1. If insolvency of your credit institution should occur, your deposits would be repaid up to EUR 100 000 [replace by adequate amount if currency not EUR]. Such set off should not impede the capacity of DGSs to repay deposits within the deadline set by this Directive. (5)  Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 (OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p. 1). Deposit Guarantee Schemes have been harmonised across the member states of the EU, protecting the first EUR100,000/ £85,000 of eligible deposits held with banks in the event that they fail. 2. 4. 4. The Deposit Guarantee Schemes Directive (DGSD), Directive (EC) 94/19 (amended by Directive (EC) 2009/14), is one of two existing EU guarantee scheme directives. Where the depositor so requests, it shall be communicated on paper. Member States shall ensure that credit institutions make available to actual and intending depositors the information necessary for the identification of the DGSs of which the institution and its branches are members within the Union. DGSs shall ensure the confidentiality and the protection of the data pertaining to depositors’ accounts. Member States should not be prevented from taking appropriate measures concerning the rights of DGSs in a winding up or reorganisation procedure of a credit institution. In times of stability it is possible that different coverage leads to depositors choosing the highest deposit protection rather than the deposit product best suited to them. Given the divergences in administrative practices relating to DGSs in Member States, Member States should be free to decide which authority determines the unavailability of deposits. EBA and the competent and designated authorities shall cooperate with each other and exercise their powers in accordance with the provisions of this Directive and with Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010. By way of derogation from paragraph 2, Member States may, where justified and upon approval of the Commission, authorise a minimum target level lower than the target level specified in paragraph 2, provided that the following conditions are met: the reduction is based on the assumption that it is unlikely that a significant share of available financial means will be used for measures to protect covered depositors, other than as provided for in Article 11(2) and (6); and. Append an asterisk (, Other sites managed by the Publications Office, Portal of the Publications Office of the EU. This shall not apply if a credit institution has been excluded from a DGS pursuant to Article 4(5). DGSs should, inter alia, have appropriate systems and procedures in place for selecting and implementing such measures and monitoring affiliated risks. If insolvency should occur, your deposits would be repaid up to EUR 100 000 [replace by adequate amount if currency not EUR]. It may repay the loan in annual instalments. Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission. This Directive encompasses the harmonisation of the funding mechanisms of DGSs, the introduction of risk-based contributions and the harmonisation of the scope of products and depositors covered. The repayable amount shall be made available without a request to a DGS being necessary. By 3 July 2019, EBA shall report to the Commission on calculation models and their relevance to the commercial risk of the members. Such agreements shall take into account the requirements laid down in Article 4(9). Depositors shall be informed prior to the conclusion of the contract by the credit institution where their liabilities towards the credit institution are taken into account when calculating the repayable amount. Member States should ensure that the protection of deposits resulting from certain transactions, or serving certain social or other purposes, is higher than EUR 100 000 for a given period. 7. By 3 July 2019, the Commission shall submit a report, and, if appropriate, a legislative proposal to the European Parliament and the Council setting out how DGSs operating in the Union may cooperate through a European scheme to prevent risks arising from cross-border activities and protect deposits from such risks. The European Commission proposed in July 2010 a comprehensive review of the Directive on Deposit Guarantee Schemes (DGS) aimed at harmonising and simplifying the Directive in order to improve protection of deposits… PE-CONS 82/14 2. The share of each depositor in a joint account shall be taken into account in calculating the limit provided for in Article 6(1). The restrictions set out in that Article shall apply. Confirmation that the deposits are eligible deposits shall be provided to depositors on their statements of account including a reference to the information sheet set out in Annex I. 5. The limit referred to in Article 6(1) shall not be exceeded. [Only where applicable:] However, deposits in an account to which two or more persons are entitled as members of a business partnership, association or grouping of a similar nature, without legal personality, are aggregated and treated as if made by a single depositor for the purpose of calculating the limit of EUR 100 000 [replace by adequate amount if currency not EUR]. 9. That reduced target level shall not be lower than 0,5 % of covered deposits. Member States shall ensure that schemes referred to in points (a) and (b) of the first subparagraph have in place adequate financial means or relevant financing arrangements to fulfil their obligations. Contributions to DGSs should be based on the amount of covered deposits and the degree of risk incurred by the respective member. 1. When Member States adopt those measures, they shall contain a reference to this Directive or shall be accompanied by such a reference on the occasion of their official publication. Given the different living costs between the Member States, that amount should be determined by the Member States. The European Supervisory Authority (European Banking Authority) (‘EBA’), established by Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council (11) should issue guidelines for specifying methods for calculating contributions. Depositors at branches set up by credit institutions in another Member State shall be repaid by a DGS in the host Member State on behalf of the DGS in the home Member State. in the official language or languages of the Member State in which the covered deposit is located. Member States may decide that credit institutions pay a minimum contribution, irrespective of the amount of their covered deposits. 2. Member States may extend the initial period referred to in the first subparagraph for a maximum of four years if the DGS has made cumulative disbursements in excess of 0,8 % of covered deposits. Member States shall ensure that credit institutions mark eligible deposits in a way that allows an immediate identification of such deposits. Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure (2). Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 has assigned a number of tasks concerning Directive 94/19/EC to EBA. EBA opinion on deposit guarantee schemes. Member States shall ensure that their DGSs have in place sound and transparent governance practices. As a result of recent changes, all deposit guarantee schemes have been harmonized, so that the same high standard is offered within the EU. The EU has gradually increased the level of deposit protection since the first directive for DGS was introduced in 1994. Having regard to the opinion of the European Central Bank (1). It also makes proposals on how the DGS will work in operation, as well as in cooperation with the EU Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive … Notwithstanding the time limit laid down in paragraph 1 of this Article, where a depositor or any person entitled to or interested in sums held in an account has been charged with an offence arising out of or in relation to money laundering as defined in Article 1(2) of Directive 2005/60/EC, the DGS may suspend any payment relating to the depositor concerned, pending the judgment of the court. DGSs shall produce an annual report on their activities. The absence of such agreements shall not affect the claims of depositors under Article 9(1) or of credit institutions under paragraph 3 of this Article. 4. Directive 94/19/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 1994 on deposit-guarantee schemes requires all member states to have a deposit guarantee scheme for at least 90% of the … DGSs may use their own risk-based methods for determining and calculating the risk-based contributions by their members. 6. It should also lead to a fair calculation of contributions and provide incentives to operate under a less risky business model. Adverse effects on financial stability should be avoided, for example where only credit institutions with a high-risk profile are transferred to a cross-border DGS. It is therefore reasonable to set the harmonised coverage level at EUR 100 000. 6. Under EU rules, deposit guarantee schemes. The repayment period should therefore be reduced to seven working days. Therefore, Member States should be able to apply a higher coverage level if they provided for a coverage level that was higher than the harmonised level before the application of Directive 2009/14/EC. Member States may provide for lower contributions for low-risk sectors which are regulated under national law. Authorities also have much easier access to credit than citizens. The competent authority may defer, in whole or in part, a credit institution's payment of extraordinary ex-post contributions to the DGS if the contributions would jeopardise the liquidity or solvency of the credit institution. The contributions deferred pursuant to this paragraph shall be paid when such payment no longer jeopardises the liquidity or solvency of the credit institution. However, in certain circumstances, credit institutions may operate in a highly concentrated market where most credit institutions are of such a size and degree of interconnection that they would be unlikely to be wound up under normal insolvency proceedings without endangering financial stability and would therefore be more likely to be subject to orderly resolution proceedings.