the legal obligation under Section 15a of the AML Act – Procedure for detecting irregularities (Czech version only) that nothing changes for obliged entities under the Czech AML Act (Czech version only) and they are still required to comply with the procedure under Section 15a when irregularities are detected, i.e. to report irregularities concerning the beneficial owner that come to light during a client check. Although the Supreme Court pointed out that the protection of privacy and personal data precludes enforcing the registration obligation for beneficial owners, this consideration does not apply to obliged entities, as their reporting obligation does not serve to interfere with privacy, but to fulfil the purpose of the AML Act. Obliged entities must therefore continue to follow the definition of irregularities under the Beneficial Owners Registration Act (Czech version only) and to follow standard procedures when irregularities are detected. Indeed, even the Supreme Court has not questioned this obligation.

·       The proposal raises corporate income tax (CIT) for banks to 30% in 2026, 26% in 2027, and 23% from 2028, while lowering the bank levy to 0.0329% in 2027 and 0.0293% in 2028, front‑loading the peak combined burden into 2026. Authorities justify the changes by high sector profitability and fiscal needs, while market commentary highlights potential constraints on lending capacity and a higher near‑term cost of capital. Government estimates indicate roughly PLN 6.6bn additional revenue in 2026 and about PLN 23.4bn over a decade, implying a structurally higher effective rate for banks.

·    The Monetary Policy Council (MPC) cut National Bank of Poland (NBP) rates by 0.25 pp, setting the reference rate at 4.75%, the deposit rate at 4.25%, and the lombard rate at 5.25%. The resolution entered into force on 04/09/2025, as confirmed by the communiqué and the MPC’s post-meeting information.

·    The Polish Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK) reiterates the obligation to refund or restore the account by D+1 (end of the next business day) once the payer denies authorisation, except where fraud is reasonably suspected and reported or the 13‑month limit applies. Recent commitment decisions and settlements, including with mPay and Revolut Bank UAB, entrench a "refund‑first, investigate‑later" operating model for payment service providers (PSPs) and banks, requiring updates to complaints and fraud‑handling procedures. The enforcement push is complemented by public communications and consumer education on unauthorised transactions and payment safety via UOKiK’s dedicated information channels.