Warning Savings protection Warning The AMF and the ACPR warn the public against the activities of several entities offering investments in Forex and in crypto-assets derivatives in France without being authorized to do so

1.1 Fri 29/10/2021 - 12:00 Reference texts article 223-1 du règlement général de l’AMF Book 1 Recommendation Closing of the 2021 financial statements and financial statements examination work Closing of the 2021…

Der EuGH hat mit Urteil vom 19.03.2026 (C-43/25, „SML Maschinen") entschieden, dass sich der Empfänger von Rückzahlungen auf ein Gesellschafterdarlehen nicht auf Art. 13 EuInsVO 2000 (bzw. Art. 16 EuInsVO n.F.) berufen kann, um ein Rückforderungsverlangen des Insolvenzverwalters abzuwehren, wenn dieses der Durchsetzung des insolvenzrechtlichen Forderungsnachrangs dient....By: Mayer Brown

31 March 2026 The International Capital Market Association (ICMA), with support from the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA), is pleased to announce the publication of the sixth edition of its report, The Asian International Bond Markets: Issuance Trends and Dynamics.The report provides a data-driven overview of how Asian issuers are accessing international bond markets, examining issuance trends by jurisdiction, currency, tenor, debut issuance and sustainable bonds. This latest edition is based on the full-year 2025 dataset and offers a detailed picture of the forces shaping Asia’s international funding landscape.Key findings Latest issuance trends: Asian international bond issuance rose to USD527 billion in 2025, up 14% year on year, continuing the recovery from the 2022 to 2023 trough. Jurisdictional highlights: Japan and China remained the region’s largest markets covering over half of the region’s total issuance, while ASEAN jurisdictions’ combined issuance volume grew by one-third year-on-year. Currency and tenor: The US dollar remained the principal currency of issuance, representing two-thirds of the region’s issuance. Tenor-wise, 1-5 year maturities remained the core of supply, with growing preference for longer-dated funding. Sustainable bonds: Issuance in Asia totalled USD94 billion, maintaining a share of roughly one fifth of the region’s overall international bond issuance. Download the report now for an in-depth look into the trends shaping Asia’s bond markets in 2026. 

effective from 18 march 2026, the government of jersey introduced significant amendments to the sanctions and asset-freezing (jersey) law 2019. these changes aim to align jersey’s sanctions framework more closely with international standards, particularly those of the uk and to strengthen jersey’s commitment to combating financial crime and ensuring compliance with global sanctions regimes. key changes include: expanded prohibitions: restrictions on providing economic resources, funds, or financial services to designated persons now explicitly extend to entities owned or controlled by such persons. broader reporting obligations: relevant financial institutions (rfis) must report to the minister for external relations if they know or suspect someone is a designated person or involved in an offence under the law. this obligation applies regardless of whether the institution has a direct connection (e.g., account or dealings) with the individual. enhanced disclosure powers: the minister may disclose information obtained under the law to competent authorities outside the uk and eu or to other parties if deemed appropriate. clarifications on indirect availability: new provisions define "indirectly making resources available" to include entities controlled by designated persons. rfis and other stakeholders are advised to review their compliance processes and submit reports promptly if required. for further details read the government of jersey’s update here the sanctions and asset-freezing law (jersey) amendment regulations 2026 can be found here

We are going ahead with a scheme to compensate motor finance customers who were treated unfairly. Courts have found that firms broke the law by failing to disclose important information to customers. An industry-wide scheme is the quickest and most cost effective way to deliver fair compensation.We had over 1,000 consultation responses and engaged extensively with consumer groups, professional representatives, firms, manufacturers, investors and industry bodies. While most respondents supported a scheme, we received much conflicting feedback on its details.We have listened and made several changes, set out in detail below, to design a final scheme which strikes the balance between sometimes competing principles such as simplicity and cost effectiveness, comprehensiveness and fairness.Our final approach is fair for consumers and proportionate for firms.We have tightened eligibility so only those treated unfairly receive compensation. Agreements involving minimal commission or zero APRs will not receive redress. Where a lender can prove there were visible links with a manufacturer and dealer, a contractual tie alone will not trigger compensation. The threshold for high commission cases has been modestly raised. These and other changes mean 12.1m agreements are now eligible for compensation, down from 14.2m at consultation.We have adjusted how compensation is calculated to better reflect greater loss between 2007-2014. We have also ensured that consumers are not put back in a better position than they would have been had they been treated fairly, so in around 1 in 3 cases compensation will be capped. Firms are expected to pay out around £7.5 billion in redress, down from £8.2 billion at consultation.We have also streamlined the scheme so consumers are compensated quickly and it is cost effective for firms to deliver. Millions of consumers will be compensated this year, most of the rest by the end of 2027. Lenders will only need to contact complainants or those due compensation and recorded delivery will not be required, helping to cut the cost to firms of delivering the scheme by over 40%.The estimated total bill to firms is down from £11 billion to £9.1 billion.We want to provide certainty for consumers and finality for firms and investors, supporting the ongoing availability of competitively priced motor finance. Our approach is the best way to resolve this issue in the interests of consumers, firms, investors and the market. We estimate the cost of dealing with complaints would be over £6bn more without a scheme.We expect everyone to get behind the scheme, and lenders to put things right promptly for their customers. We need to draw a line under the past and support a healthy motor finance market for the future.ScopeMotor finance agreements taken out between 6 April 2007 and 1 November 2024 where commission was payable by the lender to the broker will be considered for compensation.Firms owe liabilities from 2007. If complaints from that date were not covered they would need to be dealt with individually by firms, the Financial Ombudsman Service and through the courts, resulting in higher costs, lengthy delays and greater uncertainty.We have the powers to include agreements before 2014. However, this was questioned by some consultation respondents. So, we will implement two schemes, one covering 6 April 2007 - 31 March 2014 and one from 1 April 2014 - 1 November 2024. If the earlier period is subject to legal challenge on these grounds, redress for consumers with agreements from April 2014 shouldn’t be delayed.EligibilityConsumers will only be considered for compensation if they weren’t told details of at least one of 3 arrangements between the lender and the broker (usually the dealer):A discretionary commission arrangement (DCA), which allowed the broker to adjust the interest rate the customer would pay to obtain a higher commission.A high commission arrangement (at least 39% of the total cost of credit and 10% of the loan).Contractual ties that gave a lender exclusivity or a right of first refusal, except where the lender can prove there were visible links with the manufacturer and dealer.There will be some exceptions, with cases considered fair, if:The commission was £120 or less for agreements beginning before 1 April 2014 and £150 or less from that date. Commission amounts below those levels are unlikely to have influenced the consumer’s decision or broker’s behaviour.The borrower wasn’t charged interest.The DCA wasn’t used to earn discretionary commission.The lender can prove, in certain limited circumstances, it was fair not to disclose one of the arrangements above or that the consumer did not suffer any loss. This includes if a tie wasn’t operated in practice or no better deal was available.Consumers who have successfully complained to the Financial Ombudsman, had their claim determined by a court or accepted redress will be excluded from the scheme.Claims for high value loans - higher than 99.5% of other loans that year - are also excluded, as they are not suitable for a mass-market redress scheme. These consumers can still complain to their lender and the Financial Ombudsman.Consumers generally have 6 years to bring a claim, but that may be extended where information about commission or a tie was deliberately concealed. We do not expect lenders to routinely find that cases are out of time to be considered for the scheme, given how poor disclosure was.However, firms can exclude cases only involving high commission and ending before 26 March 2020 if they can show that the fact commission was payable was clearly and prominently disclosed. If firms rule consumers out of the scheme on this basis, they must inform them and explain why. The consumer will have the right to challenge this with the Financial Ombudsman.Consumers whose arrangement is deemed fair under the scheme can ask the Financial Ombudsman to review whether the scheme rules were followed. They could still make a claim in court.Calculating redressApproximately 90,000 consumers whose cases align closely with the Johnson case considered by the Supreme Court will receive redress of all commission plus interest. We define these as cases involving an undisclosed contractual tie and/or DCA and very high commission of at least 50% of the total cost of credit and 22.5% of the loan.For all other cases, consumers will receive the average of estimated loss and the commission paid, plus interest (the hybrid remedy). The estimated loss is based on economic analysis that shows there was a difference in the APR on DCA loans compared to those with flat fee arrangements.Following feedback, we have enhanced our analysis, incorporating more agreement data and covering a longer period of 2017-2021. We estimate average loss to be equivalent to an APR adjustment of 17% for this period and apply it to agreements from 1 April 2014.Firms have advised that the availability of pre-2014 data is limited. Collecting such data risks delaying compensation for consumers and certainty for firms with no guarantee it would materially improve any estimate of loss.Feedback and supporting evidence from respondents indicate that more harmful forms of DCA were more prevalent in earlier years. Differences between average DCA and non-DCA APRs were also larger during this period, indicating greater financial loss.To reflect that, we have set an APR adjustment of 21% for pre 2014 cases. This sits at the mid-point between a 17% and 26% APR adjustment. The latter figure is, on average, equivalent to being repaid commission, which is the remedy reserved for those who suffered the most unfairness. The difference between APR-17% and APR-21% results in an increase to average redress of £31 for pre 2014 cases.We are also using these APR adjustments for the relatively small number of cases that didn’t involve a DCA, but involved high commission or a tie.Consumers should not be compensated more than if they had been treated fairly or than those who suffered the most unfairness. So in around 1 in 3 cases receiving the hybrid remedy, compensation will be capped at the lowest of:90% of commission plus interest.The total cost of credit, adjusted to account for a minimal cost offered to only 5% of the market at the time, excluding 0% APR deals.The actual total cost of credit, calculated on a simpler basis. This may be the lower figure if the adjusted cost of credit can’t be accurately calculated, for example, if the lender doesn’t have the payment schedule.This means that about 64,000 agreements, where the APR was in the lowest 5% offered in the market at the time, excluding 0% deals, will not get compensation.Simple interest will be paid on compensation, based on the annual average Bank of England base rate per year plus 1% from the date of overpayment to the date compensation is paid. We have introduced a floor so the minimum interest rate consumers will receive for any year is 3%. Consumers will no longer be able to challenge the rate they get.How the scheme will operateThere will be a short implementation period so firms can prepare. This will be up to:30 June 2026 for loans taken out from 1 April 2014.31 August 2026 for those agreed earlier.People who have already complained or complain before the end of the relevant implementation period will be compensated sooner. Lenders will have 3 months from the end of the implementation period to let complainants know whether they’re owed compensation and how much.Firms will only have to contact people who haven’t complained if they are potentially owed money or those who are timed out of the scheme, avoiding unnecessary and costly communication with customers who are not owed redress. Firms have 6 months from the end of the relevant implementation period to do so. Consumers must respond within 6 months if they wish to join the scheme. Consumers who are not contacted can still complain to their firm by 31 August 2027.Lenders can use a range of communication channels that best meet consumers’ needs, with appropriate safeguards to prevent fraud.Cost of redressBased on further analysis, we now estimate 75% of eligible consumers will take part, resulting in firms paying redress of £7.5 billion. Non redress costs are estimated to be £1.6 billion, taking the likely total bill to firms to £9.1 billion.Our consultation set out indicative cost estimates. We have since refined our methodology to fully align with our consultation proposals and incorporated further lender data into our modelling. We have updated estimated redress liabilities and non redress costs under our proposals, compared to under our final rules, below.Consultation proposalsConsultation proposals, updatedFinal policyRedress at estimated uptake£8.2bn(85% uptake)*£9.3bn(75% uptake)£7.5bn(75% uptake)Non redress costs£2.8bn£2.5bn£1.6bnTOTAL (at estimated uptake)£11bn£11.8bn£9.1bnRedress liabilities(100% uptake)£9.7bn£12.5bn£10bnEligible agreements14.2m16.8m12.1mAverage redress per agreement£695£775£829*At 75% uptake this would have been £7.3bn.Ensuring compliance with the schemeWe have established a dedicated supervisory team, led by a Director. We will supervise firms closely to make sure they follow the rules, including assessing whether any exclusions of agreements have been applied appropriately. Firms’ senior managers will be required to attest to responsibility for their firm’s overall oversight and delivery of the scheme.We will intervene if firms fail to comply, including using enforcement powers if necessary. Firms will have to report regularly so we can closely monitor compliance, and we will publish updates on the scheme’s progress.We have set up a taskforce with the Solicitors Regulation Authority, Advertising Standards Authority and the Information Commissioner’s Office to tackle the poor handling of motor finance claims by some claims management companies (CMCs) and law firms.Market impactThe motor finance market has continued to attract investment and function well since we announced our intention to introduce a compensation scheme.Share prices of affected UK listed lenders increased by a range of 2.1% to 29.7% in the two weeks following the Supreme Court judgment and continued to rise steadily until the recent conflict in the Middle East. There have been 5 public securitisations of UK automotive loans since September 2025. New car sales in February reached a 22-year high and a record £41bn was lent on motor finance in 2025, 6% up on 2024.We have updated our analysis of the scheme’s potential market impact. We conclude there will be limited impact on the new car finance market.Changes we have made to how the scheme operates, such as removing the need to write to all customers, will benefit sub-prime and smaller lenders by ensuring the scheme is cost-effective to deliver. While there may be some short-term effects in the used and subprime segments, these are expected to be modest, with any affected lending volumes replaced over time.Overall, we anticipate continued availability of motor finance and strong competition between lenders. Without a scheme, the impact on access to motor finance and prices for consumers could be significantly higher with uncertainty continuing for many more years.

François-Louis Michaud will take up his position as Chair of the European Banking Authority (EBA) as from the 16 April 2026, following today’s formal appointment by the Council of the European Union.

Central Bank of Ireland today launched a commemorative coin celebrating the life and work of renowned Irish playwright Seán O'Casey, on what would have been his 146th birthday. It marks the 100th anniversary of the inaugural performance of his masterpiece The Plough and the Stars at the Abbey Theatre.The silver proof coin will go on sale today (Monday 30 March 2026) at 1pm on www.collectorcoins.ie. Designed by PJ Lynch, there are just 3,000 coins available, and they will retail at €90. Governor Gabriel Makhlouf presented the coin to Seán O'Casey's daughter Shivaun during a launch at the Abbey Theatre attended by the O'Casey family and the current cast of the production, marking a fitting tribute to one of Ireland's most significant dramatic works.The premiere of The Plough and the Stars took place at the Abbey Theatre in 1926, less than ten years after the Easter Rising of 1916. Flawlessly weaving comedy with tragedy, the play tells the story of ordinary lives torn apart by the idealism of the time. This O'Casey masterpiece is a classic of human and political theatre which continues to resonate today.Governor Gabriel Makhlouf said: "Seán O'Casey's The Plough and the Stars remains one of the most powerful and enduring works in Irish theatre. A century on from its premiere, O'Casey's unflinching portrayal of how political upheaval affects ordinary people continues to speak to audiences. This commemorative coin honours O'Casey's artistic genius and the Central Bank is proud to mark this significant cultural anniversary."The Plough and the Stars is running in the Abbey Theatre until 30 April 2026 in an exciting new production directed by Tom Creed. Further informationElaine Scanlon – elaine.scanlon@centralbank.ie 087 213 6313ENDSNotes to the EditorProof coins are collectable coins and are not intended for general circulation. They are minted using specially polished dies and blanks that give them a mirror-like finish. Every year the Central Bank issues a number of collector coin products, on behalf of the Minister for Finance. The Collector Coin Advisory Group advises the Bank in relation to coin themes. The Central Bank invites public submissions in relation to themes.

Das Staatssekretariat für Wirtschaft (SECO) hat eine Änderung der Liste der sanktionierten natürlichen Personen, Unternehmen und Organisationen der Verordnung vom 21. März 2025 über Massnahmen gegenüber Personen und Organisationen, die mit den Organisationen ISIL (Da'esh) und Al-Kaida in Verbindung stehen (SR 946.231.08), publiziert. 

On 24 March 2026, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) announced that it will set out its approach to motor finance redress on Monday 30 March 2026 shortly after markets close. This follows the FCA’s consultation on establishing a compensation scheme in October 2025.

 The FSMA is receiving increasing numbers of reports of dubious WhatsApp groups, in which fraudsters share so-called exclusive investment tips or promote fraudulent trading apps.  How does the fraud work?Consumers find advertisements on social media (often Facebook or Instagram) for WhatsApp groups where, it is claimed, exclusive analyses of financial markets and profitable investment tips are shared. These advertisements are often published via pages that fraudulently use the name and logo of well-known banks and news services. These are cases of identity theft.Consumers who click on the advertisement are added to WhatsApp groups. These groups are managed by people who pose as prominent economists or CEOs of investment firms. These are also cases of identity theft.In these WhatsApp groups, consumers are encouraged to participate in lotteries. This is most likely a way to obtain consumers’ personal data. In addition, consumers are urged to purchase specific American listed shares. The aim appears to be to manipulate those share prices. This is also known as a 'pump and dump' operation. Lastly, these WhatsApp groups also promote fake applications for trading in cryptocurrencies. Which entities are involved in this scam?The FSMA notes that the fraudsters who manage the WhatsApp groups often pretend to be economists, people from the academic or business world, and well-known figures. For example, the FSMA has received reports of identity theft involving the following people:Colmant BrunoDe Bondt JanDe Bondt WernerGuenter ThomasHendelman SeanLynch PeterMckay RandyNoels GeertPraet PeterRutsaert Nicolas In addition, the fraudsters also claim that they work for authorized (often foreign) financial service providers, in particular: Bolero (KBC Bank NV)Loomis Sayles (Netherlands) B.V.SFM UK Management LLPUniversa Investments LPWilliams Jones Wealth Management LLCWatch out! These are cases of identity theft. The WhatsApp groups have, in fact, no connection whatsoever with authorized institutions. Consumers also reported that they were referred to a company called Nanolite Foundation, which uses the website nanolite-foundationnlf.com.The managers of the WhatsApp groups also try to persuade consumers to download fake applications, such as:BLRKXGS FLUXLSCINVNLF INTSFM VALORSXMKTUNIVLPThe FSMA has added these companies to the list of companies that are operating unlawfully in Belgium. Please note, the list is not exhaustive. In order to determine whether or not a company is authorized to offer financial products and services, please visit the ‘Check your provider’ page. If you have any doubts, feel free to contact the FSMA. I’ve fallen victim. What should I do?If you are a member of such a WhatsApp group, the FSMA advises you to leave it as soon as possible. Also block the telephone number of the WhatsApp group administrator and break off all contact. Do not follow the investment tips and do not download any applications promoted in these WhatsApp groups. Not only are the investments made through these applications completely false, but malware may also be installed through them.Do not transfer any (more) money and contact your bank. Inform your bank immediately if you have transferred money.Report the fraud to the competent authorities. Contact the FSMA and file a complaint with the police.Document all exchanges of information and transactions. Gather all evidence of your exchanges of information with the platform, including emails, messages, account statements and screen shots of the transactions. These items will, of course, be very valuable when you report the fraud.Beware of so-called ‘recovery rooms’: fraudsters contact victims of a scam in the past and offer to help them, for a fee, to recover their lost money. Often these constitute yet another attempt at fraud. For more recommendations on how to avoid investment fraud, please consult the ‘How to recognize and avoid fraud’ page on the FSMA website. Please watch the awareness-raising videos as well (available in French and Dutch only).

March 9, Chicago – NFA has ordered Commodity Asset Management LLC (Commodity Asset Management), a former NFA Member commodity pool operator and commodity trading advisor located in New York, N.Y., not to reapply for NFA membership or act as a principal of an NFA Member at any time in the future. NFA also ordered Jonathan Mark Tulkoff, a prior associated person and principal of Commodity Asset Management and former NFA Associate, not to reapply for NFA membership or act as a principal of an NFA Member for nine months and further order him to pay a $100,000 fine and comply with an undertaking if he reapplies for NFA membership or principal status in the future.