ekana. Joskus vuoden 2005 loppupuolella luet siitä kun se tulee suomalaisiin medioihin kuten energiadirektiivikin. Sitten sä vaan uskot että osakkeet ja asunnot romahtavat:
(muista vielä tämä mediapellet ovat jo myyneet sulle asunnot ja osakkeet kun tämä jysähtää!!)
(31) Institutions are very long-term investors. Redemption of the assets held by these institutions cannot, in general, be made for any purpose other than providing retirement benefits. Furthermore, in order to protect adequately the rights of members and beneficiaries, institutions should be able to opt for an asset allocation that suits the precise nature and duration of their liabilities. These aspects call for efficient supervision and an approach towards investment rules allowing institutions sufficient flexibility to decide on the most secure and efficient investment policy and obliging them to act prudently. Compliance with the "prudent person" rule therefore requires an investment policy geared to the membership structure of the individual institution for occupational retirement provision.
(32) Supervisory methods and practices vary among Member States. Therefore, Member States should be given some discretion on the precise investment rules that they wish to impose on the institutions located in their territories. However, these rules must not restrict the free movement of capital, unless justified on prudential grounds.
(33) As very long-term investors with low liquidity risks, institutions for occupational retirement provision are in a position to invest in non-liquid assets such as shares as well as in risk capital markets within prudent limits. They can also benefit from the advantages of international diversification. Investments in shares, risk capital markets and currencies other than those of the liabilities should therefore not be restricted except on prudential grounds.
(34) However, if the institution works on a cross-border basis, it may be asked by the competent authorities of the host Member State to apply limits for investment in shares and similar assets not admitted to trading on a regulated market, in shares and other instruments issued by the same undertaking or in assets denominated in non-matching currencies provided such rules also apply to institutions located in the host Member State.
(35) Restrictions regarding the free choice by institutions of approved asset managers and custodians limit competition in the internal market and should therefore be eliminated.
(36) Without prejudice to national social and labour legislation on the organisation of pension systems, including compulsory membership and the outcomes of collective bargaining agreements, institutions should have the possibility of providing their services in other Member States. They should be allowed to accept sponsorship from undertakings located in other Member States and to operate pension schemes with members in more than one Member State. This would potentially lead to significant economies of scale for these institutions, improve the competitiveness of the Community industry and facilitate labour mobility. This requires mutual recognition of prudential standards. Proper enforcement of these prudential standards should be supervised by the competent authorities of the home Member State, unless specified otherwise.
http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32003L0041:EN:HTML
(muista vielä tämä mediapellet ovat jo myyneet sulle asunnot ja osakkeet kun tämä jysähtää!!)
(31) Institutions are very long-term investors. Redemption of the assets held by these institutions cannot, in general, be made for any purpose other than providing retirement benefits. Furthermore, in order to protect adequately the rights of members and beneficiaries, institutions should be able to opt for an asset allocation that suits the precise nature and duration of their liabilities. These aspects call for efficient supervision and an approach towards investment rules allowing institutions sufficient flexibility to decide on the most secure and efficient investment policy and obliging them to act prudently. Compliance with the "prudent person" rule therefore requires an investment policy geared to the membership structure of the individual institution for occupational retirement provision.
(32) Supervisory methods and practices vary among Member States. Therefore, Member States should be given some discretion on the precise investment rules that they wish to impose on the institutions located in their territories. However, these rules must not restrict the free movement of capital, unless justified on prudential grounds.
(33) As very long-term investors with low liquidity risks, institutions for occupational retirement provision are in a position to invest in non-liquid assets such as shares as well as in risk capital markets within prudent limits. They can also benefit from the advantages of international diversification. Investments in shares, risk capital markets and currencies other than those of the liabilities should therefore not be restricted except on prudential grounds.
(34) However, if the institution works on a cross-border basis, it may be asked by the competent authorities of the host Member State to apply limits for investment in shares and similar assets not admitted to trading on a regulated market, in shares and other instruments issued by the same undertaking or in assets denominated in non-matching currencies provided such rules also apply to institutions located in the host Member State.
(35) Restrictions regarding the free choice by institutions of approved asset managers and custodians limit competition in the internal market and should therefore be eliminated.
(36) Without prejudice to national social and labour legislation on the organisation of pension systems, including compulsory membership and the outcomes of collective bargaining agreements, institutions should have the possibility of providing their services in other Member States. They should be allowed to accept sponsorship from undertakings located in other Member States and to operate pension schemes with members in more than one Member State. This would potentially lead to significant economies of scale for these institutions, improve the competitiveness of the Community industry and facilitate labour mobility. This requires mutual recognition of prudential standards. Proper enforcement of these prudential standards should be supervised by the competent authorities of the home Member State, unless specified otherwise.
http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32003L0041:EN:HTML
Vastaukset 4
Vanhimmat
Oli siinä ulkomaankieltä ja paljon. Mitä yritit sanoa? Suomennanko minä? Okei. ASUNTOJEN HINNAT OVAT KOVASSA NOUSUSSA. (et sitten kerro, että kuulit tämän minulta)
pois. Kysy käännösapua valtiovarainministeriön virkamiehiltä. Siellä he pohtivat mitä tehdä tälle direktiiville.
sivuilla http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:32003L0041:FI:HTML
byrokrattipaskoille ja sellainen määrä jonninjoutavaa sontaa että ihan hirvittää. Lopettakaa nyt ääliöt tuon sonnan kanto/tukeminen, täällä Suomessa olis töitäkin tehtävänä!!