The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision published proposals to revise the standards for operational risk for internationally active banks. The Basel Committee consulted in 2014 on a revised Standardized Approach to operational risk and simultaneously undertook a review of the Advanced Measurement Approach for operational risk. The Basel Committee is proposing to replace the AMA from the Basel framework as well as the three existing Standardized Approaches with a Standardized Measurement Approach. The new SMA is not based on any modelling and would set a standardized approach for measuring operational risk for regulatory capital purposes which would include risk sensitivity by using a bank's financial statement information and its internal loss experience. The Basel Committee introduced the AMA for operational risk in 2006 as part of the Basel II framework. The AMA allows regulatory capital to be estimated using a range of internal modelling practices subject to approval by the bank's regulator. Comments on the proposals are due by June 3, 2016. The Basel Committee intends to provide further details on the timeline for withdrawal of the AMA and implementation of the SMA during the course of 2016. 

View th consultation paper. 

The US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System issued interagency guidance on funds transfer pricing (FTP) practices related to funding risk and contingent liquidity risk for large financial institutions (i.e., domestic institutions with $250 billion or more in assets and foreign institutions with $250 billion or more in US assets). The interagency guidance describes four overarching principles that banks should use to develop, implement and maintain an effective FTP framework: (i) allocate FTP costs and benefits on funding risk and contingent liquidity risk; (ii) have a consistent and transparent FTP framework for identifying and allocating FTP costs and benefits on a timely basis and at a sufficiently granular level, commensurate with the firm’s size, complexity, business activities and overall risk profile; (iii) have a robust FTP governance structure including the production of a report on FTP and oversight from a senior management group and central management function; and (iv) align business incentives with risk management and strategic objectives by incorporating FTP costs and benefits into product pricing, business metrics and new product approval. The guidance notes that an institution’s FTP framework should be adequately tailored to its size, complexity, business activities and overall risk profile.

View interagency guidance.

The European Banking Authority published its report on the functioning of supervisory colleges in 2015. The report sets out the EBA's annual assessment of how well the supervisory colleges have met the action plan for 2015. The EU supervisory colleges make joint decisions on capital, liquidity and recovery plans for EU cross-border banking groups. The EBA considers that, generally, there were significant improvements, particularly when it came to the reorganization of supervisory colleges following the introduction of the Single Supervisory Mechanism in 2014, the frequency of interaction and the quality of supervisory colleges. However, the EBA notes that some areas still require work, such as the joint decision processes, quality of joint decision documents and requests for individual recovery plans outside the joint decision process. The report also includes the EBA's action plan for supervisory colleges in 2016. The plan sets out the focus areas for supervisory colleges which are: on going balance sheet cleaning, reduction of non-performing loans for legacy portfolios, the sustainability of banks' business models, conduct risk and IT risk.
 
View the EBA's Report.

The US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the US Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation jointly issued and requested public comment on interim final rules to implement section 83001 of the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act, or FAST Act, which permitted the agencies to expand the on-site examination schedule for qualifying insured depository institutions with less than $1 billion in total assets to once every 18 months from once every 12 months. The interim final rules make parallel changes to the regulations of the federal agencies regarding on-site examination cycles for US branches and agencies of foreign banks with total assets of less than $1 billion. Under the interim final rules, the number of institutions that may qualify for an expanded 18-month examination cycle increased by 617, to close to 5,000 banks and savings associations. In addition, the number of US branches and agencies of foreign banks that may qualify for the 18-month examination cycle increased by 26 branches and agencies to a 89 branches and agencies. The interim final rules are effective on February 29, 2016. Comments on the rules must be received by April 29, 2016.

View the full text of the rules.
 

The US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency published a bulletin summarizing its process for initiating and proceeding with any enforcement action for noncompliance with Bank Secrecy Act compliance program requirements or repeated or uncorrected BSA compliance problems. The OCC bulletin supplements the “Interagency Statement on Enforcement of Bank Secrecy Act/Anti-Money Laundering Requirements” and rescinds OCC Bulletin 2005-45, “Process for Taking Administrative Enforcement Actions Against Banks Based on BSA Violations,” dated December 23, 2005. The revised OCC bulletin describes the OCC’s process for conducting administrative enforcement actions based on BSAcompliance issues, which, in each case, begins with a cease-and-desist order issued by the OCC. Pursuant to the OCC bulletin, the enforcement action process now includes a provision which requires the OCC to give any bank investigated by the OCC for noncompliance with BSA or anti-money laundering requirements an opportunity to respond before the
decision to issue a cease-and-desist order is finalized. In each case, the OCC will notify the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of all formal and informal enforcement actions.

View the OCC bulletin.
 

The Prudential Regulation Authority and Financial Conduct Authority jointly announced that they will comply with all aspects of the European Banking Authority's Guidelines on Sound Remuneration Policies published in December 2015, save for the approach related to the Bonus Cap. The Bonus Cap approach relates to provisions that establish that the limit on awarding variable remuneration to 100% of fixed remuneration, or 200% with shareholder approval must be applied to all firms subject to the Capital Requirements Directive. The PRA and FCA favor a risk-based approach in the application of the Bonus Cap, which under CRD principles allows for firms to comply in a way that is proportionate and appropriate to the firm's size, internal organisation, nature, scope and complexity of business. As the EBA Guidelines represent an interpretation of the CRD with which the PRA and FCA do not agree, the PRA and FCA will continue to use the current approach which requires smaller firms to determine an appropriate ratio between fixed and variable remuneration. The Guidelines are applicable to banks and investment firms and cover all staff, with particular aspects focusing on staff whose professional activities have a material impact on a firm's risk profile. The Guidelines set out detailed requirements for remuneration policies and related governance arrangements for implementing remuneration policies and apply from January 1, 2017.
 
View the EBA's Guidelines on Sound Remuneration Policies.
 
View the PRA and FCA's joint statement.

The US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency published revisions to its policy for assessing civil money penalties as set forth in its Policies and Procedures Manual. The revised PPM, titled “Civil Money Penalties,” replaces the PPM of the same title issued in June 1993. The revised PPM sets forth the OCC’s policies and procedures when assessing civil money penalties against entities such as institution-affiliated parties, national banks, federal savings associations, federal branches and agencies, and bank service companies and service providers.

View the full text of the OCC PPM.
 

The Prudential Regulation Authority published a final Policy Statement, Supervisory Statement and Rules for the internal governance of branches of non-EEA banks and PRA-designated investment firms. The PRA consulted in 2015 on its proposed changes, which centre around creating a separate PRA Rulebook. These changes follow the split of the Financial Services Authority into the PRA and the FCA, after which the PRA inherited materials from the FSA to create a Rulebook which contains only PRA rules. The new Rules and Supervisory Statement set out how third country branches should comply with PRA requirements for internal governance of third country branches and cover general organizational requirements, responsibility of personnel, skills, knowledge and expertise of individuals, risk control, outsourcing and record keeping. The PRA has also aligned the final Rules and Supervisory Statement with the requirements for third country branches under the Senior Manager and Certification Regimes.  The Rules on internal governance of third country firms will apply from March 7, 2016, the same date from which the SM&CR applies for all firms.
 
View the PRA's Policy Statement.
 
View the PRA's Supervisory Statement.

The Payment Systems Regulator published an interim report following its market review into bank ownership and payment infrastructure competitiveness in the UK. The PSR's motivation to conduct the review stems from its statutory objective to promote competition and innovation in the market for payment systems and the services that the systems provide. The Report outlines the PSR's provisional finding that there is no effective competition in the central payment infrastructure market.

Read More.

The European Banking Authority has launched the next round of EU-wide bank stress tests and released the associated methodology and macroeconomic scenarios for its application. The test will involve a sample of 51 EU banks, covering 70% of the region's banking sector. The purpose of the test is to provide a common analytical framework for supervisors, banks and other market participants to assess and compare the stress of EU banks when faced with economic shocks. The common methodology of the test is to assess solvency and the main types of risk faced by EU banks: credit and securitization, market, sovereign, funding and operational and conduct risk. The adverse scenario posed by the test highlights the most material threats to the stability of the EU banking sector: (i) sudden increased risk compounded by a reduction in secondary market liquidity; (ii) weak profitability prospects; (iii) low nominal growth and rising debt sustainability concerns; and (iv) stress in the growing shadow banking sector fueled by liquidity risk. An EU-wide asset quality review will not be conducted before the 2016 test, as was the case in 2014. National regulators regularly assess asset quality as part of their supervisory work. The EBA has not set a single capital threshold. The EBA expects the results of the stress test to be published in the third quarter of 2016. The results will be used to assist the Supervisory Review and Evaluation Processes when determining appropriate capital resources. National regulators will review the results and determine whether any supervisory measure is necessary to address any capital shortfall. 

View the EBA press release and related documents.

The US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation issued the “Quarterly Banking Profile” which summarized financial results for the fourth quarter of 2015 for commercial banks and savings institutions insured by the FDIC. As a general matter, FDIC-insured institutions reported aggregated net income of $40.8 billion in the fourth quarter of 2015, an increase of 11.9% (or $4.4 billion) from the previous year. In a statement, FDIC Chairman Martin J. Gruenberg noted that the banking industry improved on both revenue and income from the previous year, but noted that banks should remain vigilant to continued interest-rate risk, credit risk and evolving market conditions.

View more information on the FDIC Quarterly Banking Profile.

View the full text of Chairman Gruenberg’s statement.
 

The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency jointly issued interim final rules that will allow certain well-capitalized and well‑managed insured depository institutions with less than $1 billion in total assets to qualify for an 18-month examination cycle, rather than a 12-month cycle. Institutions are considered to be well-capitalized and well-managed if they have a composite examination rating of 1 or 2—the top ratings in the five-point scale indicating the safety and soundness of a bank or savings association. 

The rules are estimated to increase the number of institutions that may qualify for an 18-month examination cycle by approximately 617, to nearly 5,000 insured depository institutions. In addition, the rules increase the number of US branches and agencies of foreign banks that may qualify for an 18-month examination cycle by 26 branches and agencies, to a total of 89. The changes are intended to reduce regulatory compliance costs for smaller institutions, while still maintaining safety and soundness protections. Comments to the rules will be accepted for 60 days from publication in the Federal Register.

View the interim final rules and request for comments. 

The Prudential Regulation Authority published policy statement outlining approach to identifying other systematically important institutions (i.e. institutions that are not classed as globally systematically important financial institutions but whose failure would have a significant negative effect on the UK financial system). The PRA is required to identify O-SIIs pursuant to the Capital Requirements Directive which implements the framework for domestic systemically important institutions developed by the Basel Committee for Banking Supervision.

Read More.

The European Central Bank launched a consultation on its proposed guide to the recognition of institutional protection schemes for prudential purposes. Under the Capital Requirements Regulation an IPS is a contractual or statutory liability arrangement of a group of banks which protects member institutions, in particular, by ensuring their liquidity and solvency. Certain waivers or relaxation of capital requirements are available for IPS member institutions under CRR.  In particular, CRR provides that the ECB may, subject to certain exceptions, allow credit institutions to apply a 0% risk weight to exposures to other counterparties whichare members of the same IPS. The ECB directly supervises the largest Eurozone banks for prudential purposes and overseas the prudential supervision by national regulators of the smaller Eurozone banks. The ECB's proposed guidelines set out how it intends to assess compliance of an IPS and its members with the requirements set out in the CRR. Responses to the consultation should be submitted by April 15, 2016. Once finalized, the final guidelines will be incorporated into the ECB Guide on options and discretions available in Union law (which is currently being finalized).
 
View the proposed guide.
 
View the ECB's consultation webpage.

The US Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System sent a letter to firms participating in the upcoming Dodd-Frank Act Stress Test (DFAST) and Comprehensive Capital Analysis Review (CCAR) notifying them of certain enhancements to aspects of its operational risk and capital models. Among the enhancements to operational risk models are losses from expenses related to put‑back mortgages, as well as potential costs form unfavorable litigation outcomes. For DFAST 2016, the Federal Reserve Board notes that it will use historically-based loss projections (with two new modifications) using an average of two models, while dropping the loss distribution approach. Changes to capital models include incorporating greater precision in the adjustments to the regulatory capital ratio denominators, as well as modifying assumptions regarding the relationship between mortgage servicing assets and associated deferred tax liabilities.

View the letter.    

The US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation issued a proposal that would require certain insured depository institutions to maintain certain books and records in order to facilitate the payment of insured deposits to customers in the event such institutions were to fail. The proposed rule applies to insured depositary institutions with a large number of deposit accounts (more than 2 million). Based on current data, 36 insured depository institutions would be covered by the rule. The recordkeeping requirements would require the institutions covered by the rule to maintain complete and accurate data on each depositor and would require such institutions to ensure that their information technology systems have the ability to calculate the amount of insured money for each depositor within 24 hours of a failure. Comments on the proposed rule must be received within 90 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register.

View the text of the FDIC proposed rule.

The US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the US Securities and Exchange Commission jointly issued a proposed rule to implement provisions for the orderly liquidation of covered brokers and dealers as required under Title II of the Dodd Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Specifically, Title II provides for federal receivership proceedings of qualifying financial companies, including covered broker-dealers, with the FDIC serving as receiver. The proposed rule defines a covered broker or dealer as any covered financial company that is registered with the SEC as a broker or dealer and is a member of the Securities Investor Protection Corporation. A covered financial company is generally one that is in danger of default and whose failure would have serious adverse effects on US financial stability, as determined by the Secretary of the Treasury. In the case of covered broker dealer, the FDIC will serve as receiver, but the SIPC will serve as trustee. 

Comments on the proposed rule must be received within 60 days after the date of publication in the Federal Register.

View the full text of the proposed rule.

A Commission Implementing Decision was published in the Official Journal of the European Union, updating the list of third countries with equivalent regulatory arrangements in relation to prudential requirements for banks and investment firms for the purpose of the treatment of exposures. The Decision lists the countries whose arrangements for supervision and regulation of banks and investment firms are deemed by the European Commission to be equivalent to the standards of the EU as set out in the Capital Requirements Regulation. The assessments reviewed the supervisory and regulatory arrangements in each country for: (i) banks; (ii) investment firms; and (iii) exchanges. The following nations are now equivalent across all three categories: Australia, Brazil, China, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Africa and the United States. This Decision will enter into force on March 8, 2016.

View the list of equivalent third countries and territories.

In a speech at the Brookings Institution in Washington, DC, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis President Neel Kashkari argued that banks are still too big to fail and remain a significant, ongoing risk to the US economy. Kashkari noted that the Dodd-Frank Act did not go far enough and that regulators should consider breaking up large banks into smaller entities, turning them into public utilities by forcing them to hold higher levels of capital (as high as 25% of total assets), and taxing leverage throughout the financial system. According to Kashkari, the Minneapolis Fed will launch an initiative to consider transformational options through policy symposiums and policy briefs and create an actionable plan to end too big to fail that will be released by year-end for consideration by legislators, policymakers, and the public.

Kashkari’s predecessor at the Minneapolis Fed, Narayana Kocherlakota, responded to Kashkari’s proposals, noting that such measures, particularly imposing higher capital standards, would have “adverse macroeconomic consequences.”

View Kashkari’s speech.  

View Kocherlakota’s response.  

The European Banking Authority published final draft Implementing Technical Standards on the mapping of assessments by Credit Rating Agencies for securitization positions under the Capital Requirements Regulation. The CRR establishes that the risk weights under the standardized and internal ratings based approach for securitization positions should be based, if applicable, on the credit quality of the positions. This credit quality is determined by reference to the credit ratings of CRAs. The draft ITS determine the mapping between credit ratings and credit quality steps for the allocation of risk weights to External Credit Assessment Institutions' ratings issued on securitizations. The mapping is backed by the results of an impact analysis as well as quantitative considerations. A securitization-specific systematic mapping methodology is also being considered by the EBA and this would be based on the historical performance of securitization ratings. The ITS aim to enhance regulatory harmonization across the EU allowing credit ratings of all registered credit rating agencies to be used for calculating institutions’ capital requirements.
 
View the final draft ITS.

The Commission Implementing Regulation on the disclosure of leverage ratios by financial institutions under the Capital Requirements Regulation was published in the Official Journal of the European Union. The Regulation provides that firms must disclose relevant information concerning leverage ratios in the form of an approved template. Firms will be under an obligation to disclose a breakdown of the leverage ratio total exposure measure, a reconciliation of the leverage ratio for a firm's published financial statements and qualitative information on the risk of excessive leverage and the factors impacting the leverage ratio. The Regulation applies directly across the EU from February 16, 2016.

View the Regulation.

The US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency issued two revised booklets of the Comptroller’s Handbook: the “Country Risk Management” booklet and the “Installment Lending” booklet. Each revised booklet updates and replaces the previous versions of the respective booklets. The “Installment Lending” booklet provides updated guidance to examiners regarding the administration of installment lending practices and the controls and processes necessary to manage the risks associated with those practices as well as updated guidance for assessing the quantity of risk associated with installment lending activities.

The “Country Risk Management” booklet provides updated guidance to examiners regarding country risk management, based on lessons learned from the financial crisis of 2008 as well as the European banking and debt crises. The booklet also updates descriptions of the risks associated with international activities and contains a more detailed discussion of the effects of country risk, cross-border risk and sovereign risk on the OCC’s 8 risk categories (credit, interest rate, liquidity, price, operational, compliance, strategic, and reputation).

View the “Installment Lending” booklet.

View the “Country Risk Management” booklet. 

 

Janet Yellen, the Chair of the US Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System submitted before Congress the Federal Reserve Board’s semiannual Monetary Policy Report. In her remarks, Chair Yellen discussed the current economic situation and outlook of the US economy since July 2015, including strong gains in the job market along with continued moderate expansion in economic activity. Chair Yellen further discussed monetary policy and emphasized that the Federal Open Market Committee continues to monitor the federal funds rate, but anticipates that economic conditions will warrant only gradual increases in the federal funds rate.

VIew Chair Yellen’s testimony. 
 

Stanley Fischer, the Vice Chairman of the US Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System gave a speech at a conference sponsored by the Committee on Capital Markets Regulation discussing the function of the Federal Reserve as a lender of last resort in the United States. In his remarks, Vice Chairman Fischer noted that, despite recent developments that have placed limitations on the Federal Reserve’s actions as a lender of last resort, the Federal Reserve, when necessary and appropriate, has the authority to act as lender of last resort in several ways. Vice Chairman Fischer noted that the Federal Reserve retains the power to extend discount window loans, either to individual institutions or more generally in order to address broader financial stresses, to insured depository institutions, including commercial banks, thrift institutions, credit unions, or US branches and agencies of foreign banks.  Further, the Federal Reserve is also permitted, with the approval of the Secretary of the Treasury, to lend to non-bank institutions through the use of broad-based facilities to provide liquidity to financial markets.

View the text of Vice Chairman Fischer's speech.
 

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation released the economic scenarios for use by certain covered financial institutions in the 2016 stress tests required under the Dodd-Frank Act. Generally, those financial institutions with total consolidated assets of more than $10 billion are required to conduct stress tests. The released scenarios include key variables that reflect economic activity, such as unemployment, exchange rates, prices, income, interest rates and other economic and financial factors. The FDIC coordinated with the Federal Reserve Board and the OCC, which released the scenarios in late January, in developing and distributing the scenarios. 

View FDIC stress test scenarios.
 

The European Banking Authority published an Opinion on the implementation of the regulatory review of the Internal Ratings-Based approach to calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts for credit risk. The Opinion sets out the general principles and timelines for implementation and aims to provide clarity for national regulators and relevant firms. The EBA has also published a report on the future of the IRB approach. Both the Opinion and Report aim to address concerns raised over the lack of comparability of capital requirements determined under the IRB approach across firms as well as identify the main drivers of variability in the implementation of IRB models. The IRB framework will be made up of Regulatory Technical Standards and Guidelines which will be introduced in 2016 and 2017 in four phases: (i) the IRB assessment methodology will be introduced in the first quarter of 2016; (ii) a definition of "default" will be introduced by mid-2016; (iii) estimation of risk parameters and treatment of defaulted assets will be introduced by mid-2017; and (iv) credit risk mitigation will be introduced by the end of 2017. The EBA expects that the effective implementation in all areas will be finalized by the end of 2020.
 
View the EBA's Opinion and Report.

The US Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System extended the comment period to March 21, 2016, for the proposed policy statement describing the Federal Reserve Board’s framework in setting the Countercyclical Capital Buffer. The original deadline for submission of comments was February 19, 2016. The Federal Reserve Board first announced it was soliciting public comment on the proposed policy statement on December 21, 2015. The CCyB is a macro-prudential tool that raises capital requirements on internationally active banking institutions when the risk of above-normal losses in the future is elevated. The proposed policy statement describes various financial-system vulnerabilities as well as issues for Federal Reserve Board consideration in setting the buffer. 

View the proposed policy statement.

View the appendix to the proposed policy statement.

The US Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System extended the comment period to February 19, 2016, for its proposed rule to strengthen the ability of the largest domestic and foreign banks operating in the United States to be resolved without extraordinary government support or taxpayer assistance. The original deadline for submission of comments was February 1, 2016. The proposed rule requires US Global Systemically Important Banks and the US operations of foreign GSIBs to meet a long-term debt requirement, a “Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity” requirement and a requirement that the parent holding company of a domestic GSIB avoid entering into various financial arrangements that would create obstacles to an orderly resolution. These requirements would strengthen the ability of those banks to withstand financial stress and failure without imposing losses on taxpayers. The proposed rule also includes regulatory capital deductions for firms regulated by the Federal Reserve Board that hold unsecured debt of the parent holding companies of domestic GSIBs.

View the Federal Register notice. 

The Prudential Regulation Authority published final rules amending the Pre-Issuance Notification regime. The PIN regime applies to banks, building societies, insurers and PRA-designated investment firms. Under the amended rules, banks, building societies and PRA-designated investment firms will have to give the PRA one month's notice before issuing a Common Equity Tier 1 instrument and complete the CET1 Compliance Template, which may be used instead of providing a legal opinion on the quality of capital requirement. The advance notification requirement will not apply where certain capital instruments are issued on substantively similar terms to prior issued instruments. Insurers will be required to submit legal opinions for instruments issued, other than ordinary share capital, on the quality of capital requirement and must also provide the PRA with one month's notice prior to amending capital instruments. Insurers will also be subject to certain conditions in the event that they make use of the advance notification exemption for drawdowns from note issuance programs. All relevant firms will be required to submit accounting opinions when issuing Additional Tier 1 Capital instruments or Restricted Tier 1 Capital instruments, as applicable.
 
View the PRA's Policy Statement and final rules.

The Bank of England's Financial Policy Committee published its proposed framework for the UK Systemic Risk Buffer for ring-fenced banks and large building societies (i.e. those that will be subject to the UK ring-fencing rules from 2019 with assets over £25 billion). The SRB, a discretionary buffer under the EU Capital Requirements Directive, aims to mitigate and prevent long-term non-cyclical macro-prudential or systemic risk. 
 
The FPC is proposing that the SRB rate would be calibrated according to a firm's total Risk-Weighted Assets so that firms with RWA: (i) less than £175 billion will have a 0% SRB; (ii) between £175 and £320 billion will have a 1% SRB; (iii) between £320 and £465 billion will have a 1.5% SRB; (iv) between £465 and £610 billion will have a 2% SRB; (v) between £610 and £755 billion will have a 2.5% SRB; and (vi) over £755 billion will have a 3% SRB.
 
Firms subject to the SRB will also be subject to a 3% minimum leverage ratio requirement as well as an additional leverage ratio buffer of 35% of the applicable SRB rate. The Prudential Regulation Authority will apply the SRB to individual firms from 2019, which is when the ring-fencing rules will become applicable. Comments to the consultation are due by April 22, 2016. The FPC intends to finalize the rules by May 31, 2016.
 
View the FPC's consultation paper.

The European Securities and Markets Authority published its Opinion on draft Implementing Technical Standards on Main Indices and Recognized Exchanges under the Capital Requirements Regulation. The Opinion sets out proposed updates to the draft ITS further to requirements under the CRR to define main indices and recognized exchanges. The definitions are required because the terms have been used in the specification of eligible collateral which is used for the calculation of credit risk by banks and investment firms subject to the CRR. ESMA provided the final draft ITS to the Commission in January 2015 for endorsement. The Commission notified ESMA that it intended to endorse the ITS with amendments by adding the Hang Seng Composite Index and the Russell 3000 Index. In ESMA's Opinion, the Hang Seng Composite Index and the Russell 3000 Index should not be added to the list of main equity indices. Instead, ESMA suggests adding the Russell 1000 Index, the Shanghai Shenzhen CSI 300, the S&P BSE 100 Index and the FTSE Nasdaq Dubai UAE 20 Index to that the list. ESMA also undertook a full review of the ITS and suggests replacing the Nikkei 225 with the Nikkei 300 and the NZSE 10 with the S&P NZX 15 Index. ESMA recommends that the European Commission consider amending the current procedure used to update the list of indices and exchanges to a less burdensome and more speedy process, as the long timeframes required to update a legislative instrument such as an ITS are not appropriate for the frequency with which indices or exchanges are created or merged.
 
View the Opinion.

The European Systemic Risk Board published Recommendations and Decisions relating to setting Countercyclical Buffer Rates for exposures to third countries and the assessment of cross-border effects of and voluntary reciprocity for macro-prudential measures. The ESRB is responsible for macro-prudential oversight within the European Union. In respect of CBRs, the ESRB recommends that national designated authorities: (i) inform the ESRB as soon as a third county sets a CBR in excess of 2.5%; (ii) identify material third countries on an annual basis taking into account the ESRB Decision on the assessment of materiality of third countries for recognizing and setting CBRs; and (iii) consider and coordinate on whether a lower CBR should be set for exposures to a third country in the event that the third country authority sets a lower CBR. In respect of the assessment of cross-border effects of macro-prudential measures, the ESRB recommends that national designated authorities: (i) assess the cross-border effects, prior to adoption, of the implementation of their own macro-prudential measures on other Member States and on the Single Market, including the risk of regulatory arbitrage; (ii) reciprocate the macro-prudential measures adopted by other Member States where such reciprocation is recommended by the ESRB; and (iii) notify the ESRB of any macro-prudential measure implemented, including an assessment of the effect of the measure and whether any reciprocation by other Member States may be necessary. The ESRB has also established a website which sets out the CRB rates set by national designated authorities.
 
View the ESRB Recommendations and Decisions.
 
View the CBR rate website.

The US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency released economic and financial market scenarios to be used by certain financial companies, including national banks and federal savings associations with total consolidated assets of more than $10 billion, to conduct upcoming stress tests. The supervisory scenarios include baseline, adverse and severely adverse scenarios, as described in the OCC’s final rules that implement annual stress test requirements under Section 165(i)(2) of the Dodd-Frank Act.

View the OCC press release.

View the 2016 scenario information. 

The US Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System released supervisory scenarios for the 2016 Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review and Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act stress test exercises. The Federal Reserve Board also issued instructions to firms participating in CCAR. CCAR assesses the capital planning processes and capital adequacy of the largest US-based bank holding companies, including the firms’ planned capital actions. The Dodd-Frank Act stress tests are a forward-looking component to help evaluate whether firms have sufficient capital. Firms are required to use the supervisory scenarios in both the stress tests conducted as part of CCAR and those required by the Dodd-Frank Act. The outcomes are measured under three scenarios: severely adverse, adverse and baseline. This year, CCAR will include 33 bank holding companies with $50 billion or more in total consolidated assets, all of which are required to submit their capital plans and stress testing results to the Federal Reserve Board on or before April 5, 2016. The Federal Reserve Board will announce the results of its supervisory stress tests by June 30, 2016, with the exact date to be announced later.

View the Federal Reserve Board press release.

View the CCAR summary instructions. 

View the Dodd-Frank Act stress exercises.

View the 2016 macro scenario tables. 

 
The European Banking Authority published a letter dated December 18, 2015 addressed to the European Commission in which the EBA requests delays to the dates by which the EBA is required to prepare technical standards and reports under the Capital Requirements Directive, the Capital Requirements Regulation, the EU Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive, the European Market Infrastructure Regulation and the Credit Rating Agencies Regulation. The EBA states that for the most part it has not been able to deliver its mandates according to deadlines due to a persistent shortage in resources and the need to prioritize other workstreams. The EBA invites the Commission to request the EBA to fulfil its mandates  within new time limits.
 
View the EBA's letter.

Regulatory Technical Standards and Implementing Technical Standards on the operational functioning and general conditions for the functioning of colleges of supervisors under the Capital Requirements Directive were published in the Official Journal of the European Union. Colleges bring together different national and European regulatory authorities that supervise a banking group and provide a framework for coordinating and performing supervisory duties within the EU banking sector. The College of Supervisors is established for EEA banks with subsidiaries or significant branches in other EEA countries and includes national regulators from the EU as well as non-EU areas when necessary. The Regulations deal with matters including: (i) the mapping of group institutions; (ii) the designation of members and observers of a college; and (iii) participation in college meetings and activities. The Regulations enter into force on February 17, 2016.
 
View the RTS.
 
View the ITS.

A Regulation was published in the Official Journal of the European Union, setting out Implementing Technical Standards on the joint decision process for the application for certain prudential permissions under the Capital Requirements Regulation. The ITS deal with matters including: (i) the involvement of third country supervisory authorities in the assessment process; (ii) the steps and procedures for joint decision processes; (iii) the preparation of assessment reports and arriving at and communicating joint decisions; and (iv) resolution of disagreements and decisions taken in the absence of a joint decision. The Regulation enters into force on February 17, 2016.
 
View the ITS on the joint decision process for the application for certain prudential permissions.

A Regulation setting out Regulatory Technical Standards for prudent valuations under the Capital Requirements Regulation was published in the Official Journal of the European Union. The RTS relate to firms applying the CRR standards to assets measured on a fair value basis. The RTS deal with matters including: (i) the methodology for calculating Additional Valuation Adjustments; (ii) consideration to be given to available market data; and (iii) the simplified and core approaches for the determination of AVAs. The Regulation enters into force on February 17, 2016.
 
View the RTS for prudent valuation.

The European Banking Authority issued a press release announcing the launch of an impact assessment of the forthcoming implementation of the new financial instruments standard, the International Financial Reporting Standards 9, on a sample of around 50 regulated firms across the EU. The new standards supersede the reporting standards for financial instruments in force in the EU since 2005 and change the way financial instruments are accounted for. The new standards will apply to: (i) banks that are required to prepare consolidated financial statements in accordance with the IFRS; (ii) banks that are required to use the IFRS for the determination of own funds; and (iii) certain investment firms. IFRS also apply to listed issuers as a result of the Transparency Directive. The EBA will assess the impact of the new standards on regulatory own funds, the interaction between the standards and prudential requirements as well as how firms are preparing for the implementation of the new standards.
 
View the press release.

The European Commission published a report on the appropriateness of the definition of "eligible capital" under the Capital Requirements Regulation. The definition of "eligible capital" is used for defining large exposures, setting large exposure limits, determining the prudential treatment of qualifying holdings outside the financial sector and setting the capital requirements for investment firms with limited investment services. 

Read more.

The Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation released a revised notice of proposed rulemaking that would amend the manner in which banks with less than $10 billion in assets that have been insured by the FDIC for at least five years are assessed for deposit insurance. The rule reflects comments received on the initial proposed rule on small bank assessments that the FDIC released in June 2015 on topics such as calculation of asset growth and treatment of reciprocal deposits and Federal Home Loan Bank advances. Specifically, the new proposed rule, among other things: (i) uses a brokered deposit ratio as a measure in the financial ratios method for calculating assessment rates for established small banks (instead of the previously proposed core deposit ratio); (ii) removes the existing brokered deposit adjustment for established small banks; and (iii) revises the previously proposed one-year asset growth measure. The new proposed rule, like the June 2015 proposal, seeks to ascertain appropriate assessments that accurately reflect the risks taken by smaller banks. Comments may be submitted for 30 days, following the publication of the proposed amendments in the Federal Register.

View the FDIC press release. 

View the notice of proposed rulemaking. 

US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Chairman Martin J. Gruenberg and US Comptroller of the Currency Thomas J. Curry announced interim final rules expanding the examination cycle for institutions with less than $1 billion in assets that meet certain standards, under statutory power granted by the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act which was enacted on December 4, 2015. Specifically, the rule will permit institutions with total assets of $200 million or greater and not exceeding $1 billion that receive a composite CAMELS or ROCA rating of “1” or “2,” and that meet other qualifying criteria, to qualify for an 18-month examination cycle. Previously, the longer, 18 month exam cycle was only available to certain insured depository institutions with less than $500 million in assets. Comments on the interim final rule may be submitted for 60 days, following the publication of the proposed amendments in the Federal Register. 

View the FDIC Chairman's statement. 

View the OCC press release.

View the Comptroller's statement. 

View the interim final rule. 

US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Vice Chairman Thomas M. Hoenig gave a speech to the Peterson Institute for International Economics, during which he challenged the Federal Reserve Board’s proposal on TLAC. While agreeing that converting debt is often part of a reorganization or recovery strategy, Hoenig discussed the risks of increased debt levels on the stability of the banking system. The proposed TLAC rule requires GSIBs to maintain sufficient long-term debt to facilitate a Single Point of Entry resolution approach, wherein only the top-tier holding company would be put into receivership and through conversion of debt to equity the operating subsidiaries would be recapitalized. Hoenig noted that the proposed rule estimates that to meet a collective $680 billion long-term debt requirement, GSIBs will need to issue approximately $100 billion in new debt. Hoenig also discussed the negative consequences of the proposal, notably the leverage that it would add to an already highly-leveraged industry, as well as the fact that it may encourage firms to adopt an SPOE resolution strategy and otherwise change their business models even where their Title I resolution plans do not currently contemplate an SPOE plan. The Vice Chairman suggested that “(t)he long-term debt requirement would place added earning demands on the banking system and could be counter-productive, especially during a period of financial stress”. Hoenig also suggested that rather than imposing a rule that facilitates only the SPOE strategy, regulators may want to adopt an approach that is tailored to the business model and resolution plan of each individual institution, even where the approach might call for varying debt and equity requirements. 

View the Vice Chairman's speech. 

The European Banking Authority published proposed Guidelines on implicit support for securitization transactions (i.e. support provided by a firm where it is not contractually obliged to do so), as required by the Capital Requirements Regulation. Examples of implicit support include purchases of deteriorating credit risk exposures from an underlying pool or improvement of quality of credit enhancements through the addition of higher quality risk exposures. The CRR requires that any reduction in capital requirements gained through a securitization must be justified by a corresponding transfer of risk to third parties. The CRR restricts the provision of implicit support, because it does not result in significant risk transfer to third parties, by requiring firms to hold a minimum of own funds against all of the securitized exposures as if they had not been securitized. A transaction is not considered to provide support if it is executed under arm's length conditions and is taken into account in the assessment of significant risk transfer. The EBA's proposed Guidelines cover what constitutes arm's length conditions and when a transaction is not structured to provide support. 

Read more.

The US Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System approved an application by Union di Banche Italiene, S.p.A., a foreign bank headquartered in Italy, to establish a representative office in New York under section 10(a) of the International Banking Act of 1978. UBI is organized as a joint stock corporation under Italian law and has total assets of approximately $108 billion. As part of its evaluation under the IBA and Regulation K, the Federal Reserve Board noted its previous determinations that other banks in Italy were subject to comprehensive, consolidated supervision by the Bank of Italy alone. However, UBI became subject to direct prudential supervision by the European Central Bank pursuant to the Single Supervisory Mechanism as of November 2014. This order appears to represent the first Federal Reserve Board order under the IBA since the SSM took effect, finding that a foreign bank is subject to comprehensive, consolidated supervision by the ECB and a home country supervisor (the Bank of Italy) acting through the SSM. 

View the order. 

A letter addressing possible competition issues between established and challenger banks dated October 7, 2015 sent from the Chairman of the Treasury Committee, Mr. Andrew Tyrie, addressed to the Deputy Governor for Prudential Regulation at the Bank of England, Mr. Andrew Bailey, was published. The letter refers to the potential difficulties challenger banks may face in satisfying the conditions required to use the Internal Ratings-Based approach for calculating credit risk. Mr. Tyrie is concerned that newer banks may be at a competitive disadvantage to more established banks, given that the IRB approach leads to lower capital requirements compared to the Standardized Approach which newer smaller banks would be able to use more easily. The letter asks whether: (i) the new corporation tax regime for banks encourages competition between new and established banks; (ii) adaptations made by the Prudential Regulation Authority's to capital requirements for new banks will be effective in overcoming the competitive disadvantage that new banks may face; (iii) the PRA has plans to make further adjustments to capital or other requirements for new banks; (iv) the PRA is restricted, and if so, to what extent, from making further adjustments to newer banks' capital requirements under the Capital Requirements Directive IV or other EU legislation; and (v) there has been a reduction in requests for pre-application discussions with the PRA and Financial Conduct Authority since the new tax regime was announced in July 2015.
 
View the letter.

The US Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency released an advisory indicating support for the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision’s March 2014 guidance entitled “External audits of banks” for internationally active banks. The advisory notes that while the guidance is largely consistent with existing US standards and practices, there are certain differences between the principles and the expectations of US regulators. The advisory defines “internationally active banks” as insured depository institutions that have consolidated total assets of $250 billion or more, consolidated total on-balance sheet foreign exposure of $10 billion or more and US depository institution holding companies that meet, or have a subsidiary depository institution that meets, the same standards (with the calculation of consolidated total assets excluding assets held by insurance underwriting subsidiaries, in the case of bank holding companies). Key differences highlighted in the advisory include: (i) unlike the guidance, US standards and practices do not require “tendering”, i.e., putting an external audit contract out for bid, but the US banking agencies recommend that institutions consider whether such practice is appropriate; and (ii) while the US banking agencies encourage open communication between external auditors and a financial institution’s supervisor, there is no generally applicable requirement for an external auditor to report directly to the institution’s primary regulators.

View the interagency advisory statement. 

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision has published revised standards on minimum capital requirements for market risk, which form part of the new market risk framework as endorsed by the Group of Central Bank Governors and Heads of Supervision, known as GHOS, the Basel Committee's governing body. Improvements in the new risk framework include: (i) a revised boundary between the banking and trading books that will reduce scope for arbitrage; (ii) a revised internal models approach with more coherent and comprehensive risk capture; (iii) an enhanced model approval process and more prudent recognition of hedging and portfolio diversification; and (iv) a revised standardized approach that serves as a credible fall-back and floor to the model-based approach and facilitates more consistent and comparable reporting of market risk across banks and jurisdictions. The Basel Committee will also finalize its efforts to address the problem of excessive variability in risk-weighted assets by the end of this year. These efforts will include a proposal to remove the internal model approach for credit risk and limits on the use of internal models for credit risk (in particular, through the use of floors). The GHOS also agreed that the final design and calibration of the leverage ratio should be based on a Tier 1 definition of capital and should comprise a minimum level of 3%. The Basel Committee will finalize the calibration in 2016 to allow time for the leverage ratio to be implemented as a Pillar 1 measure by January 1, 2018.
 
View the revised minimum capital requirements for market risk.

The European Banking Authority published: (i) revised final draft Implementing Technical Standards on the uniform formats and date for disclosure of values used to identify Global Systemically Important Institutions; (ii) revised final draft Regulatory Technical Standards on the specification of the methodology for the identification of G-SIIs; and (iii) draft revised Guidelines on the further specification of the indicators of global systemic importance and their disclosure under the Capital Requirements Directive IV. 

Read more.

The European Central Bank's Banking Supervision division published its priorities for 2016. Under the Single Supervisory Mechanism Regulation, the ECB is responsible for the direct prudential supervision of the largest Eurozone banks and indirectly responsible for prudentially supervising the smaller Eurozone banks. The priorities, which aim to direct the ECB's supervision of the largest Eurozone banks, are business model and profitability risk, credit risk, capital adequacy, risk governance and data quality and liquidity. The ECB will be implementing initiatives around the priorities during 2016, including thematic reviews and holding dialogue with the banks.
 
View the 2016 SSM Priorities.