EU Taxonomy: MEPs do not object to inclusion of gas and nuclear activities.

EU missed opportunity to show global leadership on climate change with a robust and science-based taxonomy that underpins a credible pathway to net zero. This will undermine the EU’s climate neutrality target by 2050.

The taxonomy is a voluntary instrument to guide financial sector toward investment that allow us to reach our climate goals, which it is a de facto the key driven force. We are talking about what is the guide for the future on what is sustainable.!

Europe’s energy shortages have underscored the challenges of phasing out fossil fuels & nuclear power, and of relying on renewable supplies and power storage. Gas is seen as a way of helping to wean poorer EU countries like Poland off coal, which pollutes much more. France have touted nuclear as a low-carbon energy source crucial for the replacement of Russian fossil fuels. Excluding these energies sources from the taxonomy could be “particularly challenging” for Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction. Germany has expressed its rejection of the inclusion of nuclear energy and its dependency on gas. This decision could benefit Russia and perpetuate European reliance on its gas supplies.

It’s completely clear that both nuclear energy, and fossil gas have nothing to do with sustainability. This denotes the supremacy of lobby groups and countries’ energy policy over the scientific rationale.!!!

More on: https://bit.ly/3anhVyY

The European Central Bank takes further steps to incorporate climate change into its monetary policy operations.

The ECB will account for climate change in its corporate bond purchases, collateral framework, disclosure requirements and risk management, in line with its climate action plan.

The Eurosystem aims to gradually decarbonise its corporate bond holdings, on a path aligned with the goals of the Paris Agreement. It will limit the share of assets issued by entities with a high carbon footprint that can be pledged as collateral by individual counterparties when borrowing from the Eurosystem. It will only accept marketable assets and credit claims from companies and debtors that comply with the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) as collateral in Eurosystem credit operations. The Eurosystem will further enhance its risk assessment tools and capabilities to better include climate-related risks.

These measures aim to reduce financial risk related to climate change on the Eurosystem’s balance sheet, encourage transparency, and support the green transition of the economy.

Looking ahead, the Governing Council is committed to regularly reviewing that they are fit for purpose and aligned with the objectives of the Paris Agreement and the EU’s climate neutrality objectives.

More on https://bit.ly/3P5jaRU

EU agrees on company disclosures to combat greenwashing.

The European Union has reached a deal on corporate sustainability 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗿𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗶𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗹𝗮𝗿𝗴𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗻𝗶𝗲𝘀 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟰.

Listed or unlisted companies with over 250 staff and turnover of €40 million will have to disclose environmental, social and governance (ESG) risks and opportunities, and the impact of their activities on the environment and people.

Some smaller listed companies will be subject to a lighter set of reporting standards, which they can opt out of until 2028, the committee said. 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗮𝗴𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗲𝘀 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘀𝘂𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗿𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝘀 𝗺𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗯𝗲 𝗮𝘂𝗱𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝘀𝗲𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗹𝘆. The CSRD will replace the current Non-Financial Reporting Directive (NFRD).

More on https://bit.ly/3QCZRB0

EU banking package and sustainability

On 27 October 2021, the European Commission adopted a review of EU banking rules (the Capital Requirements Regulation – CRR – and the Capital Requirements Directive – CRD IV). These new rules will ensure that EU banks become more resilient to potential future economic shocks.

The package implements Basel III, stablishes new sustainability rules, and provides stronger enforcement tools for supervisors overseeing EU Banks.

Concerning Sustainability, it intends to strength the resilience of the banking sector to ESG risks, aligned with the Commission’s Sustainable Finance Strategy. It improves the way banks measure and manage these risks, ensuring that markets can monitor what banks are doing. This proposal will require banks to systematically identify, disclose and manage ESG risks as part of their risk management. It includes regular climate stress testing by both supervisors and banks. Supervisors will need to assess ESG risks as part of regular supervisory reviews. All banks will also have to disclose the degree to which they are exposed to ESG risks. To avoid undue administrative burdens for smaller banks, disclosure rules will be proportionate.

The proposed measures will not only make the banking sector more resilient, but also ensure that banks take into account sustainability considerations.

More on https://bit.ly/3Gsbs0T

Climate Change and prudential policy

Central Banks’ objective of maintaining price stability, enables climate protection goals. For example, low inflation rates will allow households and firms to detect price signals from climate policy and adjust thus their behaviour. Putting the right price tag on greenhouse gas emissions is arguably the most powerful weapon  in the fight against climate change.

Central Banks should not slip into the role of a climate policy actor as they have different segregation of responsibilities. Unlike monetary policy, climate policy changes the distribution of resources and income distinctly and permanently. Democratic processes and direct political accountability are important when making such decisions. Central Banks should guarantee independence to safeguard price stability objective.

A clash of objectives could arise as well if, say, the Central Bank attempted to use its monetary policy asset purchase programmes  to pursue environmental policy objectives, as these programmes  need to be scaled back as soon as warranted  to ensure price stability. Ultimately, monetary policy is not a structural policy instrument: it is cyclical in nature, balancing each other out over the long run through  the interplay of monetary policy loosening and tightening.

However, Central Banks can step up their game to protect the climate without running the risk of overstretching their mandate of preserving price stability. As climate change affect firms and lenders, Central Banks need to ensure that climate-related financial risks are appropriately taken into account as part of risk management.

So, from a monetary policy, perspective, Central Banks are within their rights to request better information. The Eurosystem should consider purchasing or accepting as collateral only those securities whose issuers meet certain climate-related reporting requirements. Hence, the importance of the ratings of agencies to adequately and transparently reflect climate-related financial risks.

Other further measure may be to limit the maturities or the volume of securities from certain issuers in the monetary policy portfolio, if required to contain financial risk.

More on https://bit.ly/3AouqBB

Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFRD) – Q&A published by the EU Commision

The following points were addressed:

1. The 500-employee criterion includes employees of a parent undertaking and of subsidiary undertakings regardless of whether they are established inside or outside the EU.

2. The definition of ‘financial market participant’ outlined in the regulation includes both EU Alternative Investment Fund Managers (AIFMs) and non-EU AIFMs.

3. Registered AIFMs must also fulfil the requirements laid down in the SFDR.

4. In addition to ‘sustainable investments’, Article 9 products may also include investments for specific purposes such as hedging or liquidity, which must meet minimum environmental or social safeguards.

5. A financial product that promotes environmental, social or sustainability requirements or restrictions laid down in law, including international conventions or voluntary codes, in its investment policy is subject to Article 8. Additionally, financial products having an environmental objective but not meeting the DNSH principle should also qualify as Article 8 products.

Furthermore, the promotion of ESG characteristics does not refer solely to pre-contractual disclosures, but also to a broad range of documents including marketing communications, advertisements, use of product names or designations, and factsheets.

This Q&A was published in response to questions asked by the European ESAs (ESMA, EIOPIA and EBA). It provides clarity for financial market participants in response to a broad range of questions relating to the disclosure requirements specified in the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation 2019/2088.

More on https://bit.ly/3xdbaFi

Overhaul of the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS), the Energy Taxation Directive (ETD), and the introduction of a Carbon Border Adjustment (CBAM)

The European Commission has adopted a package of measures intended to put the EU firmly on the road to climate neutrality by 2050 with the intermediate step of a minimum 55% reduction in net greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. An overhaul of the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) and of the Energy Taxation Directive (ETD), and the introduction of a Carbon Border Adjustment (CBAM) form part of the package:

A.- ETS overhaul: it would bring maritime transport within the scope of the ETS and accelerate the reduction of the number of emissions allowances that can be issued each year. A separate proposed directive would lead to the gradual reduction of free emissions allowances available to the airline industry. It also envisages the establishment of a separate emissions trading system for road transport and heating fuels which would apply from 2026 at the fuel supplier level. Its introduction would be accompanied by the establishment of a Social Climate Fund.
B.- ETD overhaul: the ETD does not reflect the current mix of energy products and criticized that it does not link the minimum tax rates to energy content and CO2 emissions.
Minimum tax rates would be based on the real energy content and environmental performance of each product, with most polluting fuels taxed at the highest level. The tax base would also be expanded – including through the removal of existing exemptions. An eye-catching change in this respect is that fuels for the aviation and maritime industries would lose existing exemptions.
The burden of higher minimum levels of energy taxation may be felt disproportionately by consumers and poorer households. The mitigation of this risk does, however, appear to be left mostly to each Member State’s tax system and the commission encourages Member States to consider using energy tax revenues to support vulnerable households.
C. CBAM introduction: the overarching aim is to prevent carbon leakage. The CBAM has been designed as a system of certificates to complement the ETS rather than, for instance, an import tax. Importers will be required to purchase certificates at a price to be set by the Commission on a weekly basis to mirror average ETS prices (which are established on a daily basis) in respect of relevant goods (being, at least initially, only iron and steel, cement, fertiliser, aluminium and electricity generation as per Annex I to the proposed CBAM regulation) imported into the EU customs territory from third countries. Imports from countries that participate in the ETS or have an emissions trading system linked to it are exempt from CBAM.

More on: https://bit.ly/3yYDk8a

Commission puts forward New strategy for Sustainable Finance and proposes new European Green Bond Standard

The Commission also adopted yesteday a Delegated Act on the information to be disclosed by financial and non-financial companies about how sustainable their activities are, based on Article 8 of the EU Taxonomy.

Thus, EU took another major step towards achieving the goals in the Green Deal by ensuring a comprehensive approach to funding the green transition.

EU proposed incorporating climate-related risks into banks’ capital requirements. The challenge for lenders is weaning themselves off their lending exposure to fossil fuels. Their initial disclosures have been limited and commercial lenders still have “patchy” data regarding their exposure to climate change.

The ECB will hold a stress test next year to see how their balance sheets may fare as the climate and economy shifts. EU states will be asked to assess by June 2023 how their financial markets contribute to reaching the bloc’s climate goals. ECB will then calibrate the right pace for the transition by setting intermediate targets for the financial sector. Insurance capital rules may also be similarly amended.

The Commission confirmed it will publish taxonomy rules later this year for agriculture, certain industries and possibly nuclear and gas power plants. EU needed to guard against the risks associated with the transition, thus considering an “intermediate taxonomy” that would allow transition bonds.

The strategy seeks to empower individuals and the bloc’s 23 million SME by defining green loans and mortgages by 2022. New accounting rules may also be needed to “recognise and report” ESG risks in financial statements.

The strategy sets out a positive vision of the reform needed in the financial system to support the European economy.

More on https://bit.ly/3jRgriU

The EU Green Bond Standard (EU GBS

It will be logically voluntary. It will be ready to be used in 2022 and aims to set the global standard. Global ESG debt market tops 3 TUSD, with Europe taking a lead as nearly a quarter of its bond sales this year were related to social factors.

Sovereign issuers will be granted some flexibility to assess government spending programs based on their terms and conditions. The 27-member bloc itself is set to become one of the largest issuers, with 30% of its 800 BEUR pandemic recovery funding planned as green debt.

The ESMA will determine whether a bond is green or not, with external reviewers to be approved by the body. Issuers should disclose impact assessments at least once, as well as annual allocation reports for how the funds were used and they will be free to align their bonds alongside other standards.

EU GBS affords issuers an opportunity to launch taxonomy-aligned green bonds at a potentially lower cost of capital. For investors, the standard affords an opportunity to make investments in green bonds that are credible and easier to report on.

More on: https://bit.ly/3gBg7m2

Network for Greening the Financial System (NGFS) update of their economic scenarios

Reaching net zero by 2050 could lift growth and employment but would require an inflation-boosting $160 per tonne carbon price — or equivalent “shadow price” — by the end of the decade. This will push up inflation and also raise unemployment in some countries with energy-intensive industries.

Only a relatively quick and orderly transition to a low carbon economy would add to growth while a delayed transition or no action would cut deep into the economy.If these changes occur in an orderly fashion, the scenarios suggest that it could lead to some increase in global GDP, and lower unemployment relative to prior trends.If the transition fails, the scenarios suggest that up to 13% of global GDP would be at risk by the end of the century, even before accounting for the potential consequences of severe weather events.

Currently about a fifth of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions are covered by a carbon price.

More on: https://bit.ly/3ziT7j6