PROBLEMS OF THEORETICAL VALIDITY OF A NUMBER OF DEFINITIONS IN LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY DOCUMENTS ON BANKING

Abstract

The article is devoted to the influence of legislative and regulatory documents on banking on the activities of domestic banks. A number of theoretically unjustified terms in these documents are highlighted; their improvement will contribute to further activities of domestic banks and the country’s socio-economic development. Relevance of the topic is the need to use irreproachable (from the point of view of theory and practice) legislative and normative fundamental documents, which directly affect the activities of domestic banks. Some steps are proposed to eliminate existing deficiencies in the Law of Ukraine "On the National Bank of Ukraine" (articles 6 and 7) and in regulatory documents on banking; the fallacy of the dual term “refinancing of banks”. The author considers it’s necessary: (i) to use the term "refinancing" only when repeated permanent financing the government by the banks of the country occurs, (ii) NBU loans, which he provides to banks as a lender of last resort, to be called loans to maintain the liquidity of banks, (iii) to bring NBU approaches, concerning the essence of the open currency position of the bank, in line with its scientifically sound and defined in article 1 of this Law essence, (iv) to adjust the methodology for calculating the individual and overall open currency position of the bank, (v) to resume the calculation of the overall open currency position in all currencies and banking metals, taking into account the sign, at the end of the working day, and (vi) to restore the limits of all types of open currency positions guided by the methodology for determining its types in the Law of Ukraine “On the National Bank of Ukraine”. After carrying out these activities, the legislative and regulatory acts, according to which the banking system of Ukraine operates, will contribute to the development of both the banking system and the country as a whole.