Opinion of the European Central Bank of  26 April 2006  on a proposal for a directive on payment services in the internal market (ECB/2006/21)
Date: 2006-04-26
Institutions: European Central Bank
Subjects: European Central Bank, approximation of laws, financial institution, payment, provision of services, services contract, single market

C 109/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

9.5.2006

EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

OPINION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

of 26 April 2006

on a proposal for a directive on payment services in the internal market

(ECB/2006/21)

(2006/C 109/05)

Introduction and legal basis

On 19 January 2006 the European Central Bank (ECB) received a request from the Council of the European
Union for an opinion on a ‘Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on
payment services in the internal market and amending Directives 97/7/EC, 2000/12/EC and 2002/65/EC’
(COM(2005) 603 final) (hereinafter the ‘proposed directive’).

The ECB's competence to deliver an opinion is based on the first indent of Article 105(4), in conjunction
with the fourth indent of Article 105(2), of the Treaty establishing the European Community, as the
proposed directive concerns a basic task of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB), namely to
promote the smooth operation of payment systems (1). The ECB's competence is also based on
Article 105(5) of the Treaty, pursuant to which the ESCB contributes to the smooth conduct of policies
pursued by the competent authorities relating to the prudential supervision of credit institutions and the
stability of the financial system. In accordance with the first sentence of Article 17.5 of the Rules of Proce-
dure of the European Central Bank, the Governing Council has adopted this opinion.

General observations

1.1 The proposed directive is a very welcome initiative, as it establishes a comprehensive legal framework
for payment services in the EU. Currently, the diversity of national legislation relating to payments
makes implementation of the Single Euro Payments Area (SEPA) problematic. Harmonisation of the
national legal requirements for payments will therefore assist the banking industry in its efforts to
establish the SEPA. Moreover, the introduction of the concept of ‘payment institutions’ should lead to
the harmonisation of access rules to the market for payment services. However, to fully exploit the
advantages of harmonised legislation, attention should be paid to aligning the scope of the proposed
directive and that of the E-money Directive (2), in particular taking account of the need to differentiate
between payment services based on payment accounts and e-money payment services based on centra-
lised accounting. Should the adoption of the proposed directive be delayed, however, the introduction
of SEPA-compliant national schemes on 1 January 2008 and the full migration of these by 2010
could be put at risk. In this regard, Titles III and IV of the proposed directive are crucial as they intro-
duce a harmonised set of rules regarding information requirements, authorisation, execution and liabi-
lity in respect of payment transactions. It appears that the policy and legal issues in these Titles of the
If negotiations are
proposed directive might be solvable within a relatively short
prolonged, the option of carving out certain parts of the proposed directive by giving priority to adop-
tion of the parts necessary for successful implementation of the SEPA could be considered.

time frame.

(1) In addition, the ECB's competence to deliver an opinion is based on Article 22 of the Statute of the European System
of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank concerning the task of the ECB and the national central banks to,
inter alia, ensure efficient and sound clearing and payment systems within the Community and with other countries.
(2) Directive 2000/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 September 2000 on the taking up,
pursuit of and prudential supervision of the business of electronic money institutions (OJ L 275, 27.10.2000, p. 39).

9.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 109/11

1.2 However, certain aspects of the proposed directive raise a number of concerns which are set out in

more detail below.

Specific observations

2 Payment institutions' activity

2.1 The introduction of a new concept of ‘payment institutions’ is a step towards harmonising the current
diversity of approaches under national law to the regulation of entities that provide payment services
without being a credit institution, an e-money institution or a post office giro institution. However,
the proposed directive is not clear concerning the kinds of activities that such payment institutions
may perform. Under the proposed directive, payment institutions may receive funds from the public
for the provision of payment services. These funds should not, however, be deposits or other repayable
funds within the meaning of Article 3 of the Consolidated Banking Directive (3), or e-money as defined
in Article 1(3)(a) of the E-money Directive (see Article 10(1) of the proposed directive).

2.2 In this respect, the wording of the proposed directive does not make it clear whether payment institu-
tions may hold funds having similar economic and legal characteristics to deposits or e-money. The
ability of payment institutions to provide payment accounts implies that payment institutions could
keep funds for a longer period than is necessary to finalise a payment transaction. This is a matter for
concern, as Article 65(4) of the proposed directive refers to ‘savings accounts’ without explaining
where these accounts are held and for what purpose. However, recitals 8 and 9 to the proposed direc-
tive state that payment institutions may not take deposits. These points are elaborated further below.

2.3 It is also noted that under paragraph 4 of the Annex to the proposed directive, payment institutions
may execute payment transactions if the funds are covered by a credit line without there being any
restrictions on the ability to grant credit in terms of the amount and/or the maturity of the credit.

3 Deposits or other repayable funds

3.1 With regard to the holding of deposits or other repayable funds, it should be recalled that Article 3 of
the Consolidated Banking Directive prohibits undertakings other than credit institutions from carrying
on the business of taking deposits or other repayable funds from the public. While the Consolidated
Banking Directive does not define deposit-taking, the concept of ‘deposits or other repayable funds’
under that Directive has been broadly interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Commu-
nities, which has noted that ‘the term “other repayable funds” […] refers not only to financial instru-
ments which possess the intrinsic characteristic of repayability, but also to those which, although not
possessing that characteristic, are the subject of a contractual agreement to repay the funds paid’ (4). It
does not matter whether such funds are received in the form of deposits or in other forms, such as
‘the continuing issue of bonds and other comparable securities’ (5), as referred to in a forerunner of the
Consolidated Banking Directive. Thus, ‘all receipts of monies may amount to deposit-taking business
(in the broader sense) if they involve repayment of the monies received. It is unimportant in this
regard whether the requirement of repayment already exists at the time the funds are received (and
forms an “essential” element of that transaction), or whether this obligation only arises as a result of

(3) Directive 2000/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 March 2000 relating to the taking up
and pursuit of the business of credit institutions (OJ L 126, 26.5.2000, p. 1). Directive as last amended by Commis-
sion Directive 2006/29/EC (OJ L 70, 9.3.2006, p. 50).

(4) See paragraph 17 of the Judgment of 11 February 1999 in Case 366/97 Massimo Romanelli [1999] ECR I-855.
(5) Recital 5 to first Council Directive 77/780/EEC of 12 December 1977 on the coordination of the laws, regulations
and administrative provisions relating to the taking up and pursuit of the business of credit institutions (OJ L 322,
17.12.1977, p. 30). Directive repealed by Directive 2000/12/EC.

C 109/12

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

9.5.2006

the creation of a contractual entitlement’ (6). A proper interpretation of deposit-taking ‘will have to be
guided by the question of the range of the savings to be protected and the interpretation of the charac-
teristics of “credit business” in the light of the risks considered significant in terms of the protection of
recovery of deposits. The outcome is a tendency towards a broad interpretation both of deposit-taking
business and credit’ (7).

3.2 In view of the above, it would appear that payment institutions will in fact receive deposits from their
customers. If this is the case, then, as a general matter, if the payment institution became insolvent,
any funds it held at the moment of insolvency would form part of its estate, and would thus be avail-
able to meet the claims of all of its creditors. The activity of receiving deposits or other repayable
funds is at the heart of the concept of banking itself, as is made clear in the definition of ‘credit institu-
tion’ laid down in Article 1(1)(a) of the Consolidated Banking Directive (8). Altering the fundamental
concept of banking requires careful consideration from the perspectives of monetary policy, the
soundness and safety of payment systems, financial stability and statistics, all of which are matters in
relation to which the ESCB has extensive competences. The activities of payment institutions inevitably
include holding funds of the public, even if only for a limited period of time. Consumer protection
and financial stability issues must therefore be taken into consideration when establishing supervisory
requirements and safeguards for such activities.

4 Supervisory requirements

4.1 Overall, the proposed directive would allow payment institutions to operate under a lighter supervi-
sory regime than that applicable under the Consolidated Banking Directive. Besides an authorisation
procedure based on some qualitative requirements, payment institutions would have to comply with a
regulatory framework, which would: (i) mainly be based on a number of generally drafted disclosure
requirements; and (ii) not include capital requirements against quantifiable risks (see Article 5 of the
proposed directive). The light supervisory regime raises some concerns, which are accentuated by the
fact that the proposed directive prescribes full harmonisation (see Article 78 of the proposed directive)
in contrast to the regulatory approach taken in other Community legislation governing the taking up
and pursuit of the business of providing financial services.

4.2 The ECB is of the view that there is scope for improvement in the regulatory treatment of payment
institutions under the proposed directive in three main areas. First, the unclear distinction between
payment institutions and other payment service providers makes it extremely difficult to assess risks
and the related safeguards. This is the case not only if and insofar as payment institutions may hold
funds that are difficult to distinguish from deposits, but also with regard to their ability to grant credit
financed by money received from the public (see paragraph 4 of the Annex to the proposed directive).
Second, the proposed directive does not address the different categories of risks associated with
payment services. In this respect, it is worth recalling that payment services performed by credit insti-
tutions will be made subject to specific capital requirements as a result of the operational risk
attaching to such services (9). Third, it may also be argued that the authorisation procedure laid down
in the proposed directive is based on criteria which leave too much room for different interpretations
at national level. Member States may also waive some of the authorisation requirements under certain
circumstances (10).

4.3 In view of these considerations, there seems to be a mismatch under the proposed directive between
the scope of activities of payment institutions and the prudential framework within which such activ-
ities are to be carried out. Once the actual scope of payment institutions' activities has been clarified,
the imposition of adequate capital requirements and/or other similar safeguards (e.g. initial capital
requirements, guarantees) should be considered on the basis of an assessment of the related risks.

(6) See Alexander Bornemann, ‘Abridged Opinion on the Concept of the Credit Institution in the Directives of the Euro-

pean Community Relating to Bank Regulation and Supervision’, p. 11. Available as a PDF file from:
<http://www.money-advice.net/media.php?id=234>

(7) Ibid.
(8) Article 1(1)(a) states that a ‘credit institution shall mean an undertaking whose business is to receive deposits or other

repayable funds from the public and to grant credits for its own account’.

(9) See Part 2 of Annex X to a ‘Proposal for Directives of the European Parliament and of the Council Re-casting Direc-
tive 2000/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 March 2000 relating to the taking up and
pursuit of the business of credit institutions and Council Directive 93/6/EEC of 15 March 1993 on the capital
adequacy of investment firms and credit institutions’ (COM(2004) 486 final).

(10) The conditions for the relevant derogations to apply are set out in Article 21 of the proposed directive.

9.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 109/13

4.4 The absence of capital requirements for payment institutions could potentially provide scope for
supervisory arbitrage. Regardless of whether credit
institutions perform their payments business
directly or through subsidiaries qualifying as payment institutions, they will be subject to supervision
on a consolidated basis for operational risks as well as credit risks. Conversely, stand-alone payment
institutions or payment institutions that are not part of a banking group will not be subject to any
capital requirements despite carrying on the same business.

4.5 Moreover, the proposed directive is generally unclear with regard to the respective responsibilities of
the home and host Member States' competent authorities. One example of this is the third paragraph
of Article 6 of the proposed directive, which regulates the granting of European passports to payment
institutions without making it clear which competent authority of which Member State will be in
charge of supervising such payment institutions. It would be worthwhile considering these issues more
carefully.

4.6 In applying Article 15 of the proposed directive, the competences of the ESCB and of national central
banks with respect to the smooth operation of payment systems and, in those Member States where
applicable, the competences of national central banks in the field of supervision should be duly
respected.

4.7 The supervisory powers of the competent authorities under Article 16 of the proposed directive could
be made clearer in a number of respects. First, the scope of ‘on-site inspections’ (Article 16(b)) could
be more precisely specified. Second, the exact meaning of the power to impose ‘proportionate penal-
ties’ (Article 16(d)) could also be clarified. Third, the conditions for suspension and withdrawal of an
authorisation (Article 16(e)) could be defined, possibly by means of a separate provision. In order to
achieve a sufficient level playing field within the European area and sufficient efficiency in the supervi-
sion of institutions benefiting from free establishment and free provision of services, Article 16 of the
proposed directive should be amended to ensure that all competent authorities have all the powers
provided for by this Article, in particular supervisory and enforcement abilities.

4.8 Article 19 of the proposed directive provides for Member States to allow exchanges of information
between their competent authorities, central banks, the ESCB and the ECB. While this provision is, in
principle, welcome, it is suggested that if the competent authority is an entity other than the central
bank, and the latter is also the payment system overseer, it should be complemented by other provi-
sions stipulating that:
the competent
authority has to consult the relevant central bank; and (ii) competent authorities are obliged to share
information with the relevant central bank. Such provisions would be beneficial, given the overall
responsibility of central banks in the field of payments.

(i) prior to granting or suspending/withdrawing a licence,

5 Banking or e-money licence

5.1 If payment institutions are allowed to hold funds which in both economic and legal terms qualify as
deposits, although conceptually not characterised as such under the proposed directive, the level of
risk will be equal to that of credit or e-money institutions. Accordingly, the level of safeguards should
be the same as that applied to credit and/or e-money institutions. It follows that payment services
should preferably be restricted to credit or e-money institutions. This would ensure sufficient protec-
tion of customer funds and sound financial activity, and is therefore the ECB's preferred approach.

5.2 If the level of safeguards imposed on credit and/or e-money institutions is also established for payment

institutions, then Title II of the proposed directive would need to be fundamentally redrafted.

6 Limiting the activities of payment institutions

6.1 If the category of lightly-supervised payment institutions is introduced, as proposed by the Commis-
sion, the proposed directive should be amended to make it clear that payment institutions should not
be allowed to keep payment service users' funds for longer than the limited time period during which
they are being transferred from payer to payee, nor should they be allowed to reinvest such funds. The
current wording of Article 10(2) of the proposed directive could otherwise lead to the conclusion that
the opening of accounts by payment institutions in their books implies that the funds received could

C 109/14

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

9.5.2006

be reinvested for the benefit of the payment institution. Such a clarification could be achieved, for
example, by restricting the payment service activities of payment institutions to those specified in
paragraph 7 of the Annex to the proposed directive. The activity specified in paragraph 5 of the
Annex could also be ascribed to payment institutions pending, however, clarification that the activity
of issuing cards is linked to a requirement for the cardholder's account to be held with a credit institu-
tion. Moreover, payment institutions should not be allowed to grant credit in accordance with para-
graph 4 of the Annex to the proposed directive.

6.2 Furthermore, to avoid any diverging interpretation, it might be useful to indicate which services may
be offered by which type of institution, regrouping all paragraphs of the Annex to the proposed direc-
tive as follows: (i) paragraphs 1-7: credit institutions; (ii) paragraphs 1-3 and 5-7: e-money institutions;
and (iii) paragraph 7: payment institutions. In addition, as mentioned above, the activity specified in
paragraph 5 of the Annex could possibly also be considered as an activity provided by payment insti-
tutions (11). The same may hold true for the activity specified in paragraph 4 of the Annex, if it is
ensured that funds received from payment service users to provide payment services cannot be
deployed to extend credit to other payment service users.

6.3 Other minimum safeguards could be considered to protect payment service users' funds. For example,
in the context of certain specific futures-clearing arrangements, cash placed by customers with futures-
clearing brokers is construed under the laws of certain Member States (e.g. Germany and the United
Kingdom) and of the United States as being the property of the customer rather than as being a cash
deposit. This arrangement is often provided for by specific legislation or is confirmed by case-law.
Without addressing the proprietary nature of such cash, which might raise difficulties under the laws
of some Member States, one option would be to develop the safeguards contained in Article 10(2) of
the proposed directive obliging payment institutions to keep the payment service users' funds separate
in their books. This could be done by amending the proposed directive to ensure that more explicit
obligations are imposed on payment institutions as follows: (i) to earmark funds accepted to specific
transactions; (ii) to segregate funds accepted for a payment transaction from other funds accepted for
activities other than payment services and record them separately in payment institutions' books; (iii)
to keep payment service users' funds under an account name which clearly identifies them as such; (iv)
not to commingle payment service users' funds with the funds of the payment service provider or any
other payment service user or person; (v) to insulate payment service users' funds from any third-party
action against the payment institution; (vi) if a payment institution becomes insolvent, to return
payment service users' funds promptly and in priority to all other claims; and (vii) where insufficient
funds are available for remittance to payment service users of an insolvent payment institution, to
distribute the remaining funds to the payment service users on a pro rata basis in accordance with the
principal amount of their respective claims.

6.4 Furthermore, the reference in Article 10(1)(b) of the proposed directive to ancillary services such as
‘the guaranteeing execution of payment transactions’ requires further explanation, to make it clear that
such services are only for the benefit of the payment services users taking part in the transaction.

6.5 Finally, Article 10(3) of the proposed directive states that the activities of payment institutions are not
to be restricted to offering payment services subject to applicable national and Community law. This
implies that the range of activities of payment institutions may go beyond those listed in the Annex to
the proposed directive, which gives rise to two concerns. First, the proposed directive does not list all
types of activities allowed. A full assessment of these activities from the point of view of consumer
protection and financial stability can only be made if all possible activities are known. Second, if such
activities are based on national law, then the purpose of the proposed directive, namely to ensure full
harmonisation, will not be achieved. For these reasons, Article 10(3) of the proposed directive should
be deleted.

7 Creation of the SEPA

7.1 The banking industry is currently working intensively on services that will meet the demands of the
SEPA. As early as 1 January 2008, the industry aims to offer pan-European payment instruments to
citizens, authorities and commercial enterprises for both national and cross-border payments. Creation
of the SEPA could however be problematic within the current Community legal framework, given the

(11) It is noted that the regrouping does not take into account the activities of post office giro institutions since the licen-

sing of these, and thus the type of activities they may undertake, is governed by Member States' national laws.

9.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 109/15

diversity of applicable national
legislation. Harmonisation of the legal framework for payments is
therefore important, as it will assist the banking industry in its efforts to establish the SEPA. The
SEPA-relevant parts of the proposed directive (largely Titles III and IV) appear to be less controversial
than Title II. If adoption of the proposed directive is delayed owing to ambiguities described above,
the implementation of the SEPA might also be delayed. In order to prevent such a delay, therefore, it
would be beneficial to carve Title II out of the proposed directive. However, such a carve-out should
be conditional on making payment institutions subject to separate Community legislation in due
course. In this respect, the role of payment institutions could logically be discussed in the context of
the planned review of the E-money Directive in order to achieve a consistent regulatory and supervi-
sory framework for different categories of payment service providers.

7.2 Another possibility might be for the Governing Council of the ECB to adopt an ECB regulation under
Article 105(2) of the Treaty and Article 22 of the Statute which would govern the specific SEPA-
related provisions of the proposed directive that fall within the ESCB's fields of competence, while
recognising, however, that not all provisions facilitating SEPA could be adopted on this basis.

7.3 A specific SEPA-related issue concerns the maximum execution time of ‘D+1’, as provided for in
Article 60(1) and Article 61(1) of the proposed directive. It is expected that the majority of payment
service providers could fulfil this requirement by 1 January 2010. However, it must be kept in mind
that the industry has not been consulted on the consequences of the requirement of ‘D+1’ and that
some banking communities might have difficulties complying in time.

8 Exemption of central banks

The last indent of Article 1 of the proposed directive provides that central banks acting as monetary autho-
rities and public authorities which provide payment services are not considered to be payment service
providers. In order to remove possible ambiguities regarding the meaning of this provision, it would be
helpful to clarify that all activities performed by central banks are exempt from the proposed directive
instead of introducing the unclear condition that this exemption should only apply to the provision of
payment services by central banks acting as monetary or public authorities. Any such exemption should be
without prejudice to the ECB's policy statement of 4 August 2005 regarding central banks' provision of
retail payment services in euro to credit institutions (12), which states that in order to avoid competitive
distortions or a crowding-out of market initiatives, national central banks which offer retail payment
services to credit institutions take due account of the requirements and competitive environment of the
market concerned, including cost recovery. As currently drafted, this provision is likely to lead to divergent
implementation among Member States, thereby causing unnecessary confusion for both central banks and
financial market participants.

9 Operation of and access to payment systems

9.1 The proposed directive should make it clear that payment system operators will be entitled to differ-
entiate between different types of payment service providers regarding the conditions to be fulfilled
before the latter can gain access to payment systems. This should be done on objective grounds, with
the aim of managing the risks associated with payment service providers. In addition, the scope of
Article 23(1) of the proposed directive should be limited to ensuring non-discriminatory access of
payment institutions to payment systems. Article 23(1) of the proposed directive should be amended
accordingly.

9.2 It is understood that the intention of Article 23(2) of the proposed directive is to exempt systems
designated under the Settlement Finality Directive (13) from the access conditions under Article 23(1).
However, the wording is not sufficiently clear in this respect, and a straightforward exemption is
suggested.

(12) Available on the ECB's website at www.ecb.int.
(13) Directive 98/26/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 May 1998 on settlement finality in

payment and securities settlement systems (OJ L 166, 11.6.1998, p. 45) (SFD).

C 109/16

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

9.5.2006

9.3 Furthermore, the proposed directive should make it clear that the provision of clearing and settlement
services is subject to oversight standards established by the Eurosystem, in accordance with Article
105(2) of the Treaty. This could be achieved, for example, by amending recital 12 to the proposed
directive and Article 23(2) accordingly. In this respect, the Eurosystem will, in connection with its task
of promoting the smooth operation of euro area payment systems, consider whether the participation
of payment institutions in payment systems is sufficiently safe and does not imply undue risks for the
stability of the financial system.

9.4 Finally, Article 10(1)(c) of the proposed directive grants payment institutions an explicit right to
operate payment systems. As Community legislation currently neither defines the concept of ‘payment
system operator’ nor regulates the legal nature of such operators, there is no need to introduce a right
for payment institutions (or any other category of payment service provider governed by the proposed
directive) to operate payment systems. In the same vein, the reference to ‘operation of payment
systems’ in the title and first paragraph of Article 23 of the proposed directive should be deleted.

10 Payments Committee

Under Article 76 of the proposed directive, the Commission may amend the list of payment services in the
Annex, assisted pursuant to Article 77 by a Payments Committee composed of representatives of the
Member States and chaired by a representative of the Commission. Considering the importance of the list,
and the influence an amendment could have on the payment market, the Payments Committee's mandate
should be unambiguous, avoiding any conflict with the Eurosystem's competences as established under the
Treaty and the Statute. In view of the ECB's specific competences in this field, the ECB should be repre-
sented as an observer on the Payments Committee.

11 Negative scope of application of the proposed directive

11.1 The scope of the proposed directive, as set out in Articles 2 and 3, may result in some differences of
interpretation. Under Article 2, the proposed directive applies to an exhaustive list of business activ-
ities defined as payment services and listed in the Annex to the proposed directive. Under Article 3,
it also contains what seems to be an exhaustive list of exemptions from the proposed directive,
although it could be useful to clarify this point. In order to make the relationship between Articles 2
and 3 of the proposed directive clearer, the ECB suggests replacing the current heading of Article 3
with the term ‘exemptions’.

11.2 In addition, some of the items governed by Article 3 are problematic. First, the proposed directive
does not seem to be technologically neutral, as it discriminates between physical and electronic
It may therefore create an unwarranted bias towards paper-based payment
forms of payment.
services. Depending on existing national legislation, payment service providers that currently offer
paper-based services might find it more costly to introduce more efficient electronic versions of their
products, as they would then fall under the proposed directive, which might therefore delay the
generally desirable introduction of electronic payment services.

11.3 Second, the waiver for certain payment services provided by providers of telecommunications, IT
systems or networks, as outlined in Article 3(j) of the proposed directive, may be prone to different
interpretations. The provision is not technologically neutral and may be interpreted either too
narrowly or too widely (e.g. payments on online trading platforms such as eBay might be excluded,
although they are not materially different from services that would fall under the proposed directive).
As a result the proposed directive could be implemented unevenly. Moreover, the relationship
between the waiver and paragraphs 8 and 9 of the Annex to the proposed directive is not fully clear.
As a result the ECB suggests that Article 3(j) of the proposed directive and paragraphs 8 and 9 of the
Annex thereto should be deleted altogether.

11.4 To the extent that paper-based promissory notes are referred to in Article 3(f) of the proposed direc-
tive, a general reference should also be made to bills of exchange, including both bills of exchange
covered by the 1930 Geneva Convention (14) and bills of exchange that are not.

(14) Convention providing a uniform law for bills of exchange and promissory notes (Geneva, 7 June 1930).

9.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 109/17

12 Definitions

12.1 The proposed directive follows two different approaches when laying down definitions. In some
cases definitions are established by means of specific provisions in Article 4, while in other cases
definitions are dispersed throughout different parts of the proposed directive (e.g.
in Article 1
(‘credit institutions’, ‘electronic money institutions’, ‘post office giro institutions’ and ‘payment insti-
tutions’), Article 2 (‘payment services’ and ‘payment transaction’), Article 29 (‘framework contracts’),
and Article 51 (‘micro enterprises’)). It is suggested that all definitions could be contained in a single
definitions article of the proposed directive, which could be the first article. This would be similar
to the approach taken in the Consolidated Banking Directive.

12.2 At the same time, there is an issue of consistency with definitions and concepts used in existing
Community law, e.g. the SFD. For instance, this is the case for the definition of ‘payment system’ in
Article 4(3) of the proposed directive, which should be made compatible with the concept of a
‘system’ as used in the SFD, given the potential interaction between systems designated under the
SFD and other payment systems. Further consistency could be achieved by introducing into the
proposed directive the definitions of ‘payer’ and ‘payee’ contained in Article 3 of the proposed regu-
lation on information on the payer accompanying transfers of funds (15).

12.3 The concept of ‘payment institution’ should be amended to exclude the possibility that natural
persons may act as payment institutions, since this would give rise to the risk that the funds of the
payment institution could be commingled with those of the natural person concerned.

12.4 The concept of ‘payment account’ contained in Article 4(7) of the proposed directive is unclear.
This should be remedied, as it is key to interpreting the concept of payment services and the scope
of payment institutions' activity. As currently drafted, it is not clear if all categories of payment
service providers may provide payment accounts. If payment institutions are to be permitted to
provide payment accounts, the differences between ‘conventional’ bank accounts and payment
accounts have to be clarified. Furthermore, the characteristics of such accounts need to be clearly
defined. The questions that arise in this context relate to who is entitled to provide such accounts,
who may hold them and what their legal nature and effects are.

12.5 Another issue that needs clarification is what is meant by the reference in the definition of payment
account to the account being ‘used exclusively for payment transactions’. Does this, for example,
exclude the possibility of interest-bearing accounts or keeping funds for a longer time than is strictly
necessary for the transaction? It must also be ensured that payment institutions may not pay interest
or provide other incentives to the account holder.

12.6 The definition of ‘funds’ contained in Article 4(8) of the proposed directive should be redrafted by,

inter alia, replacing the word ‘cash’ with a reference to banknotes and coins.

12.7 In relation to the definition of ‘unique identifier’ contained in Article 4(15) of the proposed direc-
tive, it is recalled that ECB Opinion CON/2005/56 of 15 December 2005 on a proposal for an EC
regulation on information on the payer accompanying transfers of funds (16) proposes specific
wording for the definition of ‘unique identifier’, which now appears to be reflected in the current
version of the proposed regulation. It is suggested that the definition of 'unique identifier' in both
the proposed regulation and the proposed directive should be harmonised.

12.8 The concept of ‘execution time’

is used in various recitals to the proposed directive and in
Articles 26(1)(a)(ii) and 31(1)(b)(ii), Article 35 and Section 2 of Chapter 2 of Title IV, without being
defined. Defining the execution time as a specific time-span (which could be measured, for instance,
in working days or operating hours) would be beneficial as it would enable the maximum execution
time to be defined. Moreover, there are many transactions that are effected without the use of a
payment account (e.g. money remittances to non-banking customers). The definition of execution
time in the proposed directive should also cover such cases.

(15) ‘Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on information on the payer accompa-

nying transfers of funds’ (COM(2005) 343 final).

(16) OJ C 336, 31.12.2005, p. 109.

C 109/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

9.5.2006

12.9 There is no common calendar of ‘working days’ in the EU, and, although the term is also applied
throughout Section 2 of Chapter 2 of Title IV of the proposed directive,
it is not defined. For
processing and operating purposes, and to ensure that the scope of obligations is clear, it would be
useful to insert such a definition into the proposed directive (in the definitions article).

12.10 The term ‘scriptural money’

is used in the proposed directive without being defined, e.g.

in
Article 3(b), Article 4(8) of the proposed directive and paragraph 7 of the Annex to the proposed
directive. It is suggested that a definition of scriptural money should be established (in the defini-
tions article), bearing in mind that only central banks and credit institutions (which include e-
money institutions) may hold such funds.

12.11 In the same vein, the term ‘branch’ is used in Article 4(2) and Article 20 of the proposed directive
without being defined. It is suggested that a definition of ‘branch’ should be introduced in line with
the definition in Article 1(3) of the Consolidated Banking Directive.

12.12 The definition of ‘framework contract’ should be moved from Article 29 to the definitions article.
Moreover, for reasons of consistency, the term ‘framework contract’ should be used throughout the
proposed directive, replacing the alternative term ‘framework agreement’ used in recital 18 to the
proposed directive and in Articles 32 and 33.

13 Additional legal and technical comments

13.1

It needs to be clarified whether host Member States may, for statistical reporting purposes, require
that all payment institutions having branches within their territories report on their activities to the
competent statistical authorities of the host Member State, inter alia, the national central bank and/
or the national statistical agency.

13.2

It could be explicitly clarified that the reference to ‘any currency’ in Article 2 of the proposed direc-
tive is intended to apply to the currencies of countries outside the Community.

13.3 Article 1 of the proposed directive is entitled ‘Subject matter’ and should accordingly be restricted
to a basic presentation of the proposed directive's subject matter. It would seem more appropriate
for the four categories of payment service providers to come under a single definition of ‘payment
service provider’ to be included in the definitions article, especially given that the definitions article
also defines the concept of a payment service user.

13.4 Article 11(2) of the proposed directive concerning the use of tied agents, outsources or subsidiaries
refers to outsourcing of ‘all operations’. This is problematic, as it would allow the creation of shell
companies that formally comply with the proposed directive, while the actual operations are
performed by a third party that is not subject to its requirements. The ECB therefore suggests
amending Article 11 to avoid such implications.

13.5 Article 12(1) of the proposed directive refers to ‘operational risk’ without defining this concept.
The necessary precision could be provided by applying the definition of ‘operational risk’ contained
in Article 4(22) of the proposed Capital Adequacy Directive (17).

13.6

The record-keeping rules contained in Articles 13 and 44 of the proposed directive might imply
that a payment institution's record-keeping obligations do not extend for longer than one year.
These obligations should be brought more explicitly in line with other Community legislation, such
as Article 30 of the Third Money Laundering Directive (18), which lays down a minimum record-
keeping obligation of five years.

(17) See footnote 9 for full reference.
(18) Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on the prevention of the
use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing (OJ L 309, 25.11.2005,
p. 15).

9.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 109/19

13.7

13.8

13.9

The concept of ‘consent’ contained in Article 41 of the proposed directive is not precise enough.
Reference to withdrawal of consent and a definition thereof are necessary in this context.

The wording of Article 52 of the proposed directive concerning refunds is ambiguous, for example
referring to entitlement to a refund where the amount of the transaction executed is not an
amount ‘that a reasonable payer would expect if he were in the payer's position’. This wording
leaves wide room for interpretation, which increases uncertainty in the payments field, and could
lead to an increase in disputes and leave consumers unprotected. In order to minimise the risk of
future litigation, further consideration should therefore be given to clarifying the wording of Article
52.

Finality of a payment is crucial for the payee, and therefore the concept of ‘being informed’
contained in Article 53(1) of the proposed directive is too vague, as the timing could differ signifi-
cantly where the information becomes accessible via the payer's internet bank or a publicly-avail-
able account printer, as opposed to cases where the payer receives a hard-copy account statement
by post. A fixed moment in time relating to the transfer itself would therefore be preferable. To
allow the payer additional time to react, the permitted time frame could be extended from four to
six weeks.

13.10 The concepts of ‘acceptance’ and of ‘irrevocability’ contained in Article 54 and 56 of the proposed
directive, while being clear and helpful, should be compatible with the concepts of ‘entry into a
system’ and ‘irrevocability’ in the SFD.

13.11 Article 54(2) of the proposed directive should be amended to ensure that the time lag between the

receipt and acceptance of a payment is not unnecessarily prolonged.

13.12 Article 65(1) of the proposed directive concerning availability of funds states that Member States
must ensure that payment service providers of the payee make funds available to the payee as soon
as these funds are credited to the account of the payee. It would seem obvious that funds are avail-
able once credited to the payee's account. Therefore it would seem appropriate to make it clear
that funds are to be made available to the payee immediately once the payment service provider
has received them.

13.13 To enable payment schemes to allow efficient straight-through processing, Article 66(1) of the
proposed directive should be amended by inserting a reference to the International Bank Account
Number (IBAN) as the preferred unique identifier in all cases, thereby ensuring a harmonised
approach in the use of unique identifiers.

14 Drafting proposals

In addition to the above advice, drafting proposals are set out in the Annex.

Done at Frankfurt am Main, 26 April 2006.

The President of the ECB

Jean-Claude TRICHET

C 109/20

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

9.5.2006

ANNEX

Drafting proposals (1)

Text proposed by the Commission (2)

Amendments proposed by the ECB (3)

Amendment 1

Recital 12

(12) It is essential to the function of a payment service
provider that it be able to operate within payment
systems or to participate in such systems. In order to
ensure equality of treatment throughout the Com-
munity as between the different
categories of
payment service provider, according to the terms of
their prudential licence, it is necessary to clarify the
rules concerning access to the provision of payment
services and participation in payment systems. Provi-
sion should be made for the non-discriminatory treat-
ment of payment institutions and credit institutions
as regards their operation within payment systems
and their access thereto.

(12) It is essential to the function of a payment service
provider that it be able to operate within payment
systems or to participate in such systems. In order to
ensure equality of treatment throughout the Com-
munity as between the different
categories of
payment service provider, according to the terms of
their prudential licence, it is necessary to clarify the
rules concerning access to the provision of payment
services and participation in payment systems. Under
Article 105(2) of the Treaty and Article 3.1 and
Article 22 of the Statute of the European System
of Central Banks and of the European Central
Bank (hereinafter the ‘Statute of the ESCB’), one
of the basic tasks to be carried out through the
European System of Central Banks (ESCB) is to
promote the smooth operation of payment
systems. The ECB and the national central banks
of the Member States may provide facilities, and
the ECB may make regulations, to ensure effi-
cient and sound clearing and payment systems
within the Community and with other countries.
this Directive concerning
The provisions of
access to the provision of payment services and
participation in payment systems are without
prejudice to these competences of the ECB and
the ESCB, which apply in the Member States that
have adopted the euro. Provisions should be made
the non-discriminatory treatment of payment
for
institutions and credit
institutions as regards their
operation within payment systems and their access
thereto.

Justification — See paragraph 9.3 of the opinion

Amendment 2

Article 1, Subject matter

This Directive lays down the rules in accordance with
which Member States shall distinguish the following fourca-
tegories of payment service provider:
(a) credit

institutions within the meaning of Directive

This Directive lays down the rules in accordance with
which Member States shall distinguish four categories of
payment service provider, as defined in Article [4] [Defi-
nitions article].

2000/12/EC;

(b) electronic money institutions within the meaning of

Directive 2000/46/EC;

(c) post office giro institutions, as referred to in the
second indent of Article 2(3) of Directive 2000/12/EC,
which are entitled under national or Community law
to provide payment services;

This Directive also lays down rules concerning transpar-
ency conditions, and the respective rights and obligations
of users and providers,
in relation to the provision of
payment services as a regular occupation or business
activity.

(1) The drafting proposals in the Annex are based on the text of the proposed directive and are limited to amendments made to reflect

the ECB's proposals in this opinion.

(2) Italics in the body of the text indicate where the ECB proposes deleting text.
(3) Bold in the body of the text indicates where the ECB proposes inserting new text.

9.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 109/21

(d) other natural or legal persons who have been granted
authorisation in accordance with Article 6 of
this
Directive to provide and execute payment services
throughout the Community, hereinafter 'payment insti-
tutions.

This Directive also lays down rules concerning transpar-
ency conditions, and the respective rights and obligations
of users and providers,
in relation to the provision of
payment services as a regular occupation or business
activity.

Central banks acting as monetary authorities and public authori-
ties which provide payment services are not considered to be
payment service providers.

Justification — See paragraph 13.3 of the opinion

Amendment 3

Article 2(1), first subparagraph

This Directive shall apply only to business activities, listed
in the Annex, consisting in the execution of payment
transactions on behalf of a natural or legal person, herein-
after ‘payment services’, where at least one of the payment
service providers is located in the Community.

This Directive shall apply only to payment services.

Justification — See paragraph 12.1 of the opinion

Article 1, exemption of central banks — to be added to Article 2(1), second subparagraph

Amendment 4

Central banks acting as monetary authorities and public
authorities which provide payment services are not consid-
ered to be payment service providers.

This Directive shall not apply to payment services provided
by central banks.

Justification — See paragraph 8 of the opinion

Amendment 5

Article 3, title

Negative scope

Exemptions

Justification — See paragraph 11.1 of the opinion

Amendment 6

Article 3(j)

(j) payment transactions executed by means of a mobile
telephone or any other digital or IT device, where all
the following conditions are met:

[Deletion]

(i) the service provider operating the telecommunica-
tion or IT system or network is closely involved in
the development of the digital goods or electronic
communication services provided;

(ii) the goods and services cannot be delivered in the

absence of the service provider;

(iii) there is no alternative option for remuneration.

Justification — See paragraph 11.3 of the opinion

C 109/22

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

9.5.2006

Amendment 7

Article 4(3)

‘payment system’ means a funds transfer system with
formal and standardised arrangements and common rules
for the processing, clearing and/or settlement of payment
transactions;

including without

‘payment system’ means a funds transfer system with
formal and standardised arrangements and common rules
for the processing, clearing and/or settlement of payment
limitation systems
transactions,
designated and notified to the Commission as
in accordance with Directive
payment
98/26/EC of
the
Council of 19 May 1998 on settlement finality in
payment and securities settlement systems (FN);

the European Parliament and of

systems

Justification — See paragraph 12.2 of the opinion

Amendment 8

Article 4(8)

‘funds’ means cash, scriptural money and electronic money
as referred to in Directive 2000/46/EC;

‘funds’ means banknotes and coins and scriptural money;

Justification — See paragraph 12.6 of the opinion

Amendment 9

Definitions article

Article 1

Subject matter

This Directive lays down the rules in accordance with
which Member States shall distinguish the following four
categories of payment service provider:

[..]

(d) other natural or legal persons who have been granted
authorisation in accordance with Article 6 of
this
Directive to provide and execute payment services
throughout the Community, hereinafter ‘payment insti-
tutions’.

‘payment institution’ means any legal person other than:
(a) a credit institution within the meaning of Article 1(1)
of Directive 2000/12/EC; (b) an electronic money institu-
tion as defined in Article 1(3)(a) of Directive 2000/46/EC);
or (c) a post office giro institution, as referred to in the
second indent of Article 2(3) of Directive 2000/12/EC,
which is entitled under national or Community law to
provide payment services; which has been granted authori-
sation in accordance with Article 6 to provide and execute
payment services throughout the Community;

Justification — See paragraphs 12.1 and 12.3 of the opinion

Amendment 10

Definitions article

[Insertion]

‘payment service’ means a business activity listed in the
Annex, consisting of the execution of payment transac-
tions on behalf of a natural or legal person, where at least
one of the payment service providers is located in the
Community;

Justification — See paragraph 12.1 of the opinion

(FN) OJ L 166, 11.6.1998, p. 45.

9.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 109/23

Amendment 11

Definitions article

‘payment service provider’ means: (a) a credit institution
within the meaning of Article 1(1) of Directive
2000/12/EC; (b) an electronic money institution as defined
in Article 1(3)(a) of Directive 2000/46/EC); (c) a post office
giro institution, as referred to in the second indent of
Article 2(3) of Directive 2000/12/EC, which is entitled
under national or Community law to provide payment
services; or (d) without prejudice to Article 21, a payment
institution;

Article 1

Subject matter

This Directive lays down the rules in accordance with
which Member States shall distinguish the following four
categories of payment service provider:

(a) credit

institutions within the meaning of Direc-

tive 2000/12/EC;

(b) electronic money institutions within the meaning of

Directive 2000/46/EC;

(c) post office giro institutions, as referred to in the
second indent of Article 2(3) of Directive 2000/12/EC,
which are entitled under national or Community law
to provide payment services;

(d) other natural or legal persons who have been granted
authorisation in accordance with Article 6 of
this
Directive to provide and execute payment services
throughout the Community, hereinafter ‘payment insti-
tutions’.

[Insertion]

[Insertion]

[Insertion]

Justification — See paragraph 12.1 of the opinion

Amendment 12

Definitions article

‘payment transaction’ means the act, initiated by the payer
or by the payee, of depositing, withdrawing or transferring
funds from the payer to the payee,
irrespective of any
underlying obligations between the payment service users;

Justification — See paragraph 12.1 of the opinion

Amendment 13

Definitions article

‘execution time’ means the time between the acceptance of
a payment order by a payment service provider and the
point in time when the amount to be paid pursuant to the
payment order is made available to the payee;

Justification — See paragraph 12.8 of the opinion

Amendment 14

Definitions article

‘scriptural money’ means deposit balances held on an
account at a credit institution or a central bank, or elec-
tronic money as defined in Article 1(3)(b) of Directive
2000/46/EC;

Justification — See paragraph 12.10 of the opinion

C 109/24

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

9.5.2006

[Insertion]

[Insertion]

Amendment 15

Definitions article

‘framework contract’ means a payment service agreement
characterised by the fact that it commits a payment service
provider to the future execution of individual or successive
payment transactions on the order of the payer;

Justification — See paragraph 12.12 of the opinion

Amendment 16

New Article 6, Consultation of central banks

The competent authorities of the home Member State shall
consult
the relevant central bank before accepting or
rejecting an application for authorisation or suspending or
withdrawing an authorisation.

Justification — See paragraph 4.8 of the opinion

Amendment 17

Article 10(1) and (2)

Payment institutions shall be entitled to engage in

1.
the following activities:

(a) the provision of payment services;
(b) the provision of operational and related ancillary
services such as the guaranteeing execution of payment
transactions,,
foreign exchange services, safekeeping
activities, and storage and processing of data;

(c) the accessing and operation of payment systems for the
purposes of transferring, clearing and settling funds,
including any instruments and procedures relating to
the systems.

In the context of point (a), funds received by payment institu-
tions from payment service users with a view to the provi-
sion of payment services shall not constitute a deposit or
other repayable funds within the meaning of Article 3 of
Directive 2000/12/EC, or electronic money within the
meaning of Directive 2000/46/EC.

2.
Funds received from payment service users and speci-
fically accepted in connection with a payment service shall
not be used by payment institutions to support other busi-
ness activities otherthan payment services. The payment insti-
tution shall keep separately in its books the payment service users
funds, accepted for a payment
from other funds
accepted for activities other than payment services.

transaction,

Payment

1.
exclusively in the following activities:

institutions shall be entitled to engage

(a) the provision of permitted payment services as set

out in the Annex;

(b) the provision of operational and related ancillary
services
such as guaranteeing the execution of
payment transactions, foreign exchange services, safe-
keeping activities, and storage and processing of data;
(c) the accessing of payment systems for the purposes of
transferring, clearing and settling funds, including any
instruments and procedures relating to the systems,
without prejudice to Article 23.

2. When payment institutions engage in the provi-
sion of payment services under paragraph (1)(a), funds
received by payment institutions from payment service
users with a view to the provision of payment services
shall not constitute a deposit or other repayable funds
within the meaning of Article 3 of Directive 2000/12/EC,
or electronic money as defined in Article 1(3)(b) of
Directive 2000/46/EC. Funds received by a payment
institution shall be transferred to the payee or, if an
order is not executed, paid to the payer or other
person entitled to the funds within the execution
time prescribed in Section 2 of Chapter 2 of Title IV
of this Directive.

3.
Funds received from payment service users and speci-
fically accepted in connection with a payment service shall
be earmarked to the specific transaction in respect of
which they are provided to the payment institution
and may not be used by payment institutions to support
other business
services
activities
requested by the payment service user.

than the payment

9.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 109/25

4. Member States shall ensure that appropriate safe-
guards are in place to protect payment service users as
follows:

(a) in relation to funds received from payment service
users, which have been accepted for a payment trans-
action, a payment institution shall segregate such funds
from other funds accepted for activities other than
payment services and account for them separately in
its books;

(b) a payment

institution shall keep the funds of a
payment service user under an account name which
clearly identifies the payment service user;

(c) no funds of

a payment

service user may be
commingled with the funds of a payment service
provider or any other payment service user or any
other person other than the payment service user on
whose behalf the funds are held;

(d) the funds of a payment service user shall be insulated
from any third-party action against the payment insti-
tution;

(e) in the event that one or more reorganisation measures
is adopted or winding-up proceedings are opened
against a payment institution, the relevant administra-
tive or judicial authorities, or the relevant administrator
or liquidator, as the case may be, shall promptly return
the funds of all payment service users to such payment
service users in priority to all other claims against that
payment institution;

(f) in the event that one or more reorganisation measures
is adopted or winding-up proceedings are opened
against a payment institution and insufficient funds are
available for remittance of all the funds due to payment
the relevant administrative or judicial
service users,
authorities, or the relevant administrator or liquidator,
as
shall promptly distribute to
payment service users the funds of such payment
service users on a pro rata basis according to their
claims and in priority to all other claims against that
payment institution.

the case may be,

Note: it is suggested that the above provision should be
accompanied by the introduction of the following defini-
tions into the definitions article in the proposed directive,
all taken directly from Article 2 of Directive 2001/24/EC
of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 April
2001 on the reorganisation and winding-up of credit insti-
tutions (FN):

(1) ‘administrator’ means any person or body appointed
by the administrative or judicial authorities whose task
is to administer reorganisation measures;

(2) ‘administrative or

judicial authorities’ means

such
administrative or judicial authorities of the Member
States as are competent for the purposes of reorganisa-
tion measures or winding-up proceedings;

(FN) OJ L 125, 5.5.2001, p. 15.

C 109/26

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

9.5.2006

(3) ‘reorganisation measures’ mean measures which are
intended to preserve or restore the financial situation
of a payment institution and which could affect third
parties' pre-existing rights,
including measures invol-
ving the possibility of a suspension of payments,
suspension of enforcement measures or reduction of
claims;

(4) ‘liquidator’ means any person or body appointed by
the administrative or judicial authorities whose task is
to administer winding-up proceedings;

(5) ‘winding-up proceedings’ mean collective proceed-
ings opened and monitored by the administrative
or judicial authorities of a Member State with the
aim of realising assets under the supervision of
those authorities, including where the proceedings
are terminated by a composition or other, similar
measure.

Justification — See paragraphs 6.3, 6.4 and 9.4 of the opinion

Amendment 18

Article 10(3)

3.
The business activities of authorised payment institutions
shall be non-exclusive and shall not be restricted to payment
services, having regard to the applicable national and Com-
munity law.

[Deletion]

Justification — See paragraph 6.5 of the opinion

Amendment 19

Article 11(2)

2. Where a payment institution intends to outsource
some or all of its operations, it shall inform the competent
authority accordingly.

its operations,

2. Where a payment institution intends to outsource
some of
inform the competent
it shall
authority of its home Member State accordingly. Such
outsourcing shall be without prejudice to the applica-
tion of this Directive to the entity to which some of
the operations have been outsourced, to the extent
that
service
provider in its own right.

such entity qualifies as a payment

Justification — See paragraph 13.4 of the opinion

Amendment 20

Article 16

Member States shall ensure that the controls exercised by
the competent authorities for checking continued compli-
ance with this Title are proportionate, adequate and
responsive to the risks to which payment institutions are
exposed.

Member States shall ensure that the controls exercised by
the competent authorities for checking continued compli-
ance with this Title are proportionate, adequate and
responsive to the risks to which payment institutions are
exposed.

In order to check compliance with this Title, the compe-
tent authorities may take only the following steps:

In order to check compliance with this Title, the compe-
tent authorities shall have the ability to take the
following steps:

(a) to require the payment institution to provide any infor-

(a) to require the payment institution to provide any infor-

mation needed to monitor compliance;

mation needed to monitor compliance;

9.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 109/27

(b) to carry out on-site inspections with the payment insti-
tution, an outsourced entity, a tied agent or a
the payment
subsidiary under the responsibility of
institution;

(b) to carry out on-site inspections with the payment insti-
tution, an outsourced entity, a tied agent or a
the payment
subsidiary under the responsibility of
institution;

(c) to issue recommendations and guidelines;

(c) to issue recommendations and guidelines;

(d) to issue warnings and impose proportionate penalties

(d) to issue warnings and impose proportionate penalties

in cases of non-compliance;

in cases of non-compliance;

(e) to suspend or withdraw authorisation in cases, where
the conditions for authorisation in accordance with
Article 5 are no longer fulfilled.

(e) to suspend or withdraw authorisation in cases, where
the conditions for authorisation in accordance with
Article 5 are no longer fulfilled.

Justification — See paragraph 4.7 of the opinion

Amendment 21

Article 19, first paragraph

The competent authorities of the different Member States
shall cooperate and, in particular, exchange information in
order to ensure proper application of this Directive.

The competent authorities of the different Member States
shall cooperate and, in particular, exchange information in
order to ensure proper application of this Directive, both
among themselves and with the central banks of the
ESCB.

Justification — See paragraph 4.8 of the opinion

Amendment 22

Article 19, second paragraph, point (b)

(b) central banks, the European System of Central Banks and
the European Central Bank, in their capacity as monetary
authorities, and, where appropriate, other public autho-
rities responsible for overseeing payment and settle-
ment systems;

central banks in third countries and, where appropriate,
other public
for overseeing
payment and settlement systems;

responsible

authorities

Justification — See paragraph 4.8 of the opinion

Amendment 23

Article 23(1)

Access to and operation of payment systems
1. Member States shall ensure that rules on access to and
operation of payment systems shall be objective and propor-
tionate and shall not inhibit access more than is necessary to
safeguard against specific risks and to protect the financial safety
of the payment system.

Payment systems may not impose any of the following
requirements:

Access to payment systems

1. Member States shall ensure that a payment institu-
tion's access to a payment system shall not be:

(a)

(b)

restricted on a discriminatory basis, provided that the
financial and operational
the payment
system is ensured; and
restricted on the basis of institutional status.

safety of

rule which discriminates

(a) a ban on participation in other payment systems;
(b) a

between authorised
payment service providers in relation to the rights,
obligations and entitlements of participants;
(c) any restriction on the basis of institutional status.

Justification — See paragraphs 9.1 and 9.4 of the opinion

C 109/28

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

9.5.2006

Amendment 24

Article 23(2)

2.
Paragraph 1 shall be without prejudice to requirements
imposed on participants in a payment and securities settlement
system by Community legislation and in particular by Directive
98/26/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (4).

2.
Paragraph 1 shall not apply to systems designated
under Directive 98/26/EC and shall be without preju-
dice to the competences of the ECB and the ESCB as
laid down in Article 105(2) of the Treaty and Article
the ESCB,
3.1 and Article 22 of
concerning access to payment systems and the provi-
sion of payment systems.

the Statute of

Justification — See paragraphs 9.2 and 9.3 of the opinion

Amendment 25

Article 41

Member States shall ensure that a payment transaction is
considered to be authorised only if
the payer has
consented to the respective payment order addressed to
the payment service provider.

Member States shall ensure that a payment transaction is
considered to be authorised only if
the payer has
consented to the respective payment order addressed to
the payment service provider.

Consent shall consist in an explicit authorisation for the
payment service provider to effect a payment transaction
or a series of transactions.

Consent shall consist in giving an explicit authorisation for
the payment
to effect a specified
payment transaction or a specified series of transactions.

service provider

In the absence of such consent, a payment transaction
shall be considered to be unauthorised.

A payment transaction may be authorised by the payer
prior or subsequent to the execution of the payment trans-
action.

Consent may be withdrawn in accordance with the
contractual conditions agreed between the payment service
provider and the payer, but no later than the point in time
of acceptance of a payment order or the point in time
when a payment order becomes irrevocable under Articles
54 or 56.

In the absence of such consent, or if such consent is
transaction shall be
validly withdrawn, a payment
considered to be unauthorised.

A payment transaction may be authorised by the payer
prior or subsequent to the execution of the payment trans-
action.

Justification — See paragraph 13.7 and 13.10 of the opinion

Amendment 26

Article 53(1)

1. Member States shall ensure that
the payer shall
request the refund, at the latest within four weeks of being
informed of the payment transaction in question by the payment
service provider. […]

1. Member States shall ensure that
the payer shall
request the refund, at the latest within six weeks from the
date on which the funds are debited. […]

Justification — See paragraph 13.9 of the opinion

Amendment 27

Article 54(2)

In the case of electronically initiated transactions, the
2.
payment service provider shall inform the payment service
user of acceptance of the order for execution. He shall do
so without undue delay and, in any case, before the end of
the next working day after the point in time of acceptance
under paragraph 1.

In the case of electronically initiated transactions, the
2.
payment service provider shall inform the payment service
user of acceptance of the order for execution. He shall do
so without undue delay following receipt of
the
payment order and, in any case, before the end of the
next working day after the point in time of acceptance
under paragraph 1.

Justification — See paragraph 13.11 of the opinion

(4) OJ L 166, 11.6.1998, p. 45.

9.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 109/29

Amendment 28

Article 65(1), first subparagraph

1. Member States shall ensure that the payment service
provider of the payee makes funds available to the payee
as soon as those funds are credited to the payee's payment
account.

1. Member States shall ensure that the payment service
provider of the payee makes funds available to the payee
immediately once it has received them.

Justification — See paragraph 13.12 of the opinion

Amendment 29

Article 66(1)

[…]Where the IBAN was specified as the unique identifier,
it should take precedence over the name of the payee, if it
is provided additionally. However,
the payment service
provider should, where possible, verify the consistency of
the former with the latter.

[…]Where the IBAN is specified as the unique identifier, it
shall take precedence over any other unique identifier,
including the name of the payee, if such other identifier
is provided in addition to the IBAN. However,
the
payment service provider should, where possible, verify
the consistency of the unique identifiers provided.

Justification — See paragraph 13.13 of the opinion

Amendment 30

Article 77(1)

assisted by a Payments
The Commission shall be
Committee, hereinafter
‘the Committee’, composed of
representatives of the Member States and chaired by a
representative of the Commission.

assisted by a Payments
The Commission shall be
Committee, hereinafter
‘the Committee’, composed of
representatives of the Member States and observers from
the ECB, and chaired by a representative of the Commis-
sion.

Justification — See paragraph 10 of the opinion

Amendment 31

Annex

ANNEX
‘PAYMENT SERVICES’ UNDER ARTICLE 2(1)

ANNEX
PAYMENT SERVICES UNDER ARTICLE 4

(1) Cash deposits on a payment account held either by
the user's payment service provider or by another
payment service provider as well as all the operations
required for operating a payment account.

(2) Cash withdrawals from a payment account held
either by the user's payment service provider or by
another payment service provider, as well as all the
operations required for operating a payment account.
(3) Execution of payment transactions, including transfer
of funds, where the funds are held on deposit in a
payment account with the user's payment service
provider or with another payment service provider:

— execution of direct debits, including one-off direct

debits;

— execution of payment

transactions through a

payment card or a similar device;

— execution of credit transfers,

including standing

orders.

1.
Credit institutions within the meaning of Article 1(1)
of Directive 2000/12/EC, including electronic money insti-
as defined in Article 1(3)(a) of Directive
tutions
2000/46/EC, may provide the following payment services:

(i) Cash deposits on a payment account held either by
the user's payment service provider or by another
payment service provider as well as all the operations
required for operating a payment account.

(ii) Cash withdrawals from a payment account held either
by the user's payment service provider or by another
payment service provider, as well as all the operations
required for operating a payment account.

(iii) Execution of payment transactions, including transfer
of funds, where the funds are held on deposit in a
payment account with the user's payment service
provider or with another payment service provider:

— execution of direct debits, including one-off direct

debits;

C 109/30

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

9.5.2006

(4) Execution of payment transactions where the funds
are covered by a credit line for a payment service
user provided in accordance with Directive 98/7/EC of
the Council amending
the European Parliament and of
Directive 87/102/EEC for the approximation of the
laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the
Member States concerning consumer credit and other
applicable Community legislation:

— execution of direct debits, including one-off direct

debits;

— execution of payment

transactions through a

payment card or a similar device;

— execution of credit transfers,

including standing

orders.

(5) Issuing of payment cards which allow the payment

service user to transfer funds.

(6) Execution of payment transactions, including transfer
of
funds, where the electronic money within the
meaning of Directive 2000/46/EC is issued by the
payment service provider.

(7) Money remittance services where the cash, scriptural
money or electronic-money is accepted by the
payment service provider from the payment service
user for the sole purpose of making a payment trans-
action and transferring the funds to the payee.

(8) Execution of payment transactions by any means of
communication at a distance such as mobile tele-
phones or other digital or IT devices where the
service provider operating the telecommunication or
IT system or network is facilitating the payment of
goods or services that are not digital goods or elec-
tronic
and so are not
communication services
provided through the device itself.

(9) Execution of payment transactions by any means of
communication at a distance such as mobile tele-
phones or other digital or IT devices where the
service provider operating the telecommunication or
IT system or network simply arranges a transfer of
funds for the payment of digital goods or electronic
communication services provided through the device,
without
service
provided.

intervention in the

any other

— execution of payment

transactions

through a

payment card or a similar device;

— execution of credit

transfers,

including standing

orders.

(iv) Execution of payment transactions, including transfer
of funds, where the electronic money as defined in
Article 1(3)(b) of Directive 2000/46/EC is issued by
the payment service provider.

2.
Credit institutions within the meaning of Article 1(1)
of Directive 2000/12/EC, with the exception of electronic
money institutions as defined in Article 1(3)(a) of Directive
2000/46/EC, may provide the following payment services:

(i) Execution of payment transactions where the funds are
covered by a credit line for a payment service user
provided in accordance with Council Directive 87/
102/EEC of 22 December 1986 for the approximation
of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions
of the Member States concerning consumer credit (FN)
and other applicable Community legislation:

— execution of direct debits, including one-off direct

debits;

— execution of payment

transactions

through a

payment card or a similar device;

— execution of credit

transfers,

including standing

orders.

3.
Credit institutions within the meaning of Article 1(1)
of Directive 2000/12/EC, including electronic money insti-
tutions
as defined in Article 1(3)(a) of Directive
2000/46/EC, and payment institutions may provide the
following payment services:

(i) Issuing of payment cards which allow the payment
service user to transfer funds where the cardholder's
account is with a credit institution;

(ii) Money remittance services where banknotes and
coins,
scriptural money or electronic money are
accepted by the payment service provider from the
payment service user for the sole purpose of making a
payment transaction and transferring the funds to the
payee.

Justification — See paragraphs 6.2 and 11.3 of the opinion

(FN) OJ L 42, 12.2.1987, p. 48. Directive as last amended by Directive 98/7/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L

101, 1.4.1998, p. 17).