Ceci n’est pas un PEPP

Karel Lannoo

ECMI Papers from Centre for European Policy Studies

Abstract: Not much is left of the Personal European Pension Product (PEPP) as intended by the European Commission in June 2017. Proposed as a core element of the Capital Markets Union (CMU), the text as agreed between the European Parliament (EP) and the EU Council has become unclear, unattractive and unsuitable. The EP should not have rushed into signing off on an inadequate measure, or the EU Commission would have done well to withdraw the text. Key elements of the proposal were watered down or replaced in response to heavy pressure from member states and certain organisations. It is a classic example of how not to create the capital markets union: protecting national idiosyncrasies and vested interests, and losing out globally at the same time.

Pages: 5 pages
Date: 2019-05
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.eurocapitalmarkets.org/sites/default/files/ceci_nest_pas_un_pepp.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eps:ecmiwp:494

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in ECMI Papers from Centre for European Policy Studies Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Margarita Minkova ().