Bigtechs already have a material footprint in financial services, and not least in payment services: Amazon Pay operates in 10 countries, Google Pay in 22 countries and Apple Pay in 25 countries. Facebook Messenger allows peer-to-peer payments in 3 countries and a Facebook wallet is reportedly in preparation. Moreover, Bigtechs like the GAFA companies have competitive advantages in terms of expanding their activities further in this area, including massive financial resources to strong brand recognition, a worldwide customer base and privileged access to cutting edge technologies. Therefore, Bigtechs more than Fintechs have the potential to fundamentally redefine financial intermediation: not to recreate the universal banking model, but rather to integrate the entire landscape of financial services into their own digital ecosystems. This does not mean that banks will be disintermediated; but rather that banks may be interfaced by Bigtechs’ platforms. Such a move is already gaining considerable traction in China. So, to conclude on the new players emerging in the digital era and their impact on financial intermediation, digital finance may not lead to a more decentralised system as the centripetal forces of network effects may benefit large conglomerates the most. Rather than eliminating intermediation, if left on its own, digital finance will more likely lead to reshuffling the cards, with the most digitally-agile incumbents and the most financially-able challengers becoming the new dominant (and potentially systemic) intermediaries. (B) Beyond native digital intermediaries, we have also witnessed the steady growth of the asset management industry in the wake of the great financial crisis.

But greater competition is absolutely necessary to stimulate financial innovation. In addition, it translates in a market structure that is more attractive from a financial stability perspective and easier to oversee from a supervisory standpoint. So, to conclude my second point, the completion of the regulatory decade to strengthen banking financial intermediation is not the end of the story; it’s just the end of the beginning. The transformation of financial intermediation is full of opportunities but it also highlights the limitations of sectoral and entity-based regulations and the need to adapt regulation and supervision to a morphing financial intermediation. To manage the financial stability risks stemming from an unbundled financial intermediation model, what we need is to develop: -  First, well-articulated and complementary regulation and supervision going from microprudential to macro-prudential, from prudential to consumer protection, anti-money laundering, data protection and anti-trust laws;  -  Secondly, a technology-neutral stance, which accommodates Fintech innovation while preserving financial stability; and  -  Thirdly, an activity-based regulation and supervision, to ensure a level playing field between all entities pursuing the same financial activity. 3- The need to advance the European regulatory agenda to support a more diversified and integrated intermediation model All these new trends in financial intermediation – digitalisation, non-bank financial intermediation, Brexit – plead for advancing the European agenda to support a more diversified and integrated intermediation model. At the same time, these changes represent an incredible opportunity to restructure the European financial system in order to unleash growth and innovation.