| Abstract [eng] |
Previous financial crisis has shown that regulation of individual financial institutions and their supervision at micro level was not enough. Microprudential politics, whose main goal is to ensure the stability and sustainability of the individual participants, does not provide a safe environment for both consumers and financial institutions. Through applying microprudential measures in the last crisis period, attention was focused on the individual role of each institution, while the entire financial system had less attention. By analyzing the causes and consequences of the crisis, a conclusion was made that the supervision of individual institutions does not mean that the entire financial system will be protected from the systematic and external negative risks, which, if ignored, could disrupt the stability of the financial system. Therefore, in order to increase the individual banking and financial stability of banks, the European Union introduced a new macroprudential policy. One of the measure groups introduced measures aimed to manage bank’s capital reserves. These reserves should manage future risks and potential financial loss in the period of crisis or in other adverse circumstances, which absorb banking stability and enhance banks’ capital adequacy risk. Regarding the new regulatory environment and lessons learned, commercial banks must adapt to the new requirements and are forced to change its financial management. Changes in the banking environment raise a lot of questions for the policy makers. Nobody knows how to carry out the new policy, what are the possible effects on the banks and whether these measures will not be more expensive than the actual benefits. Therefore, macroprudential policy and analysis of its impact on commercial banks’ becomes relevant and is one of the most analyzed topics around the entire financial sector. |
