Question ID:
2023_6802
Legal Act:
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
Topic:
Market risk
Article:
352
Paragraph:
2
COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs/Recommendations:
EBA/GL/2020/09 - Guidelines on the treatment of structural FX under Article 352(2) of CRR
Article/Paragraph:
118 background section
Disclose name of institution / entity:
Yes
Name of institution / submitter:
ING
Country of incorporation / residence:
Netherlands
Type of submitter:
Credit institution
Subject Matter:
Structural FX: considering tax effect when calculating maximum open position that can be waived from FX charge
Question:

May tax effect be considered when computing the maximum open position that can be waived in the context of the structural FX provision referred to in Article 352(2) of Regulation( EU) No 575/2013?

Background on the question:

Article 352(2) of Regulation( EU) No 575/2013 (CRR) states that FX positions deliberately taken to hedge against adverse effects of FX on its ratios (CET1 ratio) may be excluded from the calculation of net open currency positions (no MRWA), subject to permission of competent authorities.

FX results arising from capital in subsidiaries are tax exempted but from capital in branches (plus related FX hedges) are taxed, resulting in less effective protection of the CET1 ratio. Consequently, hedges for branches need to be increased to be sufficiently effective.

Ignoring this tax effect would make it difficult to effectively hedge a bank’s CET1 ratio and the bank’s MRWA at the same time. Thus, excluding the tax effect does not fully facilitate the hedge against adverse effect of FX on ratios. Including tax elements makes economic sense and is in line with the regulatory definition of CET1 capital and intentions described in the EBA Guidelines on the treatment of structural FX under Article 352(2) of Regulation( EU) No 575/2013 

Date of submission:
12/05/2023
Published as Rejected Q&A
06/06/2023
Rationale for rejection:

This question has been rejected because it is considered that EBA guidance or clarification is not needed with regard to the issue that it raises. For example, this can be the case where it is considered that the existing regulatory framework is sufficiently clear and unambiguous.

The Single Rule Book Q&A tool has been established to provide explanations and non-binding interpretations on questions relating to the practical application or implementation of the provisions of legislative acts referred to in Article 1(2) of the EBA’s founding Regulation, as well as associated delegated and implementing acts, and guidelines and recommendations, adopted under these legislative acts.

For further information on the purpose of this tool and on how to submit questions, please see “Additional background and guidance for asking questions”.

Status:
Rejected question
Image CAPTCHA