Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee – Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Central Bank, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on a Savings and Investments Union: A Strategy to Foster Citizens’ Wealth and Economic Competitiveness in the EU (COM(2025) 124 final)
Date: 2025-07-16
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EU strategy, capital market, competitiveness, financial supervision, investment, savings, single market, supplementary pension, sustainable development, wealth








C_202505155EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2025/5155


28.10.2025






Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee
Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the European Council, the Council, the European Central Bank, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on a Savings and Investments Union: A Strategy to Foster Citizens’ Wealth and Economic Competitiveness in the EU

(COM(2025) 124 final)

(C/2025/5155)


Rapporteur: 
Petru Sorin DANDEA






Advisor


Christian M. STIEFMUELLER (for the rapporteur)




Referral


European Commission, 13.5.2025




Legal basis


Article 304 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union




Section responsible


Economic and Monetary Union and Economic and Social Cohesion




Adopted in section


4.7.2025




Adopted at plenary session


16.7.2025




Plenary session No


598




Outcome of vote
(for/against/abstentions)


184/2/5




1.   Conclusions and recommendations









1.1.


The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) welcomes the Commission’s Communication on a Savings and Investment Union (SIU) and believes that its completion could unlock a significant part of the untapped potential of the Single Market. The EESC notes that previous attempts to set up a Capital Markets Union (CMU) have failed to deliver satisfactory progress. To be successful, the SIU must be designed with the clear objectives of offering genuine, tangible benefits for EU citizens and businesses and funding the real economy, as well as promoting a fair transition, delivering a fair distribution of costs, returns and risks, and safeguarding financial market stability.












1.2.


The EESC notes that fragmentation of the EU’s capital markets is one of the key impediments to the efficient flow of capital within the Single Market. It welcomes the Commission’s suggestion that the focus be on enhancing the interoperability, interconnection and efficiency of EU trading and post-trading infrastructure by leveraging state-of-the art technology. It believes that integrated markets also require integrated supervision. Operators of major cross-border financial infrastructures in the EU should be placed under pan-European supervision by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), which should be equipped with adequate resources to fulfil this expanded role. The EESC proposes that the competencies and capacities of ESMA be strengthened accordingly.












1.3.


The EESC suggests that the EU’s efforts concentrate on the significant gap in equity funding, which is depriving both companies of risk-bearing long-term capital, and investors of opportunities to participate in value creation. Private companies, especially SMEs, should be encouraged to diversify their sources of funding and adopt more resilient, less leveraged capital structures, which are crucial for enabling risk-taking and innovation. Equity markets, both listed and unlisted, should be strengthened by further harmonisation of the relevant company, insolvency and tax laws at the highest possible level.












1.4.


The EU must make better use of its still formidable resources of talented and highly-skilled citizens, world-leading institutions in research and education, and dynamic, innovative companies; it needs to reverse the ‘brain drain’ of highly-skilled, innovative researchers and entrepreneurs by offering compelling incentives for entrepreneurs and employees to stay and work in Europe.












1.5.


The EESC believes that it is of the utmost importance to offer a compelling proposition to encourage EU savers to become retail investors and actively participate in capital markets. The participation of retail investors in capital markets must be demand-driven. To this end, investors should have access to the widest possible range of safe, cost-effective, transparent and well-performing investment options. An open, vibrant and competitive market for cross-border investment services, including affordable, high-quality investment advice, is a prerequisite. New instruments, such as a Savings and Investment Account, should be explored; however they will not be taken up unless these preconditions are met.












1.6.


The EESC is of the view that the success of the SIU requires clear and transparent key performance indicators (KPIs) and calls upon the Commission to define and publish a KPI dashboard to monitor progress in implementation of the SIU over time. The EESC recommends setting an ambitious but realistic target date for completion of the SIU, against which progress can be measured.




2.   General comments









2.1.


The EESC welcomes the Commission’s Communication on a Savings and Investment Union, and believes that completing such a union could unlock a significant part of the untapped potential of the Single Market. Currently in Europe, over EUR 10 trillion are saved in bank deposits (1). The EESC notes that previous attempts to set up a Capital Markets Union (CMU) have failed to deliver satisfactory progress. To be successful this time, the SIU must be designed with the clear objectives of offering genuine, tangible benefits for EU citizens and businesses in Europe, and funding the real economy, promoting a fair transition, delivering a fair distribution of costs, returns and risks, and safeguarding financial market stability.












2.2.


The EESC reiterates its view, expressed in several previous opinions (2), that deepening EU capital markets could help meet investment needs for digitalisation, greening and defence policies. According to the Competitiveness Compass (3), the EU needs hundreds of billions of euros of additional investment every year. The EESC points out, however, that these funds are above all European citizen’s savings, and due care must be applied to ensure that they are invested (i) responsibly, in keeping with each individual’s ability to assess and bear financial risk and accompanied by measures on financial literacy and education and adequate investor protection; (ii) cost-effectively, with fair and transparent cost and performance metrics, while offering competitive returns; (iii) freely, by providing access to the widest possible range of cross-border investment options, and (iv) in keeping with the general objectives of promoting a fair transition, delivering a fair distribution of costs, returns and risks, and safeguarding financial market stability.












2.3.


The EESC notes that fragmentation of the EU’s capital markets is one of the key impediments to the efficient flow of capital in the Single Market. It welcomes the Commission’s suggestion that there be a focus on enhancing the interoperability, interconnection and efficiency of EU trading and post-trading infrastructures by leveraging state-of-the art technology (4). The EESC notes that the adoption of pan-European technology platforms, such as Target2 Securities (T2S) or the Smart Middleware Platform (SIMPL), should be encouraged in order to facilitate the formation of federated structures that enable operators of financial infrastructures to cooperate across borders. The EESC refers to its previous opinion (5) and reiterates its recommendation to further expand T2S to become a fully-fledged, pan-European Central Securities Depository (CSD).












2.4.


The EESC agrees that the integration of capital markets supervision at European level is a key element of the SIU. The supervision of operators of market infrastructures with significant cross-border activities, such as central securities depositories and central counterparties, should be gradually transferred to ESMA. The ability of ESMA to take over this task in full or in part will only be possible if it is allocated the necessary financial and human resources. Reforms in ESMA governance and its relationship with competent national authorities should be undertaken in order to prepare for a potential further step in supervisory integration once the right conditions have been met.












2.5.


The EESC suggests that the EU’s efforts concentrate on the significant gap in equity funding, which is depriving both companies of risk-bearing long-term capital and investors of opportunities to participate in value creation. To be successful, measures must address deficiencies on both the supply and the demand sides. On the supply side, issuance and cross-border access to Member State capital markets must become less burdensome and more fluid, and EU companies’ equity instruments must become freely tradeable across Member States’ borders. Further harmonisation of company, insolvency and tax law may be needed, as well as further harmonisation of financial reporting rules for statutory reporting, that should be promoted across Member States through the introduction of International Financial Reporting Standards. These harmonisations should be done at the highest possible level, but must be agreed in a transparent, democratically accountable manner, in view of its economically and socially sensitive nature. On the demand side, Europeans and their households should have access to a wider array of well-regulated, cost-effective, transparent and well-performing investment products offering investment choices on a pan-European basis. Dedicated instruments, such as a Savings and Investment Account, should be explored, but not introduced unless the afore-mentioned preconditions are met.












2.6.


Without an adequate level of financial literacy, retail investors could be exposed to significant losses if they suddenly started investing directly in capital markets The financial literacy of retail investors must therefore be further improved, for example by using national and EU funds. Statutory information on financial products, such as prospectuses and key information documents (KIDs), must provide comprehensive information – including information about people’s rights as investors and consumers – in an accessible, user-friendly format. The strategy should focus on increasing retail investors’ knowledge of the different risk classes, different financial instruments and prudent investment practices. The EESC notes, however, that financial literacy should not be regarded as a substitute for maintaining strong legal protection for savers, retail investors and consumers in general.












2.7.


Particular attention must be paid to young people, to develop sound financial decision-making capabilities early on in life and prevent over-indebtedness, promote responsible financial planning for long-term financial well-being and ensure quality financial education in line with young people’s unique position in investment ecosystems. Young investors are especially willing to engage in new financial opportunities, but they are also vulnerable and disproportionately exposed to financial misinformation and high-risk products. To protect them, the EU should ensure robust consumer protection, including platform-level safeguards, educational onboarding for first-time investors, and limitations on the promotion of speculative financial instruments. Given the strong interest of young Europeans in social and sustainable investment, these priorities should be more prominently reflected in the Commission’s proposals. Moreover, EU-wide data collection on young people’s saving and investment behaviour is essential to ensure future evidence-based regulation and a meaningful response to young people’s needs.












2.8.


The EESC believes that institutional investors, especially asset managers, insurers and pension funds, will continue to play an essential role in channelling funds from households to the capital markets. By virtue of their economies of scale, institutional investors are able to invest in a wider range of capital markets and instruments, thus offering investors a degree of diversification. Properly regulated and supervised, institutional investors should also provide the level of protection needed for the participants they represent. The EESC notes, however, that high fees, inadequate product information and disappointing investment performance have often discouraged retail investors from investing in capital markets. The EESC therefore supports the call made by the Joint Committee of the European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs) (6) for a review of the regulatory framework for these products, for efforts to secure more transparency and safety for investors, and for greater harmonisation of the rules on product distribution.












2.9.


The EESC agrees with the Commission’s proposal that preferential tax treatment be applied to retail investors, but draws attention to the fact that the measure would be difficult to implement due to the very different tax systems within the EU. The EU tax system is fragmented and is regulated, especially for direct taxes, at national level. The viability and acceptance of harmonised measures could be explored in a narrow, targeted way. The EESC welcomes the Finance Europe initiative, launched by six Member States in June 2025, to promote European investment through a pan-European savings product label. This effort aims to enhance integration within the EU’s fragmented financial markets and supports the long-standing goal of creating a SIU.












2.10.


The EESC agrees with the objective of promoting the development of supplementary pensions under prudent conditions, but believes that these pensions must not be positioned as a substitute for public pension systems. Automatic enrolment into supplementary schemes should be promoted, subject to adequately regulated and transparent fee structures, and in such a way that participants maintain control of their pension savings choices and have consistent visibility of investment outcomes. Regulations on supplementary private pension schemes should ensure adequate protection for participants in these funds, especially against exposure to high-risk or other unsuitable investments. The EESC emphasises that pension policy has first and foremost the social policy objective of ensuring the best possible provision of social security for workers in old age. Public pension schemes are the best way to fulfil this socio-political mandate. With this in mind, it considers that expanding and strengthening occupational pension schemes (Pillar 2), agreed through collective bargaining, subject to a minimum contribution from employers, and supervised by a public body implementing binding and sustainable investment guidelines, could be a way forward, provided this is done in a way that complements public pension systems and does not undermine them.












2.11.


The attractiveness and long-term viability of supplementary, capital-funded pension schemes for individual savers depends ultimately and above all on how an investment performs, which is determined by the way it is run and its cost-effectiveness. In order to achieve wider acceptance of capital-funded pension schemes in the EU, it is critical to pay more attention to restructuring the supply side, which is currently fragmented along national lines. In some Member States, mandatory contributions to supplementary pension schemes are used to create a special pool of individual retirement savings for which the public sector provides centralised services, e.g. by aggregating demand and providing centralised access to a broad range of investment products. The EESC calls upon the Commission and Member States to examine such models in a structured way and consider measures to encourage Member States to adopt ‘best practice’ in this domain.












2.12.


The EESC reiterates that the mobilisation of public financial resources must go hand in hand with the mobilisation of private financial resources. It therefore recommends establishing an EU investment fund for competitiveness and resilience, to be established as part of the next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF). It believes that such an EU investment fund should be financed by a mix of resources, including Member State contributions, new own resources and joint EU debt issuance; this latter – innovative – instrument was pioneered successfully during the COVID-19 pandemic and could be repeated in the future to finance the sustainable competitiveness and resilience of the single market. In that context, the EESC also reiterates and fully supports the Commission’s call for the Council ‘to resume work on the issue of new own resources as a matter of urgency’ (7).












2.13.


The EESC believes that supporting higher risk projects and long-term transition projects is possible by building on and expanding the capacity of the European Investment Bank (EIB), the European Investment Fund and national promotional banks and institutions. In particular, equity investments by public and private entities are a central funding alternative for start-ups, scale-ups and established companies, and remain an under-exploited resource that can bolster EU competitiveness. The EESC believes that both the EU and its Member States can encourage the development of pan-European venture capital funds, by providing guarantees and, more importantly, direct investment. Experience in some Member States has shown that public support, including direct investment and a solid guarantee system, can accelerate the development of the venture capital sector. However, steps must be taken to ensure that risks are distributed fairly between public-sector and private-sector investors so that the public sector does not assume a disproportionate share of the risk.












2.14.


Existing tax legislation and solvency requirements in Member States favours the financing of companies through credit operations to the detriment of financing operations on the capital markets. The EESC believes that this is an element that discourages the development and integration of European capital markets. To eliminate the bias in favour of debt financing, it calls for the adoption of more balanced tax systems, without prejudice to the equitable distribution of the tax burden or the integrity of Member States’ tax bases overall. As part of this process, the Commission should present a revised version of the Debt-Equity Bias Reduction Allowance (DEBRA) initiative, encouraging Member States to promote the necessary reforms. Furthermore, the local financial reporting rules hinder cross-border investment and the financing of larger, mid-sized and smaller companies through equity financing. The use of common financial reporting rules for statutory reporting across Member States could help to broaden financing possibilities for local businesses, for instance, by attracting cross-border capital investors.












2.15.


In order to avoid a repeat of the problems encountered with the CMU and the Banking Union, the EESC recommends that the Member States and the European Parliament support the Commission’s initiatives for the SIU. In view of the global geopolitical context, and the pressing need to generate the capital required to finance European companies and the ReArm Europe/Readiness 2030 plans, implementation of the SIU should be undertaken with a new sense of urgency.




3.   Specific comments









3.1.


At the end of 2022, there were 310 securities trading venues in the EEA, including 128 regulated markets, 152 multilateral trading facilities (MTFs) and 30 organised trading facilities (OTFs). For post-trading, there were 18 clearing and 21 settlement markets in the EU. This fragmentation stands in the way of the creation of deep and liquid pools of capital, which would be needed to fund EU companies on favourable, internationally competitive terms and to generate attractive investment opportunities for EU investors. The EESC acknowledges the progress already made with initiatives such as Target2 Securities (T2S), the Consolidated Tape system and the European Single Access Point (ESAP), and welcomes the Commission’s suggestion to focus on enhancing the interoperability, interconnection and efficiency of EU trading and post-trading infrastructures by leveraging state-of-the art technologies.












3.2.


The EESC points out that one of the barriers that European savers face when they want to access the market is the absence of financial instruments that allow for small capital investments. Diversification of investment instruments is needed to give access to retail investors. The EESC notes that a pan-European investment and savings account, taking inspiration from successful models already tried and tested in some Member States, could make a significant contribution to facilitating access to capital markets for retail investors, provided that such products are well-regulated, cost-effective, transparent and well-performing, offering equal access to the widest possible range of European and other markets, and as long as investors – and consumers more generally – are adequately protected.












3.3.


The EESC agrees with the Commission on the barriers that hinder the integration of capital markets. Any strategy will not be able to generate significant results unless it is focused on the specific needs of start-up companies in innovative sectors that rely on attracting and retaining specialised, highly skilled personnel. The EU must reverse the ‘brain drain’ of highly-skilled, innovative researchers and entrepreneurs towards other jurisdictions, and should therefore develop a distinct model. Early-stage companies should be encouraged to extend full and fair participation in the value created by collective effort, by offering shares to all permanent, full-time employees. The EESC is mindful of the fact – and acknowledges – that labour law and tax legislation remain under the control of Member States. Harmonised tax incentives, e.g. regarding capital gains on employee shares, should however be considered.












3.4.


The EESC believes that the development – within the framework of a public-private project – of a European company offering integrated cloud services, providing a resilient, autonomous technical infrastructure for the SIU, could be key to better integration of capital markets and the banking system. It is well known that when European states have jointly allocated resources for the development of companies or projects, these have proven to be successful. Currently, even the largest lending institutions, the systemic European banks, use cloud services offered by global, predominantly American platform operators, which could also represent a security problem.












3.5.


The EESC is of the view that the success of the SIU requires clear, transparent key performance indicators (KPIs) and calls upon the Commission to define and publish a KPI dashboard to monitor progress with the implementation of the SIU over time. Potential KPI metrics could include (i) the growth in cross-border retail investment volumes; (ii) the reduction in average capital market transaction costs; (iii) the number of start-ups using pan-European equity tools; (iv) the capital raised by SMEs through public and venture markets; and (v) the rate of progress with legal harmonisation in the domains of insolvency and withholding tax. The EESC recommends setting an ambitious but realistic target date for completion of the SIU, against which progress can be measured.






Brussels, 16 July 2025.


The President


of the European Economic and Social Committee

Oliver RÖPKE
               





(1)  European Commission, Communication on a Savings and Investments Union, 19 March 2025: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52025DC0124.

(2)  Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions – A Capital Markets Union for people and businesses – new action plan’ (COM(2020) 590 final) (OJ C 155, 30.4.2021, p. 20) and Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee – Investments and reforms to boost European competitiveness and creating a Capital Markets Union (exploratory opinion requested by the European Parliament) (OJ C, C/2025/3193, 2.7.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/3193/oj).

(3)  European Commission, A competitiveness compass for the EU, Communication, 29 January 2025: https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/10017eb1-4722-4333-add2-e0ed18105a34_en?filename=Communication_1.pdf.

(4)  European Commission, Communication on a Savings and Investments Union, European Commission, 19 March 2025: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52025DC0124.

(5)  Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 909/2014 as regards settlement discipline, cross-border provision of services, supervisory cooperation, provision of banking-type ancillary services and requirements for third-country central securities depositories (COM(2022) 120 final – 2022/0074 (COD)) (
OJ C 443, 22.11.2022, p. 87).

(6)  Joint Committee of the European Supervisory Authorities, Call for advice on PRIIPs: ESA advice on the review of the PRIIPs Regulation, JC 2022/20, 29 April 2022: https://www.eiopa.europa.eu/system/files/2022-04/esa_advice_on_the_review_of_the_priips_regulation.pdf.

(7)  European Commission, Communication on The road to the next Multiannual Financial Framework (COM(2025) 46 final), 11 February 2025: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52025DC0046&qid=1751625022478.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/5155/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)