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.

List of Q&A's

Definition of 'carrying amount' for the purposes of templates C 67.00, C 68.00 and C 69.00

In the guidance annexes for DPM 2.7 for ALMM returns C 67.00, C 68.00 and C 69.00 (Annex XIX) the requirement for ‘volume’ and ‘amount of funding’ has been further specified to ‘carrying amount’ for these templates only. Annex XIX does not define ‘carrying amount’ for liabilities – with reference to the ALMM templates mentioned, should it include accrued interest?

  • 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Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (repealed)

Effective LGD

Could effective LGD (LGD*) be used both in AIRB and FIRB if the operation has an eligible financial collateral under Financial Collateral Comprehensive method?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

Consideration of surplus collateral received in providing further credit risk mitigation

We are aware of differing interpretations by market participants in relation to the answers given under EBA Single Rulebook Q&A 2013_206 and 2016_2735 on the application of Collateral Received to achieve further credit risk mitigation to the extent that Collateral Received exceeds the net replacement cost, RC net.For collateral received to reduce Net Replacement Cost, RC net, can surplus collateral be used to offset the reduced potential future credit exposure, PCE red, or may EAD, RC net + PCE red be further offset by any surplus Collateral Received that has not been applied in the RC net calculation? 

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

“Past due” columns: How to count number of days for “1 year” and “5 years” past due?

In Template F 18.00 the “cross carrying amount / nominal amount” and the “accumulated impairment, accumulated negative changes in fair value due to credit risk and provisions of non-performing exposures” have to be allocated to different “past-due” columns according to its number of days past due. How many days past due have to be assumed in order to allocate an exposure to past-due column “1 year” or “5 years” respectively?

  • 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)

Grandfathering of own funds instruments

For application of the grandfathering rules defined in Article 484 CRR and following, does the change in debtor resulting from a merger means that a new capital instrument has been issued and that its eligibility for grandfathering or for full eligibility as an own fund instrument should be assessed at the date of the merger or should one use the initial characteristics of the bond?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

FINREP Templates F 30.01 and F 30.02, validation v1019_m

For interests in unconsolidated structured entities for which no liquidity support is drawn, what is the treatment for validation v1019_m?

  • 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)

Definition of subordinated exposures

What is the definition for subordinated exposures within the context of article 161?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

Unfunded credit risk mitigation for specialised lending exposures

How should RWA be calculated for unfunded credit risk mitigation when the protected exposure is a specialised lending exposure in respect of which an institution is not able to estimate PDs and used the risk weights in Article 153(5) CRR?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

Commitment to buy newly issued shares and synthetic holding deduction

What would be the prudential treatment applicable to a financial instrument where a bank commits itself to buy newly issued shares of an insurance company for a given amount should certain events occur?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 241/2014 - RTS for Own Funds requirements for institutions

FINREP (IAS 39), Validation rules v5014_m

Validation rule v5014_m talks about the total of loans and advances of Non financial corporation reported in template F 06.00 that should be equal to       template F 18.00 (Gross exposure) in Non financial corporation for loans and       advances at amortised cost+     template F 18.00 (Gross exposure) in Non financial corporation for loans and advances at fair value other than HFT+     template F 04.01 in Non financial corporation for loans and advances held for trading./.    template F 04.01, amount of cumulative changes in fair value attributable to changes in credit risk for NFC.Since, the above rule is only considering the gross exposure in Non financial corporation. So, why we are deducting the amount for cumulative changes in fair value attributable to changes in credit risk. That will create delta.

  • 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)

Calculation of original and residual maturities in the context of ALMM (C 66.01) for puttable bonds

Assume the following data for a puttable bond:Origination date:                               30.08.2018First investors’ put optionality:          15.02.2019Second investors’ put optionality:     15.05.2019Final maturity:                                   30.10.2020From our point of view, the instructions of annex XXII (reference 1.1.4) and annex XXIII (paragraph 12) in combination with the answers to the question 2 in EBA/ITS/2017/01 suggest this bond should be assigned with original (OM) and residual maturities (RM), both in days, for illustrative reporting dates as shown below:Reporting date: 31.08.2018: OM 169; RM 168Reporting date: 30.09.2018: OM 169; RM 138Reporting date: 30.12.2018: OM 169; RM 47Reporting date: 31.03.2019: OM 169; RM 45Reporting date: 30.06.2019: OM 169; RM 488Reporting date: 30.09.2019: OM 169; RM 396

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Draft ITS on Supervisory Reporting of Institutions

Inconsistency between validation rules and ITS/CRR for C 07.00

Why is there an inconsistency between the provisions of the CRR / the ITS on Reporting and several validation rules (e4891_n // e4894_n)?

  • 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)

Liquid asset received as a component of a pool of collateral in securities transaction (reverse repo or collateral swap).

Is Article 30(6)(c) of the DR(EU) 2015/61 also applicable to Level 1 HQLA that can be substituted by Level 2 HQLA?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/61 - DR with regard to liquidity coverage requirement

Clarification of the conditions for reduction of own funds due to Article 77 CRR and Article 28 RTS on Own funds.

Should deductions from own funds with regard to a permission to reduce own funds in accordance with Article 77 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR) be made right after the permission from the competent authority (CA) is granted or could it be later at the time of the institution’s public announcement in accordance with Article 28 (2) of the RTS on Own Funds? In that context, how should the concept of ‘sufficient certainty’ of Article 28 (2) RTS be applied?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 241/2014 - RTS for Own Funds requirements for institutions

Reporting of Pillar 2 requirements in C 03.00 (follow-up to Q&As 2015_2302 and 2016_2699)

For 2017, the competent authority distinguished the Pillar 2 requirements in two slices: P2R (Pillar 2 requirement) and P2G (Pillar 2 Guidance).The EBA Pillar 2 Roadmap of 11 April 2017 explains in page 5 ‘.... competent authorities would not require institutions to disclose capital guidance publicly. It should be noted, however, that competent authorities under the CRD do not have the legal powers to actively prevent institutions from disclosing P2G. Institutions are generally expected not to disclose P2G...’. Moreover, an institution underlined the confidentiality of the P2R, and claims that some regulatory data, among them some COREP ones like those in template CA3 (C 03.00), are regularly transmitted to CCPs in purposes of certification.Question 1Do you confirm that the P2G is not expected in COREP CA3 (C 03.00)?Question 2For 2017, an example of requirements whose formulation is approximately standard for institutions:‘The [competent authority] requires [the institution] to maintain, on a consolidated basis, a total SREP capital requirement (TSCR) of 9.25% as that ratio is defined in section 1.2 of Guidelines EBA/GL/2014/13. The TSCR of 9.25% includes:(i) the minimum own funds requirement of 8% to be maintained at all times in accordance with Article 92(1) of Regulation (EU) N) 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council; and(ii) an own funds requirement of 1.25% required to be held in excess of the minimum own funds requirement and to be maintained at all times in accordance with [the national transposition measures of Article 104 of Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)], to be made up entirely of Common Equity Tier 1 capital.[The institution] is hereby reminded that it is also subject to the overall capital requirement (OCR), as that ratio is defined in section 1.2 of Guidelines EBA/GL/2014/13, which includes, in addition to the TSCR, the combined buffer requirement as defined in point (6) of Article 128 of Directive 2013/36/EU, to the extent it is legally applicable.’‘[The competent authority] expects that [the institution] complies, on a consolidated basis, with Pillar 2 capital guidance of Y% to be made up entirely of Common Equity Tier 1 capital and to be held over and above:(i) the minimum Common Equity Tier 1 ratio required under Article 92 (1) (a) of Regulation (EU) N) 575/2013;(ii) the own funds requirement of 1.25% required to be held in excess of the minimum own funds requirement and to be maintained at all times in accordance with [the national transposition measures of Article 104 of Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)], to be made up entirely of Common Equity Tier 1 capital;(iii) the combined buffer requirement as defined in point (6) of Article 128 of Directive 2013/36/EU, to the extent it is legally applicable.'How do these requirements of the competent authority have to be reported in COREP CA3?Option 1:CA3 r080: Target CET1 capital ratio due to Pillar II adjustments = 5.75% (i.e. 4.5% -regulatory minimum- + 1.25% -P2R of CET1-),CA3 r100: Target T1 capital ratio due to Pillar II adjustments = nothing,CA3 r120: Target Total capital ratio due to Pillar II adjustments = 9.25% (i.e. 8% -regulatory minimum- + 1.25% -P2R of CET1-).Option 2:CA3 r080: 9.25% (i.e. 4.5% -regulatory minimum- + 4.75% -P2R-)CA3 r100: nothing,CA3 r120: 9.25% (i.e. 8% -regulatory minimum- + 1.25% -P2R-).Others?

  • 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)

Appropriate Risk Weight for purchased defaulted assets

Where an entity subject to the CRR purchased Non-Performing Loans booked at the purchase price (net book value, “NBV”), which is significantly below the loans’ gross book value (“GBV”), can the difference between GBV and NBV be treated as specific credit risk adjustment when deciding whether a risk weight of 100% (rather than 150%) applies according to Article 127 CRR?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 183/2014 - RTS for the calculation of specific and general credit risk adjustments

Recognition of non cash variation margin in the calculation for replacement cost of derivatives for Leverage Ratio

In the leverage ratio exposure calculation of non-client cleared derivatives can non cash variation margin be deducted?  

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/62 - DR with regard to the leverage ratio

Treatment of inflows from credit facilities in LCR

If an institution expects that a credit facility is prolonged when it becomes due or a renegotiation date occurs, should institutions report an inflow at the due/renegotiation date?Shall institutions report interest payments on credit facilities as inflows if customers do not pay interests in cash?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/61 - DR with regard to liquidity coverage requirement

Validation rules v2815_m, v2821_m vs. FINREP / AE instructions

Validation rules v2815_m and v2821_m imply that customer loans on demand are reported in different rows in the Asset Encumbrance template F 32.01.Our understanding of FINREP and AE instructions differs as follows:In Asset Encumbrance template F 32.01, all loans on demand are reported in row 020 ‘Loans on demand’, whether they are due from credit institutions or customers. In French accounting (PCEC), credit institution loans on demand are classified in class of accounts 1, and customer loans on demand in class of accounts 2.In FINREP template F 01.01, class 1 loans on demand are reported in row 030 ‘Cash balances at central banks’ and class 2 loans on demand in row 200 ‘Loans and advances’.We believe validation rules v2815_m and v2821_m are inconsistent with FINREP and AE instructions on customer loans on demand.

  • 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)