WRITTEN QUESTION E-3153/01

by Helena Torres Marques (PSE) to the Commission

(14 November 2001)

Subject: Cost of transactions effected through the Multibanco network in Portugal

1. In Portugal, a company called SIBS (Sociedade Interbancária de Serviços), belonging to all the Portuguese banks, has a monopoly on the provision of Multibanco services. Clients of the banks have always been able to effect transactions through the Multibanco network free of charge.

2. Until now banks have built up and expanded this network, encouraging their clients gradually to stop using the banks as such, thereby significantly reducing personnel costs and making the clients themselves responsible for carrying out any transactions they require.

3. Since the announcement was made that the Commission was preparing a proposal for a regulation on cross-border payments in euros, the banks have begun to make it clear that they intend to introduce charges on any transactions carried out through the Multibanco network at national level.

4. Given that all the banks work with SIBS, would the Commission not agree that people in Portugal are now being made dependent on a banking cartel? What action will it take to ensure that this does not actually happen?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(7 January 2002)

The question concerns two subjects, the alleged existence of a banking cartel in Portugal, and the effects on domestic banking charges of the draft Regulation on cross-border payments in euros(1).

Concerning the competition law aspects of the question, the Commission would first of all point out that it is only competent to examine restrictions of competition which have an appreciable effect on trade between Member States; In the absence of an appreciable effect in inter State trade, national competition authorities are competent to examine alleged restrictions of competition under national competition law.

The Commission has no evidence in its possession as to whether or not there has been concertation or collusion between banks in Portugal concerning prices charged to clients for banking services. However, the Commission agrees that any possible agreement between banks on the prices charged to end consumers would constitute a very serious restriction of competition.

Given the domestic nature of the activities in question within Portugal, it would seem that any possible restrictions of competition which might exist are unlikely to effect trade between Member States to an appreciable extent, and therefore that the Portuguese competition authorities, rather than the Commission, would be competent to carry out any investigation that might be necessary. However, the Commission will consult with the national competition authorities to see if they have any information which would justify any possible investigation taking place at an EU level rather than a national level.

As to the possible effect on domestic banking charges of the draft Regulation on cross-border payments in euros, the Commission considers that the risk that domestic charges will be increased by banks to compensate for a fall in charges for cross-border transfers is very small, given how few cross-border transactions are carried out compared with domestic transactions. Moreover, banks should quickly put in place the infrastructures which will enable them to make cross-border payments as efficient, inexpensive and reliable as domestic payments. If some banks were tempted to increase their charges on domestic transactions in reaction to the Regulation, the increased transparency and prior notification of changes to charges provided for under the Regulation would enable customers to react.

(1) OJ C 270 E, 25.9.2001.