Question ID:
Legal Act:
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
Other topics
COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs/Recommendations:
Not applicable
Disclose name of institution / entity:
Type of submitter:
Competent authority
Subject Matter:
Can the activity consisting in granting credits on own account without collecting deposits or other repayable funds from the public be subject to the requirements of the CRD IV regarding the freedom to provide services and freedom of establishment?

According to Article 4.1 (1) of the CRR, credit institution means an undertaking the business of which is to take deposits or other repayable funds from the public and to grant credits for its own account. The regulations of the CRR and CRDIV are applicable only to the institutions that fulfill both criteria, i.e. the business of which consist of both activities – taking deposits or other repayable funds from the public and granting credits for own account. Only such types of institutions are obliged to be subject to prudential supervision and only to such types of institutions the requirements of authorization and passporting in case of starting cross-border activity are applicable. In some jurisdictions, however, national legislation requires to obtain authorization and to be under prudential supervision from entities which do not accept deposits or other repayable funds but provide some kind of financial activity, in particular, grant different types of credits. This is for example a case of factoring or leasing firms. In these jurisdictions competent authorities require such firms to use passport notification procedure from the CRD IV to notify the intention to start cross-border activity in other Member State. Moreover, these authorities require relevant firms (i.e. leasing or factoring firms) from other Member State to notify the intention to start cross-border activity in jurisdiction of these authorities, using the procedure from the CRD IV. Notwithstanding of the lack of the EU legal basis for such requirements, it must be also noticed that in jurisdictions where such firms are not subject to authorization and prudential supervision, competent authorities have no mandate either to send or accept any notifications regarding the cross-border activity of such firms.

Background on the question:


Date of submission:
Published as Rejected Q&A
Rationale for rejection:

Please note that as part of adjustments to the Single Rulebook Q&A process, agreed by the EBA and the European Commission, it has been decided to reject outstanding questions submitted before 1 January 2020, when the Q&A process was updated as part of the last ESAs Review. In particular, the question that you have submitted has now regrettably been rejected and will not be addressed.

If you believe your question would still benefit from clarification, you are invited to resubmit your question, adapting it to reflect any legislative, regulatory or other relevant developments that may have occurred since the initial date of submission. The EBA will aim to address resubmitted questions as a matter of priority. When considering to resubmit, you are kindly requested to observe the updated admissibility criteria agreed in the context of the adjustment of the Q&A process, available in the Additional background and guidance for asking questions. We hope for your understanding.

For further information please refer to the press release and the updated Q&A page.

Rejected question