Finansinspektionen (FI) conducted a survey of twenty insurance firms and determined that the firms in general handle complaints in a satisfactory manner, but there is room for improvement.
The ability to borrow is beneficial to households in many ways. At the same time, debt can make their consumption more sensitive to unexpected changes in interest rates, income, and house prices. This, in turn, can affect how the economy evolves in a crisis. But measures that lead to lower debt don’t necessarily increase the resilience of all households. To assess the effects of borrower-based measures, it is necessary to also consider households’ balance sheets, in particular their liquid assets.
Since 2010, FI has implemented a number of macroprudential measures aimed at increasing the resilience in the financial system and subduing the risks associated with high and rising household debt. These measures include tightening the capital requirements on banks and introducing a mortgage cap and two amortisation requirements. In this report, we present an overall assessment of these measures, with a focus on the measures that, via lenders, place restrictions on households’ mortgage borrowing.
The temporary amortisation exemption resulted in new mortgagors borrowing almost 4 per cent more and buying homes that were approximately 1 per cent more expensive, concludes a new FI Analysis.
FI has analysed and compared information that firms under FI’s money laundering supervision reported to the authority during the years 2018-2021. The analysis indicates areas where the companies need to develop their processes to better handle the risk of being misused for money laundering or terrorist financing.
The economy is continuing to recover. Support measures have been necessary to speed up the recovery, but they need to be gradually phased out as the economy strengthens. This applies primarily to measures that are associated with the build-up of stability risks.
Finansinspektionen concludes in a new report that fund managers need access to additional tools to manage liquidity risks in Swedish UCITS and special funds. We consider there to be a certain type of swing pricing that could be used already today. The report outlines a suggestion for how to regulate this and other liquidity management tools in legislation and regulations. FI takes the position that Swedish UCITS only need to be open for redemptions once a week. We suggest that the funds instead only need to be open for redemptions twice a month.
Loans and other debts are of significance to repayment problems. This analysis focuses on the significance of loans to individual’s repayment problems.
This FI analysis describes the funding structure of the major Swedish banks in the period 2002–2019. Consequently, the period analysed does not cover the ongoing pandemic and its impact on the financial markets through central banks’ and supervisory authorities’ various monetary policy and supervision measures.