Capital Requirements Regulation 2013

MEDIA ALERT: Wolters Kluwer expert comments on European Parliament vote to pass amendment implementing Basel III reforms

Retrieved on: 
Vendredi, avril 26, 2024

The European financial landscape saw a milestone event this week, as the EU Parliament passed the Amendment to Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, implementing the Basel III finalization within Europe.

Key Points: 
  • The European financial landscape saw a milestone event this week, as the EU Parliament passed the Amendment to Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, implementing the Basel III finalization within Europe.
  • “This is a major overhaul of the capital requirements framework, impacting various aspects, including credit risk, operational risk, market risk, and the capital floor.
  • Whereas other significant jurisdictions, including the U.S., the U.K. and Hong Kong, have deferred timelines, the EEA region is now moving ahead with the Basel III reforms without delay.
  • Wolters Kluwer FRR is part of Wolters Kluwer’s Corporate Performance & ESG (CP & ESG) division, headed by CEO Karen Abramson .

The EBA consults on draft technical standards on the specification of long and short positions under the derogations for market and counterparty risks

Retrieved on: 
Jeudi, avril 25, 2024

The EBA consults on draft technical standards on the specification of long and short positions under the derogations for market and counterparty risks

Key Points: 
  • The EBA consults on draft technical standards on the specification of long and short positions under the derogations for market and counterparty risks
    The European Banking Authority (EBA) today launched a public consultation on its draft Regulatory Technical Standards (RTS) on the method for identifying the main risk driver and determining whether a transaction represents a long or a short position.
  • These RTS are part of the Phase 1 deliverables of the EBA roadmap on the implementation of the EU banking package in the area of market risk.
  • The Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR) includes some derogations for the calculation of the capital requirements for market and counterparty credit risks, for small trading book business, derivative business or business subject to market risk.
  • A position can be considered as long or short depending on how movements in its main risk driver affect the market value.

Cboe Clear Europe Secures Support of Additional Key Participants for Launch of Securities Financing Transactions Clearing Service

Retrieved on: 
Jeudi, avril 4, 2024

Brings total number of launch participants to nine, comprising a broad range of key market participants, including banks, clearing firms, asset managers and custodians

Key Points: 
  • Brings total number of launch participants to nine, comprising a broad range of key market participants, including banks, clearing firms, asset managers and custodians
    Launch on track for Q3 2024, subject to regulatory approvals
    AMSTERDAM and LONDON, April 4, 2024 /PRNewswire/ -- Cboe Clear Europe, Cboe's Amsterdam-based pan-European clearing house, today announced that it has secured the support of additional participants to support the launch of its Central Counterparty (CCP) clearing service for securities financing transactions (SFTs).
  • Their commitment brings the total number of launch participants for the SFT clearing service to nine, comprising a broad range of key market participants, including banks, clearing firms, asset managers and custodians.
  • Alessandro Cozzani, Managing Director, Bank of America, said: "We are excited to embark on this journey with Cboe Clear Europe.
  • At launch, Cboe Clear Europe will be the only pan-European CCP offering these consolidated services for SFTs in European cash equities and ETFs."

Complementary cost-benefit assessment on the Integrated Reporting Framework - Closer alignment with FINREP solo

Retrieved on: 
Vendredi, avril 5, 2024

Complementary cost-benefit assessment on the Integrated Reporting Framework ?

Key Points: 
    • Complementary cost-benefit assessment on the Integrated Reporting Framework ?
      Executive summary

      2

      towards closer alignment of the two frameworks, rather than implementing all
      changes at once.

    • Complementary cost-benefit assessment on the Integrated Reporting Framework ?
      Executive summary

      3

      1

      Introduction
      The complementary IReF cost-benefit assessment (CBA) followed an earlier
      consultation on an initial CBA that was launched in 2020.

    • The report summarises the feedback received from the banking industry on the
      possible closer alignment of the IReF with FINREP solo.
    • Complementary cost-benefit assessment on the Integrated Reporting Framework ?
      Introduction

      4

      2

      General question on closer alignment
      with FINREP solo
      Closer alignment between the IReF and FINREP solo could allow more substantial
      use of the IReF dataset for supervisory purposes, with the potential benefit of
      reducing ad hoc requests to reporting agents due to a more analytical and stable
      dataset.

    • The ECB legal framework for collecting FINREP solo information (Regulation (EU)
      2015/34)4 currently sets up four different levels of reporting for proportionality
      measures:
      ?

      FINREP data points;

      ?

      over-simplified FINREP;

      ?

      simplified FINREP;

      ?

      full FINREP.

    • Closer alignment does not mean that data
      under the IReF will be collected from reporting agents at the level of the legal entity
      in its entirety.
    • Complementary cost-benefit assessment on the Integrated Reporting Framework ? General
      question on closer alignment with FINREP solo

      5

      Chart 2.1
      General assessment on closer alignment between the IReF and FINREP solo

      Notes: The percentages are calculated for each driver as the simple average of the corresponding frequencies across euro area
      countries.

    • See Annex B of the report ?Complementary cost-benefit assessment of the Integrated Reporting Framework ? Extension of
      the IReF Regulation to cover country-specific requirements? published on the ECB?s website for information on how national results
      are calculated.
    • Members also raised the point that IReF
      information required for closer alignment with FINREP solo would only be collected
      from institutions that are currently subject to FINREP solo reporting.
    • The open text comments that were received in the complementary CBA show that
      different approaches to reporting at the level of the reporting agent may result in
      different expectations regarding closer alignment.
    • There
      were also several comments regarding the frequency and timeliness of the reporting
      of attributes needed for closer alignment with FINREP.
    • Many comments questioned which accounting standards will underpin IReF
      reporting, as those applicable to statistical reporting are often different from those
      relating to FINREP solo reporting.
    • Complementary cost-benefit assessment on the Integrated Reporting Framework ? General
      question on closer alignment with FINREP solo

      7

      3

      Extensions related to concepts already
      available in the IReF baseline scenario
      The IReF baseline scenario includes several accounting concepts that only apply to
      specific financial instruments.

    • See
      Annex B of the report ?Complementary cost-benefit assessment of the Integrated Reporting Framework ? Extension of the IReF
      Regulation to cover country-specific requirements? published on the ECB?s website for information on how national results are
      calculated.
    • See
      Annex B of the report ?Complementary cost-benefit assessment of the Integrated Reporting Framework ? Extension of the IReF
      Regulation to cover country-specific requirements? published on the ECB?s website for information on how national results are
      calculated.
    • See
      Annex B of the report ?Complementary cost-benefit assessment of the Integrated Reporting Framework ? Extension of the IReF
      Regulation to cover country-specific requirements? published on the ECB?s website for information on how national results are
      calculated.
    • See
      Annex B of the report ?Complementary cost-benefit assessment of the Integrated Reporting Framework ? Extension of the IReF
      Regulation to cover country-specific requirements? published on the ECB?s website for information on how national results are
      calculated.
    • See
      Annex B of the report ?Complementary cost-benefit assessment of the Integrated Reporting Framework ? Extension of the IReF
      Regulation to cover country-specific requirements? published on the ECB?s website for information on how national results are
      calculated.
    • See
      Annex B of the report ?Complementary cost-benefit assessment of the Integrated Reporting Framework ? Extension of the IReF
      Regulation to cover country-specific requirements? published on the ECB?s website for information on how national results are
      calculated.
    • See
      Annex B of the report ?Complementary cost-benefit assessment of the Integrated Reporting Framework ? Extension of the IReF
      Regulation to cover country-specific requirements? published on the ECB?s website for information on how national results are
      calculated.
    • See
      Annex B of the report ?Complementary cost-benefit assessment of the Integrated Reporting Framework ? Extension of the IReF
      Regulation to cover country-specific requirements? published on the ECB?s website for information on how national results are
      calculated.
    • Complementary cost-benefit assessment on the Integrated Reporting Framework ? Annex A
      Results by type and size of respondent

      57

      ? European Central Bank, 2024
      Postal address
      Telephone
      Website

      60640 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
      +49 69 1344 0
      www.ecb.europa.eu

      All rights reserved.

The Eurosystem Integrated Reporting Framework ‒ an overview

Retrieved on: 
Vendredi, avril 5, 2024

The Eurosystem Integrated

Key Points: 
    • The Eurosystem Integrated
      Reporting Framework ? an overview
      1

      Background
      European Union (EU) banks face a whole range of data reporting obligations,
      including for statistical, resolution and prudential information.

    • Existing ECB statistical regulations specify the information that must be reported, but
      not how the actual reporting process is to be carried out.
    • The Eurosystem Integrated Reporting Framework ? an overview

      1

      submitted by reporting agents to NCBs.

    • This arrangement dates back to when the ECB was set up in 1998 and was justified
      at the time, as it meant that statistical reporting could be founded on well-established
      national reporting frameworks.
    • Figure 1
      Current Eurosystem approach to collecting statistical information from banks

      Banks

      NCBs

      ECB

      Transformations by banks

      Transformations by NCBs
      Country A

      BSI & MIR

      Integrated approach
      ?

      SHS

      Country B

      Operational
      systems

      Monetary data

      b.o.p., i.i.p &
      sector accounts

      Credit register
      Sector accounts

      AnaCredit
      b.o.p.

    • Under the new paradigm, cross-border banks could unify the
      technical specifications of their reporting for all their European entities.
    • 2

      The scope of the IReF
      The IReF seeks to integrate existing ESCB statistical data requirements for banks as
      far as possible into a single, standardised reporting framework applicable across the
      euro area.

    • The feasibility of aligning the IReF
      more closely with the Financial Reporting (FINREP) requirements applicable at solo
      level11 is also being assessed.
    • Some NCBs have
      developed an integrated reporting framework for investment funds (covering both
      MMFs and non-MMFs).
    • The Eurosystem reviewed the results of the CBA to identify optimal features for
      banks, the Eurosystem and its users.
    • This time frame will give reporting agents and the Eurosystem enough lead time to
      prepare the legal and technical framework without unduly delaying the expected
      reduction in the reporting burden.
    • 16

      See ?On a Feasibility Study of an Integrated Reporting System under Article 430c CRR?, EBA, 2021;
      and ?The EBA?s feasibility study on integrated reporting system provides a long-term vision for
      increasing efficiencies and reducing reporting costs?, EBA, December 2021.

    • The Eurosystem is already cooperating closely with the banking industry to optimise
      reporting and reduce the overall reporting burden via the Banks? Integrated Reporting
      Dictionary (BIRD).19 BIRD offers a redundancy-free source (i.e.
    • The IReF describes statistical requirements in a redundancy-free layer
      and will represent future statistical reporting obligations issued by the ECB and
      applicable to Eurosystem banks.
    • Data quality should increase and costs decrease, as the BIRD input layer would
      provide a comprehensive and flexible tool to support data reporting.

AnaCredit plausibility checks, version 2.0

Retrieved on: 
Mardi, avril 2, 2024

AnaCredit plausibility

Key Points: 
    • AnaCredit plausibility
      checks
      Plausibility checks performed on
      AnaCredit datasets
      Version 2.0

      March 2024

      Contents
      1

      Introduction

      2

      2

      Plausibility checks

      3

      2.1

      Definitions

      3

      2.2

      Classification

      4

      3

      AnaCredit external plausibility checks

      7

      3.1

      Plausibility checks with other statistical reporting frameworks

      8

      3.2

      Plausibility checks with supervisory reporting frameworks

      AnaCredit plausibility checks ? Contents

      27

      1

      1

      Introduction
      This document sets out the AnaCredit plausibility checks.

    • AnaCredit plausibility checks ? Plausibility checks

      3

      are erroneous and require revision; second, where the AnaCredit data are correct
      but the BSI data have not been reported correctly; third, where methodological
      differences in the requirements of the two datasets justify the discrepancy.

    • Figure 1
      Types of AnaCredit plausibility check
      Structure

      Stability

      per OA

      Consistency within or across attributes

      Time consistency of aggregate metrics

      across OAs

      Consistency with data of other OAs

      Changes in relative position compared
      to other OAs

      Benchmark
      comparisons

      Consistency with statistical and/or
      supervisory reporting

      Consistency of ratios over time

      Internal
      plausibility

      External
      plausibility

      AnaCredit plausibility checks ? Plausibility checks

      4

      2.2.1

      Internal plausibility checks
      Internal plausibility checks are self-contained within the AnaCredit data set, i.e.

    • AnaCredit plausibility checks ? Plausibility checks

      5

      2.2.2

      External plausibility checks
      External plausibility checks assess the consistency of data reported under AnaCredit
      with other datasets.

    • AnaCredit plausibility checks ? Plausibility checks

      6

      3

      AnaCredit external plausibility checks
      The following subsections contain the details of the AnaCredit external plausibility
      checks.

    • List of external plausibility checks performed under AnaCredit
      Table 1 shows the external plausibility checks under AnaCredit.
    • Plausibility checks with other statistical reporting
      frameworks
      This section includes AnaCredit external plausibility checks against other statistical
      reporting frameworks.
    • AnaCredit plausibility checks ? AnaCredit external plausibility checks

      9

      3.1.1.2

      ?

      loans to other financial intermediaries, financial auxiliaries, captive financial
      institutions and money lenders (S.125+S.126+S.127) across all maturity
      breakdowns;

      ?

      loans to insurance corporations (S.128) across all maturity breakdowns;

      ?

      loans to pension funds (S.129) across all maturity breakdown.

    • AnaCredit plausibility checks ? AnaCredit external plausibility checks

      10

      instruments (loans), so the resulting aggregate is a good match to the BSI statistic.

    • AnaCredit plausibility checks ? AnaCredit external plausibility checks

      12

      loans.

    • AnaCredit plausibility checks ? AnaCredit external plausibility checks

      14

      If any of the input data necessary for this calculation are missing or inconsistent, the
      [relevant BSI balance] resolves to NULL for the instrument concerned.

    • AnaCredit plausibility checks ? AnaCredit external plausibility checks

      16

      the latter assuming the credit risk and the MFI being responsible for managing the
      loan.

    • AnaCredit plausibility checks ? AnaCredit external plausibility checks

      17

      Intra-company instrument flag
      BSI statistics also include intra-company loans, i.e.

    • AnaCredit plausibility checks ? AnaCredit external plausibility checks

      18

      Settled loans
      BSI statistics only include loans which have been settled, i.e.

    • AnaCredit plausibility checks ? AnaCredit external plausibility checks

      20

      resolves to NULL for the instrument concerned.

    • AnaCredit plausibility checks ? AnaCredit external plausibility checks

      25

      divided by the number of the main debtors.

    • AnaCredit plausibility checks ? AnaCredit external plausibility checks

      26

      3.2

      Plausibility checks with supervisory reporting frameworks
      This section includes AnaCredit external plausibility checks against supervisory
      reporting frameworks.

    • AnaCredit plausibility checks ? AnaCredit external plausibility checks

      27

      FINREP templates and compared with suitably computed AnaCredit equivalents for
      banks reporting the supervisory financial information under Regulation ECB/2015/13
      (FINREP solo).

    • AnaCredit plausibility checks ? AnaCredit external plausibility checks

      28

      Figure 3
      Calculation flow ? schematic overview of the comparison with FINREP solo

      By stacking the FINREP solo benchmark side-by-side with its AnaCredit equivalent,
      the deviation between the values can be quantified.

    • AnaCredit plausibility checks ? AnaCredit external plausibility checks

      29

      3.2.2.1

      FINREP solo benchmark value
      As mentioned, comparing AnaCredit with supervisory financial information helps
      ensure accounting information on loan portfolios that must be reported to AnaCredit
      is reported properly.

    • AnaCredit plausibility checks ? AnaCredit external plausibility checks

      30

      Table 3
      The formula for the benchmark DP_FNRP_F1800_ALL_00 from data points from the
      reporting templates of the EBA reporting framework.

    • The composition of FINREP solo reporters thus defined serves as a basis for
      determining (i) which AnaCredit observed agents correspond to which FINREP solo
      reporters, and (ii) the extent to which the perimeter of a FINREP solo reporter can be
      reconstructed from AnaCredit (given that some observed agents may have been

      AnaCredit plausibility checks ? AnaCredit external plausibility checks

      32

      derogated from reporting to AnaCredit).

    • AnaCredit plausibility checks ? AnaCredit external plausibility checks

      34

      For a given FINREP solo reporter, the result of the calculation described in this
      section (i.e.

    • AnaCredit plausibility checks ? AnaCredit external plausibility checks

      35

      ? European Central Bank, 2024
      Postal address
      Telephone
      Website

      60640 Frankfurt am Main, Germany
      +49 69 1344 0
      www.ecb.europa.eu

      All rights reserved.

The EBA consults on draft technical standards on off-balance sheet items under the standardised approach of credit risk

Retrieved on: 
Mardi, avril 2, 2024

The EBA consults on draft technical standards on off-balance sheet items under the standardised approach of credit risk

Key Points: 
  • The EBA consults on draft technical standards on off-balance sheet items under the standardised approach of credit risk
    - The EBA plays an important role in the implementation of the Basel III framework through the Banking Package in the EU.
  • - These draft technical standards are part of the first phase of the EBA roadmap on the implementation of the EU Banking Package.
  • - These draft technical standards will contribute to a more a robust regulatory framework, efficient supervision, and enhanced risk control by credit institutions.
  • The European Banking Authority (EBA) today launched a public consultation on its draft Regulatory Technical Standards (RTS) under the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR3) regarding off-balance sheet items under the standardised approach of credit risk.

The EBA publishes an analysis of specific aspects of the net stable funding ratio framework

Retrieved on: 
Samedi, février 3, 2024

The EBA publishes an analysis of specific aspects of the net stable funding ratio framework

Key Points: 
  • The EBA publishes an analysis of specific aspects of the net stable funding ratio framework
    The European Banking Authority (EBA) today published its Report about some specific aspects of the net stable funding ratio (NSFR) framework.
  • The EBA conducted mostly a qualitative analysis based on expert judgement, as well as some sensitivity analysis.
  • The EBA proposed to merge the two mandates so as to include all the requested analysis in a single report.
  • - The Report leverages mostly on qualitative analysis based on expert judgement, supplemented by some sensitivity analysis.