Royal Decree-Law 7/2021 of 27 April transposing EU Directives on competition, anti-money laundering, credit institutions, telecommunications, tax measures, environmental damage, worker displacement, and consumer defense

OFFICIAL STATE BULLETIN No. 101 Wednesday, 28 April 2021 Sec. I. Page 49749 I. GENERAL PROVISIONS THE HEAD OF STATE 6872 Royal Decree-Law 7/2021, of 27 April, transposing European Union Directives in the matters of competition, prevention of money laundering, credit institutions, telecommunications, tax measures, prevention and repair of environmental damage, displacement of workers in the provision of transnational services, and consumer defense. I Timely transposition of European Union Directives currently constitutes one of the priority objectives established by the European Council. The European Commission submits periodic reports to the Competitiveness Council, which are given high political value as they serve to measure the effectiveness and credibility of Member States in implementing the internal market. Compliance with this objective is even more prioritized today given the scenario designed by the Treaty of Lisbon, which amends the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community, regarding failures to transpose on time. For such failures, the Commission may ask the Court of Justice of the European Union to impose significant financial penalties in an accelerated manner (Article 260.3 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union – TFEU). Spain has consistently met transposition objectives within committed timeframes since their establishment. However, in recent years, events such as the repetition of general elections in 2019, with the consequent dissolution of the General Courts and the existence of a caretaker government for a prolonged period, as well as the spread of the pandemic caused by COVID-19 from the first quarter of 2020, explain the accumulation of delays in transposing certain Directives. These require a legal norm to incorporate them into the internal legal order. In some of these cases, there is also a risk of fines based on Article 260.3 of the TFEU, as corresponding letters of formal notice have been received and an infringement procedure has been opened by the Commission. This is the case for most of the Directives whose transposition constitutes the object of this Royal Decree-Law. Given the gravity of the consequences of continuing to accumulate delays in incorporating such Directives into the Spanish legal order, it is necessary to approve a Royal Decree-Law to proceed with such transposition, which will allow closing the infringement procedures opened by the European Commission. Regarding the existence of "non-compliance procedures against the Kingdom of Spain," it must be taken into account that despite the optional nature provided in Article 260.3 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, in its Communication of 13 December 2016, "EU Law: Better results through better application," the Commission announced a change in approach, moving to systematically request lump-sum payments. The logical consequence of the lump-sum payment approach is that, in cases where a Member State remedies the infringement by transposing the Directive during an infringement procedure, the Commission will no longer withdraw its action solely for that reason. As a transitional provision, the Commission has stated that it will not apply this new practice to procedures where the letter of formal notice predates the publication of said communication in the Official Journal of the European Union, which took place on 19 January 2017. Consequently, it is of extraordinary and urgent necessity to proceed with transposition before the lawsuit is formalized before the Court of Justice, thereby avoiding a judicial procedure that would conclude with a judgment declaring the Kingdom of Spain's non-compliance with the obligations imposed by EU Law. Regarding the use of the Royal Decree-Law, the Constitutional Court has declared that the situation of extraordinary and urgent necessity that requires, as an enabling premise, Article 86.1 of the Spanish Constitution, can be deduced "from a plurality of elements," among them, "those reflected in the statement of reasons of the norm" (STC 6/1983, of 4 February). On the other hand, between the situation of extraordinary and urgent necessity enabling the use of the Royal Decree-Law and the measures contained therein, there must be a "direct relationship or congruence." Therefore, for the concurrence of the premise of extraordinary and urgent necessity, STC 61/2018, of 7 June, (FJ 4), requires, on the one hand, "the explicit and reasoned presentation of the reasons that the Government has taken into account for its approval," that is, what has come to be called the situation of urgency; and, on the other, "the existence of a necessary connection between the defined situation of urgency and the specific measure adopted to address it." On the other hand, regarding the figure of the Royal Decree-Law as a transposition instrument, it should be noted that the Constitutional Court, in Judgment 23/1993, of 21 January, declares that the Royal Decree-Law is a constitutionally lawful instrument to address problematic economic situations, and in its Judgment 1/2012, of 13 January, it validates the concurrence of the enabling premise of extraordinary and urgent necessity of Article 86.1 of the Spanish Constitution when there is "patent delay in transposition" and the existence of "non-compliance procedures against the Kingdom of Spain." Likewise, regarding the diversity of scopes and matters that this Royal Decree-Law regulates, it is deemed necessary to highlight that the Constitutional Court, in Judgment 136/2011, of 13 September, affirms that the dogma of the desirable homogeneity of a legislative text is not an insurmountable obstacle preventing the legislator from issuing multisectoral norms, as there is also no provision, express or implicit, in the Spanish Constitution that prevents laws from having heterogeneous content. To add further, Judgment of the Constitutional Court 199/2015, of 24 September, declared in the matter of cross-cutting decrees-laws that "the concurrence of urgency and necessity must be analyzed for each provision, because only in this way can an appropriate examination be carried out on the meaningful connection between the defined situation of urgency and the specific measure adopted to address it." Thus, the Constitutional Court continues in its Judgment, "even if one can speak of the existence of a global situation of urgency or necessity, linked to what this Court has termed 'problematic economic situations,' in cases where there is a provision for a set of diverse measures to address that situation, the Government can be required to reasonably explain the reasons it has taken into account for including each block of measures in the decree-law, opting to remove them from the orbit of a potential specific bill project. Therefore (...) the assessment of the concurrence of the enabling premise in a cross-cutting decree-law involves verifying that the motivation regarding the existence of said premise is not a vague generic motivation, but refers expressly to each provision or group of provisions, with the objective of externalizing the reasons that justify the inclusion of those measures in a decree-law. Only in this way can those called to exercise control over the Decree-Law keep in mind 'the concrete situations and governmental objectives that have led to the approval of each of the Decree-Laws under review' (SSTC 6/1983, of 4 February, FJ 5; 182/1997, of 28 October, FJ 3; 11/2002, of 17 January, FJ 4, and 137/2003, of 3 July, FJ 3)." It should also be noted that this Royal Decree-Law does not affect the legal order of the basic institutions of the State, the rights, duties, and freedoms of citizens regulated in Title I of the Constitution, the regime of the Autonomous Communities, nor general electoral law. For all the above, and in accordance with the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court, the successive sections of this statement of reasons specify the reasons justifying the extraordinary and urgent necessity of transposing the various Directives in each of the scenarios covered by this Royal Decree-Law. II Title I, comprising Articles One and Two, contains the modifications derived from the transposition of Directive (EU) 2019/1 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 11 December 2018, aimed at empowering the competition authorities of the Member States to apply competition rules more effectively and guarantee the proper functioning of the internal market (ECN+ Directive). The effective application of competition law guarantees competitive, more open, and fair markets, in which companies compete on the basis of their merits, generating wealth and creating jobs. Such application also protects consumers from commercial practices that generate artificially high prices for goods and services and increases their possibilities of choosing higher quality goods and services. Achieving these competition policy objectives requires competition authorities endowed with the necessary powers and instruments to guarantee the existence of effective competition in markets. Thus, the effective application of competition legislation in the European Union requires a true common area of application for both Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and national competition law in parallel with those articles, so that National Competition Authorities (hereinafter NCA) can be fully effective. However, traditionally there have been divergences in the tools available to different NCAs to effectively apply competition rules, as well as room for improvement in mutual assistance instruments among them. The approval of Directive (EU) 2019/1 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 11 December 2018, aimed at empowering the competition authorities of the Member States to apply competition rules more effectively and guarantee the proper functioning of the internal market (ECN+ Directive), has as its main objective to overcome the deficiencies of the system that have led to the unequal application of Articles 101 and 102 of the TFEU, ensuring that the NCAs of Member States have the guarantees of independence, resources, and enforcement and fining powers necessary to effectively apply Articles 101 and 102 of the TFEU. The transposition deadline for the ECN+ Directive expired on 4 February 2021. A letter of formal notice from the Commission dated 18 March was received for response within two months, and an infringement procedure is open. Within the Spanish competition defense system, the National Markets and Competition Commission (CNMC) acts as the NCA with the role of guarantor of competition in markets at the national level, without prejudice to the powers of autonomous competition bodies. Spanish regulation already contemplates most of the provisions contained in the ECN+ Directive. However, full compliance with the ECN+ Directive requires modifying Law 15/2007, of 3 July, on Competition Defense, to guarantee full compliance with European law provisions and make some specific modifications to Law 3/2013, of 4 June, on the creation of the National Markets and Competition Commission. Among the elements transposed into our legal order, the measures and instruments to promote mutual assistance between the CNMC and the NCAs of EU Member States and the European Commission stand out, reinforcing the European Competition Network of which they are all part, guaranteeing the effective application of Articles 101 and 102 of the TFEU and the proper functioning of the internal market. In this area, the regulation of the interruption of the statute of limitations by action of other NCAs, by action of the European Commission, or as a consequence of judicial review is notable. The law proceeds to transpose into our legal order other elements that seek to guarantee a more effective application of competition rules. In this sense, the duties of information and collaboration and inspection powers are expanded and specified to a greater extent, expressly regulating the power to conduct interviews with the representative persons and staff of the investigated companies. Likewise, derived from the transposition process, the law makes other adjustments to competition rules, such as the review of the maximum limit of fines for all infringements of Articles 101 and 102 of the TFEU, the review of the regulation of coercive fines, the introduction of certain adjustments in the leniency program, or the inclusion of rejecting complaints based on prioritization criteria. Finally, it should be noted that the complete transposition of the ECN+ Directive requires some minor modifications not provided for in a law-level norm, as it has been decided, in accordance with the principles of good regulation, that their transposition be carried out through regulatory norms. Therefore, the modification of certain articles of the Competition Defense Regulation, approved by Royal Decree 261/2008, of 22 February, and the modification of Royal Decree 2295/2004, of 10 December, relating to the application in Spain of EU competition rules, are proposed to address issues such as the form of presentation of leniency applications or the development of cooperation principles. A final provision is included to safeguard the rank of these regulatory developments. III Title II, consisting of Article Three, introduces the necessary modifications in our internal legal order for the correct transposition of the recent Directive on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering or terrorist financing, which modifies the previous Directives adopted in this area. This is a matter that needs to adapt and evolve as the risks and threats faced by its regulatory framework do. In accordance with this premise, after the transposition by Royal Decree-Law 11/2018, of 31 August, of Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 20 May 2015, on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering or terrorist financing (Fourth Directive), national regulation must be adapted again to other European norms. Specifically, it is necessary to transpose Directive (EU) 2018/843 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 30 May 2018, amending Directive (EU) 2015/849 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering or terrorist financing, and amending Directives 2009/138/EC and 2013/36/EU (Fifth Directive). This has the double objective of perfecting terrorism prevention mechanisms and improving the transparency and availability of information on the beneficial owners of legal persons and other entities without legal personality acting in legal transactions. Among the modifications derived from the transposition of the Fifth Directive, the incorporation of new obligated subjects stands out, and in particular, the submission to preventive obligations of persons providing virtual currency to legal currency exchange services. Likewise, providers of electronic wallet custody services are incorporated as obligated subjects, understood as those natural or legal persons providing services for the safeguarding of private cryptographic keys on behalf of their clients, for the holding, storage, and transfer of virtual currencies in a manner similar to the custody of funds or traditional financial assets. In both cases, submission to anti-money laundering regulation is accompanied, as required by Directive (EU) 2018/843 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 30 May 2018, by an obligation to register these providers. The Fifth Directive carries out a transcendental reform regarding beneficial owner registers, for which it establishes a public access system no longer limited to obligated subjects and authorities. To this end, this law creates a new model of beneficial ownership identification starting with the creation of a Single Register at the Ministry of Justice, which will obtain information directly but will also centralize the information contained in the registers and databases existing in the General Council of the Notary and the Mercantile Registry. This register will guarantee interconnection with the rest of EU registers and will be responsible for controlling access and its adjustment to Law, as well as to the limitations imposed by regulations. The creation of this register is accompanied by the establishment of an obligation for legal persons and entities without legal personality to obtain, conserve, and update this beneficial ownership information and provide it to authorities and obligated subjects. In this context, both the data and information that must be maintained in this register and the specific persons responsible for its maintenance and update are clarified. The Fifth Directive establishes for the first time the obligation to create automated systems of centralized databases of payment accounts and bank accounts, an instrument already contemplated in the original text of Law 10/2010, of 28 April, on the prevention of money laundering and terrorist financing, known as the Financial Ownership File. This automated file has been fully operational in Spain since 2016, but additional adjustments are now made to adapt its content to the new requirements of the Fifth Directive. Thus, the obligation to declare the rental of safety deposit boxes and payment accounts is incorporated, including those managed by payment entities and electronic money entities, which become obligated subjects to declare along with credit institutions, which already had this obligation. Likewise, modifications are included in the access system to this information, recognizing new authorities with access competencies and modifying the framework and conditions for access by other authorities already contemplated by the norm. On the other hand, in accordance with what is established in the Fifth Directive, the processing of personal data in this matter will be subject to Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 27 April 2016, on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) and Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 23 October 2018, on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by the institutions, bodies, and agencies of the Union and on the free movement of such data, as well as Organic Law 3/2018, of 5 December, on Personal Data Protection and guarantee of digital rights, in the terms indicated in this law. Regulation (EU) 2018/1672 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 23 October 2018, on controls of cash entering and leaving the Union and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1889/2005, mandatory from 3 June 2021, establishes new obligations that must be included in Law 10/2010, of 28 April, and, as its Recital (7) states, determines a system of rules that facilitates the prevention, detection, and investigation of criminal activities defined in the anti-money laundering Directive. Specifically, the definition of cash includes raw materials used as a high-liquidity deposit, the obligation to report unaccompanied cash is established, and the need to declare cash transported in movements entering or leaving the European Union by those carrying out professional transport activities of funds or payment means is required. The legal regime applicable to the temporary seizure of payment means is also modified, in order to comply with Article 7 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1672 of 23 October 2018, which determines the introduction of an administrative claim against the temporary seizure of payment means and its relationship with the sanctioning procedure for cash movement for the purposes of Articles 34 and 35 of Law 10/2010, of 28 April. IV Title III of this Royal Decree-Law establishes, in Articles Four to Eight, the legal modifications derived from the transposition of those provisions requiring law-level rank from Directive (EU) 2019/878 (CRD5) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2019 and Directive (EU) 2019/879 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 20 May 2019. In response to the financial crisis that unfolded in 2007-2008 and the procyclical mechanisms that contributed to causing it and aggravated its effects, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) published a new global framework with new rules on bank capital adequacy. cve: BOE-A-2021-6872 Verifiable at https://www.boe.es

OFFICIAL STATE BULLETIN No. 101 Wednesday, 28 April 2021 Sec. I. Page 49750 to transposition before the lawsuit is formalized before the Court of Justice, thereby avoiding a judicial procedure that would conclude with a judgment declaring the Kingdom of Spain's non-compliance with the obligations imposed by EU Law. Regarding the use of the Royal Decree-Law, the Constitutional Court has declared that the situation of extraordinary and urgent necessity that requires, as an enabling premise, Article 86.1 of the Spanish Constitution, can be deduced "from a plurality of elements," among them, "those reflected in the statement of reasons of the norm" (STC 6/1983, of 4 February). On the other hand, between the situation of extraordinary and urgent necessity enabling the use of the Royal Decree-Law and the measures contained therein, there must be a "direct relationship or congruence." Therefore, for the concurrence of the premise of extraordinary and urgent necessity, STC 61/2018, of 7 June, (FJ 4), requires, on the one hand, "the explicit and reasoned presentation of the reasons that the Government has taken into account for its approval," that is, what has come to be called the situation of urgency; and, on the other, "the existence of a necessary connection between the defined situation of urgency and the specific measure adopted to address it." On the other hand, regarding the figure of the Royal Decree-Law as a transposition instrument, it should be noted that the Constitutional Court, in Judgment 23/1993, of 21 January, declares that the Royal Decree-Law is a constitutionally lawful instrument to address problematic economic situations, and in its Judgment 1/2012, of 13 January, it validates the concurrence of the enabling premise of extraordinary and urgent necessity of Article 86.1 of the Spanish Constitution when there is "patent delay in transposition" and the existence of "non-compliance procedures against the Kingdom of Spain." Likewise, regarding the diversity of scopes and matters that this Royal Decree-Law regulates, it is deemed necessary to highlight that the Constitutional Court, in Judgment 136/2011, of 13 September, affirms that the dogma of the desirable homogeneity of a legislative text is not an insurmountable obstacle preventing the legislator from issuing multisectoral norms, as there is also no provision, express or implicit, in the Spanish Constitution that prevents laws from having heterogeneous content. To add further, Judgment of the Constitutional Court 199/2015, of 24 September, declared in the matter of cross-cutting decrees-laws that "the concurrence of urgency and necessity must be analyzed for each provision, because only in this way can an appropriate examination be carried out on the meaningful connection between the defined situation of urgency and the specific measure adopted to address it." Thus, the Constitutional Court continues in its Judgment, "even if one can speak of the existence of a global situation of urgency or necessity, linked to what this Court has termed 'problematic economic situations,' in cases where there is a provision for a set of diverse measures to address that situation, the Government can be required to reasonably explain the reasons it has taken into account for including each block of measures in the decree-law, opting to remove them from the orbit of a potential specific bill project. Therefore (...) the assessment of the concurrence of the enabling premise in a cross-cutting decree-law involves verifying that the motivation regarding the existence of said premise is not a vague generic motivation, but refers expressly to each provision or group of provisions, with the objective of externalizing the reasons that justify the inclusion of those measures in a decree-law. Only in this way can those called to exercise control over the Decree-Law keep in mind 'the concrete situations and governmental objectives that have led to the approval of each of the Decree-Laws under review' (SSTC 6/1983, of 4 February, FJ 5; 182/1997, of 28 October, FJ 3; 11/2002, of 17 January, FJ 4, and 137/2003, of 3 July, FJ 3)." It should also be noted that this Royal Decree-Law does not affect the legal order of the basic institutions of the State, the rights, duties, and freedoms of citizens regulated in Title I of the Constitution, the regime of the Autonomous Communities, nor general electoral law. For all the above, and in accordance with the jurisprudence of the Constitutional Court, the successive sections of this statement of reasons specify the reasons justifying the extraordinary and urgent necessity of transposing the various Directives in each of the scenarios covered by this Royal Decree-Law. II Title I, comprising Articles One and Two, contains the modifications derived from the transposition of Directive (EU) 2019/1 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 11 December 2018, aimed at empowering the competition authorities of the Member States to apply competition rules more effectively and guarantee the proper functioning of the internal market (ECN+ Directive). The effective application of competition law guarantees competitive, more open, and fair markets, in which companies compete on the basis of their merits, generating wealth and creating jobs. Such application also protects consumers from commercial practices that generate artificially high prices for goods and services and increases their possibilities of choosing higher quality goods and services. Achieving these competition policy objectives requires competition authorities endowed with the necessary powers and instruments to guarantee the existence of effective competition in markets. Thus, the effective application of competition legislation in the European Union requires a true common area of application for both Articles 101 and 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and national competition law in parallel with those articles, so that National Competition Authorities (hereinafter NCA) can be fully effective. However, traditionally there have been divergences in the tools available to different NCAs to effectively apply competition rules, as well as room for improvement in mutual assistance instruments among them. The approval of Directive (EU) 2019/1 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 11 December 2018, aimed at empowering the competition authorities of the Member States to apply competition rules more effectively and guarantee the proper functioning of the internal market (ECN+ Directive), has as its main objective to overcome the deficiencies of the system that have led to the unequal application of Articles 101 and 102 of the TFEU, ensuring that the NCAs of Member States have the guarantees of independence, resources, and enforcement and fining powers necessary to effectively apply Articles 101 and 102 of the TFEU. The transposition deadline for the ECN+ Directive expired on 4 February 2021. A letter of formal notice from the Commission dated 18 March was received for response within two months, and an infringement procedure is open. Within the Spanish competition defense system, the National Markets and Competition Commission (CNMC) acts as the NCA with the role of guarantor of competition in markets at the national level, without prejudice to the powers of autonomous competition bodies. Spanish regulation already contemplates most of the provisions contained in the ECN+ Directive. However, full compliance with the ECN+ Directive requires modifying Law 15/2007, of 3 July, on Competition Defense, to guarantee full compliance with European law provisions and make some specific modifications to Law 3/2013, of 4 June, on the creation of the National Markets and Competition Commission. cve: BOE-A-2021-6872 Verifiable at https://www.boe.es

OFFICIAL STATE BULLETIN No. 101 Wednesday, 28 April 2021 Sec. I. Page 49752 Among the elements transposed into our legal order, the measures and instruments to promote mutual assistance between the CNMC and the NCAs of EU Member States and the European Commission stand out, reinforcing the European Competition Network of which they are all part, guaranteeing the effective application of Articles 101 and 102 of the TFEU and the proper functioning of the internal market. In this area, the regulation of the interruption of the statute of limitations by action of other NCAs, by action of the European Commission, or as a consequence of judicial review is notable. The law proceeds to transpose into our legal order other elements that seek to guarantee a more effective application of competition rules. In this sense, the duties of information and collaboration and inspection powers are expanded and specified to a greater extent, expressly regulating the power to conduct interviews with the representative persons and staff of the investigated companies. Likewise, derived from the transposition process, the law makes other adjustments to competition rules, such as the review of the maximum limit of fines for all infringements of Articles 101 and 102 of the TFEU, the review of the regulation of coercive fines, the introduction of certain adjustments in the leniency program, or the inclusion of rejecting complaints based on prioritization criteria. Finally, it should be noted that the complete transposition of the ECN+ Directive requires some minor modifications not provided for in a law-level norm, as it has been decided, in accordance with the principles of good regulation, that their transposition be carried out through regulatory norms. Therefore, the modification of certain articles of the Competition Defense Regulation, approved by Royal Decree 261/2008, of 22 February, and the modification of Royal Decree 2295/2004, of 10 December, relating to the application in Spain of EU competition rules, are proposed to address issues such as the form of presentation of leniency applications or the development of cooperation principles. A final provision is included to safeguard the rank of these regulatory developments. III Title II, consisting of Article Three, introduces the necessary modifications in our internal legal order for the correct transposition of the recent Directive on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering or terrorist financing, which modifies the previous Directives adopted in this area. This is a matter that needs to adapt and evolve as the risks and threats faced by its regulatory framework do. In accordance with this premise, after the transposition by Royal Decree-Law 11/2018, of 31 August, of Directive (EU) 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 20 May 2015, on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering or terrorist financing (Fourth Directive), national regulation must be adapted again to other European norms. Specifically, it is necessary to transpose Directive (EU) 2018/843 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 30 May 2018, amending Directive (EU) 2015/849 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering or terrorist financing, and amending Directives 2009/138/EC and 2013/36/EU (Fifth Directive). This has the double objective of perfecting terrorism prevention mechanisms and improving the transparency and availability of information on the beneficial owners of legal persons and other entities without legal personality acting in legal transactions. Among the modifications derived from the transposition of the Fifth Directive, the incorporation of new obligated subjects stands out, and in particular, the submission to preventive obligations of persons providing virtual currency to legal currency exchange services. Likewise, providers of electronic wallet custody services are incorporated as obligated subjects, understood as those natural or legal persons providing services for the safeguarding of private cryptographic keys on behalf of their clients, for the holding, storage, and transfer of virtual currencies in a manner similar to the custody of funds or traditional financial assets. In both cases, submission to anti-money laundering regulation is accompanied, as required by Directive (EU) 2018/843 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 30 May 2018, by an obligation to register these providers. The Fifth Directive carries out a transcendental reform regarding beneficial owner registers, for which it establishes a public access system no longer limited to obligated subjects and authorities. To this end, this law creates a new model of beneficial ownership identification starting with the creation of a Single Register at the Ministry of Justice, which will obtain information directly but will also centralize the information contained in the registers and databases existing in the General Council of the Notary and the Mercantile Registry. This register will guarantee interconnection with the rest of EU registers and will be responsible for controlling access and its adjustment to Law, as well as to the limitations imposed by regulations. The creation of this register is accompanied by the establishment of an obligation for legal persons and entities without legal personality to obtain, conserve, and update this beneficial ownership information and provide it to authorities and obligated subjects. In this context, both the data and information that must be maintained in this register and the specific persons responsible for its maintenance and update are clarified. The Fifth Directive establishes for the first time the obligation to create automated systems of centralized databases of payment accounts and bank accounts, an instrument already contemplated in the original text of Law 10/2010, of 28 April, on the prevention of money laundering and terrorist financing, known as the Financial Ownership File. This automated file has been fully operational in Spain since 2016, but additional adjustments are now made to adapt its content to the new requirements of the Fifth Directive. Thus, the obligation to declare the rental of safety deposit boxes and payment accounts is incorporated, including those managed by payment entities and electronic money entities, which become obligated subjects to declare along with credit institutions, which already had this obligation. Likewise, modifications are included in the access system to this information, recognizing new authorities with access competencies and modifying the framework and conditions for access by other authorities already contemplated by the norm. On the other hand, in accordance with what is established in the Fifth Directive, the processing of personal data in this matter will be subject to Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 27 April 2016, on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation) and Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 23 October 2018, on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data by the institutions, bodies, and agencies of the Union and on the free movement of such data, as well as Organic Law 3/2018, of 5 December, on Personal Data Protection and guarantee of digital rights, in the terms indicated in this law. Regulation (EU) 2018/1672 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 23 October 2018, on controls of cash entering and leaving the Union and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1889/2005, mandatory from 3 June 2021, establishes new obligations that must be included in Law 10/2010, of 28 April, and, as its Recital (7) states, determines a system of rules that facilitates the prevention, detection, and investigation of criminal activities defined in the anti-money laundering Directive. Specifically, the definition of cash includes raw materials used as a high-liquidity deposit, the obligation to report unaccompanied cash is established, and the need to declare cash transported in movements entering or leaving the European Union by those carrying out professional transport activities of funds or payment means is required. The legal regime applicable to the temporary seizure of payment means is also modified, in order to comply with Article 7 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1672 of 23 October 2018, which determines the introduction of an administrative claim against the temporary seizure of payment means and its relationship with the sanctioning procedure for cash movement for the purposes of Articles 34 and 35 of Law 10/2010, of 28 April. IV Title III of this Royal Decree-Law establishes, in Articles Four to Eight, the legal modifications derived from the transposition of those provisions requiring law-level rank from Directive (EU) 2019/878 (CRD5) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2019 and Directive (EU) 2019/879 of the European Parliament and of the Council, of 20 May 2019. In response to the financial crisis that unfolded in 2007-2008 and the procyclical mechanisms that contributed to causing it and aggravated its effects, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) published a new global framework with new rules on bank capital adequacy. cve: BOE-A-2021-6872 Verifiable at https://www.boe.es