List of Q&As

Inclusion of mixed-activity holding companies into group resolution plans

Under which conditions should group resolution plans capture mixed-activity holding companies?

Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

ID: 2015_2097 | Topic: Resolution plans | Date of submission: 06/07/2015

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: 29/06/2015

Dealing with leasing (car leasing) in the calculation of the structural liquidity ratio (NSFR)

Can leasing contracts (e.g. car leasing), which are accounted for as tangible fixed assets according to national accounting standards, be treated in the NSFR according to the actual inflow/cash flow?

Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

ID: 2019_4780 | Topic: Liquidity risk | Date of submission: 14/06/2019

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

ID: 2017_3280 | Topic: Liquidity risk | Date of submission: 02/05/2017

Definition of “aggregate liabilities” and “total liabilities” in the context of the 5% threshold

Do the terms “aggregated liabilities” and “total liabilities” used in the calculation of the 5% threshold for multi-currency reporting, refer to on-B/S liabilities in accordance with the applicable accounting framework referring to Article 24 CRR only or does it include contingent liabilities booked in the off-B/S as well?

Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

ID: 2016_2679 | Topic: Liquidity risk | Date of submission: 17/03/2016

Financial Customers

When assessing the primary activities of any legal entity to assess whether these activities fall within the list of activities that define an entity as a "financial customer" (Annex I), should the activity of the entity being assessed include intragroup activity with other controlled entities within the same group or should intragroup activities with other controlled entities within the same group be excluded?

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

ID: 2016_2996 | Topic: Liquidity risk | Date of submission: 16/11/2016

Scope of application of EBA guidelines on loan origination and monitoring

Are sections 4, 5 and 8 of the EBA guidelines on loan origination and monitoring not applicable to agreements referred to in Article 2(2)( h) of Directive 2008/48/EU, while all other parts of the guidelines are still applicable to those agreements?   

Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: EBA/GL/2020/06 - Guidelines on loan origination and monitoring

ID: 2021_6130 | Topic: Credit risk | Date of submission: 02/08/2021

Association of personalised security credentials to the payment service user

Should strong customer authentication (SCA) elements always be issued under control of the Account service Payment Services Provider (ASPSP)?

Legal act: Directive 2015/2366/EU (PSD2)

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2018/389 - RTS on strong customer authentication and secure communication

ID: 2021_6141 | Topic: Strong customer authentication and common and secure communication (incl. access) | Date of submission: 06/08/2021

Confirmation of Funds (CoF) request by a PISP in case of batch processing system

With respect to confirmation of funds request made by a Payment Initiation Service Provider (PISP), in the event that the Account Servicing Payment Service Providers (ASPSP) makes use of a batch processing system, should the ASPSP take into account batches that are in the queue waiting to be processed at the point when the fund confirmation request is made?

Legal act: Directive 2015/2366/EU (PSD2)

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2018/389 - RTS on strong customer authentication and secure communication

ID: 2021_6077 | Topic: Strong customer authentication and common and secure communication (incl. access) | Date of submission: 06/07/2021

Payers right to make use of payment initiation service providers for all types of payment transactions

Shall payers be able to make use of payment initiation service providers for transmitting all types of credit-transfer based online payment orders from their payment accounts?

Legal act: Directive 2015/2366/EU (PSD2)

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2018/389 - RTS on strong customer authentication and secure communication

ID: 2020_5498 | Topic: Strong customer authentication and common and secure communication (incl. access) | Date of submission: 11/09/2020

Alternative strong customer authentication for citizens without mobile

Why does the PSD2 allow banks to deny the access to the electronic financial services to customers without a mobile but with a PC?

Legal act: Directive 2015/2366/EU (PSD2)

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2018/389 - RTS on strong customer authentication and secure communication

ID: 2020_5325 | Topic: Strong customer authentication and common and secure communication (incl. access) | Date of submission: 21/06/2020

Revocation / Invalidation of SCA proof before execution date

In order for a payment instruction to be regarded as 'authorised', is the Account Servicing Payment Service Provider (ASPSP) obliged to verify the strong customer authentication (SCA) proof immediately prior to the execution of each future dated payment instruction? If the ASPSP fails to re-verify the SCA proof, can the ASPSP hold the payer liable in the event of fraud?

Legal act: Directive 2015/2366/EU (PSD2)

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2018/389 - RTS on strong customer authentication and secure communication

ID: 2018_4440 | Topic: Strong customer authentication and common and secure communication (incl. access) | Date of submission: 28/12/2018

Home / host cooperation

Should banks notify only National Competent Authorities (NCAs) of the home Member State when they use Strong customer authentication (SCA) exemptions on Secure corporate payment processes and protocols  (Article 17 of Regulation (EU) 2018/389 – RTS on strong customer authentication and secure communication) and Transaction risk analysis (Article 18 of the Delegated Regulation)?

Legal act: Directive 2015/2366/EU (PSD2)

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2018/389 - RTS on strong customer authentication and secure communication

ID: 2018_4170 | Topic: Strong customer authentication and common and secure communication (incl. access) | Date of submission: 30/07/2018

Maturity calculation under IRB for exposures that only have contractual cashflows in the form of fees

Does Article 162(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR) apply to exposures for which cash flow schedules contractually payable by the obligor are only fee-related (e.g., as in the case of guarantees)?

Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

ID: 2021_5773 | Topic: Credit risk | Date of submission: 09/03/2021

Treatment of cured defaulted exposures

For the treatment of cured defaulted exposures, a probation period of 90 days with no default triggers must apply before the exposure is moved back to a non-defaulted status. According to Article 178(1)(b CRR) default shall be considered to have occurred with regard to a particular obligor when the obligor is more than 90 days past due on any material credit obligation. However, if the material arrears fall below the thresholds, the arrears counter will reset to 0. Should the probation period of 90 days with no default triggers apply before the exposure is moved back to a non-defaulted status?

Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: EBA/GL/2016/07 - Guidelines on the application of the definition of default under Article 178 CRR

ID: 2021_5754 | Topic: Credit risk | Date of submission: 22/02/2021

Look-through application under IRB approach

When an institution applies the look-through approach to units or shares of Collective Investment Undertaking (CIU) under the IRB approach and where the institution is allowed to use IRB advanced approach for the underlying credit exposures of the CIU in accordance with Article 148 CRR, can the institution still use the standard approach for those underlying exposures of which obligors are not internally rated and/or for which the information required for own LGD estimation are not available to the institution?

Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

ID: 2021_5712 | Topic: Credit risk | Date of submission: 02/02/2021

Calculation of the collateral value of immovable property considering minimum level of over-collateralisation ratio

Should the haircut due to minimum level of over-collateralisation be reflected in the calculation of collateral value with or without the deducted prior claims? Besides market value or mortgage lending value is there any other value that could be considered for the calculation purposes?

Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

ID: 2021_5685 | Topic: Credit risk | Date of submission: 13/01/2021

Treatment of third country covered bonds under IRB Approach

Which LGD should be applied for third country covered bonds (issued under a dedicated legal framework) which are not eligible for the same LGD as UCITS 52(4)?

Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

ID: 2020_5522 | Topic: Credit risk | Date of submission: 30/09/2020

Applicability of the Guidelines of the Committee of European Banking Supervisors on Article 106(2)(c) and (d) of Directive 2006/48/EC (CRD)

Are the implementation guidelines on Article 106(2)(c) and (d) of Directive 2006/48/EC (CRD) of the Committee of European Banking Supervisors applicable for interpreting Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 as amended by Regulation (EU) 2019/876?

Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

ID: 2020_5340 | Topic: Large exposures | Date of submission: 30/06/2020

Use of the “maturity of the tranche” (MT) as defined in Article 257 CRR as the “residual maturity” for purposes of the volatility adjustments for securitisation positions under Table 1 of Article 224(1) CRR.

Where collateral takes the form of securitisation positions meeting the criteria in Article 197(1)(h) CRR, can the institution use the “weighted average maturity” (WAM) as defined in Article 257 CRR as the “residual maturity” for purposes of the volatility adjustments set out in Table 1 of Article 224(1) CRR?

Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

ID: 2020_5211 | Topic: Credit risk | Date of submission: 16/04/2020