The Panamanian Banking Association warns that Bill No. 388 on the administrative recognition of the prescription of debts could lead to an increase in the cost and difficulty of accessing credit for families, entrepreneurs, and companies in Panama, by increasing risks within the financial system. The guild expressed its concern about the scope of the initiative, stating that some of its provisions could alter the incentives that currently support the country's credit system. A few days ago, a legislative initiative was approved in its third debate in the National Assembly, establishing an administrative procedure for the recognition of the prescription of debts with banks and financial entities, reactions from the banking sector have arisen within a three-year period since the last time it was possible to collect. This confirms the statements given to SNIP News by the executive president of the banking guild a few days ago, in which said that they were against this law. Panamanian Banking Association against the law that allows the elimination of bank debt and warns of negative effects. According to the association, the Panamanian credit system is based on trust and the fulfillment of obligations by the vast majority of clients. This dynamic has made it possible to maintain stable delinquency levels and for credit to continue to be a tool used by thousands of families to acquire housing, start businesses, or face important moments in their lives. The guild warned that the project could create incentives for some debtors to opt out of fulfilling their commitments until the debt prescribes, especially if any negative reference is eliminated from the credit history once that process is recognized. In the association's judgment, this could send a contrary signal to those who, even facing economic difficulties, choose to restructure their loans and continue to meet their financial obligations. The project also proposes the creation of an administrative procedure for the recognition of the prescription of debts before the bank, the Superintendence of Banks and eventually the Supreme Court of Justice, while the traditional judicial process would remain in force. According to the Banking Association, the coexistence of both routes could generate greater operational complexity, additional costs, and legal uncertainty within the system. The organization reiterated its willingness to participate in a technical dialogue on the initiative, with the aim of strengthening consumer protection without affecting legal security or the conditions that today sustain access to credit in Panama.
