Bratislava: The European Commission has handed the region’s banks a three-year reprieve on the toughest slice of the new bank capital regime, delaying the market risk rules that traders had warned would push European desks out of step with rivals in New York and London.
The decision keeps in force a lighter version of the Fundamental Review of the Trading Book, the framework that governs how much bank capital lenders must hold against the bonds, currencies and derivatives they trade. Brussels first paused the rules in 2025; the new measure extends that pause and reshapes it, and the adjusted regime now applies for three years from 1 January 2027.
Commission officials argue that acting alone would have been reckless. The United States and the United Kingdom have both dragged their feet on the same Basel standard, and European banks feared that early adoption would raise their trading costs while American competitors kept theirs low. By stretching the timetable, the Commission wants to preserve what it calls an international level playing field.
The move sits inside the wider CRR3 and CRD6 package, the sprawling law that finally writes the last Basel III reforms into European rulebooks. That package still phases in an output floor that will climb to 72.5 percent of model-based capital by the end of the decade, so the reprieve trims one corner of the framework rather than unpicking the whole design.
Banks broadly welcomed the delay, though several lobby groups grumbled that the Commission had already tightened other parts of the regime and that the savings would prove modest. Consumer and transparency campaigners took the opposite view, warning that repeatedly postponing the market risk rules leaves a gap in the defences meant to stop a repeat of the 2008 crash.
The European Banking Authority now carries the heavy lifting. The regulator faces a crowded 2026, with more than 260 technical deliverables on its desk, and it must convert the political compromise into workable standards that supervisors in every member state can apply consistently. The Commission explains the market risk adjustment on its finance pages, while the European Banking Authority tracks the technical work.
For savers and businesses, the practical effect looks slight in the short run. Banks keep more room to trade without parking extra capital, which supporters say should help them fund companies and hold down borrowing costs. Critics counter that cheap trading capacity often flatters bank profits until markets turn, and that the reprieve simply postpones a reckoning rather than settling it.
The Commission has framed the three-year window as a chance for global regulators to converge. If Washington and London finally move, Brussels can align on a common schedule; if they stall again, Europe will face the same choice in 2030, only with less political goodwill left to spend.




