OpenLobby.EU
Explore

Asociación Nacional de Establecimientos Financieros de Crédito (ASNEF)

ASNEF

(1) Reunir en su seno a las empresas que practiquen la financiación y representarlas ante las autoridades, corporaciones publicas, etc.

Lobbying Activity

Meeting with Maravillas Abadía Jover (Member of the European Parliament)

4 Dec 2025 · Insolvency law (Second Chance)

Response to Consumer Agenda 2025-2030 and Action Plan on Consumers in the Single Market

23 Jul 2025

We hereby enclose ASNEF comments on the Consumer Agenda for 2025-2030 and the consumer action plan. ASNEF is duly registered in the EU transparency register with number 11218815591-29.
Read full response

Response to Review of the Securitisation Framework

24 Mar 2025

We hereby attach ASNEF's comments for the preliminary review of the Securitisation Framework. A courtesy translation in English is included.
Read full response

Response to Report on the application of the General Data Protection Regulation

7 Feb 2024

ASNEF, as the trade association of regulated financial institutions of Spain, hereby encloses feedback on the application of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
Read full response

Response to Open finance framework

27 Oct 2023

Please find attached the comments from ASNEF, the Spanish Finance Houses Association, duly registered in the Transparency Registry with nº 11218815591-29, with regards to the European Commission's proposed Regulation on the Financial Data Access Framework. ASNEF wants to remind the European Commission that ensuring equal conditions in the financial data market is vital to uphold the principle of 'same activity, same risk, same regulation, and same supervision' for all market participants. Further comments are in the attached document.
Read full response

Response to Instant Payments

27 Dec 2022

Por la presente se adjuntan los comentarios de ASNEF (nº de Registro de Transparencia 11218815591-29) relativos a la propuesta de Reglamento sobre transferencias inmediatas y, en concreto, en relación con los Artículos 5 quáter, apartado 1 y 5 quinquies, apartado 3. -------- Please find enclosed ASNEF feedback, both in Spanish and English, in relation to the Proposal for a Regulation on instant credit transfers in euro. Comments refers to ARTICLE 5c, paragraph 1 as well as ARTICLE 5d, paragraph 3.
Read full response

Response to Distance Marketing of Consumer Financial Services - Review of EU rules

1 Jul 2022

Adjuntamos observaciones de ASNEF (Registro de Transparencia UE nº 11218815591-29) a la Propuesta de Directiva. We attach observations from ASNEF (EU Transparency Registry No. 11218815591-29) to the Proposal for a Directive
Read full response

Response to Consumer Credit Agreement – review of EU rules

2 Sept 2021

“The Spanish Finance Houses Association (ASNEF), the voice of the Spanish specialized consumer credit providers welcomes the opportunity to contribute with it´s comments to the European Commission’s proposal for a Consumer Credit Directive (CCD). Please find enclosed our comments on the Directive proposal. We remain fully committed to the Commission’s objectives as outlined in the Consumer Financial Services Action Plan in providing European consumers with the highest level of consumer protection, a wide choice of products suitable to their needs and the improved functioning of the retail financial services market. We remain at the Commission’s disposal, should the need for further clarification or any form of assistance be required/desired.
Read full response

Response to Requirements for Artificial Intelligence

30 Jul 2021

ASNEF, the Finance Houses Association of Spain, represented by the Secretary General, Mr. Ignacio Pla Vidal, and duly registered in the Transparency Registry with nº 11218815591-29, submits the following observations: 1. Concerning recital 37, the proposed Regulation mentions the following: "Considering the very limited scale of the impact and the available alternatives on the market, it is appropriate to exempt AI systems for the purpose of creditworthiness assessment and credit scoring when put into service by small-scale providers for their own use”. We consider it of utmost importance that the meaning of "small-scale suppliers" and "for their own use" be specified in the context of this exception to consideration as high risk and the application of the consequent requirements and obligations. 2. Secondly, we ask for further clarification on how those “high-risk” systems that are already in use by the institutions will need to adapt to the new regulation. 3. Finally, we request a wide transitional period to be included, so that entities that are already using Artificial Intelligence for the creditworthiness assessment and credit score can adapt to the new requirements.
Read full response

Response to Report on the application of the General Data Protection Regulation

29 Apr 2020

The Spanish Finance Houses Association (hereby “ASNEF” or “Associaton”) calls for a uniform application of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) since sanctions and real application in the different Member States are not the same. The GDPR seems to be more of a Directive tan a Regulation. Concerning digitalization, the GDPR is not helping to achieve a complete digital transition. A clear example of this is the regulatory limitations within the application of cookies. ASNEF calls for a specific Regulation on E-privacy. Aspects on the GDPR that should be addressed are data auto-filling and data sharing among finance entities. Also, international data transfer processes are not uniform. Other aspects of the GDPR that should be addressed: - Consumer Profiling (lack of uniform criteria in the EU). - Storage periods. Furthermore, there is a lack of necessary coordination between the regulatory requirements of financial institutions regarding the control of financial risks, especially responsible lending and over-indebtedness and the limitations of the Regulation and its interpretation and development in certain jurisdictions. Also, ASNEF calls for the mainstreaming of the GDPR with the CCD, regarding aspects consumer consent and legitimate interest.
Read full response

Response to Report on the Application of the eIDAS Regulation

16 Oct 2019

En relación con el mercado español, cabe decir que desgraciadamente y si bien el sistema de firma reconocida o cualificada implementado en el Documento Nacional de Identidad debería haber tenido una gran difusión, su utilización en las transacciones mercantiles es, sin embargo, prácticamente nula. Ello se debe, de una parte, a la necesidad de que el ciudadano haga uso de un lector y, de otra, a las dificultades que imponen los procedimientos del referido sistema de firma. No obstante, en España, la utilización de la firma electrónica se ha desarrollado de forma importante en los últimos años gracias a otros sistemas de firma electrónica no reconocida autorizados por la normativa española de firma electrónica. En cuanto a la firma en la nube, cabe decir que en nuestra opinión no se espera una buena acogida judicial en nuestra jurisdicción, al estar configurado el sistema de firma fuera de la esfera de control del usuario previendo la ejecución de la firma mediante el envio de un código al mismo, lo que obviamente carece de la seguridad necesaria. Courtesy translation: Feedback on: Secure electronic transactions – application of EU rules In relation to the spanish market, it is unfortunate that although the recognized or qualified signature system implemented in the National Identity Document should have been widely disseminated, its use however is practically null , in commercial transactions. This is due, on the one hand, to the need of the citizen to use an electronic reader and, on the other hand, due to the difficulties imposed by the procedures of the aforementioned signature system. However, in Spain, the use of the electronic signature has developed significantly in recent years thanks to other electronic signature systems authorized by the Spanish electronic signature regulations. As for cloud signing, a good judicial reception is, in our opinion, not expected in our jurisdiction since the signature system is configured outside the user's control sphere, providing, for the execution of the signature, that a code must be sent to the user, which obviously lacks the necessary security.
Read full response