The insights from the 2008 financial crisis were that the banking sector was in need of change of regulation. The period from 2008 and onwards has involved several changes, of which capital requirements, MREL requirements and the resolution tool are three main regulations which have been introduced. The question being asked is whether we are now in a new macroeconomic regime, or whether the previous market regime which still prevails. To answer the question, the regulation that was added after 2008 is examined, as well as how these have motivated strengthening financial stability. The empirical evidence underlying the analysis consists of documents published by relevant authorities acting or working with regulation and/or supervision of the financial sector. The study has been carried out via an idea analysis where empirical ideas are used to answer the question of which macroeconomic regime currently prevails. The former regime is referred to as the market regime and is characterized by a belief in efficient markets through deregulation, independent central banks and a belief in a free market as the key to financial development. The regime that emerges shows both similarities and differences with the market regime. The fundamental political ideology that prevailed under the previous regime persists even today, but at the same time there are indications of a breaking point in the regime. Today's regime is more restrictive and the view of responsibility has clearly changed. Market regime thus still prevails but in a new guise, which was named neo-market regime to describe the differences between the period before 2008 and the period after.

The subject of this diploma thesis is to carry out the analysis of banking regula-tion on minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL) and based on this analysis to identify possible impacts on the balance structure of se-lected groups of banks in V4 countries. The main reasons for creating the MREL regulation are defined in the thesis. Furthermore, the thesis describes the devel-opment of banking regulations in connection with the events on the world mar-kets and the expected impacts on the banking sectors of the V4 countries. Based on the data from the annual reports of the selected banks, it is assessed whether the selected banks and their groups have the required amount of regulatory capi-tal.

La tesi si propone di rintracciare all’interno dell’ordinamento italiano una regola giuridica, quanto più generale possibile, suscettibile di applicazione al maggior numero di ipotesi in cui un atto giuridico determina l’alterazione di un ordine dato di priorità applicabile a pretese di azionisti e creditori di una società di capitali. Si rileva, infatti, che il diritto vivente delle garanzie reali possa spesso trovarsi in contrasto con un fondamentale principio di diritto dei contratti: quello di relatività dei loro effetti. Vengono, quindi, isolate, due classi di garanzie reali che, al contrario, risultano essere compatibili con il principio richiamato. Una più ampia regola viene, di seguito, proposta, basata sulla stessa logica che fonda l’istituto dei vantaggi compensativi, funzionale a regolare i fenomeni di alterazione di un ordine di priorità, a prescindere dalla natura della pretesa coinvolta. Essenzialmente, quest’ultima regola costituisce la trasposizione nel linguaggio e nel sistema giuridico del criterio di efficienza di Kaldor-Hicks. Dal lato dei diritti patrimoniali e nel prisma dei problemi “ordinali”, vengono individuate decisive somiglianze tra le pretese a titolo di debito e quelle a titolo di capitale di rischio, cosicché viene proposta l’applicazione di istituti classici del diritto azionario (ad es., il diritto di recesso) alla materia dei rapporti di credito. Definito l’ambito di applicazione dei diritti reali di garanzia e riconosciuta la maggior efficienza di strutture del passivo costruite prevalentemente sullo schema della subordinazione invece che su quello della preferenza, si propone di attuare un netto passaggio di sistema dal secondo schema al primo. Lo studio si conclude misurando i risultati ottenuti sugli analoghi fenomeni che si verificano nell’ambito della disciplina del sistema finanziario. / This thesis aims at finding in the Italian legal system a general rule able to provide a guidance for the modification of the order of priority of claims against limited liability corporations. It is argued that the applicable legal approach to security interests could often be in contrast with a basic principle of contract law: relativity. Therefore, firstly, two classes of security interests that proved to be coherent with the aforementioned principle are described. Secondly, a wider rule based on a logic of compensation is put forward and tested on some particular cases. Basically, this rule is a transposition into legal terms of the well-known Kaldor-Hicks criterion. On the economic rights side, similarities are founded between credit claims and equity claims about order issues, so that the compensation rule is thought as applicable, almost equivalently, to both types of claims. Application to a certain class of creditors of “organizational rules” (for example, right of withdrawal) typically provided by law for shareholders is also suggested. Defined the scope of application of security interests and considered the efficiency gains that are achievable by subordination structures instead of priority ones, it is proposed to pursue the same goal of modifying a given order of priority, through subordination agreements. Finally, these results are discussed taking into account some financial law topics.