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

Cadrage de l'état C67 (ALMM) sur la concentration du financement par contrepartie avec Finrep / Aligning the C 67.00 template (ALMM) on the concentration of funding by counterparty with FINREP

French question: Nous interrogeons sur la pertinence de l'instruction en annexe XXI chapitre 1.2 § 2 (c) dans lequel il est indiqué que la somme des section 1 et 2 de l'état C67 doit être égale au total des passifs de l'établissement tel que déclaré dans FINREP. Est-il cohérent d'établir un cadrage entre FINREP et l'état C67 - section 1 (r010) + 2 (r120) - alors que : 1- Finrep est établi sur un périmètre différent de celui du risque de liquidité (Prudentiel / Liquidité), cf. article 18 du réglement 575/2013 (CRR) 2- Finrep est établi selon une fréquence trimestrielle alors que les états ALMM sont prévus à fréquence mensuelle 3- Les délais de remise des états ALMM sont plus courts (J+30 calendaires puis J+15 calendaires) que ceux des états Finrep (J+30 ouvrés en moyenne, fixé par l'ABE). 4- Comment envisager dans ce contexte le calcul des durées moyennes pondérées initiales et résiduelles sur les autres passifs (section 2 - r120) ? English question: We would like to question the relevance of the instruction in Annex XXI, section 1.2(2)(c) which indicates that the totals of sections 1 and 2 of C 67.00 should equal an institution's total liabilities as reported in FINREP. Is it consistent to make a link between FINREP and the C 67.00 template – section 1 (r010) + 2 (r120) – when: 1- FINREP is based on a different scope from that of liquidity risk (prudential/liquidity), cf. Article 18 of Regulation 575/2013 (CRR). 2- FINREP is done on a quarterly basis while the ALMM templates have a monthly frequency. 3- The deadlines for submitting the ALMM templates are shorter (t+30 calendar days then t+15 calendar days) than those of the FINREP templates (t+30 working days on average, set by the EBA). 4- In this context, how should the weighted average initial and residual maturities of other liabilities be calculated (section 2 – r120)?

  • 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_2365
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Liquidity (LCR, NSFR, AMM)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 08/01/2016

Interaction of shares transfer with the resolution process

Is there a difference in process between the transfer effected under the sale of business tool and the transfer effected under the bridge institution tool, whereby the resolution entity’s shares are, first, transferred to a bridge institution and, later, to a third entity, pursuant to Article 40(6)(b) 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_2360
  • Topic: Resolution tools and powers
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 21/01/2022

Entity in resolution and purchaser not registered in the same Member State

Article 38 (7) of Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD) says that a purchaser will have the appropriate authorisation to carry out the business it acquires. In case the entity in resolution and the purchaser are not registered in the same Member State, which authority is competent to give this authorisation: the authority in the member state of the entity in resolution, or the authority in the member state of the purchaser?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2359
  • Topic: Resolution tools and powers
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 25/11/2016

Limitation of a transfer to a certain period of time

Is it possible to limit a transfer under Article 38 (6) of Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD) to a certain period of time following the initial transfer?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2358
  • Topic: Resolution tools and powers
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 16/10/2015

Supplementary transfers when using the sale of business tool

Does the power under Article 38(5) of Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD) allow the resolution authority to make supplementary transfers even when the conditions for resolution are not met anymore?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2357
  • Topic: Resolution tools and powers
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 16/12/2016

Expenses in the context of Article 37 (7)

What kind of costs does the term "expenses" in Article 37 (7) of Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD) refer to?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2356
  • Topic: Resolution tools and powers
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 16/10/2015

PD selection in case of substitution approach

In case of substitution approach application, the PD to be use (Annex IV, C103, c060), is the one of guarantor or the one of the obligor?

  • Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Draft ITS on Supervisory Reporting of Institutions (for benchmarking the internal approaches)
  • ID: 2015_2355
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Supervisory Benchmarking
  • Date of submission:

Definition of the counterparty size in case of substitution approach application

In case of substitution approach application, for the field "size of counterparty, (Annex II, C103, c110) should we use the turnover of the guarantor or the one of the obligor?

  • Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Draft ITS on Supervisory Reporting of Institutions (for benchmarking the internal approaches)
  • ID: 2015_2354
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Supervisory Benchmarking
  • Date of submission:

Reimbursement of shareholders and creditors

In our understanding, Articles 36(12) and 46(3) confer upon the resolution authority a mere power - not an obligation - to reimburse shareholders and creditors. If this is the case, is such power an unfettered discretion or should it be exercised under particular conditions? If the latter is correct, which conditions apply?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2351
  • Topic: Valuation
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 28/10/2016

Correct scope of clusters based on collateralisation status and collateral type

Both template C 102.00 (LDP) and template C 103.00 (HDP) include clusters based on collateralisation status and collateral type. Reference is made to c150-c210 columns of COREP template C 08.01. It remains however unclear how facilities should be treated which are only partially collateralized and/or for which there are several collateral types.Assume a facility of 100, of which 20 secured by financial collateral, 30 by real estate collateral and 50 unsecured. We see many possibilities to report such a facility in the template, either by splitting the facility over various clusters, by reporting it in full in all concerned clusters or by combinations of these two approaches.Example:1) we could use a 'splitted' approach, so    cluster unsecured  = 50,    cluster secured      = 50,                cluster secured financial collateral  = 20,                cluster secured real estate              = 302) we could keep the facility intact and always report it in full, so    cluster unsecured = 0,    cluster secured     = 100,                cluster secured financial collateral  = 100,                cluster secured real estate              = 1003) we could use a combination of the two with collateral status clusters determined 'in full' and collateral type cluster using a split approach, so    cluster unsecured = 0,    cluster secured     = 100,                cluster secured financial collateral  = 20,                cluster secured real estate              = 304)  ...?Please elaborate further on the correct treatment.

  • Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Draft ITS on Supervisory Reporting of Institutions (for benchmarking the internal approaches)
  • ID: 2015_2347
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Supervisory Benchmarking
  • Date of submission:

‘Exposure weighted average LGD’ computation in CR GB2 report

Own funds instructions states that column ‘090 Exposure weighted average LGD (%)’ in CR GB 2 has the same definition as column 230 of CR IRB template.Column 230 of CR IRB template has the following definition:‘All the impact of CRM techniques on LGD values as specified in Part 3 Title II Chapters 3 and 4 of CRR shall be considered […].Exposure and the respective LGDs for large regulated financial sector entities and unregulated financial entities shall not be included in the calculation of column 230, they shall only be included in the calculation of column 240.’In case, only the exposure to large regulated financial sector entities would be reported in the CR GB2, which value should be reported in the column 090 of CR GB2? ‘Null’ value, zero or the LGD average of exposures to large regulated financial sector entities?

  • 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_2346
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - COREP (incl. IP Losses)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 28/07/2017

Requirements regarding „control” by the resolution authority

Are the requirements of “control” of the bridge bank (Article 40(2)(a)) and asset separation tool (Article 42(2)(a)) met if the conditions specified under Article 41(1) and Article 42(4) respectively are satisfied?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2345
  • Topic: Resolution tools and powers
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 09/12/2016

Payment of consideration in shares of a bridge institution

Is it possible to pay the consideration mentioned in Article 40 (4) of Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD) in shares of a bridge institution? Is the same possible in case the asset separation tool has been applied?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2343
  • Topic: Resolution tools and powers
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 21/01/2022

Private ownership of a bridge institution or an asset management tool

We seek clarification on Articles 40(2) and 42(2) of Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD). Can a bridge institution or an asset management tool be fully privately owned?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2342
  • Topic: Resolution tools and powers
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 23/06/2017

Wholly or partially owned by a public authority requirement and bail-in

Article 40 of Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD) requires that the bridge institution is wholly or partially owned by public authorities (including the resolution fund) and that it is controlled by the resolution authority. How is this ownership requirement compatible with Article 43(2)(b)(ii) BRRD?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2341
  • Topic: Resolution tools and powers
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 21/01/2022

Procedural requirements of the sale of business tool with regard to state aid

How can an open and competitive sale process in accordance with the state aid rules be conducted in case of applying sale of business tool and fulfilling the provisions from Article 39(3)?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2339
  • Topic: Resolution tools and powers
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 10/03/2017

Rights over or in relation to assets, rights and liabilities transferred

According to Articles 38 (13), 40 (11) and 42 (12) of Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD), parties whose assets, rights and liabilities are not transferred, shall not have any rights over or in relation to the assets, rights and liabilities that are transferred. What is the rationale of these provisions?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2338
  • Topic: Resolution tools and powers
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 21/01/2022

Definition of 'continuity'

How should the term ‘continuity’ or ‘continuing issue of bonds’ be defined?

  • Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2337
  • Topic: Other issues
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Supervisory Benchmarking exercise for 2015 - Market Risk related

Please could information be provided on the process for selecting stressed VaR period for calculating stressed VaR for the hypothetical portfolios

  • Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Draft ITS on Supervisory Reporting of Institutions (for benchmarking the internal approaches)
  • ID: 2015_2336
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Supervisory Benchmarking
  • Date of submission: