The Securities and Markets Stakeholder Group published advice to the European Securities and Markets Authority in a Position Paper on Supervisory Convergence. The Paper outlines supervisory convergence as one of the key strategies to be pursued by ESMA from 2016 until 2020. The SMSG also outlines the possible role it may take in supporting ESMA to ensure consistent supervisory practice across the European Union.
 

The Institute of International Finance, the International Swaps and Derivatives Association and the Global Financial Markets Associations jointly issued an open letter to the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. The letter outlines the collective views of the Associations on the Basel Committee's Consultative Document on Pillar 3 Disclosure Requirements which was published on March 11, 2016. The consultation was a second phase review of the proposed consolidated and enhanced framework for Pillar 3 disclosures under Basel III.

The Federal Reserve Board issued supervisory guidance for supervised institutions with total consolidated assets of less than $50 billion for assessing risk management. The guidance notes that sound risk management principles should apply to all risks facing an institution, including, but not limited to, credit, market, liquidity, operational, compliance and legal risk. The guidance states that in evaluating an institution’s risk management framework, examiners should evaluate four key areas: board and senior management oversight of risk management, policies, procedures and limits, risk monitoring and management information systems and internal controls. The guidance provides additional considerations that examiners should look for in connection with each of these areas, but notes that the considerations listed therein are not a checklist. The guidance explicitly recognizes that risk management processes and control functions for the US operations of foreign banking organizations may be implemented domestically or outside of the United States. However, in cases where the functions are performed outside of the United States, the guidance states that the oversight function, policies and procedures, and information systems need to be sufficiently transparent to allow US supervisors to assess their adequacy.  

View the guidance.

US House Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling provided remarks regarding proposed legislation to replace the Dodd-Frank Act. The Executive Summary and additional details were subsequently released, and the full bill is expected to be released later this month. Under the proposal, banks that maintain a leverage ratio of at least 10 percent and a composite CAMELS rating of 1 or 2 would be deemed well-capitalized and able to elect able to opt out of many regulatory requirements, including capital and liquidity requirements and limits on capital distributions and mergers or acquisitions.  The proposal would also repeal Title II of the Dodd-Frank Act (the orderly liquidation authority) and replace it with a new subchapter of the US Bankruptcy Code, remove the authority of the Financial Stability Oversight Council, to designate firms as systemically important and certain payments and clearing organizations as systemically important financial market utilities, and reform the Securities and Exchange Commission and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. 

View the Executive Summary of the Financial Choice Act and Representative Hensarling’s speech. 

The European Banking Authority published a decision, dated May 31, 2016, on data for supervisory benchmarking under the Capital Requirements Directive. The CRD requires that regulators monitor the range of risk-weighted exposure amounts or own funds requirements, as applicable, except for operation risk, for the exposures or those relating to transactions in benchmark portfolios resulting from the internal approaches adopted by firms. Regulators are also required to assess, at least annually, the quality of the relevant approaches adopted by institutions. In performing this function, regulators receive benchmarking information and data in accordance with the Benchmarking Implementation Regulation. The EBA is required under the CRD to assist regulators in their assessment with regard to supervisory benchmarking. The Decision follows publication of the amended technical standards on benchmarking of internal approaches and requires regulators to submit data for the 2016 benchmarking. Following delay in the EU’s adoption of the Benchmarking Implementation Regulation, the EBA has repealed its previous decision on the topic and replaced it with this decision. 

The Federal Reserve Board announced that it would release results from the latest supervisory stress tests on Thursday, June 23, 2016. Results from the Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review will be released on Wednesday, June 29, 2016. The stress tests, conducted pursuant to requirements in the Dodd-Frank Act, and the CCAR exercises aim to help large bank holding companies assess the sufficiency of their capital and capital planning processes, taking into account the unique risks of the institutions and the companies’ risk measurement and risk management procedures.

View the Federal Reserve Board’s press release regarding the stress testing and CCAR results.

A Commission Delegated Regulation further specifying the circumstances in which exclusion from the application of write-down or conversion powers is necessary under the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive was published in the Official Journal of the European Union. Under the BRRD, the bail-in tool may be applied to all liabilities unless they fall within the list of liabilities explicitly excluded. The new Regulation provides that regulators may only exclude a liability if the obstacles invoked for such exercise do not allow for it to take place within a reasonable time. The BRRD only allows regulators to exclude a liability from bail-in, if it considers that it is not possible to bail-in the liability within a “reasonable time,” which is determined by assessing when the write-down amount ultimately has to be determined; and then assessing, the time by which all tasks needed to bail-in those liabilities would need to be performed in order to meet the resolution objectives. The new Regulation specifies that regulators may exclude liabilities on the basis of it being necessary and proportionate to preserve critical functions and core business lines under the BRRD. The Regulation will apply from June 21, 2016. 

View the delegated regulation.

A Commission Delegated Regulation was published in the Official Journal of the European Union correcting two Commission Delegated Regulations under the Capital Requirements Regulation and Capital Requirements Directive. The Regulation corrects a previous Commission Delegated Regulation supplementing the CRR with regard to the Regulatory Technical Standards for non-delta risk of options in the standardized market risk approach. Under the CRR, the EBA is empowered to develop a range of methods to reflect non-delta risks in the own funds requirements of firms in a manner proportionate to the scale and complexity of firms’ activities in options and warrants. One approach to measure non-delta risks of options and warrants is the “simplified approach”. The EBA developed draft RTS accordingly, under which institutions that exclusively purchased options and warrants were obliged to use the simplified approach and did not prevent other institutions from using this approach. The correction states that only institutions that exclusively purchase options and warrants may use the simplified approach, which removes the obligation on such firms to only use the simplified approach and prevents other firms from using it.

Read more.

The US Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System adopted a proposal to extend various regulatory reporting requirements to US intermediate holding company (IHC) subsidiaries of foreign banking organizations. The final reporting requirements are generally the same as the proposal, with a few adjustments and clarifications.  Under the final requirements, the Federal Reserve noted that it will consider requests to modify the financial data for previous years that an IHC would be required to report, or extend the time period by which an IHC would have to report the historical data on the applicable Form FR Y-14. The FR Y-14 series of reports generally collects data for stress-testing purposes. The Federal Reserve Board also clarified that it is not requiring at this time that the FR Y-14 attestation requirement apply to IHC subsidiaries of US bank holding companies subject to the Large Institution Supervision Coordinating Committee. The Federal Reserve Board also extends the IHC’s first filing date of the FR Y-15 form to December 5, 2016 to allow institutions time to facilitate accurate reporting.  

View the Final Rule.

The European Commission published a consultation paper on the implementation of the NSFR at European Union level. The Net Stable Funding Ratio measures the assumed degree of stability of liabilities and the liquidity of assets over a one-year horizon. The CRR introduced reporting requirements for the NSFR without setting any more detailed requirements. The EBA published a report in December 2015 on whether, and how, it would be appropriate to ensure that institutions use stable sources of funding, supporting the Basel Committee NSFR at a European level but with some specificities regarding its calibration. To supplement the Commission’s analysis of the EBA’s report and Call for Evidence published in September 2015, the Commission is calling for a more nuanced treatment of specific business models and some transactions.  The consultation seeks views on the treatment of specific aspects of the NSFR, derivative and short-term transactions (less than six months) with financial institutions and the application of the proportionality principle, in particular, the appropriate level of NSFR application and the criteria for defining institutions with a “low liquidity risk profile”. 

Responses to the consultation are due by June 24, 2016.

View the consultation on implementation of NSFR.

View the EBA report on NSFR.

The Financial Policy Committee published the final UK framework for the Systemic Rick 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 European Commission published a consultation paper on proposed options for implementing principles of proportionality in the upcoming capital requirements framework, to review the Original Exposure Method and replace the current standardized approached for counterparty credit risk with a new standardized approach.  The consultation looks at the potential introduction of new standards for market risks in the prudential framework as it provides an opportunity to reassess the issue of proportionality for smaller or simpler financial institutions. The current risk framework contained in the CRR establishes some principles of proportionality but there is no derogation for small trading book businesses which would allow firms with non-significant trading activities to use a simplified prudential framework to calculate requirements for their trading exposures. The proposed Basel Committee for Banking Supervision standardized approach would bring significant modifications to the current approach in the CRR, making it more risk sensitive and better suited for complex financial instruments. The Commission is considering whether to implement a simplified version of the new standardized approach or to keep the current standardized approach. 

A Commission Implementing Regulation which amends the Implementing Technical Standards on uniform formats and dates for the disclosure of values used to identify global systemically important institutions under the CRR was published in the Official Journal of the European Union. The ITS supplement CRR provisions that require regulators to identify G-SIIs, based upon the templates issued by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. The amended ITS take into account revisions proposed by the European Banking Authority in January 2016. G-SIIs are now required to report the information used to identify G-SIIs (such as indicators, ancillary data and memorandum items) to the regulator in electronic format, using a template annexed to amending ITS. The amended ITS provides that G-SIIs publicly disclose the values of the indicators used for determining the score of G-SIIs in accordance with the Commission Delegated Regulation on the methodology for the identification of G-SIIs. Information required in the template includes general information such as bank name and reporting dates. The template will also include monetary values on indicators such as payments made in the reporting year, assets under custody and underwritten transaction in debt and equity markets. The amending ITS entered into force on May 26, 2016. 

View the amending ITS.

The European Banking Authority published guidelines for upcoming stress tests of deposit guarantee schemes under the Deposit Guarantee Schemes Directive. The Directive introduced a number of measures to improve the resilience of deposit guarantee schemes in Europe and the EBA is required to perform stress tests every three years; the first is to take place by July 3, 2017. The purpose of the stress test is to verify whether the operation and funding capabilities of the DGS are sufficient to ensure deposit protection, within the conditions of the Directive, during times of increased pressure.  The EBA has decided to produce guidelines for consistency across the European Union and to ensure that the stress test is a credible assessment tool. 

Read more.

As part of his remarks at a global economic symposium in Paris, US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Vice Chairman Thomas Hoenig stated his objections to the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision’s recently proposed revisions to the Basel III leverage ratio framework. In his speech, Hoenig noted that the banking industry has begun to lobby for special treatment or exemptions from capital requirements for a host of assets included in the leverage ratio calculation. Hoenig argued that if accepted, the effect of such proposed revisions would be to again lower acceptable industry capital standards.

Read more.

The FDIC extended the comment period for proposed recordkeeping requirements for FDIC-insured institutions with at least 2 million deposit accounts. The purpose of the proposed recordkeeping requirements is to facilitate rapid payment of insured deposits to customers if large institutions were to fail. The proposed requirements would not apply to smaller institutions, including community banks.

Read more.

The European Banking Authority published a Decision permitting the use of unsolicited credit assessments of certain External Credit Assessment Institutions for calculating firm capital requirements. The Decision aims to harmonize regulation related to the use of solicited and unsolicited credit assessments across the European Union. 

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York published a post on its Liberty Street Economics blog assessing the impact of interagency guidance intended to curtail leveraged lending issued by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Federal Reserve Board and the FDIC in March of 2013. The post shows that banks, in particular the largest institutions, cut leveraged lending while nonbanks increased such lending after the guidance. During the same period of time, nonbanks increased their borrowing from banks, possibly to finance their growing leveraged lending activity. The post notes that this evidence highlights an important challenge of macroprudential policies. Since those policies reach beyond individual banks and target risk in the entire banking system, they are more likely to trigger significant responses that may have unintended consequences.
 

The European Banking Authority, European Securities and Markets Authority and European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (known as the Joint Committee of the European Supervisory Authorities) published an Opinion on the European Commission's proposed amendments to the ESA's final draft Implementing Technical Standards on the mapping of credit assessments to the risk weights of External Credit Assessment Institutions under the Capital Requirements Regulation and Solvency II Directive. The ESA's submitted their final draft ITS to the European Commission in November 2015. The Commission notified the ESAs on March 30, 2016 that it intended to adopt the ITS with amendments by relaxing the ESA's approach to the mapping of ECAIs. The ESA's do not agree with the proposed amendments for several reasons including the fact that the Commission's approach favors promoting competition over financial stability risk concerns.  

View the Opinion.

A Commission Delegated Regulation containing Regulatory Technical Standards specifying the conditions for the application of derogations, concerning currencies with constraints on the availability of liquid assets, under the Capital Requirements Regulation was published in the Official Journal of the European Union.  The CRR sets out a Liquidity Coverage Requirement which requires firms to hold liquid assets to maintain adequate levels of liquidity buffers to cope with any possible imbalances between liquidity inflows and outflows. Firms may derogate from the LCR where the requirement exceeds the availability of those assets in a particular currency. 

Read more.

The Prudential Regulation Authority published a consultation paper on its proposed approach to Pillar 2 liquidity requirements for intraday risk, debt buyback and non-margined derivatives, including a proposed policy statement. The Capital Requirements Directive gives national regulators discretion to set Pillar 2 liquidity requirements, in addition to the standard Pillar 1 Liquidity Coverage Ratio which applies to all firms. The PRA is proposing that:   (i) the level of application for setting Pillar 2 requirements should be aligned to the Pillar 1 approach; (ii) there should be no specific disclosure requirements under Pillar 2, other than the disclosure of the high quality liquid assets required to cover Pillar 2 risks which are part of the LCR disclosure requirements; (iii) it will use supervisory discretion, guided by a firm's outstanding debt or exposures, to assess liquidity risk linked with debt buyback and non-margined derivatives; and (iv) the assessment of intraday liquidity risk will be based on a firm’s maximum net debits, stress testing framework and key characteristics, as well as the markets in which it operates. 
 

The European Banking Authority published an Opinion on the European Commission’s proposed amendments to the EBA's final draft Implementing Technical Standards on benchmarking of internal approaches to regulatory capital. The Capital Requirements Directive sets out a framework for supervisory benchmarking of the internal approaches that EU firms use to calculate own-funds requirements for credit and market risk exposures. The final draft ITS, submitted by the EBA to the Commission in March 2015, include the benchmarking portfolios, templates, definitions and IT solutions for usage in that exercise. On April 16, 2016, the European Commission informed the EBA that it intended to adopt the final draft ITS with amendments.  

Read more.

The US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency released a mid-cycle status report on key actions that it has taken to date pursuant to its Committee on Bank Supervision’s annual operating plan for the fiscal year that commenced on October 1, 2015. The plan sets forth the agency’s broad supervision priorities and objectives and is used to develop individual bank supervisory strategies and make related resource allocation decisions.  Key actions completed in the first half of fiscal year 2016 include issuing various supervisory communications, including 557 reports of examination, conducting workshops, issuing guidance and reports surveying best practices, and ongoing outreach meetings and presentations to industry members. The OCC’s supervisory priorities for the duration of the 2016 fiscal year include compliance, operational resiliency, credit risk management, stress testing, strategic planning and execution, corporate governance, and interest rate risk.

View the OCC’s mid-cycle status report.  

The US Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System announced that the Office of Financial Policy and Research has been renamed as the Division of Financial Stability and designated as a division of the Federal Reserve. Federal Reserve economist Nellie Liang, who was appointed to establish the office in November 2010 will stay on as director. The Division of Financial Stability is responsible for the Federal Reserve’s work on financial stability, including coordinating its interagency and international work, and its role as a member of the Financial Stability Oversight Council and the Financial Stability Board. According to the press release, the change reflects the growth in responsibilities and staffing of the Division. 

View the press release. 

The European Banking Authority published a consultation paper on draft guidelines on liquidity coverage ratio disclosures, to complement the disclosure requirements of liquidity risk management under the Capital Requirements Regulation. The CRR provides general disclosure framework for firms for each category of risk where liquidity risk should be considered. Disclosure of ratios and figures to regulators is required under the CRR, in particular, ratios and figures that provide external stakeholders with a comprehensive view of the firm’s management of risk. In January 2015 the Liquidity Coverage Ratio Delegated Act was published, specifying the LCR for credit institutions. The ratio targets ensure that credit institutions maintain an adequate level of liquidity buffer to cover net liquidity outflows in the context of stressed conditions over a period of thirty days. The EBA proposes these draft guidelines to harmonize and specify disclosures required under the general principles in the CRR on liquidity and LCR. 

The European Banking Authority published a letter from it to the European Commission relating to the Calls for Advice on various aspects of the revised international regulatory capital requirements. The Commission has requested advice from the EBA on the revision of the own funds requirements for market risk, counterparty credit risk, exposures to CCPs, large exposures and the net stable funding requirement. 

Read more.

The Banking Supervision division of the European Central Bank announced that it is currently undertaking comprehensive assessments of four European Banks. The banks being assessed are Abanka d.d. (Slovenia), Akciju sabiedrība "Rietumu Banka" (Latvia), Banca Mediolanum S.p.A. (Italy) and Citibank Europe Plc (Ireland). The assessments are being undertaken separately to the European Banking Authority stress test. The assessments commenced in March 2016 and the ECB expects results to be published in November 2016.

View the announcement. 

The European Banking Authority published a discussion paper on innovative uses of consumer data by financial institutions. The focus of the paper is the risks and benefits to consumers and financial institutions arising from the use of commercially available data. Recent innovations include financial institutions combining consumer data they hold internally with data sourced externally from private and public companies and social media.  Financial institutions are able to use consumer data, such as buyer behavior, to provide incentives such as shopping discounts to increase consumer consumption of financial services.  Benefits for consumers of such innovative usage may include cost reductions and improved quality in products and services offered as financial institutions can more accurately cater to customer needs. Financial institutions can benefit through the creation of new sources of revenue, achieved through better product and service development and sharing consumer data with third parties.

Read more. 

Executive Vice President of the US Federal Reserve Bank of New York Simon Potter discussed steps the US Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System has taken to improve the US monetary policy framework following the financial crisis in line with its principles of returning to normalization. He discussed the importance of creating a framework that can provide liquidity for monetary policy implementation and transmission. However, Potter noted that there are important tradeoffs to consider, in that financial market participants may anticipate that central banks, like the Federal Reserve, will make liquidity abundant during times of stress and manage their own liquidity conservatively. He suggested that the Basel III liquidity regulations, namely the liquidity coverage ratio which the US has adopted and the net stable funding ratio which the Federal Reserve has recently proposed, help to mitigate the risk that banks would rely too much on the central bank for liquidity. Potter also noted the importance of the US monetary policy framework being transparent in order to enable market participants to make better-informed decisions. Specifically, drawing parallels to the financial crisis, he observed that a central bank can help foster the contribution of liquidity to the financial system by market participants by committing itself to maintain liquidity.

View Potter’s speech.

The US Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System approved a joint notice of proposed rulemaking to establish a net stable funding ratio in the US, in line with the framework previously established by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation previously approved the rule on April 26, 2016. The net stable funding ratio would require covered institutions to maintain stable sources of funding, including capital and long-term debt, over a one-year horizon. Specifically, a covered company’s ratio of (i) “available stable funding,” a measure of the stability of its equity and liabilities over a one-year time horizon to (ii) “required stable funding,” a calculation made based upon the liquidity characteristics of the institution’s assets, derivative exposures and commitments over the same one-year horizon, must be at least 1.0. With respect to assets that qualify as “available stable funding,” asset categories are assigned an “available stable funding” (ASF) weight, with Tier 1 regulatory capital and Tier 2 capital instruments with a maturity of over one year receiving a 100% ASF weight, and trade date payables, certain short-term funding and certain short-term retail brokered deposits receiving a 0% ASF weight. The rule is aimed at reducing liquidity risk by ensuring that a covered institution retains sufficient liquid assets in the event of funding disruptions or a liquidity run in order to remain viable. 

Read more.

The European Banking Authority published an Opinion on the European Commission's intention not to endorse final draft Regulatory Technical Standards on additional collateral outflows, prepared under the Capital Requirements Regulation. The final draft RTS, submitted to the Commission in March 2014, set out the materiality and the measurement of additional collateral outflows resulting from the impact of an adverse market scenario on a firm's derivatives transactions, financing transactions and other contracts. The technical standards are also a component of the liquidity coverage ratio for which the final standards came into force at the end of 2015.  The EBA's final draft RTS include a historical look-back approach (known as HLBA) method for calculating additional liquidity outflows corresponding to collateral needs resulting from the impact of an adverse market scenario on a firm's derivatives transactions, financing transactions and other contracts that was more conservative than that adopted by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision in April 2014. The European Commission, which delayed the assessment of the final draft RTS pending the adoption of the LCR RTS, requested the EBA to amend its final draft RTS on additional collateral outflows to align with the HBLA approach adopted by the Basel Committee on the basis that the liquidity outflows under the EBA's HBLA approach would be much higher for major players in the derivatives markets and that netting could be allowed as most collateral received by banks is in the form of cash or sovereign debt. The EBA agrees with the European Commission and has submitted revised final RTS to the Commission for endorsement. 

View the Opinion and revised final draft RTS.

Federal Reserve Bank of New York President William Dudley delivered remarks at the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta 2016 Financial Markets Conference, focusing on the connection between liquidity and financial stability. Dudley first addressed market liquidity, noting that evidence that market liquidity has diminished is mixed. Turning to funding liquidity, Dudley emphasized the link between funding liquidity and capital requirements and asked whether more should be done to support funding liquidity. Dudley noted the importance of the availability of a lender-of-last resort, and remediating any gaps in the lender-of-last-resort function. As an example, Dudley noted the limited ability of the Federal Reserve Board to provide funding to a securities firm, even on a fully collateralized basis, and suggested that providing such firms with access to the Discount Window “might be worth exploring.” Dudley also noted that the Bank for International Settlement's Committee on the Global Financial System is engaged in a project to determine what lender-of-last-resort gaps currently exist, focusing, in particular, on those that may create vulnerability in terms of financial stability. One area that he anticipates will receive considerable attention is whether there are any gaps with respect to the activities of globally systemic firms that operate on a cross-border basis. He also noted that greater attention needs to be paid to the appropriate role for the home- versus host-country supervisor and that the regulatory and supervisory responses for large, systemically-important firms that operate on a cross-border basis need to be closely coordinated, especially during times of stress. Dudley stressed that expectations about who will be the lender-of-last-resort need to be well understood in both the home and host countries.

View the speech.

The Prudential Regulation Authority published a consultation paper on regulatory reporting of financial statements, forecast capital data and IFRS 9 requirements, setting out the PRA’s proposals on future reporting of balance sheet, statement of profit and loss and forecast capital data. The consultation paper is relevant to PRA-authorized banks, building societies and designated investment firms. It also outlines proposals for reporting of P&L data by non-EEA banks that are authorized to accept deposits through a branch in the United Kingdom. The proposals are part of the PRA’s execution of its strategy for the collection of valid, accurate and meaningful information, including a review of reporting requirements to assist the PRA in gaining the information required to engage in judgement-based supervision. Balance sheet and P&L data assist the PRA in its macro-prudential and monetary policy analysis. Responses to the consultation are due by July 29, 2016. 

View the consultation paper.

The OCC issued a bulletin reminding all OCC-supervised banks of their obligations to maintain and retain their records and the OCC’s authority to obtain prompt and complete access to each bank’s books and records and communicate freely with its employees, officers and directors. The guidance is being issued in response to the OCC’s discovery that certain communications technology being made available to banks contains data deletion and encryption features which could inhibit the OCC’s ability to access bank data and records. The guidance notes that the permanent deletion of internal communications is in conflict with the OCC’s expectations for sound governance, compliance, risk management and safety and soundness principles.

The FDIC approved a final rule that amends how banks with less than $10 billion in assets that have been insured for a minimum of five years are assessed for deposit insurance. The rule updates the data and revises the methodology that the FDIC uses to determine the risk-based assessments for such institutions. FDIC Chairman Martin J. Gruenberg anticipates that more than 93% of small banks will pay lower rates under the revised framework. The final rule will be used for rate determinations once the FDIC’s insurance fund reaches 1.15%, but not before the third quarter of 2016.
 

The European Banking Authority published a consultation paper on draft regulatory technical standards under the Capital Requirements Regulation on the disclosure of encumbered and unencumbered assets. The CRR requires the EBA to develop draft RTS to specify institutions’ disclosure of balance sheet value per exposure class broken down by asset quality and the total amount of the balance sheet value that is unencumbered. The draft RTS sets out the data required to be disclosed on encumbered and unencumbered assets, the format, and the timing of the publication. The EBA has developed the draft RTS to take into account the European Systematic Risk Board recommendations, which stated that the EBA and regulators should monitor the level, evolution and types of asset encumbrance. The EBA published its first report analyzing asset encumbrance in September 2015. The report revealed that there had been no increase in levels of asset encumbrance over the past four years. The ESRB further recommended that the EBA issue guidelines and harmonized templates and definitions on transparency requirements for credit institutions on asset encumbrance.  

The US Government Accountability Office issued a report on the resolution plan review processes developed by the US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the US Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. The report found that, although the resolution plan rule has improved the resolvability of large systemically important financial companies in the United States, the lack of transparency by US regulators regarding how the regulators assess and review plans could undermine public and market confidence in resolution plans.
Along with these findings, the GAO report issued a series of recommendations to improve the resolution review process. Among other recommendations, the GAO report encouraged the FDIC and Federal Reserve to publicly disclose information about their respective processes for assessing the credibility of resolution plans and revising the resolution plan rule’s filing requirements in order to provide companies with more time to respond to feedback and guidance from the regulators on their resolution plans.

View the GAO report.

The European Banking Authority published the first list of Other Systemically Important Institutions in the European Union. O-SIIs are institutions which have been deemed by national regulators to be systemically relevant in addition to the Global Systemically Important Institutions that have already been identified. The EBA has compiled the list based on the findings of the relevant national regulators across the EU. National regulators relied on the EBA Guidelines on the identification of O-SIIs, which included recommended uniform criteria, including size, importance (substitutability or financial system infrastructure), complexity (or cross-border activities) and interconnectedness of such institutions. The EBA’s guidelines on the identification of O-SIIs were developed in accordance with the Capital Requirements Directive and on the basis of internationally agreed frameworks established by the Financial Stability Board and the Basel Committee for Banking Supervision. The EBA will publish an updated list of O-SIIs annually along with a revised definition of any CET1 capital buffer requirements set by national regulators. 

View the list of O-SIIs.

View the EBA’s guidelines. 

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision published an erratum to its April 2016 consultation paper on proposed revisions to the Basel III leverage ratio framework. The proposals contained in the consultation paper include amendments to: (i) the measurement of derivative exposures by adopting a modified version of the standardized approach for measuring counterparty credit risk exposures; (ii) treatment of regular-way purchases and sales of financial assets so as to achieve consistency across accounting standards; (iii) treatments of provisions; and (iv) credit conversion factors for off-balance sheet items, by aligning them with the standardized approach to credit risk. In addition, the Basel Committee proposes to impose additional requirements on global systemically important banks, setting out various options, including whether the additional requirement should apply uniformly to all G-SIBs or be tailored and whether the form should be a higher minimum requirement or a buffer requirement. Responses to the consultation are still required by July 6, 2016. The Basel Committee intends to finalize the revised leverage ratio requirement in 2016 so as to allow time for its implementation by January 1, 2018. 

View the erratum.

View the amended consultation paper. 

Two letters from Olivier Guersent DG FISMA of the European Commission to Andrea Enria, Chairperson of the European Banking Authority, on issues associated with its review of the Capital Requirements Regulation were published. The first letter, dated April 12, 2016, was in response to the EBAs report on net stable funding requirements under the CCR. The EBA report concluded that NSFR standards developed by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision fit well with the European banking framework but also flagged some European specificities. By the end of 2016, the Commission, if it deems appropriate, should submit a legislative proposal on the NSFR to the European Parliament and Council relying on the EBA Report when assessing the provisions of the Basel NSFR standard to ensure that a possible NSFR proposal does not hinder the financing of the real economy. The purpose of the letter is to request additional guidance on two areas of the EBA Report. First, with regards to the treatment of derivatives in the NSFR, the Commission is of the view that more specific analysis is required. The Commission expressed concern that the 20% required stable funding factor applied to gross derivatives liabilities and the recognition of margin received as compared to margin posts have not been comprehensively analyzed or subjected to the necessary extensive public consultation. Furthermore, the EBA should provide a complementary assessment on the impact of the provisions and an analysis of the impact on the treatment and calibration of derivatives. 

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision published a list of jurisdiction specific pre-announced buffer decisions.  In December, 2010, the Basel Committee published Basel III: a global regulatory framework for more resilient banks and banking systems. As required under Basel III, this document outlines details of global regulatory standards on bank capital adequacy and liquidity, including a countercyclical buffer. The countercyclical buffer regime will be phased-in in accordance with the capital conservation buffer between January 1, 2016, and December 31, 2018 becoming fully effective on January 1, 2019. To assist in bank compliance, jurisdictions can pre-announce buffer levels when raising the countercyclical buffer up to 12 months in advance.  A jurisdiction may also announce a decrease in the requisite countercyclical buffer, the effect of which is immediate. The list includes all Basel Committee member jurisdictions, their pre-announced buffer decisions, and the current buffers in place. Jurisdictions include Argentina, China, France, India, Indonesia and the United Kingdom. The updated list also includes buffer information on the non-member jurisdiction Norway. 

View the update. 

The US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s Systemic Resolution Advisory Committee held a meeting to discuss the latest updates and advice on issues related to the resolution of systemically important financial companies pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. At the meeting, the committee covered topics including, the “living will” updates, orderly liquidation updates, and developments in resolution planning in the European Union.

View the agenda for the Systemic Resolution Advisory Committee meeting.

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision published a consultation document on guidelines for the prudential treatment of problem assets focusing on credit categorization definitions. In the context of the financial crisis, the Basel Committee noted that credit categorization terms used by firms were not always clear and made it difficult to compare financial information. This contributed to increased uncertainty at the height of the crisis and undermined investor ability to assess bank performance and risk. Credit risk categorization is a tool used by banks when assessing the solvency and riskiness of banks’ credit risk exposures.

The US Treasury Department’s Office of Financial Research published a paper analyzing data on global systemically important banks, based on data released in 2013 and 2014 by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. The OFR research report analyzed data regarding 30 banks across the world identified by the Basel Committee as G-SIBs, including eight US bank holding companies. The analysis found, among other things, an increase in the systemic importance scores by Chinese banks, while the systemic importance scores of US G-SIBs generally reflected little change and continued to be among the highest amongst global banks.

View the full text of the OFR report.
 

The European Banking Authority published a report on supervisory measures taken by national regulators in 2014 on compliance by credit institutions and investments firms with securitization risk retention, due diligence and disclosure requirements under the Capital Requirements Regulation. The EBA is required to assess regulators' measures to ensure compliance. The report notes that firms are generally undertaking actions to comply with the requirements. Since the introduction of the requirements under the Capital Requirements Directive II in 2011, ten firms have been deemed non-compliant, with one firm receiving a sanction of an additional risk weight. The report provides analysis of how the EBA's recommendations on regulation of risk retention rules, due diligence and disclosure in the EU, as specified in a 2014 EBA report, have been taken on board in the legislative proposals for the new securitization framework issued by the European Commission as part of its Capital Markets Union initiative. 

Read more. 

The US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Vice Chairman Thomas Hoenig issued the semi-annual update of the Global Capital Index, an index showing the capital ratios for global systemically important banks. Upon release of the update, Vice Chairman Hoenig noted that the loss-absorbing tangible capital levels of the largest US banks are increasing relative to their foreign counterparts. Vice Chairman Hoenig emphasized however that, although the update indicated the overall health of US banks, compared to foreign banks, progress must still continue to a point where banks maintain sufficient levels of tangible capital to effectively move the cost of downside risk from the public to the firms.

View the updated Global Capital Index.

The US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency released its Risk Appetite Statement, which documents the OCC’s overall conservative risk appetite in carrying out its supervisory mission. The Risk Appetite Statement provides that the OCC will accept more risk in some areas in order to adapt to the changing needs of supervised national banks and federal savings associations. OCC management and employees will use the statement to evaluate their decisions in overseeing national banks and federal savings associations as well as the execution of agency management functions, such as human resources, procurement and information technology.

Comptroller of the Currency Thomas J. Curry noted that by clearly articulating acceptable levels of risks within the OCC’s operations, agency personnel have “clearer signposts by which to guide their decisions and external stakeholders can better understand OCC actions in the context of the risks facing the agency.” The OCC plans to update its Risk Appetite Statement periodically as the federal banking system and its supervision evolve.

View the OCC’s Risk Appetite Statement. 

A corrigendum relating to the format and frequency of the reporting of liquidity requirements under the Capital Requirements Regulation was published in the Official Journal of the European Union. The corrigendum corrects numerical references to Annexes contained in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/322 relating to types of information to be reported and the instructions for reporting. 

View the corrigendum.

The US Financial Stability Oversight Council filed its appeal to the DC District Court opinion overturning the FSOC’s designation of insurer MetLife as a systemically important financial institution. In the March 30, 2016 judicial opinion that was unsealed last week, US District Court Judge Rosemary Collyer called the FSOC’s determination process “fatally flawed” and “arbitrary and capricious,” ruling that the FSOC did not follow its own guidelines before deciding on the Metlife designation. US Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew has criticized the court’s ruling, arguing that by overturning the conclusions of experienced financial regulators, “the court imposed new requirements that Congress never enacted, and contradicted key policy lessons from the financial crisis.”

View the US District Court opinion.

View the statement from Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew.   

The US Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System proposed technical amendments to its rule requiring a risk-based capital surcharge for global systemically important bank holding companies. The rule, finalized by the Federal Reserve Board in July 2015, establishes the criteria for identifying a GSIB and the methodology a GSIB is required to use to determine its risk-based capital surcharge, which corresponds to the systemic risk of that firm.

The proposed amendments would not materially change the underlying final rule but rather clarify that GSIBs must continue to calculate their surcharges using year-end data, while their related surcharge data will be reported on a quarterly basis. The proposal explains that bank holding companies subject to the rule are required to compute their method 2 surcharge scores using systemic indicator amounts expressed in billions of dollars even though the data is reported in millions of dollars. The amendments also provide additional information on how GSIBs should calculate their short-term wholesale funding scores, which help to determine their surcharges, during the rule’s transition period.

Comments on the proposal are due by May 13, 2016.

View the Federal Reserve Board press release.

View the proposal.