MIFID II and EMIR impact on Romanian banking system performance

MIFID II/MiFIR represents comprehensive financial market reforms in trading and settlement of financial instruments. The greatest impact of the new regulatory framework in the banking sector relates to pricing, trading, and reporting of banking products and classification of financial institutions. The new role of the financial market infrastructure provides more protection for bank customers and significantly increases market transparency. Banks are required to show their customers the best execution price on the relevant trading venues, transaction costs and market behavior. The regulation will be aligned with other financial market regulations of over-the-counter markets and market abuse protection to avoid regulatory overlap - European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR). The new regulatory framework requires the banking sector to fully comply with the rules governing the banking system of the European Union. Banks must incur significant costs in order to restructure internal processes, acquire new technological support, and forego additional profits in competitive and transparent markets. This study analyses the impact of MiFID II/MiFIR and EMIR implementation on local banks’ performance (credit institutions, Romanian legal persons). Using a unique dataset from banks that have been operating in Romania over the period 2004-2020, it is shown that the implementation of the new regulatory framework did not affect the net trading income ratio of the selected banks. Moreover, the average trading asset ratio in the post-financial crisis period increased in comparison with the average trading asset ratio in the pre-financial crisis period. Local banks that took advantage of the large economies of scale obtained due to branch banking did not reduce their investment banking activities and product offerings to customers in the period following the introduction of the regulatory framework. Most of the costs of implementing the new regulatory framework were borne only by the ultimate parents of the controlled Romanian subsidiaries. All subsidiary banks benefited equally from these economies of scale.