Question ID:
Legal Act:
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
Own funds
COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs/Recommendations:
Not applicable
Not applicable
Disclose name of institution / entity:
Type of submitter:
Competent authority
Subject Matter:
Definition of qualifying holding according to Article 4 (1) 36 CRR2

If a credit institution holds a participation below 10% in a company outside the financial sector - which according to the applicable accounting framework (IFRS) is accounted for by use of the equity method, due to the exercise of a significant influence according to IAS 28.5. - does this constitute a case of significant influence and therefore a qualifying holding according to Article 4(1)36 CRR?

Can situations arise where a significant influence exists under accounting rules, but not according to the CRR definition?

Background on the question:

Article 4(1)36 Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 as amended by Regulation (EU) 2019/876 (CRR2) defines a qualifying holding as a direct or indirect holding in an undertaking which represents 10 % or more of the capital or of the voting rights or which makes it possible to exercise a significant influence over the management of that undertaking.

Q&A 3762 clarifies that the definition of a qualifying holding is also met in cases where the possibility for an institution to exercise a significant influence in an undertaking is established, even in the absence of a minimum level of holding in the undertaking by that institution.
As Article 4 CRR2 does however not define ‘significant influence’, the question arises whether ‘significant influence’ is to be interpreted in the sense of the definition in the applicable accounting framework based on Article 24(1) CRR or if a deviating interpretation of ‘significant influence’ is feasible in the scope of the CRR.

Even if the two frameworks (accounting and regulation) are to be considered as completely independent of one another, the question nevertheless remains of whether they interfere with each other.

The IFRS framework stipulates the rebuttable presumption that a significant influence exists, where the investor possess rights which at least equal to a participation of 20%. Article 4(1)36 CRR uses a very similar wording, but reduces the threshold to 10%. One could argue that if the significant influence is equivalent to a 20% holding, that a 10% holding is also covered under such circumstances.

Date of submission:
Question under review
Answer prepared by:
Answer prepared by the European Commission because it is a matter of interpretation of Union law.