Most of the work in terms of harmonising investment products across the EU has already been agreed. Progress on savings products has also been achieved. In particular, the development of the market for the Pan-European Pension Product is particularly relevant considering the situation of public finances in many EU countries and the challenges posed by population ageing. But, looking ahead, greater headway is needed over the coming years. In particular, allow me to highlight three dimensions. First, the legal framework: Insolvency regimes vary widely across jurisdictions for financial and non-financial corporations, as a result of cultural traditions and legal frameworks. This is a major obstacle for cross-country investments and, I would add, a very difficult one indeed to overcome. Second, the strengthening of European regulators. As European markets become more integrated and technologically complex, this is becoming a more essential element that policy-makers need to address. It will be even more important since, depending on the final outcome of negotiations, Brexit might increase the risk of fragmentation, as some companies and transactions may be reallocated to various possible destinations, while others may remain in the UK. 8/11  Third, more needs to be done in terms of making capital taxation more consistent. The debate has stalled in this regard. For example, the various regimes for withholding taxes, with more than 90 types of forms in different languages, are often cited as a huge obstacle for investment by market participants. Moreover, the favorable tax treatment of debt compared to that of equity has significant economic implications.
3/11  Against this background, allow me to briefly sketch those reforms which, in my view, deserve more attention in EU policy-makers’ agendas during the next institutional period following the European elections. First, there is an urgent need for more progress to complete the single market for services. For example, by addressing obstacles in the regulation of professional services and other administrative barriers, and by enhancing cross-border cooperation in the energy sector. Second, there is also a pressing need to strengthen and simplify the fiscal framework. The current fiscal rules have proven to be overly complex, hard to enforce, and unable to prevent a procyclical fiscal policy. Moreover, steps in this direction might be essential for promoting economic stability and a more favorable environment for investments ahead of the challenge of digitalisation. Third, more efforts need to be made to preserve the multilateral system of trade. *** Focusing now more on specific euro area reforms, I would highlight in particular two priorities which, in my view, should be at the center of the discussion. Firstly, the need to increase financial integration and the development of European capital markets by reinforcing the Banking Union and the Capital Markets Union initiatives. Secondly, progress towards a more comprehensive fiscal stabilisation capacity at the Eurozone level. The need to increase financial integration European citizens and firms still face several barriers to investing across European markets. Pensioners and investors in different countries have access to different investment products and their rights differ as a result of diverging local insolvency laws.