Search for Q&As

Enquirers can use various factors to search for a Q&A:

  • These include searching by the Q&A ID; legal reference, date submitted, technical standard / guideline, or by keyword if known.
  • Searches can be extended to more than one legal act, topic, technical standard or guidelines by making multiple selections (i.e. pressing 'Ctrl' on your keyboard, and selecting the relevant ones from the drop-down lists by left mouse-click).

Disclaimer:

Q&As refer to the provisions in force on the day of their publication. The EBA does not systematically review published Q&As following the amendment of legislative acts. Users of the Q&A tool should therefore check the date of publication of the Q&A and whether the provisions referred to in the answer remain the same.

Please note that the Q&As related to the supervisory benchmarking exercises have been moved to the dedicated handbook page. You can submit Q&As on this topic here.

Final Q&As Q&As under review Rejected Q&As Archived Q&As All Q&As

List of Q&A's

Interpretation of “group headed by the Union parent undertaking” in Article 7 (1)

Should “group headed by the Union parent undertaking” in Article 7 (1) of Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD) be interpreted as the group subject to consolidated supervision pursuant to Articles 111 and 112 of Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD IV) headed by the Union parent undertaking?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2083
  • Topic: Recovery plans
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 24/07/2015

Assessment of group recovery plans

Should group recovery plans be assessed in the same way as recovery plans in Article 6 of Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)? Is the reference to Article 7 (1) contained in Article 6 (1) correct?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2082
  • Topic: Recovery plans
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 24/07/2015

Preparation and approval of recovery plans of institutions which are members of an IPS

Are institutions which are members of an IPS exempted from drafting their own recovery plans in case they are granted a waiver from “the requirements of Section 2”?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2080
  • Topic: Simplified obligations
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 25/11/2016

Meaning of “where relevant” in Article 4

Could you please clarify the meaning of the wording “where relevant” in Articles 4 (3) (4) and (8) of Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2079
  • Topic: Simplified obligations
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 24/07/2015

Designation of several authorities as resolution authority

Is it possible according to Article 3 (10) of Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD) to make specified resolution authorities responsible for the resolution of particular groups or entities and/or to divide the responsibilities for certain stages of resolution amongst them?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2077
  • Topic: Other topics
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 24/07/2015

Cooperation, collaboration and assistance of the competent authority to the resolution authority

How should those provisions of Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD) (e.g Articles 6 (4); 10; 14; 17; 27 (2); and 32(1)) which entail that competent authorities need to cooperate, collaborate and assist with the resolution authority be reflected in national legislation in situations where both functions are carried out by the same entity?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2076
  • Topic: Other topics
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 24/07/2015

Entity that formally is not a part of public administration as resolution authority

Is it possible under Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD), in particular under Article 3 to designate as a resolution authority, an entity that is entitled to issue administrative decisions but formally is not a part of public administration?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2075
  • Topic: Other topics
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 24/07/2015

Eligible Liabilities in the context of Articles 2(71) and 45(4)

Does the term "eligible liabilities" defined in Article 2(71) only cover these debt instruments which fulfil conditions laid down in Article 45(4), or does it relate to particular categories of liabilities in general?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2073
  • Topic: Other topics
  • Date of submission:

Third country resolution proceedings

How do “Third country resolution proceedings” as defined in Article 2 (1) (88) affect a failing EU institution when these are applied to a failing third country parent?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2072
  • Topic: Other topics
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 24/07/2015

Definition of branches of institutions that are established outside the Union

How should “branches of institutions that are established outside the Union […]” in Article 1 (1) (e) be interpreted?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2071
  • Topic: Other topics
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 24/07/2015

Clarification to the wording “joint decisions should be taken by national authorities concerned” in Recital 98

Could you clarify what is meant by the wording “joint decisions should be taken by national authorities concerned” in Recital 98, and in particular what is meant by the provision “joint decision shall be recognised as conclusive and applied by the other resolution authorities concerned”?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2070
  • Topic: Cross-border resolution
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 21/01/2022

Clarification to Recital 41

Do you agree that the word “not” is missing in Recital 41 and should be corrected? (“Resolution should be initiated when a competent authority, after consulting a resolution authority, determines that an institution is failing or likely to fail and alternative measures as specified in this Directive would not prevent such failure within a reasonable timeframe.”)

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2069
  • Topic: Resolution objectives and triggers
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 24/07/2015

Determination of the exposure at defaul in case of unfunded credit protection

Under the advanced approach, the IRB Approach, as permitted by the Title II - Chapter 3, does not specify the order of application of the Credit Conversion Factor (CCF) and of the credit protection when an off-balance sheet exposure is covered by an unfunded credit protection (e.g. a CDS, Credit Default Swap). Does CRR prevent from applying the credit protection on the Exposure At Default (i.e.: after application of the CCF for an off-balance sheet exposure)?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2063
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 03/06/2016

Scope of funding applicable

For template 69, prices of various lengths of funding, should own funds i.e. tier 1&2 be considered as funding and therefore applicable to be reported?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Draft ITS on Supervisory Reporting of Institutions
  • ID: 2015_2061
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Liquidity (LCR, NSFR, AMM)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 18/12/2015

F 33.00 - MATURITY DATA (AE-MAT) - Maturity of the encumbered asset

How to report initial margin (IM) and variable margin (VM) under F33 Maturity data report - 010-encumbered assets? Given there is no clear guidance on this particular maturity reporting therefore it is grateful if EBA could provide a clearer guidance or best practice on this issue.

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (repealed)
  • ID: 2015_2060
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Asset Encumbrance
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 04/06/2021

Number of distinct calculations required to assess materiality of changes to internal IRC models

Regulation (EU) No 529/2014 governs the assessment of materiality of changes and extensions to internal approaches for credit, market and operational risk. According to this regulation a change to the incremental default and migration risk charge (IRC) is to be considered material if within 15 consecutive business days (Article 7a(4)(a)) the thresholds of Article 7a(1)(c)(ii) are breached at least once. According to Article 374(1) CRR institutions may compute the IRC only weekly. Does this mean that?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 529/2014 - RTS on materiality of extensions and changes in the advanced approaches (IRB and AMA)
  • ID: 2015_2058
  • Topic: Market risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 25/09/2015

FINREP Template 19 - column 050 - of which: Performing forborne exposures under probation

Due to the amended wording, it is unclear, whether only performing forborne exposures under probation which have been reclassified out of the non-performing forborne exposures category shall be reported in column 050 or all performing forborne exposures under probation which have been reclassified out of non-performing category at any time in the past. Regarding the two examples given below, the question is if both exposures have to be reported in column 050 of template F 19.00 or only exposure A? Exposure A was classified as non-performing with forbearance measure and fulfilled all required exit criteria mentioned in paragraph 157. Thus, exposure A was reclassified out of the non-performing forborne exposures category and has to be reported in column 050 as long as it does not fulfil the exit criteria of paragraph 176. Exposure B was classified as non-performing 2 years ago, no forbearance measure was granted. One year ago, exposure B fulfilled all exit criteria of paragraph 156 and was reclassified as performing. Six month ago, on exposure B an forbearance measure was applied which has not led the exposure to be classified as non-performing. Does exposure B have to be reported in column 050 of template F 19.00 due to the fact it was reclassified out of the non-performing category (without forbearance measure) one year ago?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (repealed)
  • ID: 2015_2056
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - FINREP (incl. FB&NPE)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 13/12/2019