IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/refreg/v6yi2p317-326..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Should Denmark and Sweden Join the Banking Union?

Author

Listed:
  • Svend E Hougaard Jensen
  • Dirk Schoenmaker

Abstract

An important policy discussion on joining the banking union is currently taking place in Denmark and Sweden. In this article we review the pros and cons of joining. The main rationale for joining the banking union is the importance of cross-border banking in the EU internal market. Reviewing the banking systems, we find that banks in Denmark and Sweden have the same cross-border characteristics as those in the euro area countries, suggesting a similar rationale for joining the banking union. Moreover, both countries have large banks which may be too big to save at country level, but not at the banking union level. Nevertheless, there are some governance concerns. While euro area countries have an automatic and full say in all banking union arrangements, the non-euro area countries (the ‘out’ countries) lack certain formal powers in ultimate decision-making; however, we find that this may be less of a problem in practice. If necessary, the ‘out’ countries would have the ‘nuclear option’ of leaving the banking union.

Suggested Citation

  • Svend E Hougaard Jensen & Dirk Schoenmaker, 0. "Should Denmark and Sweden Join the Banking Union?," Journal of Financial Regulation, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 317-326.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:refreg:v:6:y::i:2:p:317-326.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jfr/fjaa005
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. de Haan,Jakob & Schoenmaker,Dirk & Wierts,Peter, 2020. "Financial Markets and Institutions," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9781108494113.
    2. Zsolt Darvas & Guntram B. Wolff, 2013. "Should Non-Euro Area Countries Join the Single Supervisory Mechanism?," DANUBE: Law and Economics Review, European Association Comenius - EACO, issue 2, pages 141-163, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hilmar Þór Hilmarsson, 2020. "The Dangers of Banking Interconnectedness During Times of Crisis: The Nordic-Baltic Case," Journal of Applied Management and Investments, Department of Business Administration and Corporate Security, International Humanitarian University, vol. 9(4), pages 153-161, December.
    2. María J. Nieto & Dalvinder Singh, 2021. "Incentive compatible relationship between the ERM II and close cooperation in the Banking Union: the cases of Bulgaria and Croatia," Occasional Papers 2117, Banco de España.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gregorio Impavido & Mr. Heinz Rudolph & Mr. Luigi Ruggerone, 2013. "Bank Funding in Central, Eastern and South Eastern Europe Post Lehman: A “New Normal”?," IMF Working Papers 2013/148, International Monetary Fund.
    2. Ida-Maria Weirsøe Fallesen, 2015. "The Challenges of the EU Banking Union - will it succeed in dealing with the next financial crisis?," Bruges European Economic Policy Briefings 36, European Economic Studies Department, College of Europe.
    3. Lisa Coiffard, 2018. "Independence of central banks after the crisis - focus on Hungary," IWE Working Papers 242, Institute for World Economics - Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    4. Zsolt Darvas & Guntram B. Wolff, 2013. "Should Non-Euro Area Countries Join the Single Supervisory Mechanism?," DANUBE: Law and Economics Review, European Association Comenius - EACO, issue 2, pages 141-163, June.
    5. Zaman, Gheorghe & Georgescu, George, 2014. "Challenges of bank lending in Romania on short, medium and long-term," MPRA Paper 60271, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Näther, Maria & Vollmer, Uwe, 2019. "National versus supranational bank regulation: Gains and losses of joining a banking union," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 1-18.
    7. Belke, Ansgar & Dobrzańska, Anna & Gros, Daniel & Smaga, Paweł, 2016. "(When) should a non-euro country join the banking union?," The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, Elsevier, vol. 14(PA), pages 4-19.
    8. Tröger, Tobias H., 2013. "The single supervisory mechanism - Panacea of quack banking regulation? Preliminary assessment of the evolving regime for the prudential supervision of banks with ECB involvement," SAFE Working Paper Series 27, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    9. Ludek Kouba & Michal Madr & Danuse Nerudova & Petr Rozmahel, 2016. "Policy Autonomy, Coordination or Harmonization in the Persistently Heterogeneous European Union?," DANUBE: Law and Economics Review, European Association Comenius - EACO, issue 1, pages 53-71, March.
    10. Mérő, Katalin, 2019. "Érdemes-e csatlakozniuk az európai bankunióhoz az euróövezeten kívüli tagállamoknak? [Is it worth non-euro member-states joining the European Banking Union?]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(5), pages 497-520.
    11. María J. Nieto & Dalvinder Singh, 2021. "Incentive compatible relationship between the ERM II and close cooperation in the Banking Union: the cases of Bulgaria and Croatia," Occasional Papers 2117, Banco de España.
    12. Darvas, Zsolt & Schoenmaker, Dirk & Véron, Nicolas, 2016. "Reforms to the European Union Financial Supervisory and Regulatory Architecture and Their Implications for Asia," ADBI Working Papers 615, Asian Development Bank Institute.
    13. Anikó Szombati & Kornél Kisgergely, 2014. "Banking union through Hungarian eyes - The MNB’s assessment of a possible close cooperation," MNB Occasional Papers 2014/115, Magyar Nemzeti Bank (Central Bank of Hungary).
    14. María Cantero Sáiz & Sergio Sanfilippo Azofra & Begoña Torre Olmo, 2019. "The single supervision mechanism and contagion between bank and sovereign risk," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 55(1), pages 67-106, February.
    15. David Howarth & Lucia Quaglia, 2013. "Banking Union as Holy Grail: Rebuilding the Single Market in Financial Services, Stabilizing Europe's Banks and ‘Completing’ Economic and Monetary Union," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51, pages 103-123, September.
    16. Mario Sarcinelli, 2013. "The European Banking Union: Will It Be a True Union without Risk Sharing?," PSL Quarterly Review, Economia civile, vol. 66(265), pages 137-167.
    17. Jaroslaw Beldowski & Agnieszka Slomka-Golebiowska, 2016. "Banking Union as an institutional response of the European Union to the financial crisis 2008–2009," Ekonomia i Prawo, Uniwersytet Mikolaja Kopernika, vol. 15(2), pages 153-165, June.
    18. Vollmer Uwe, 2016. "The Asymmetric Implementation of the European Banking Union (EBU): Consequences for Financial Stability," International Journal of Management and Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, Collegium of World Economy, vol. 50(1), pages 7-26, June.
    19. Elisabetta Montanaro, 2016. "The process towards centralisation of the European financial supervisory architecture: The case of the Banking Union," PSL Quarterly Review, Economia civile, vol. 69(277), pages 135-172.
    20. Donath Liliana & Mihutescu Cerna Veronica, 2017. "Alternative Views on the Participation of Non-Euro Zone Countries at the Bank Union," Studia Universitatis Babeș-Bolyai Oeconomica, Sciendo, vol. 62(1), pages 3-19, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:refreg:v:6:y::i:2:p:317-326.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jfr .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.