EU capitals concluded an agreement on the Commission’s bill in December, paving the way for discussions with EU legislators to make these proposals a reality. They declared that the rules of “best sharing data” would allow financial players to target consumers with “highly personalized products and services”.
But financial lobbyists have greatly criticized the proposed rules. In December, six industry associations, representing banks, insurers and asset managers, argued that the Commission had not adequately calculated the cost of the proposed rules and that customer and market demand for Such data -based services had not been proven. The group said that various key concerns “raised several times” had remained “largely untreated”.
The bill “is a fleeing train focused on driverless and brakeless,” said Florence Lustman, president of the Lobbying group French Insurance Federation, in Politico in an interview in September.
The opposition of the financial services sector found sympathy in the French government, which published a note last month, obtained by Politico, calling for an “in -depth reassessment” of the impact of IFAD on the European economy And “so that the text is adjusted accordingly, if it is not completely abandoned. »»
The traditional financial services sector was also concerned that the bill benefits from technological industry by allowing easy access to data on investment and people’s savings – allowing technological companies to offer products Highly personalized and to leave outgoing banks that find it difficult to follow.
EU legislators and governments wanted to make it more difficult for certain more powerful companies, nicknamed “Guardians”, to access data in response to these fears. This would have meant that Apple, Amazon, Alphabet, Booking.com, Meta Platforms, Bytedance and Microsoft should have faced more strict rules and checks.
Politices
