监管金融科技融资：数字银行和金融科技平台（英文版）.pdf

Financial Stability Institute FSI Insights on policy implementation No 27 Regulating fintech financing: digital banks and fintech platforms By Johannes Ehrentraud, Denise Garcia Ocampo, Camila Quevedo Vega August 2020 JEL classification: G18, G21, G23, G28, O30, O38 Keywords: fintech, regulation, digital banking, fintech platforms, crowdfunding, fintech credit, fintech balance sheet lending FSI Insights are written by members of the Financial Stability Institute (FSI) of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), often in collaboration with staff from supervisory agencies and central banks. The papers aim to contribute to international discussions on a range of contemporary regulatory and supervisory policy issues and implementation challenges faced by financial sector authorities. The views expressed in them are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the BIS or the Basel-based committees. Authorised by the Chairman of the FSI, Fernando Restoy. This publication is available on the BIS website (bis). To contact the BIS Media and Public Relations team, please email pressbis. You can sign up for email alerts at bis/emailalerts.htm. Bank for International Settlements 2020. All rights reserved. Brief excerpts may be reproduced or translated provided the source is stated. ISSN 2522-2481 (print) ISBN 978-92-9259-422-0 (print) ISSN 2522-249X (online) ISBN 978-92-9259-423-7 (online) Regulating fintech financing: digital banks and fintech platforms iii Contents Executive summary . 1 Section 1 Introduction . 3 Section 2 Regulation of digital banking . 9 Digital banking-specific licensing frameworks . 10 Initiatives to facilitate market entry . 13 Section 3 Regulation of fintech platform financing . 18 Fintech balance sheet lending . 20 Crowdfunding . 24 Section 4 Concluding remarks . 31 References . 34 Regulating fintech financing: digital banks and fintech platforms 1 Regulating fintech financing: digital banks and fintech platforms 1 Executive summary This paper explores how fintech financing is regulated. New technology-enabled business models related to deposit-taking, credit intermediation and capital-raising have emerged. These are digital banking, fintech balance sheet lending and crowdfunding platforms (the latter two are referred to as fintech platform financing). In this paper, we provide a cross-country overview of the regulatory requirements for these fintech activities in 30 jurisdictions. The paper is based on an extensive desktop review of regulations and related documents, complemented by responses to an FSI survey conducted in early 2019. 2 The proliferation of new technology-enabled business models has raised questions about the regulatory perimeter. Authorities are assessing whether their existing regulatory framework needs to be adjusted. Their response will likely depend on (i) how they see potential risks to consumers and investors, financial stability and market integrity; (ii) their assessment of how these new activities might benefit society in terms of strengthening financial development, inclusion and efficiency; and (iii) how risks are dealt with under the existing framework and whether opportunities for regulatory arbitrage have emerged. The overall challenge for authorities is to maximise the benefits of fintech innovations while mitigating potential risks for the financial system. For digital banking, most jurisdictions apply existing banking laws and regulations to banks within their remit, regardless of the technology they apply. From these jurisdictions, a few have put in place initiatives that are intended to ensure that new banks find it easier to enter the market by allowing them time to complete their build-out or to meet the requirements of the prudential framework in full. In the few jurisdictions that have set specific regulatory frameworks for digital banks, the main licencing and ongoing requirements are similar to those for traditional banks. Applicants for a digital bank licence face requirements on the place of incorporation and legal form, sustainability of business plan, minimum paid-up capital, fitness and propriety of management, risk governance frameworks and documentation of the exit strategy. They also face requirements on ownership and control, although these may be different to those applicable to other banks. After obtaining a digital bank licence, licence holders are subject to the same ongoing requirements as traditional banks on capital, leverage, liquidity, anti-money laundering/combating the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT), market conduct, data protection and cyber security. The main difference between licensing requirements for traditional and digital banks is in technology-related elements and the aims of the business plan. Digital banks face restrictions on their physical presence and, in some cases, the market segments they are allowed to serve. Their fit and proper 1 By Johannes Ehrentraud (Johannes.Ehrentraudbis) and Denise Garcia Ocampo (Denise.GarciaOcampobis), Bank for International Settlements and Camila Quevedo Vega (caquevedosuperfinanciera.gov.co), Financial Superintendence of Colombia. The authors are grateful to the contacts at the central banks and financial authorities from the jurisdictions covered in this paper; to Sharmista Appaya, Juan Carlos Crisanto, John Cunningham, Jon Frost, Kinga Huzarski, Fabiana Melo, Jermy Prenio, Nobu Sugimoto and Greg Sutton for their helpful comments; to Mathilde Janfils for valuable research assistance, and to Martin Hood, Esther Knzi and Christina Paavola for their helpful support with this paper. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the BIS, the Basel-based standard setters or the covered jurisdictions listed in Annex Table 1. 2 The survey covered most of the jurisdictions covered in this paper, except Chinese Taipei, Finland, India, Korea, Malaysia and Portugal. 2 Regulating fintech financing: digital banks and fintech platforms requirements tend to be more prescriptive in relation to board members expertise in technology; a satisfactory track record in operating a technology business; and assessments of technical infrastructure by independent third-party technical experts. In addition, some jurisdictions require digital banks to demonstrate a commitment in driving financial inclusion, particularly for underserved and hard-to-reach market segments. Most surveyed jurisdictions have no specific regulatory framework for fintech balance sheet (FBS) lending. In these jurisdictions, FBS lending is subject to regulations for non-bank lending. Requirements on the extension of credit, however, vary considerably across countries and the responsibility for supervising this activity does not necessarily lie with the financial authority. Brazil is the only surveyed jurisdiction that has introduced a specific licensing framework for FBS lending. Many surveyed jurisdictions have introduced crowdfunding (CF) regulations. The regulatory setup, however, varies across jurisdictions and is influenced by a jurisdictions overall supervisory architecture, as well as the differences in risks that loan and equity CF entail. Separate frameworks were most often implemented for equity CF. In these cases, a third of surveyed jurisdictions have a specific framework exclusively for equity CF. This is twice the number of jurisdictions that have frameworks for loan CF. For multi-type frameworks, about half of surveyed jurisdictions have an exclusive regulatory framework for loan and equity CF. In jurisdictions without a dedicated regulatory framework for crowdfunding, it is subject to existing banking, securities and payments regulations. Dedicated regulatory CF frameworks typically have two broad sets of requirements, where the first set is intended to regulate how platforms may operate, which activities they can perform and what they must do to mitigate the risks they incur. In most surveyed jurisdictions, equity or loan CF platforms must be authorised before they can offer services. In terms of requirements, most surveyed jurisdictions require CF providers to operate under a specific legal form and have a minimum amount of paid-in capital. Even though they are allowed to broker multiple financial instruments, in most jurisdictions restrictions limit the ability of crowdfunding providers to invest in the financial instruments they intermediate. In most jurisdictions, crowdfunding platforms are subject to capital, business continuity and operational resilience and AML/CFT requirements. The second set of requirements is intended to protect investors and make them aware of potential risks by disclosing relevant information. Most loan and equity CF frameworks have requirements as to how information should be provided; on conducting due diligence checks on borrowers and/or issuers; and on procedures for selecting potential borrowers or projects and publishing related information. Apart from requirements related to disclosure and due diligence, there may be several other restrictions to protect investors. Commonly used investor protection tools include restrictions on the holding of clients funds, operating secondary markets or caps on investments or funds raised. Regulating fintech financing: digital banks and fintech platforms 3 Section 1 Introduction 1. This paper explores how fintech financing is regulated. Following the conceptual framework in Ehrentraud et al (2020) (Graph 1), we assess fintech activities that channel funds to people and companies. These are digital banking and fintech platform financing (fintech balance sheet lending as well as loan and equity crowdfunding). 3 For this purpose, we define these activities as follows (see Box 1 for background information on the emergence of these activities). Digital banking. Banks engaged in digital banking are deposit-taking institutions that are members of a deposit insurance scheme and deliver banking services primarily through electronic channels instead of physical branches. While they engage in risk transformation like traditional banks, digital banks 4 have a technology-enabled business model and provide their services remotely with limited or no branch infrastructure. Fintech platform financing refers to electronic platforms (not operated by commercial banks) that provide a mechanism for intermediating financing over the internet. 5 In doing so, they make extensive use of technology and data. We distinguish two types: Fintech balance sheet lending refers to electronic platforms that use their own balance sheet in the ordinary course of business to intermediate borrowers and lenders over the internet, ie they grant loans at their own risk. Because these non-bank lenders do not take deposits, they have to rely on other sources of funding, such as own equity capital, debt issuance or securitisation of the loans they originate. Crowdfunding refers to the practice of matching people and companies raising funds from those seeking to invest for a financial return without the involvement of traditional financial intermediaries. 6 The matching process is performed by a web-based platform that solicits funds for specific purposes from the public. Depending on the type of funding provided, we distinguish between loan crowdfunding and equity crowdfunding. 7, 8 In either case, individual contracts are established between those in need of funding and those seeking to invest or lend, so that the platform itself does not undertake any risk transformation. 3 These activities may be performed by financial intermediaries whose core business is financial services; or by big techs, ie large companies whose core business activity is typically of a non-financial nature. See Cornelli et al (forthcoming). Regulatory frameworks, however, do not distinguish between fintech and big tech firms. 4 Alternative terms used by market participants and regulators are virtual banks, internet-only banks, neo banks, challenger banks and fintech banks. In contrast, online banking is often used to refer to a service provided by traditional banking institutions that allows their customers to conduct financial transactions over the internet. 5 Alternative terms used for lending-related fintech platform financing activities (ie loan crowdfunding and fintech balance sheet lending) are marketplace lending or peer-to-peer (P2P) lending. While these terms are often used to refer to any activity that involves an online lending platform, in their strict meaning, lenders in P2P lending are exclusively individuals whereas in marketplace lending institutional funders may be involved as well. In practice, however, P2P and marketplace lending are often used interchangeably. 6 In line with Ehrentraud et al (2020), crowdfunding as defined in this paper excludes reward and donation crowdfunding because these activities do not entail a financial return. 7 While both loan crowdfunding and fintech balance sheet lending can be considered fintech credit (see Claessens et al (2018) and CGFS-FSB (2017), in this paper we differentiate between the two because regulatory frameworks often treat loan crowdfunding and fintech balance sheet lending differently (Ehrentraud et al (2020). 8 While all equity crowdfunding platforms intermediate funding to private companies in the form of equity, some may also intermediate funding in the form of debt or other types of securities (see Section 3). Because of this, the term investment crowdfunding is sometimes used by regulators or market participants. 4 Regulating fintech financing: digital banks and fintech platforms Fintech tree: a taxonomy of the fintech environment Graph 1 Source: Illustration by authors based on Ehrentraud et al (2020). 2. Digital banks have attracted an increasing number of customers, although this may have been affected by the Covid-19 pandemic. In Europe, entities engaged in digital banking have attracted more than 15 million customers since 2011 and could reach up to about one fifth of the population over the age of 14 by 2023. 9 A similar trend was observed in the United Kingdom, where digital banks have nearly tripled their customer base from 2018 to 2019. 10 The Covid-19 pandemic, however, may have affected the growth of digital banks, which appears to have slowed lately. 11 3. Fintech platform financing, although small, is growing fast. On a global level, transaction volumes more than doubled from USD 145 billion 12 in 2015 to USD 304.5 billion in 2018. 13 With a share of 71%, China was by far the biggest market in 2018, followed by the Americas (21%) and Europe (6%) (Graph 2). At the activity level, loan crowdfunding contributes about 83% of the overall volumes, followed by fintech balance sheet lending (14%) and equity crowdfunding (3%). 9 See The definition of digital banking used as basis for Kearneys figures may vary somewhat from the one used in this paper. 10 htt