DG Competition consults on draft competition guidance for SEPA Direct Debit schemes and looks for input on the impact on legacy schemes
04 November 2009
The DG Comp working document for comments focuses on general principles concerning multilateral interchange fee ('MIF') arrangements applied on a per transaction basis and concerning transactions that cannot be properly executed.
The European Commission has invited comments on a Commission working document that aims to provide further guidance to participants in the SEPA Direct Debit (SDD) scheme to ensure that collective financing arrangements applied within this scheme comply with EC Treaty competition rules.
Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes stated "Today we provide further clarity to all stakeholders so that SEPA Direct Debit will be well-equipped for its successful development. SEPA should bring real benefits to European consumers and businesses, but it is important that it complies with the competition rules so that the full benefits can be achieved without adverse effects on banks' customers. The Commission looks forward to receiving input from stakeholders to refine our analysis".
The Commission working document focuses on general principles concerning multilateral interchange fee ('MIF') arrangements applied on a per transaction basis and concerning transactions that cannot be properly executed (e.g. because there are insufficient funds in the payer's account or because the account number is wrong - so-called 'R'- transactions) and alternative payment arrangements. More detailed assessments should be possible following inputs from interested parties on:
· possible collective financing mechanisms in light of specific national market situations;
· the likely impact of Commission's envisaged general framework on legacy schemes; and
· the price or quality experience of SDD as compared to current national direct debit systems.
·
The main message in the Commission working document is that at this stage the Commission's preliminary view remains that a collectively set per-transaction MIF would not be in compliance with Article 81.
However, in principle, there may be different efficiency objectives for a collective arrangement for multilateral fees for R-transactions if appropriately designed. Such efficiencies, if appropriately substantiated, could allow the Commission to find a collective system for R-transactions in compliance with Article 81.
Deadline for comments is 14 December 2009
© European Commission
