This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 02013R0575-20240709
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 (Text with EEA relevance)
Consolidated text: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 (Text with EEA relevance)
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 (Text with EEA relevance)
02013R0575 — EN — 09.07.2024 — 017.001
This text is meant purely as a documentation tool and has no legal effect. The Union's institutions do not assume any liability for its contents. The authentic versions of the relevant acts, including their preambles, are those published in the Official Journal of the European Union and available in EUR-Lex. Those official texts are directly accessible through the links embedded in this document
REGULATION (EU) No 575/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 26 June 2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 (OJ L 176 27.6.2013, p. 1) |
Amended by:
Corrected by:
REGULATION (EU) No 575/2013 OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL
of 26 June 2013
on prudential requirements for credit institutions and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012
(Text with EEA relevance)
PART ONE
GENERAL PROVISIONS
TITLE I
SUBJECT MATTER, SCOPE AND DEFINITIONS
Article 1
Scope
This Regulation lays down uniform rules concerning general prudential requirements that institutions, financial holding companies and mixed financial holding companies supervised under Directive 2013/36/EU shall comply with in relation to the following items:
own funds requirements relating to entirely quantifiable, uniform and standardised elements of credit risk, market risk, operational risk, settlement risk and leverage;
requirements limiting large exposures;
liquidity requirements relating to entirely quantifiable, uniform and standardised elements of liquidity risk;
reporting requirements related to points (a), (b) and (c);
public disclosure requirements.
This Regulation lays down uniform rules concerning the own funds and eligible liabilities requirements that resolution entities that are global systemically important institutions (G-SIIs) or part of G-SIIs and material subsidiaries of non-EU G-SIIs shall comply with.
This Regulation does not govern publication requirements for competent authorities in the field of prudential regulation and supervision of institutions as set out in Directive 2013/36/EU.
Article 2
Supervisory powers
Article 3
Application of stricter requirements by institutions
This Regulation shall not prevent institutions from holding own funds and their components in excess of, or applying measures that are stricter than those required by this Regulation.
Article 4
Definitions
For the purposes of this Regulation, the following definitions shall apply:
‘credit institution’ means an undertaking the business of which consists of any of the following:
to take deposits or other repayable funds from the public and to grant credits for its own account;
to carry out any of the activities referred to in points (3) and (6) of Section A of Annex I to Directive 2014/65/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 6 ), where one of the following applies, but the undertaking is not a commodity and emission allowance dealer, a collective investment undertaking or an insurance undertaking:
the total value of the consolidated assets of the undertaking is equal to or exceeds EUR 30 billion;
the total value of the assets of the undertaking is less than EUR 30 billion, and the undertaking is part of a group in which the total value of the consolidated assets of all undertakings in that group that individually have total assets of less than EUR 30 billion and that carry out any of the activities referred to in points (3) and (6) of Section A of Annex I to Directive 2014/65/EU is equal to or exceeds EUR 30 billion; or
the total value of the assets of the undertaking is less than EUR 30 billion, and the undertaking is part of a group in which the total value of the consolidated assets of all undertakings in the group that carry out any of the activities referred to in points (3) and (6) of Section A of Annex I to Directive 2014/65/EU is equal to or exceeds EUR 30 billion, where the consolidating supervisor, in consultation with the supervisory college, so decides in order to address potential risks of circumvention and potential risks for the financial stability of the Union;
for the purposes of points (b)(ii) and (b)(iii), where the undertaking is part of a third‐country group, the total assets of each branch of the third‐country group authorised in the Union shall be included in the combined total value of the assets of all undertakings in the group;
‘investment firm’ means an investment firm as defined in point (1) of Article 4(1) of Directive 2014/65/EU which is authorised under that Directive but excludes credit institutions;
‘institution’ means a credit institution authorised under Article 8 of Directive 2013/36/EU or an undertaking as referred to in Article 8a(3) thereof;
▼M9 —————
‘insurance undertaking’ means insurance undertaking as defined in point (1) of Article 13 of Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (Solvency II) ( 7 );
‘reinsurance undertaking’ means reinsurance undertaking as defined in point (4) of Article 13 of Directive 2009/138/EC;
‘collective investment undertaking’ or ‘CIU’ means a UCITS as defined in Article 1(2) of Directive 2009/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 8 ) or an alternative investment fund (AIF) as defined in point (a) of Article 4(1) of Directive 2011/61/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 9 );
‘public sector entity’ means a non-commercial administrative body responsible to central governments, regional governments or local authorities, or to authorities that exercise the same responsibilities as regional governments and local authorities, or a non-commercial undertaking that is owned by or set up and sponsored by central governments, regional governments or local authorities, and that has explicit guarantee arrangements, and may include self-administered bodies governed by law that are under public supervision;
‘management body’ means management body as defined in point (7) of Article 3(1) of Directive 2013/36/EU;
‘senior management’ means senior management as defined in point (9) of Article 3(1) of Directive 2013/36/EU;
‘systemic risk’ means systemic risk as defined in point (10) of Article 3(1) of Directive 2013/36/EU;
‘model risk’ means model risk as defined in point (11) of Article 3(1) of Directive 2013/36/EU;
‘originator’ means an originator as defined in point (3) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402 ( 10 );
‘sponsor’ means a sponsor as defined in point (5) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402;
‘original lender’ means an original lender as defined in point (20) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402;
‘parent undertaking’ means:
a parent undertaking within the meaning of Articles 1 and 2 of Directive 83/349/EEC;
for the purposes of Section II of Chapters 3 and 4 of Title VII and Title VIII of Directive 2013/36/EU and Part Five of this Regulation, a parent undertaking within the meaning of Article 1(1) of Directive 83/349/EEC and any undertaking which effectively exercises a dominant influence over another undertaking;
‘subsidiary’ means:
a subsidiary undertaking within the meaning of Articles 1 and 2 of Directive 83/349/EEC;
a subsidiary undertaking within the meaning of Article 1(1) of Directive 83/349/EEC and any undertaking over which a parent undertaking effectively exercises a dominant influence.
Subsidiaries of subsidiaries shall also be considered to be subsidiaries of the undertaking that is their original parent undertaking;
‘branch’ means a place of business which forms a legally dependent part of an institution and which carries out directly all or some of the transactions inherent in the business of institutions;
‘ancillary services undertaking’ means an undertaking the principal activity of which, whether provided to undertakings inside the group or to clients outside the group, consists of any of the following:
a direct extension of banking;
operational leasing, the ownership or management of property, the provision of data processing services or any other activity insofar as those activities are ancillary to banking;
any other activity considered similar by EBA to those referred to in points (a) and (b);
‘asset management company’ means an asset management company as defined in point (5) of Article 2 of Directive 2002/87/EC or an AIFM as defined in Article 4(1)(b) of Directive 2011/61/EU, including, unless otherwise provided, third-country entities that carry out similar activities and that are subject to the laws of a third country which applies supervisory and regulatory requirements at least equivalent to those applied in the Union;
‘financial holding company’ means a financial institution, the subsidiaries of which are exclusively or mainly institutions or financial institutions, and which is not a mixed financial holding company; the subsidiaries of a financial institution are mainly institutions or financial institutions where at least one of them is an institution and where more than 50 % of the financial institution's equity, consolidated assets, revenues, personnel or other indicator considered relevant by the competent authority are associated with subsidiaries that are institutions or financial institutions;
‘mixed financial holding company’ means mixed financial holding company as defined in point (15) of Article 2 of Directive 2002/87/EC;
‘mixed activity holding company’ means a parent undertaking, other than a financial holding company or an institution or a mixed financial holding company, the subsidiaries of which include at least one institution;
‘third-country insurance undertaking’ means third-country insurance undertaking as defined in point (3) of Article 13 of Directive 2009/138/EC;
‘third-country reinsurance undertaking’ means third-country reinsurance undertaking as defined in point (6) of Article 13 of Directive 2009/138/EC;
‘recognised third-country investment firm’ means a firm meeting all of the following conditions:
if it were established within the Union, it would be covered by the definition of an investment firm;
it is authorised in a third country;
it is subject to and complies with prudential rules considered by the competent authorities at least as stringent as those laid down in this Regulation or in Directive 2013/36/EU;
‘financial institution’ means an undertaking other than an institution and other than a pure industrial holding company, the principal activity of which is to acquire holdings or to pursue one or more of the activities listed in points 2 to 12 and point 15 of Annex I to Directive 2013/36/EU, including an investment firm, a financial holding company, a mixed financial holding company, an investment holding company, a payment institution within the meaning of Directive (EU) 2015/2366 of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 11 ), and an asset management company, but excluding insurance holding companies and mixed‐activity insurance holding companies as defined in points (f) and (g) of Article 212(1) of Directive 2009/138/EC;
‘financial sector entity’ means any of the following:
an institution;
a financial institution;
an ancillary services undertaking included in the consolidated financial situation of an institution;
an insurance undertaking;
a third-country insurance undertaking;
a reinsurance undertaking;
a third-country reinsurance undertaking;
an insurance holding company as defined in point (f) of Article 212(1) of Directive 2009/138/EC;
an undertaking excluded from the scope of Directive 2009/138/EC in accordance with Article 4 of that Directive;
a third-country undertaking with a main business comparable to any of the entities referred to in points (a) to (k);
‘parent institution in a Member State’ means an institution in a Member State which has an institution, a financial institution or an ancillary services undertaking as a subsidiary or which holds a participation in an institution, financial institution or ancillary services undertaking, and which is not itself a subsidiary of another institution authorised in the same Member State, or of a financial holding company or mixed financial holding company set up in the same Member State;
‘EU parent institution’ means a parent institution in a Member State which is not a subsidiary of another institution authorised in any Member State, or of a financial holding company or mixed financial holding company set up in any Member State;
‘parent investment firm in a Member State’ means a parent undertaking in a Member State that is an investment firm;
‘EU parent investment firm’ means an EU parent undertaking that is an investment firm;
‘parent credit institution in a Member State’ means a parent institution in a Member State that is a credit institution;
‘EU parent credit institution’ means an EU parent institution that is a credit institution;
‘parent financial holding company in a Member State’ means a financial holding company which is not itself a subsidiary of an institution authorised in the same Member State, or of a financial holding company or mixed financial holding company set up in the same Member State;
‘EU parent financial holding company’ means a parent financial holding company in a Member State which is not a subsidiary of an institution authorised in any Member State or of another financial holding company or mixed financial holding company set up in any Member State;
‘parent mixed financial holding company in a Member State’ means a mixed financial holding company which is not itself a subsidiary of an institution authorised in the same Member State, or of a financial holding company or mixed financial holding company set up in that same Member State;
‘EU parent mixed financial holding company’ means a parent mixed financial holding company in a Member State which is not a subsidiary of an institution authorised in any Member State or of another financial holding company or mixed financial holding company set up in any Member State;
‘central counterparty’ or ‘CCP’ means a CCP as defined in point (1) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012;
‘participation’ means participation within the meaning of the first sentence of Article 17 of Fourth Council Directive 78/660/EEC of 25 July 1978 on the annual accounts of certain types of companies ( 12 ), or the ownership, direct or indirect, of 20 % or more of the voting rights or capital of an undertaking;
‘qualifying holding’ means 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;
‘control’ means the relationship between a parent undertaking and a subsidiary, as defined in Article 1 of Directive 83/349/EEC, or the accounting standards to which an institution is subject under Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002, or a similar relationship between any natural or legal person and an undertaking;
‘close links’ means a situation in which two or more natural or legal persons are linked in any of the following ways:
participation in the form of ownership, direct or by way of control, of 20 % or more of the voting rights or capital of an undertaking;
control;
a permanent link of both or all of them to the same third person by a control relationship;
‘group of connected clients’ means any of the following:
two or more natural or legal persons who, unless it is shown otherwise, constitute a single risk because one of them, directly or indirectly, has control over the other or others;
two or more natural or legal persons between whom there is no relationship of control as described in point (a) but who are to be regarded as constituting a single risk because they are so interconnected that, if one of them were to experience financial problems, in particular funding or repayment difficulties, the other or all of the others would also be likely to encounter funding or repayment difficulties.
Notwithstanding points (a) and (b), where a central government has direct control over or is directly interconnected with more than one natural or legal person, the set consisting of the central government and all of the natural or legal persons directly or indirectly controlled by it in accordance with point (a), or interconnected with it in accordance with point (b), may be considered as not constituting a group of connected clients. Instead the existence of a group of connected clients formed by the central government and other natural or legal persons may be assessed separately for each of the persons directly controlled by it in accordance with point (a), or directly interconnected with it in accordance with point (b), and all of the natural and legal persons which are controlled by that person according to point (a) or interconnected with that person in accordance with point (b), including the central government. The same applies in cases of regional governments or local authorities to which Article 115(2) applies.
Two or more natural or legal persons who fulfil the conditions set out in point (a) or (b) because of their direct exposure to the same CCP for clearing activities purposes are not considered as constituting a group of connected clients;
‘competent authority’ means a public authority or body officially recognised by national law, which is empowered by national law to supervise institutions as part of the supervisory system in operation in the Member State concerned;
‘consolidating supervisor’ means a competent authority responsible for the exercise of supervision on a consolidated basis in accordance with Article 111 of Directive 2013/36/EU;
‘authorisation’ means an instrument issued in any form by the authorities by which the right to carry out the business is granted;
‘home Member State’ means the Member State in which an institution has been granted authorisation;
‘host Member State’ means the Member State in which an institution has a branch or in which it provides services;
‘ESCB central banks’ means the national central banks that are members of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB), and the European Central Bank (ECB);
‘central banks’ means the ESCB central banks and the central banks of third countries;
‘consolidated situation’ means the situation that results from applying the requirements of this Regulation in accordance with Part One, Title II, Chapter 2 to an institution as if that institution formed, together with one or more other entities, a single institution;
‘consolidated basis’ means on the basis of the consolidated situation;
‘sub-consolidated basis’ means on the basis of the consolidated situation of a parent institution, financial holding company or mixed financial holding company, excluding a sub-group of entities, or on the basis of the consolidated situation of a parent institution, financial holding company or mixed financial holding company that is not the ultimate parent institution, financial holding company or mixed financial holding company;
‘financial instrument’ means any of the following:
a contract that gives rise to both a financial asset of one party and a financial liability or equity instrument of another party;
an instrument specified in Section C of Annex I to Directive 2004/39/EC;
a derivative financial instrument;
a primary financial instrument;
a cash instrument.
The instruments referred to in points (a), (b) and (c) are only financial instruments if their value is derived from the price of an underlying financial instrument or another underlying item, a rate, or an index;
‘initial capital’ means the amounts and types of own funds specified in Article 12 of Directive 2013/36/EU;
‘operational risk’ means the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people and systems or from external events, and includes legal risk;
‘dilution risk’ means the risk that an amount receivable is reduced through cash or non-cash credits to the obligor;
‘probability of default’ or ‘PD’ means the probability of default of a counterparty over a one-year period;
‘loss given default’ or ‘LGD’ means the ratio of the loss on an exposure due to the default of a counterparty to the amount outstanding at default;
‘conversion factor’ means the ratio of the currently undrawn amount of a commitment that could be drawn and that would therefore be outstanding at default to the currently undrawn amount of the commitment, the extent of the commitment being determined by the advised limit, unless the unadvised limit is higher;
‘credit risk mitigation’ means a technique used by an institution to reduce the credit risk associated with an exposure or exposures which that institution continues to hold;
‘funded credit protection’ means a technique of credit risk mitigation where the reduction of the credit risk on the exposure of an institution derives from the right of that institution, in the event of the default of the counterparty or on the occurrence of other specified credit events relating to the counterparty, to liquidate, or to obtain transfer or appropriation of, or to retain certain assets or amounts, or to reduce the amount of the exposure to, or to replace it with, the amount of the difference between the amount of the exposure and the amount of a claim on the institution;
‘unfunded credit protection’ means a technique of credit risk mitigation where the reduction of the credit risk on the exposure of an institution derives from the obligation of a third party to pay an amount in the event of the default of the borrower or the occurrence of other specified credit events;
‘cash assimilated instrument’ means a certificate of deposit, a bond, including a covered bond, or any other non‐subordinated instrument, which has been issued by an institution or an investment firm, for which the institution or investment firm has already received full payment and which is to be unconditionally reimbursed by the institution or investment firm at its nominal value;
‘securitisation’ means a securitisation as defined in point (1) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402;
‘securitisation position’ means a securitisation position as defined in point (19) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402;
‘resecuritisation’ means a resecuritisation as defined in point (4) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402;
‘re-securitisation position’ means an exposure to a re-securitisation;
‘credit enhancement’ means a contractual arrangement whereby the credit quality of a position in a securitisation is improved in relation to what it would have been if the enhancement had not been provided, including the enhancement provided by more junior tranches in the securitisation and other types of credit protection;
‘securitisation special purpose entity’ or ‘SSPE’ means a securitisation special purpose entity or SSPE as defined in point (2) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402;
‘tranche’ means a tranche as defined in point (6) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402;
‘marking to market’ means the valuation of positions at readily available close out prices that are sourced independently, including exchange prices, screen prices or quotes from several independent reputable brokers;
‘marking to model’ means any valuation which has to be benchmarked, extrapolated or otherwise calculated from one or more market inputs;
‘independent price verification’ means a process by which market prices or marking to model inputs are regularly verified for accuracy and independence;
‘eligible capital’ means the following:
for the purposes of Title III of Part Two it means the sum of the following:
Tier 1 capital as referred to in Article 25, without applying the deduction in Article 36(1)(k)(i);
Tier 2 capital as referred to in Article 71 that is equal to or less than one third of Tier 1 capital as calculated pursuant to point (i) of this point;
‘recognised exchange’ means an exchange which meets all of the following conditions:
it is a regulated market or a third‐country market that is considered to be equivalent to a regulated market in accordance with the procedure set out in point (a) of Article 25(4) of Directive 2014/65/EU;
it has a clearing mechanism whereby contracts listed in Annex II are subject to daily margin requirements which, in the opinion of the competent authorities, provide appropriate protection;
‘discretionary pension benefits’ means enhanced pension benefits granted on a discretionary basis by an institution to an employee as part of that employee's variable remuneration package, which do not include accrued benefits granted to an employee under the terms of the company pension scheme;
‘mortgage lending value’ means the value of immovable property as determined by a prudent assessment of the future marketability of the property taking into account long-term sustainable aspects of the property, the normal and local market conditions, the current use and alternative appropriate uses of the property;
‘residential property’ means a residence which is occupied by the owner or the lessee of the residence, including the right to inhabit an apartment in housing cooperatives located in Sweden;
‘market value’ means, for the purposes of immovable property, the estimated amount for which the property should exchange on the date of valuation between a willing buyer and a willing seller in an arm's-length transaction after proper marketing wherein the parties had each acted knowledgeably, prudently and without compulsion;
‘applicable accounting framework’ means the accounting standards to which the institution is subject under Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002 or Directive 86/635/EEC;
‘one-year default rate’ means the ratio between the number of defaults occurred during a period that starts from one year prior to a date T and the number of obligors assigned to this grade or pool one year prior to that date;
‘speculative immovable property financing’ means loans for the purposes of the acquisition of or development or construction on land in relation to immovable property, or of and in relation to such property, with the intention of reselling for profit;
‘trade finance’ means financing, including guarantees, connected to the exchange of goods and services through financial products of fixed short-term maturity, generally of less than one year, without automatic rollover;
‘officially supported export credits’ means loans or credits to finance the export of goods and services for which an official export credit agency provides guarantees, insurance or direct financing;
‘repurchase agreement’ and ‘reverse repurchase agreement’ mean any agreement in which an institution or its counterparty transfers securities or commodities or guaranteed rights relating to title to securities or commodities where that guarantee is issued by a recognised exchange which holds the rights to the securities or commodities and the agreement does not allow an institution to transfer or pledge a particular security or commodity to more than one counterparty at one time, subject to a commitment to repurchase them, or substituted securities or commodities of the same description at a specified price on a future date specified, or to be specified, by the transferor, being a repurchase agreement for the institution selling the securities or commodities and a reverse repurchase agreement for the institution buying them;
‘repurchase transaction’ means any transaction governed by a repurchase agreement or a reverse repurchase agreement;
‘simple repurchase agreement’ means a repurchase transaction of a single asset, or of similar, non-complex assets, as opposed to a basket of assets;
‘positions held with trading intent’ means any of the following:
proprietary positions and positions arising from client servicing and market making;
positions intended to be resold short term;
positions intended to benefit from actual or expected short-term price differences between buying and selling prices or from other price or interest rate variations;
‘trading book’ means all positions in financial instruments and commodities held by an institution either with trading intent or to hedge positions held with trading intent in accordance with Article 104;
‘multilateral trading facility’ means multilateral trading facility as defined in point 15 of Article 4 of Directive 2004/39/EC;
‘qualifying central counterparty’ or ‘QCCP’ means a central counterparty that has been either authorised in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 or recognised in accordance with Article 25 of that Regulation;
‘default fund’ means a fund established by a CCP in accordance with Article 42 of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 and used in accordance with Article 45 of that Regulation;
‘pre-funded contribution to the default fund of a CCP’ means a contribution to the default fund of a CCP that is paid in by an institution;
‘trade exposure’ means a current exposure, including a variation margin due to the clearing member but not yet received, and any potential future exposure of a clearing member or a client, to a CCP arising from contracts and transactions listed in points (a), (b) and (c) of Article 301(1), as well as initial margin;
‘regulated market’ means regulated market as defined in point (14) of Article 4 of Directive 2004/39/EC;
‘leverage’ means the relative size of an institution's assets, off-balance sheet obligations and contingent obligations to pay or to deliver or to provide collateral, including obligations from received funding, made commitments, derivatives or repurchase agreements, but excluding obligations which can only be enforced during the liquidation of an institution, compared to that institution's own funds;
‘risk of excessive leverage’ means the risk resulting from an institution's vulnerability due to leverage or contingent leverage that may require unintended corrective measures to its business plan, including distressed selling of assets which might result in losses or in valuation adjustments to its remaining assets;
‘credit risk adjustment’ means the amount of specific and general loan loss provision for credit risks that has been recognised in the financial statements of the institution in accordance with the applicable accounting framework;
‘internal hedge’ means a position that materially offsets the component risk elements between a trading book position and one or more non-trading book positions or between two trading desks;
‘reference obligation’ means an obligation used for the purposes of determining the cash settlement value of a credit derivative;
‘external credit assessment institution’ or ‘ECAI’ means a credit rating agency that is registered or certified in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1060/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 September 2009 on credit rating agencies ( 13 ) or a central bank issuing credit ratings which are exempt from the application of Regulation (EC) No 1060/2009;
‘nominated ECAI’ means an ECAI nominated by an institution;
‘accumulated other comprehensive income’ has the same meaning as under International Accounting Standard (IAS) 1, as applicable under Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002;
‘basic own funds’ means basic own funds within the meaning of Article 88 of Directive 2009/138/EC;
‘Tier 1 own-fund insurance items’ means basic own-fund items of undertakings subject to the requirements of Directive 2009/138/EC where those items are classified in Tier 1 within the meaning of Directive 2009/138/EC in accordance with Article 94(1) of that Directive;
‘additional Tier 1 own-fund insurance items’ means basic own-fund items of undertakings subject to the requirements of Directive 2009/138/EC where those items are classified in Tier 1 within the meaning of Directive 2009/138/EC in accordance with Article 94(1) of that Directive and the inclusion of those items is limited by the delegated acts adopted in accordance with Article 99 of that Directive;
‘Tier 2 own-fund insurance items’ means basic own-fund items of undertakings subject to the requirements of Directive 2009/138/EC where those items are classified in Tier 2 within the meaning of Directive 2009/138/EC in accordance with Article 94(2) of that Directive;
‘Tier 3 own-fund insurance items’ means basic own-fund insurance items of undertakings subject to the requirements of Directive 2009/138/EC where those items are classified in Tier 3 within the meaning of Directive 2009/138/EC in accordance with Article 94(3) of that Directive;
‘deferred tax assets’ has the same meaning as under the applicable accounting framework;
‘deferred tax assets that rely on future profitability’ means deferred tax assets the future value of which may be realised only in the event the institution generates taxable profit in the future;
‘deferred tax liabilities’ has the same meaning as under the applicable accounting framework;
‘defined benefit pension fund assets’ means the assets of a defined pension fund or plan, as applicable, calculated after they have been reduced by the amount of obligations under the same fund or plan;
‘distributions’ means the payment of dividends or interest in any form;
‘financial undertaking’ has the same meaning as under points (25)(b) and (d) of Article 13 of Directive 2009/138/EC;
‘funds for general banking risk’ has the same meaning as under Article 38 of Directive 86/635/EEC;
‘goodwill’ has the same meaning as under the applicable accounting framework;
‘indirect holding’ means any exposure to an intermediate entity that has an exposure to capital instruments issued by a financial sector entity where, in the event the capital instruments issued by the financial sector entity were permanently written off, the loss that the institution would incur as a result would not be materially different from the loss the institution would incur from a direct holding of those capital instruments issued by the financial sector entity;
‘intangible assets’ has the same meaning as under the applicable accounting framework and includes goodwill;
‘other capital instruments’ means capital instruments issued by financial sector entities that do not qualify as Common Equity Tier 1, Additional Tier 1 or Tier 2 instruments or Tier 1 own-fund insurance items, additional Tier 1 own-fund insurance items, Tier 2 own-fund insurance items or Tier 3 own-fund insurance items;
‘other reserves’ means reserves within the meaning of the applicable accounting framework that are required to be disclosed under the applicable accounting standard, excluding any amounts already included in accumulated other comprehensive income or retained earnings;
‘own funds’ means the sum of Tier 1 capital and Tier 2 capital;
‘own funds instruments’ means capital instruments issued by the institution that qualify as Common Equity Tier 1, Additional Tier 1 or Tier 2 instruments;
‘minority interest’ means the amount of Common Equity Tier 1 capital of a subsidiary of an institution that is attributable to natural or legal persons other than those included in the prudential scope of consolidation of the institution;
‘profit’ has the same meaning as under the applicable accounting framework;
‘reciprocal cross holding’ means a holding by an institution of the own funds instruments or other capital instruments issued by financial sector entities where those entities also hold own funds instruments issued by the institution;
‘retained earnings’ means profits and losses brought forward as a result of the final application of profit or loss under the applicable accounting framework;
‘share premium account’ has the same meaning as under the applicable accounting framework;
‘temporary differences’ has the same meaning as under the applicable accounting framework;
‘synthetic holding’ means an investment by an institution in a financial instrument the value of which is directly linked to the value of the capital instruments issued by a financial sector entity;
‘cross-guarantee scheme’ means a scheme that meets all the following conditions:
the institutions fall within the same institutional protection scheme as referred to in Article 113(7) or are permanently affiliated with a network to a central body;
the institutions are fully consolidated in accordance with Article 1(1)(b), (c) or (d) or Article 1(2) of Directive 83/349/EEC and are included in the supervision on a consolidated basis of an institution which is a parent institution in a Member State in accordance with Part One, Title II, Chapter 2 of this Regulation and subject to own funds requirements;
the parent institution in a Member State and the subsidiaries are established in the same Member State and are subject to authorisation and supervision by the same competent authority;
the parent institution in a Member State and the subsidiaries have entered into a contractual or statutory liability arrangement which protects those institutions and in particular ensures their liquidity and solvency, in order to avoid bankruptcy in the case that it becomes necessary;
arrangements are in place to ensure the prompt provision of financial means in terms of capital and liquidity if required under the contractual or statutory liability arrangement referred to in point (d);
the adequacy of the arrangements referred to in points (d) and (e) is monitored on a regular basis by the competent authority;
the minimum period of notice for a voluntary exit of a subsidiary from the liability arrangement is 10 years;
the competent authority is empowered to prohibit a voluntary exit of a subsidiary from the liability arrangement;
‘distributable items’ means the amount of the profits at the end of the last financial year plus any profits brought forward and reserves available for that purpose, before distributions to holders of own funds instruments, less any losses brought forward, any profits which are non-distributable pursuant to Union or national law or the institution's by-laws and any sums placed in non-distributable reserves in accordance with national law or the statutes of the institution, in each case with respect to the specific category of own funds instruments to which Union or national law, institutions' by-laws, or statutes relate; such profits, losses and reserves being determined on the basis of the individual accounts of the institution and not on the basis of the consolidated accounts;
‘servicer’ means a servicer as defined in point (13) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402;
‘resolution authority’ means a resolution authority as defined in point (18) of Article 2(1) of Directive 2014/59/EU;
‘relevant third-country authority’ means a third-country authority as defined in Article 2(1), point (90), of Directive 2014/59/EU;
‘resolution entity’ means a resolution entity as defined in point (83a) of Article 2(1) of Directive 2014/59/EU;
‘resolution group’ means a resolution group as defined in point (83b) of Article 2(1) of Directive 2014/59/EU;
‘global systemically important institution’ or ‘G-SII’ means a G-SII that has been identified in accordance with Article 131(1) and (2) of Directive 2013/36/EU;
‘non-EU global systemically important institution’ or ‘non-EU G-SII’ means a global systemically important banking group or a bank (G-SIBs) that is not a G-SII and that is included in the list of G-SIBs published by the Financial Stability Board, as regularly updated;
‘material subsidiary’ means a subsidiary that on an individual or consolidated basis meets any of the following conditions:
the subsidiary holds more than 5 % of the consolidated risk-weighted assets of its original parent undertaking;
the subsidiary generates more than 5 % of the total operating income of its original parent undertaking;
the total exposure measure, referred to in Article 429(4) of this Regulation, of the subsidiary is more than 5 % of the consolidated total exposure measure of its original parent undertaking;
for the purpose of determining the material subsidiary, where Article 21b(2) of Directive 2013/36/EU applies, the two intermediate EU parent undertakings shall count as a single subsidiary on the basis of their consolidated situation;
‘G-SII entity’ means an entity with legal personality that is a G-SII or is part of a G-SII or of a non-EU G-SII;
‘bail-in tool’ means a bail-in tool as defined in point (57) of Article 2(1) of Directive 2014/59/EU;
‘group’ means a group of undertakings of which at least one is an institution and which consists of a parent undertaking and its subsidiaries, or of undertakings that are related to each other as set out in Article 22 of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 14 );
‘securities financing transaction’ means a repurchase transaction, a securities or commodities lending or borrowing transaction, or a margin lending transaction;
‘initial margin’ or ‘IM’ means any collateral, other than variation margin, collected from or posted to an entity to cover the current and potential future exposure of a transaction or of a portfolio of transactions in the period needed to liquidate those transactions, or to re-hedge their market risk, following the default of the counterparty to the transaction or portfolio of transactions;
‘market risk’ means the risk of losses arising from movements in market prices, including in foreign exchange rates or commodity prices;
‘foreign exchange risk’ means the risk of losses arising from movements in foreign exchange rates;
‘commodity risk’ means the risk of losses arising from movements in commodity prices;
‘trading desk’ means a well-identified group of dealers set up by the institution to jointly manage a portfolio of trading book positions in accordance with a well-defined and consistent business strategy and operating under the same risk management structure;
‘small and non-complex institution’ means an institution that meets all the following conditions:
it is not a large institution;
the total value of its assets on an individual basis or, where applicable, on a consolidated basis in accordance with this Regulation and Directive 2013/36/EU is on average equal to or less than the threshold of EUR 5 billion over the four-year period immediately preceding the current annual reporting period; Member States may lower that threshold;
it is not subject to any obligations, or is subject to simplified obligations, in relation to recovery and resolution planning in accordance with Article 4 of Directive 2014/59/EU;
its trading book business is classified as small within the meaning of Article 94(1);
the total value of its derivative positions held with trading intent does not exceed 2 % of its total on- and off-balance-sheet assets and the total value of its overall derivative positions does not exceed 5 %, both calculated in accordance with Article 273a(3);
more than 75 % of both the institution's consolidated total assets and liabilities, excluding in both cases the intragroup exposures, relate to activities with counterparties located in the European Economic Area;
the institution does not use internal models to meet the prudential requirements in accordance with this Regulation except for subsidiaries using internal models developed at the group level, provided that the group is subject to the disclosure requirements laid down in Article 433a or 433c on a consolidated basis;
the institution has not communicated to the competent authority an objection to being classified as a small and non-complex institution;
the competent authority has not decided that the institution is not to be considered a small and non-complex institution on the basis of an analysis of its size, interconnectedness, complexity or risk profile;
‘large institution’ means an institution that meets any of the following conditions:
it is a G-SII;
it has been identified as an other systemically important institution (O-SII) in accordance with Article 131(1) and (3) of Directive 2013/36/EU;
it is, in the Member State in which it is established, one of the three largest institutions in terms of total value of assets;
the total value of its assets on an individual basis or, where applicable, on the basis of its consolidated situation in accordance with this Regulation and Directive 2013/36/EU is equal to or greater than EUR 30 billion;
‘large subsidiary’ means a subsidiary that qualifies as a large institution;
‘non-listed institution’ means an institution that has not issued securities that are admitted to trading on a regulated market of any Member State, within the meaning of point (21) of Article 4(1) of Directive 2014/65/EU;
‘financial report’ means, for the purposes of Part Eight, a financial report within the meaning of Articles 4 and 5 of Directive 2004/109/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 15 );
‘commodity and emission allowance dealer’ means an undertaking the main business of which consists exclusively of the provision of investment services or activities in relation to commodity derivatives or commodity derivative contracts referred to in points (5), (6), (7), (9) and (10), derivatives of emission allowances referred to in point (4), or emission allowances referred to in point (11) of Section C of Annex I to Directive 2014/65/EU.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 June 2020.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 5
Definitions specific to capital requirements for credit risk
For the purposes of Part Three, Title II, the following definitions shall apply:
‘exposure’ means an asset or off-balance sheet item;
‘loss’ means economic loss, including material discount effects, and material direct and indirect costs associated with collecting on the instrument;
‘expected loss’ or ‘EL’ means the ratio, related to a single facility, of the amount expected to be lost on an exposure from any of the following:
a potential default of an obligor over a one-year period to the amount outstanding at default;
a potential dilution event over a one-year period to the amount outstanding at the date of occurrence of the dilution event;
‘credit obligation’ means any obligation arising from a credit contract, including principal, accrued interest and fees, owed by an obligor;
‘credit exposure’ means any on- or off -balance-sheet item, that results, or may result, in a credit obligation;
‘facility’ or ‘credit facility’ means a credit exposure arising from a contract or a set of contracts between an obligor and an institution;
‘margin of conservatism’ means an add-on incorporated in risk parameter estimates to account for the expected range of estimation errors stemming from identified deficiencies in data, methods, models, and changes to underwriting standards, risk appetite, collection and recovery policies and any other source of additional uncertainty, as well as from general estimation error;
‘appropriate adjustment’ means the impact on risk parameter estimates resulting from the application of methodologies within the estimation of risk parameters to correct the identified deficiencies in data and in estimation methods, and to account for changes to underwriting standards, risk appetite, collection and recovery policies and any other source of additional uncertainty, to the extent possible in order to avoid biases in risk parameter estimates;
‘small and medium-sized enterprise’ or ‘SME’ means a company, enterprise or undertaking which, according to its most recent consolidated accounts, has an annual turnover not exceeding EUR 50 000 000 ;
‘commitment’ means any contractual arrangement that an institution offers to a client, and is accepted by that client, to extend credit, purchase assets or issue credit substitutes; and any such arrangement that can be unconditionally cancelled by an institution at any time without prior notice to an obligor or any arrangement that can be cancelled by an institution where an obligor fails to meet the conditions set out in the facility documentation, including conditions that are required to be met by the obligor prior to any initial or subsequent drawdown under the arrangement, unless contractual arrangements meet all of the following conditions:
contractual arrangements where the institution receives no fees or commissions to establish or maintain those contractual arrangements;
contractual arrangements where the client is required to apply to the institution for the initial and each subsequent drawdown under those contractual arrangements;
contractual arrangements where the institution has full authority, regardless of the fulfilment by the client of the conditions set out in the contractual arrangement documentation, over the execution of each drawdown;
the contractual arrangements allow the institution to assess the creditworthiness of the client immediately prior to deciding on the execution of each drawdown and the institution has implemented and applies internal procedures that ensure that such an assessment is being made before the execution of each drawdown;
contractual arrangements that are offered to a corporate entity, including an SME, that is closely monitored on an ongoing basis;
‘unconditionally cancellable commitment’ means any commitment the terms of which permit the institution to cancel that commitment to the full extent allowable under consumer protection and related legal acts, where applicable, at any time without prior notice to the obligor or that effectively provide for automatic cancellation due to a deterioration in a borrower’s creditworthiness.
Article 5a
Definitions specific to crypto-assets
For the purposes of this Regulation, the following definitions apply:
‘crypto-asset’ means a crypto-asset as defined in Article 3(1), point (5), of Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 16 ) that is not a central bank digital currency;
‘electronic money token’ or ‘e-money token’ means an electronic money token or e-money token as defined in Article 3(1), point (7), of Regulation (EU) 2023/1114;
‘crypto-asset exposure’ means an asset or an off-balance-sheet item related to a crypto-asset that gives rise to credit risk, counterparty credit risk, market risk, operational risk or liquidity risk;
‘traditional asset’ means any asset other than a crypto-asset, including:
financial instruments as defined in Article 4(1), point (50), of this Regulation;
funds as defined in Article 4, point (25), of Directive (EU) 2015/2366;
deposits as defined in Article 2(1), point (3), of Directive 2014/49/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 17 ), including structured deposits;
securitisation positions in the context of a securitisation as defined in Article 2, point (1), of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402;
non-life or life insurance products falling within the classes of insurance listed in Annexes I and II to Directive 2009/138/EC or reinsurance and retrocession contracts referred to in that Directive;
pension products that, under national law, are recognised as having the primary purpose of providing the investor with an income in retirement and that entitle the investor to certain benefits;
officially recognised occupational pension schemes within the scope of Directive (EU) 2016/2341 of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 18 ) or Directive 2009/138/EC;
individual pension products for which a financial contribution from the employer is required by national law and where the employer or the employee has no choice as to the pension product or provider;
a pan-European Personal Pension Product as defined in Article 2, point (2), of Regulation (EU) 2019/1238 of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 19 );
‘tokenised traditional asset’ means a type of crypto-asset that represents a traditional asset, including an e-money token;
‘asset-referenced token’ means an asset-referenced token as defined in Article 3(1), point (6), of Regulation (EU) 2023/1114;
‘crypto-asset service’ means a crypto-asset service as defined in Article 3(1), point (16), of Regulation (EU) 2023/1114.
TITLE II
LEVEL OF APPLICATION OF REQUIREMENTS
CHAPTER 1
Application of requirements on an individual basis
Article 6
General principles
Material subsidiaries of a non-EU G-SII shall comply with Article 92b on an individual basis, where they meet all the following conditions:
they are not resolution entities;
they do not have subsidiaries;
they are not the subsidiaries of an EU parent institution.
By way of derogation from the first subparagraph of this paragraph, the institutions referred to in paragraph 1a of this Article shall comply with Article 437a and point (h) of Article 447 on an individual basis.
Institutions shall comply with the obligations laid down in Part Six and in point (d) of Article 430(1) of this Regulation on an individual basis.
The following institutions shall not be required to comply with Article 413(1) and the associated liquidity reporting requirements laid down in Part Seven A of this Regulation:
institutions which are also authorised in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012;
institutions which are also authorised in accordance with Article 16 and point (a) of Article 54(2) of Regulation (EU) No 909/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 22 ), provided that they do not perform any significant maturity transformations; and
institutions which are designated in accordance with point (b) of Article 54(2) of Regulation (EU) No 909/2014, provided that:
their activities are limited to offering banking‐type services, as referred to in Section C of the Annex to that Regulation, to central securities depositories authorised in accordance with Article 16 of that Regulation; and
they do not perform any significant maturity transformations.
Article 7
Derogation from the application of prudential requirements on an individual basis
Competent authorities may waive the application of Article 6(1) to any subsidiary of an institution, where both the subsidiary and the institution are subject to authorisation and supervision by the Member State concerned, and the subsidiary is included in the supervision on a consolidated basis of the institution which is the parent undertaking, and all of the following conditions are satisfied, in order to ensure that own funds are distributed adequately between the parent undertaking and the subsidiary:
there is no current or foreseen material practical or legal impediment to the prompt transfer of own funds or repayment of liabilities by its parent undertaking;
either the parent undertaking satisfies the competent authority regarding the prudent management of the subsidiary and has declared, with the permission of the competent authority, that it guarantees the commitments entered into by the subsidiary, or the risks in the subsidiary are of negligible interest;
the risk evaluation, measurement and control procedures of the parent undertaking cover the subsidiary;
the parent undertaking holds more than 50 % of the voting rights attached to shares in the capital of the subsidiary or has the right to appoint or remove a majority of the members of the management body of the subsidiary.
Competent authorities may waive the application of Article 6(1) to a parent institution in a Member State where that institution is subject to authorisation and supervision by the Member State concerned, and it is included in the supervision on a consolidated basis, and all the following conditions are satisfied, in order to ensure that own funds are distributed adequately among the parent undertaking and the subsidiaries:
there is no current or foreseen material practical or legal impediment to the prompt transfer of own funds or repayment of liabilities to the parent institution in a Member State;
the risk evaluation, measurement and control procedures relevant for consolidated supervision cover the parent institution in a Member State.
The competent authority which makes use of this paragraph shall inform the competent authorities of all other Member States.
Article 8
Derogation from the application of liquidity requirements on an individual basis
The competent authorities may waive in full or in part the application of Part Six to an institution and to all or some of its subsidiaries in the Union and supervise them as a single liquidity sub-group so long as they fulfil all of the following conditions:
the parent institution on a consolidated basis or a subsidiary institution on a sub-consolidated basis complies with the obligations laid down in Part Six;
the parent institution on a consolidated basis or the subsidiary institution on a sub-consolidated basis monitors and has oversight at all times over the liquidity positions of all institutions within the group or sub-group, that are subject to the waiver, monitors and has oversight at all times over the funding positions of all institutions within the group or sub-group where the net stable funding ratio (NSFR) requirement set out in Title IV of Part Six is waived, and ensures a sufficient level of liquidity, and of stable funding where the NSFR requirement set out in Title IV of Part Six is waived, for all of those institutions;
the institutions have entered into contracts that, to the satisfaction of the competent authorities, provide for the free movement of funds between them to enable them to meet their individual and joint obligations as they become due;
there is no current or foreseen material practical or legal impediment to the fulfilment of the contracts referred to in (c).
By 1 January 2014, the Commission shall report to the European Parliament and the Council on any legal obstacles which are capable of rendering impossible the application of point (c) of the first subparagraph and is invited to make a legislative proposal, if appropriate, by 31 December 2015, on which of those obstacles should be removed.
Where institutions of the single liquidity sub-group are authorised in several Member States, paragraph 1 shall only be applied after following the procedure laid down in Article 21 and only to the institutions whose competent authorities agree about the following elements:
their assessment of the compliance of the organisation and of the treatment of liquidity risk with the conditions set out in Article 86 of Directive 2013/36/EU across the single liquidity sub-group;
the distribution of amounts, location and ownership of the required liquid assets to be held within the single liquidity sub-group, where the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR) requirement as laid down in the delegated act referred to in Article 460(1) is waived, and the distribution of amounts and location of available stable funding within the single liquidity sub-group, where the NSFR requirement set out in Title IV of Part Six is waived;
the determination of minimum amounts of liquid assets to be held by institutions for which the application of the LCR requirement as laid down in the delegated act referred to in Article 460(1) is waived and the determination of minimum amounts of available stable funding to be held by institutions for which the application of the NSFR requirement set out in Title IV of Part Six is waived;
the need for stricter parameters than those set out in Part Six;
unrestricted sharing of complete information between the competent authorities;
a full understanding of the implications of such a waiver.
Article 9
Individual consolidation method
Article 10
Waiver for credit institutions permanently affiliated to a central body
Competent authorities may, in accordance with national law, partially or fully waive the application of the requirements set out in Parts Two to Eight of this Regulation and Chapter 2 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402 to one or more credit institutions situated in the same Member State and which are permanently affiliated to a central body which supervises them and which is established in the same Member State, if the following conditions are met:
the commitments of the central body and affiliated institutions are joint and several liabilities or the commitments of its affiliated institutions are entirely guaranteed by the central body;
the solvency and liquidity of the central body and of all the affiliated institutions are monitored as a whole on the basis of consolidated accounts of these institutions;
the management of the central body is empowered to issue instructions to the management of the affiliated institutions.
Member States may maintain and make use of existing national legislation regarding the application of the waiver referred to in the first subparagraph as long as it does not conflict with this Regulation or Directive 2013/36/EU.
CHAPTER 2
Prudential consolidation
Section 1
Application of requirements on a consolidated basis
Article 10a
Application of prudential requirements on a consolidated basis where investment firms are parent undertakings
For the purposes of this Chapter, investment firms and investment holding companies shall be considered to be parent financial holding companies in a Member State or EU parent financial holding companies where such investment firms or investment holding companies are parent undertakings of an institution or of an investment firm subject to this Regulation that is referred to in Article 1(2) or (5) of Regulation (EU) 2019/2033.
Article 11
General treatment
For the purpose of ensuring that the requirements of this Regulation are applied on a consolidated basis, the terms ‘institution’, ‘parent institution in a Member State’, ‘EU parent institution’ and ‘parent undertaking’, as the case may be, shall also refer to:
a financial holding company or mixed financial holding company approved in accordance with Article 21a of Directive 2013/36/EU;
a designated institution controlled by a parent financial holding company or parent mixed financial holding company where such a parent is not subject to approval in accordance with Article 21a(4) of Directive 2013/36/EU;
a financial holding company, mixed financial holding company or institution designated in accordance with point (d) of Article 21a(6) of Directive 2013/36/EU.
The consolidated situation of an undertaking referred to in point (b) of the first subparagraph of this paragraph shall be the consolidated situation of the parent financial holding company or the parent mixed financial holding company that is not subject to approval in accordance with Article 21a(4) of Directive 2013/36/EU. The consolidated situation of an undertaking referred to in point (c) of the first subparagraph of this paragraph shall be the consolidated situation of its parent financial holding company or parent mixed financial holding company.
▼M8 —————
Only EU parent undertakings that are a material subsidiary of a non-EU G-SII and are not resolution entities shall comply with Article 92b of this Regulation on a consolidated basis to the extent and in the manner set out in Article 18 of this Regulation. Where Article 21b(2) of Directive 2013/36/EU applies, the two intermediate EU parent undertakings jointly identified as a material subsidiary shall each comply with Article 92b of this Regulation on the basis of their consolidated situation.
EU parent institutions shall comply with Part Six and point (d) of Article 430(1) of this Regulation on the basis of their consolidated situation where the group comprises one or more credit institutions or investment firms that are authorised to provide the investment services and activities listed in points (3) and (6) of Section A of Annex I to Directive 2014/65/EU.
Where a waiver has been granted under Article 8(1) to (5), the institutions and, where applicable, the financial holding companies or mixed financial holding companies that are part of a liquidity sub‐group shall comply with Part Six and point (d) of Article 430(1) of this Regulation on a consolidated basis or on the sub‐consolidated basis of the liquidity sub‐group.
The application of the approach set out in the first subparagraph shall be without prejudice to effective supervision on a consolidated basis and shall neither entail disproportionate adverse effects on the whole or parts of the financial system in other Member States or in the Union as a whole nor form or create an obstacle to the functioning of the internal market.
▼M8 —————
Article 12a
Consolidated calculation for G-SIIs with multiple resolution entities
Where at least two G-SII entities that are part of the same G-SII are resolution entities or third-country entities that would be resolution entities if they were established in the Union, the EU parent institution of that G-SII shall calculate the amount of own funds and eligible liabilities referred to in Article 92a(1), point (a):
for each resolution entity or third-country entity that would be a resolution entity if it were established in the Union;
for the EU parent institution as if it were the only resolution entity of the G-SII.
The calculation referred to in point (b) of the first subparagraph shall be undertaken on the basis of the consolidated situation of the EU parent institution.
Resolution authorities shall act in accordance with Article 45d(4) and Article 45h(2) of Directive 2014/59/EU.
Article 13
Application of disclosure requirements on a consolidated basis
Large subsidiaries of EU parent institutions shall disclose the information specified in Articles 437, 438, 440, 442, 450, 451, 451a and 453 on an individual basis or, where applicable in accordance with this Regulation and Directive 2013/36/EU, on a sub-consolidated basis.
The second subparagraph of paragraph 1 shall apply to subsidiaries of parent undertakings established in a third country where those subsidiaries qualify as large subsidiaries.
Article 14
Application of requirements of Article 5 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402 on a consolidated basis
▼M9 —————
Section 2
Methods for prudential consolidation
Article 18
Methods of prudential consolidation
For the purposes of Article 11(3a), institutions that are required to comply with the requirements referred to in Article 92a or 92b on a consolidated basis shall carry out a full consolidation of all institutions and financial institutions that are their subsidiaries in the relevant resolution groups.
Competent authorities shall determine whether and how consolidation is to be carried out in the following cases:
where, in the opinion of the competent authorities, an institution exercises a significant influence over one or more institutions or financial institutions, but without holding a participation or other capital ties in those institutions; and
where two or more institutions or financial institutions are placed under single management other than pursuant to a contract, clauses of their memoranda or articles of association.
In particular, competent authorities may permit or require the use of the method provided for in Article 22(7), (8) and (9) of Directive 2013/34/EU. That method shall not, however, constitute inclusion of the undertakings concerned in consolidated supervision.
By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, competent authorities may allow or require institutions to apply a different method to such subsidiaries or participations, including the method required by the applicable accounting framework, provided that:
the institution does not already apply the equity method on 28 December 2020;
it would be unduly burdensome to apply the equity method or the equity method does not adequately reflect the risks that the undertaking referred to in the first subparagraph poses to the institution; and
the method applied does not result in full or proportional consolidation of that undertaking.
Competent authorities may require full or proportional consolidation of a subsidiary or an undertaking in which an institution holds a participation where that subsidiary or undertaking is not an institution, financial institution or ancillary services undertaking and where all the following conditions are met:
the undertaking is not an insurance undertaking, a third-country insurance undertaking, a reinsurance undertaking, a third-country reinsurance undertaking, an insurance holding company or an undertaking excluded from the scope of Directive 2009/138/EC in accordance with Article 4 of that Directive;
there is a substantial risk that the institution decides to provide financial support to that undertaking in stressed conditions, in the absence of, or in excess of any contractual obligations to provide such support.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 31 December 2020.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
In light of EBA’s findings, the Commission shall, where appropriate, submit to the European Parliament and to the Council a legislative proposal to make adjustments to the relevant definitions or the scope of prudential consolidation.
Section 3
Scope of prudential consolidation
Article 19
Entities excluded from the scope of prudential consolidation
An institution, a financial institution or an ancillary services undertaking which is a subsidiary or an undertaking in which a participation is held, need not to be included in the consolidation where the total amount of assets and off-balance sheet items of the undertaking concerned is less than the smaller of the following two amounts:
EUR 10 million;
1 % of the total amount of assets and off-balance sheet items of the parent undertaking or the undertaking that holds the participation.
The competent authorities responsible for exercising supervision on a consolidated basis pursuant to Article 111 of Directive 2013/36/EU may on a case-by-case basis decide in the following cases that an institution, financial institution or ancillary services undertaking which is a subsidiary or in which a participation is held need not be included in the consolidation:
where the undertaking concerned is situated in a third country where there are legal impediments to the transfer of the necessary information;
where the undertaking concerned is of negligible interest only with respect to the objectives of monitoring institutions;
where, in the opinion of the competent authorities responsible for exercising supervision on a consolidated basis, the consolidation of the financial situation of the undertaking concerned would be inappropriate or misleading as far as the objectives of the supervision of institutions are concerned.
Article 20
Joint decisions on prudential requirements
The competent authorities shall work together, in full consultation:
in the case of applications for the permissions referred to in Article 143(1), Article 151(4) and (9), Article 283, Article 312(2) and Article363 respectively submitted by an EU parent institution and its subsidiaries, or jointly by the subsidiaries of an EU parent financial holding company or EU parent mixed financial holding company, to decide whether or not to grant the permission sought and to determine the terms and conditions, if any, to which such permission should be subject;
for the purposes of determining whether the criteria for a specific intragroup treatment as referred to in Article 422(9) and Article 425(5) complemented by the EBA regulatory technical standards referred to in Article 422(10) and Article 425(6) are met.
Applications shall be submitted only to the consolidating supervisor.
The application referred to in Article 312(2), shall include a description of the methodology used for allocating operational risk capital between the different entities of the group. The application shall indicate whether and how diversification effects are intended to be factored in the risk measurement system.
The competent authorities shall do everything within their power to reach a joint decision within six months on:
the application referred to in point (a) of paragraph 1;
the assessment of the criteria and the determination of the specific treatment referred to in point (b) of paragraph 1.
This joint decision shall be set out in a document containing the fully reasoned decision which shall be provided to the applicant by the competent authority referred to in paragraph 1.
The period referred to in paragraph 2 shall begin:
on the date of receipt of the complete application referred to in point (a) of paragraph 1 by the consolidating supervisor. The consolidating supervisor shall forward the complete application to the other competent authorities without delay;
on the date of receipt by competent authorities of a report prepared by the consolidating supervisor analysing intragroup commitments within the group.
The decision shall be set out in a document containing the fully reasoned decision and shall take into account the views and reservations of the other competent authorities expressed during the six months period.
The decision shall be provided to the EU parent institution, the EU parent financial holding company or to the EU parent mixed financial holding company and the other competent authorities by the consolidating supervisor.
If, at the end of the six-month period, any of the competent authorities concerned has referred the matter to EBA in accordance with Article 19 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, the consolidating supervisor shall defer its decision on point (a) of paragraph 1 of this Article and await any decision that EBA may take in accordance with Article 19(3) of that Regulation on its decision, and shall take its decision in conformity with the decision of EBA. The six-month period shall be deemed the conciliation period within the meaning of that Regulation. EBA shall take its decision within one month. The matter shall not be referred to EBA after the end of the six-month period or after a joint decision has been reached.
The decision shall be set out in a document containing the fully reasoned decision and shall take into account the views and reservations of the other competent authorities expressed during the six-month period.
The decision shall be provided to the consolidating supervisor that informs the EU parent institution, the EU parent financial holding company or the EU parent mixed financial holding company.
If, at the end of the six-month period, the consolidating supervisor has referred the matter to EBA in accordance with Article 19 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, the competent authority responsible for the supervision of the subsidiary on an individual basis shall defer its decision on point (b) of paragraph 1 of this Article and await any decision that EBA may take in accordance with Article 19(3) of that Regulation on its decision, and shall take its decision in conformity with the decision of EBA. The six-month period shall be deemed the conciliation period within the meaning of that Regulation. EBA shall take its decision within one month. The matter shall not be referred to EBA after the end of the six-month period or after a joint decision has been reached.
EBA shall submit those draft implementing technical standards to the Commission by 10 July 2025.
Power is conferred on the Commission to adopt the implementing technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 21
Joint decisions on the level of application of liquidity requirements
The joint decision shall be reached within six months after submission by the consolidating supervisor of a report identifying single liquidity sub-groups on the basis of the criteria laid down in Article 8. In the event of disagreement during the six-month period, the consolidating supervisor shall consult EBA at the request of any of the other competent authorities concerned. The consolidating supervisor may consult EBA on its own initiative.
The joint decision may also impose constraints on the location and ownership of liquid assets and require minimum amounts of liquid assets to be held by institutions that are exempt from the application of Part Six.
The joint decision shall be set out in a document containing the fully reasoned decision which shall be submitted to the parent institution of the liquidity subgroup by the consolidating supervisor.
However, any competent authority may during the six-month period refer to EBA the question whether the conditions in points (a) to (d) of Article 8(1) are met. In that case, EBA may carry out its non-binding mediation in accordance with Article 31(c) of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 and all the competent authorities involved shall defer their decisions pending the conclusion of the non-binding mediation. Where, during the mediation, no agreement has been reached by the competent authorities within three months, each competent authority responsible for supervision on an individual basis shall take its own decision taking into account the proportionality of benefits and risks at the level of the Member State of the parent institution and the proportionality of benefits and risks at the level of the Member State of the subsidiary. The matter shall not be referred to EBA after the end of the six-month period or after a joint decision has been reached.
The joint decision referred to in paragraph 1 and the decisions referred to in the second subparagraph of this paragraph shall be binding.
Article 22
Sub-consolidation in case of entities in third countries
Article 23
Undertakings in third countries
For the purposes of applying supervision on a consolidated basis in accordance with this Chapter, the terms ‘investment firm’, ‘credit institution’, financial institution', and ‘institution’ shall also apply to undertakings established in third countries, which, were they established in the Union, would fulfil the definitions of those terms in Article 4.
Article 24
Valuation of assets and off-balance sheet items
PART TWO
OWN FUNDS AND ELIGIBLE LIABILITIES
TITLE I
ELEMENTS OF OWN FUNDS
CHAPTER 1
Tier 1 capital
Article 25
Tier 1 capital
The Tier 1 capital of an institution consists of the sum of the Common Equity Tier 1 capital and Additional Tier 1 capital of the institution.
CHAPTER 2
Common Equity Tier 1 capital
Section 1
Common Equity Tier 1 items and instruments
Article 26
Common Equity Tier 1 items
Common Equity Tier 1 items of institutions consist of the following:
capital instruments, provided that the conditions laid down in Article 28 or, where applicable, Article 29 are met;
share premium accounts related to the instruments referred to in point (a);
retained earnings;
accumulated other comprehensive income;
other reserves;
funds for general banking risk.
The items referred to in points (c) to (f) shall be recognised as Common Equity Tier 1 only where they are available to the institution for unrestricted and immediate use to cover risks or losses as soon as these occur.
For the purposes of point (c) of paragraph 1, institutions may include interim or year-end profits in Common Equity Tier 1 capital before the institution has taken a formal decision confirming the final profit or loss of the institution for the year only with the prior permission of the competent authority. The competent authority shall grant permission where the following conditions are met:
those profits have been verified by persons independent of the institution that are responsible for the auditing of the accounts of that institution;
the institution has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the competent authority that any foreseeable charge or dividend has been deducted from the amount of those profits.
A verification of the interim or year-end profits of the institution shall provide an adequate level of assurance that those profits have been evaluated in accordance with the principles set out in the applicable accounting framework.
By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, institutions may classify as Common Equity Tier 1 instruments subsequent issuances of a form of Common Equity Tier 1 instruments for which they have already received that permission, provided that both of the following conditions are met:
the provisions governing those subsequent issuances are substantially the same as the provisions governing those issuances for which the institutions have already received permission;
institutions have notified those subsequent issuances to the competent authorities sufficiently in advance of their classification as Common Equity Tier 1 instruments.
Competent authorities shall consult EBA before granting permission for new forms of capital instruments to be classified as Common Equity Tier 1 instruments. Competent authorities shall have due regard to EBA's opinion and, where they decide to deviate from it, shall write to EBA within three months from the date of receipt of EBA's opinion setting out the rationale for deviating from the relevant opinion. This subparagraph does not apply to the capital instruments referred to in Article 31.
On the basis of information collected from competent authorities, EBA shall establish, maintain and publish a list of all forms of capital instruments in each Member State that qualify as Common Equity Tier 1 instruments. In accordance with Article 35 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, EBA may collect any information in connection with Common Equity Tier 1 instruments that it considers necessary to establish compliance with the criteria set out in Article 28 or, where applicable, Article 29 of this Regulation and for the purpose of maintaining and updating the list referred to in this subparagraph.
Following the review process set out in Article 80 and where there is sufficient evidence that the relevant capital instruments do not meet or have ceased to meet the criteria set out in Article 28 or, where applicable, Article 29, EBA may decide not to add those instruments to the list referred to in the fourth subparagraph or remove them from that list, as the case may be. EBA shall make an announcement to that effect that shall also refer to the relevant competent authority's position on the matter. This subparagraph does not apply to the capital instruments referred to in Article 31.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 July 2013.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 27
Capital instruments of mutuals, cooperative societies, savings institutions or similar institutions in Common Equity Tier 1 items
Common Equity Tier 1 items shall include any capital instrument issued by an institution under its statutory terms provided that the following conditions are met:
the institution is of a type that is defined under applicable national law and which competent authorities consider to qualify as any of the following:
a mutual;
a cooperative society;
a savings institution;
a similar institution;
a credit institution which is wholly owned by one of the institutions referred to in points (i) to (iv) and has approval from the relevant competent authority to make use of the provisions in this Article, provided that, and for as long as, 100 % of the ordinary shares in issue in the credit institution are held directly or indirectly by an institution referred to in those points;
the conditions laid down in Articles 28 or, where applicable, Article 29, are met.
Those mutuals, cooperative societies or savings institutions recognised as such under applicable national law prior to 31 December 2012 shall continue to be classified as such for the purposes of this Part, provided that they continue to meet the criteria that determined such recognition.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 July 2013.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 28
Common Equity Tier 1 instruments
Capital instruments shall qualify as Common Equity Tier 1 instruments only if all the following conditions are met:
the instruments are issued directly by the institution with the prior approval of the owners of the institution or, where permitted under applicable national law, the management body of the institution;
the instruments are fully paid up and the acquisition of ownership of those instruments is not funded directly or indirectly by the institution;
the instruments meet all the following conditions as regards their classification:
they qualify as capital within the meaning of Article 22 of Directive 86/635/EEC;
they are classified as equity within the meaning of the applicable accounting framework;
they are classified as equity capital for the purposes of determining balance sheet insolvency, where applicable under national insolvency law;
the instruments are clearly and separately disclosed on the balance sheet in the financial statements of the institution;
the instruments are perpetual;
the principal amount of the instruments may not be reduced or repaid, except in either of the following cases:
the liquidation of the institution;
discretionary repurchases of the instruments or other discretionary means of reducing capital, where the institution has received the prior permission of the competent authority in accordance with Article 77;
the provisions governing the instruments do not indicate expressly or implicitly that the principal amount of the instruments would or might be reduced or repaid other than in the liquidation of the institution, and the institution does not otherwise provide such an indication prior to or at issuance of the instruments, except in the case of instruments referred to in Article 27 where the refusal by the institution to redeem such instruments is prohibited under applicable national law;
the instruments meet the following conditions as regards distributions:
there is no preferential distribution treatment regarding the order of distribution payments, including in relation to other Common Equity Tier 1 instruments, and the terms governing the instruments do not provide preferential rights to payment of distributions;
distributions to holders of the instruments may be paid only out of distributable items;
the conditions governing the instruments do not include a cap or other restriction on the maximum level of distributions, except in the case of the instruments referred to in Article 27;
the level of distributions is not determined on the basis of the amount for which the instruments were purchased at issuance, except in the case of the instruments referred to in Article 27;
the conditions governing the instruments do not include any obligation for the institution to make distributions to their holders and the institution is not otherwise subject to such an obligation;
non-payment of distributions does not constitute an event of default of the institution;
the cancellation of distributions imposes no restrictions on the institution;
compared to all the capital instruments issued by the institution, the instruments absorb the first and proportionately greatest share of losses as they occur, and each instrument absorbs losses to the same degree as all other Common Equity Tier 1 instruments;
the instruments rank below all other claims in the event of insolvency or liquidation of the institution;
the instruments entitle their owners to a claim on the residual assets of the institution, which, in the event of its liquidation and after the payment of all senior claims, is proportionate to the amount of such instruments issued and is not fixed or subject to a cap, except in the case of the capital instruments referred to in Article 27;
the instruments are neither secured nor subject to a guarantee that enhances the seniority of the claim by any of the following:
the institution or its subsidiaries;
the parent undertaking of the institution or its subsidiaries;
the parent financial holding company or its subsidiaries;
the mixed activity holding company or its subsidiaries;
the mixed financial holding company and its subsidiaries;
any undertaking that has close links with the entities referred to in points (i) to (v);
the instruments are not subject to any arrangement, contractual or otherwise, that enhances the seniority of claims under the instruments in insolvency or liquidation.
The condition set out in point (j) of the first subparagraph shall be deemed to be met, notwithstanding the instruments are included in Additional Tier 1 or Tier 2 by virtue of Article 484(3), provided that they rank pari passu.
For the purposes of point (b) of the first subparagraph, only the part of a capital instrument that is fully paid up shall be eligible to qualify as a Common Equity Tier 1 instrument.
The condition laid down in point (f) of paragraph 1 shall be deemed to be met notwithstanding the reduction of the principal amount of the capital instrument within a resolution procedure or as a consequence of a write down of capital instruments required by the resolution authority responsible for the institution.
The condition laid down in point (g) of paragraph 1 shall be deemed to be met notwithstanding the provisions governing the capital instrument indicating expressly or implicitly that the principal amount of the instrument would or might be reduced within a resolution procedure or as a consequence of a write down of capital instruments required by the resolution authority responsible for the institution.
The condition set out in point (h)(v) of the first subparagraph of paragraph 1 shall be considered to be met notwithstanding a subsidiary being subject to a profit and loss transfer agreement with its parent undertaking, according to which the subsidiary is obliged to transfer, following the preparation of its annual financial statements, its annual result to the parent undertaking, where all the following conditions are met:
the parent undertaking owns 90 % or more of the voting rights and capital of the subsidiary;
the parent undertaking and the subsidiary are located in the same Member State;
the agreement was concluded for legitimate taxation purposes;
in preparing the annual financial statement, the subsidiary has discretion to decrease the amount of distributions by allocating a part or all of its profits to its own reserves or funds for general banking risk before making any payment to its parent undertaking;
the parent undertaking is obliged under the agreement to fully compensate the subsidiary for all losses of the subsidiary;
the agreement is subject to a notice period according to which the agreement can be terminated only by the end of an accounting year, with such termination taking effect no earlier than the beginning of the following accounting year, leaving the parent undertaking's obligation to fully compensate the subsidiary for all losses incurred during the current accounting year unchanged.
Where an institution has entered into a profit and loss transfer agreement, it shall notify the competent authority without delay and provide the competent authority with a copy of the agreement. The institution shall also notify the competent authority without delay of any changes to the profit and loss transfer agreement and the termination thereof. An institution shall not enter into more than one profit and loss transfer agreement.
EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify the following:
the applicable forms and nature of indirect funding of own funds instruments;
whether and when multiple distributions would constitute a disproportionate drag on own funds;
the meaning of preferential distributions.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 July 2013.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 29
Capital instruments issued by mutuals, cooperative societies, savings institutions and similar institutions
The following conditions shall be met as regards redemption of the capital instruments:
except where prohibited under applicable national law, the institution shall be able to refuse the redemption of the instruments;
where the refusal by the institution of the redemption of instruments is prohibited under applicable national law, the provisions governing the instruments shall give the institution the ability to limit their redemption;
refusal to redeem the instruments, or the limitation of the redemption of the instruments where applicable, may not constitute an event of default of the institution.
The condition laid down in the first subparagraph is without prejudice to the possibility for a mutual, cooperative society, savings institution or a similar institution to recognise within Common Equity Tier 1 instruments that do not afford voting rights to the holder and that meet all the following conditions:
the claim of the holders of the non-voting instruments in the insolvency or liquidation of the institution is proportionate to the share of the total Common Equity Tier 1 instruments that those non-voting instruments represent;
the instruments otherwise qualify as Common Equity Tier 1 instruments.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 July 2013.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 30
Consequences of the conditions for Common Equity Tier 1 instruments ceasing to be met
The following shall apply where, in the case of a Common Equity Tier 1 instrument, the conditions laid down in Article 28 or, where applicable, Article 29 cease to be met:
that instrument shall immediately cease to qualify as a Common Equity Tier 1 instrument;
the share premium accounts that relate to that instrument shall immediately cease to qualify as Common Equity Tier 1 items.
Article 31
Capital instruments subscribed by public authorities in emergency situations
In emergency situations, competent authorities may permit institutions to include in Common Equity Tier 1 capital instruments that comply at least with the conditions laid down in points (b) to (e) of Article 28(1) where all the following conditions are met:
the capital instruments are issued after 1 January 2014;
the capital instruments are considered State aid by the Commission;
the capital instruments are issued within the context of recapitalisation measures pursuant to State aid- rules existing at the time;
the capital instruments are fully subscribed and held by the State or a relevant public authority or public-owned entity;
the capital instruments are able to absorb losses;
except for the capital instruments referred to in Article 27, in the event of liquidation, the capital instruments entitle their owners to a claim on the residual assets of the institution after the payment of all senior claims;
there are adequate exit mechanisms of the State or, where applicable, a relevant public authority or public-owned entity;
the competent authority has granted its prior permission and has published its decision together with an explanation of that decision.
Section 2
Prudential filters
Article 32
Securitised assets
An institution shall exclude from any element of own funds any increase in its equity under the applicable accounting framework that results from securitised assets, including the following:
such an increase associated with future margin income that results in a gain on sale for the institution;
where the institution is the originator of a securitisation, net gains that arise from the capitalisation of future income from the securitised assets that provide credit enhancement to positions in the securitisation.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 July 2013.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 33
Cash flow hedges and changes in the value of own liabilities
Institutions shall not include the following items in any element of own funds:
the fair value reserves related to gains or losses on cash flow hedges of financial instruments that are not valued at fair value, including projected cash flows;
gains or losses on liabilities of the institution that are valued at fair value that result from changes in the own credit standing of the institution;
fair value gains and losses on derivative liabilities of the institution that result from changes in the own credit risk of the institution.
Without prejudice to point (b) of paragraph 1, institutions may include the amount of gains and losses on their liabilities in own funds where all the following conditions are met:
the liabilities are in the form of bonds as referred to in Article 52(4) of Directive 2009/65/EC;
the changes in the value of the institution's assets and liabilities are due to the same changes in the institution's own credit standing;
there is a close correspondence between the value of the bonds referred to in point (a) and the value of the institution's assets;
it is possible to redeem the mortgage loans by buying back the bonds financing the mortgage loans at market or nominal value.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 30 September 2013.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 34
Additional value adjustments
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 10 July 2026.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 35
Unrealised gains and losses measured at fair value
Except in the case of the items referred to in Article 33, institutions shall not make adjustments to remove from their own funds unrealised gains or losses on their assets or liabilities measured at fair value.
Section 3
Deductions from Common Equity Tier 1 items, exemptions and alternatives
Sub-Section 1
Deductions from Common Equity Tier 1 items
Article 36
Deductions from Common Equity Tier 1 items
Institutions shall deduct the following from Common Equity Tier 1 items:
losses for the current financial year;
intangible assets with the exception of prudently valued software assets the value of which is not negatively affected by resolution, insolvency or liquidation of the institution;
deferred tax assets that rely on future profitability;
for institutions calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts using the Internal Ratings Based Approach (the IRB Approach), negative amounts resulting from the calculation of expected loss amounts laid down in Articles 158 and 159;
defined benefit pension fund assets on the balance sheet of the institution;
direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by an institution of own Common Equity Tier 1 instruments, including own Common Equity Tier 1 instruments that an institution is under an actual or contingent obligation to purchase by virtue of an existing contractual obligation;
direct, indirect and synthetic holdings of the Common Equity Tier 1 instruments of financial sector entities where those entities have a reciprocal cross holding with the institution that the competent authority considers to have been designed to inflate artificially the own funds of the institution;
the applicable amount of direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of Common Equity Tier 1 instruments of financial sector entities where the institution does not have a significant investment in those entities;
the applicable amount of direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of the Common Equity Tier 1 instruments of financial sector entities where the institution has a significant investment in those entities;
the amount of items required to be deducted from Additional Tier 1 items pursuant to Article 56 that exceeds the Additional Tier 1 items of the institution;
the exposure amount of the following items which qualify for a risk weight of 1 250 %, where the institution deducts that exposure amount from the amount of Common Equity Tier 1 items as an alternative to applying a risk weight of 1 250 %:
qualifying holdings outside the financial sector;
securitisation positions, in accordance with point (b) of Article 244(1), point (b) of Article 245(1) and Article 253;
free deliveries, in accordance with Article 379(3);
positions in a basket for which an institution cannot determine the risk weight under the IRB Approach, in accordance with Article 153(8);
equity exposures under an internal models approach, in accordance with Article 155(4).
any tax charge relating to Common Equity Tier 1 items foreseeable at the moment of its calculation, except where the institution suitably adjusts the amount of Common Equity Tier 1 items insofar as such tax charges reduce the amount up to which those items may be used to cover risks or losses;
the applicable amount of insufficient coverage for non-performing exposures;
for a minimum value commitment referred to in Article 132c(2), any amount by which the current market value of the units or shares in CIUs underlying the minimum value commitment falls short of the present value of the minimum value commitment and for which the institution has not already recognised a reduction of Common Equity Tier 1 items.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 July 2013.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify the types of capital instruments of financial institutions and, in consultation with the European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority) (EIOPA) established by Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 ( 23 ), of third country insurance and reinsurance undertakings, and of undertakings excluded from the scope of Directive 2009/138/EC in accordance with Article 4 of that Directive that shall be deducted from the following elements of own funds:
Common Equity Tier 1 items;
Additional Tier 1 items;
Tier 2 items.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 July 2013.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 June 2020.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 37
Deduction of intangible assets
Institutions shall determine the amount of intangible assets to be deducted in accordance with the following:
the amount to be deducted shall be reduced by the amount of associated deferred tax liabilities that would be extinguished if the intangible assets became impaired or were derecognised under the applicable accounting framework;
the amount to be deducted shall include goodwill included in the valuation of significant investments of the institution;
the amount to be deducted shall be reduced by the amount of the accounting revaluation of the subsidiaries' intangible assets derived from the consolidation of subsidiaries attributable to persons other than the undertakings included in the consolidation pursuant to Chapter 2 of Title II of Part One.
Article 38
Deduction of deferred tax assets that rely on future profitability
The amount of deferred tax assets that rely on future profitability may be reduced by the amount of the associated deferred tax liabilities of the institution, provided the following conditions are met:
the entity has a legally enforceable right under applicable national law to set off those current tax assets against current tax liabilities;
the deferred tax assets and the deferred tax liabilities relate to taxes levied by the same tax authority and on the same taxable entity.
The amount of associated deferred tax liabilities referred to in paragraph 4 shall be allocated between the following:
deferred tax assets that rely on future profitability and arise from temporary differences that are not deducted in accordance with Article 48(1);
all other deferred tax assets that rely on future profitability.
Institutions shall allocate the associated deferred tax liabilities according to the proportion of deferred tax assets that rely on future profitability that the items referred to in points (a) and (b) represent.
Article 39
Tax overpayments, tax loss carry backs and deferred tax assets that do not rely on future profitability
The following items shall not be deducted from own funds and shall be subject to a risk weight in accordance with Chapter 2 or 3 of Title II of Part Three, as applicable:
overpayments of tax by the institution for the current year;
current year tax losses of the institution carried back to previous years that give rise to a claim on, or a receivable from, a central government, regional government or local tax authority.
►M8 Deferred tax assets that do not rely on future profitability shall be limited to deferred tax assets which were created before 23 November 2016 and which arise from temporary differences, where all the following conditions are met: ◄
they are automatically and mandatorily replaced without delay with a tax credit in the event that the institution reports a loss when the annual financial statements of the institution are formally approved, or in the event of liquidation or insolvency of the institution;
an institution is able under the applicable national tax law to offset a tax credit referred to in point (a) against any tax liability of the institution or any other undertaking included in the same consolidation as the institution for tax purposes under that law or any other undertaking subject to the supervision on a consolidated basis in accordance with Chapter 2 of Title II of Part One;
where the amount of tax credits referred to in point (b) exceeds the tax liabilities referred to in that point, any such excess is replaced without delay with a direct claim on the central government of the Member State in which the institution is incorporated.
Institutions shall apply a risk weight of 100 % to deferred tax assets where the conditions laid down in points (a), (b) and (c) are met.
Article 40
Deduction of negative amounts resulting from the calculation of expected loss amounts
The amount to be deducted in accordance with point (d) of Article 36(1) shall not be reduced by a rise in the level of deferred tax assets that rely on future profitability, or other additional tax effects, that could occur if provisions were to rise to the level of expected losses referred to in Section 3 of Chapter 3 of Title II of Part Three.
Article 41
Deduction of defined benefit pension fund assets
For the purposes of point (e) of Article 36(1), the amount of defined benefit pension fund assets to be deducted shall be reduced by the following:
the amount of any associated deferred tax liability which could be extinguished if the assets became impaired or were derecognised under the applicable accounting framework;
the amount of assets in the defined benefit pension fund which the institution has an unrestricted ability to use, provided that the institution has received the prior permission of the competent authority.
Those assets used to reduce the amount to be deducted shall receive a risk weight in accordance with Chapter 2 or 3 of Title II of Part Three, as applicable.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 July 2013.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 42
Deduction of holdings of own Common Equity Tier 1 instruments
For the purposes of point (f) of Article 36(1), institutions shall calculate holdings of own Common Equity Tier 1 instruments on the basis of gross long positions subject to the following exceptions:
institutions may calculate the amount of holdings of own Common Equity Tier 1 instruments on the basis of the net long position provided that both the following conditions are met:
the long and short positions are in the same underlying exposure and the short positions involve no counterparty risk;
either both the long and the short positions are held in the trading book or both are held in the non-trading book;
institutions shall determine the amount to be deducted for direct, indirect and synthetic holdings of index securities by calculating the underlying exposure to own Common Equity Tier 1 instruments included in those indices;
institutions may net gross long positions in own Common Equity Tier 1 instruments resulting from holdings of index securities against short positions in own Common Equity Tier 1 instruments resulting from short positions in the underlying indices, including where those short positions involve counterparty risk, provided that both the following conditions are met:
the long and short positions are in the same underlying indices;
either both the long and the short positions are held in the trading book or both are held in the non-trading book.
Article 43
Significant investment in a financial sector entity
For the purposes of deduction, a significant investment of an institution in a financial sector entity shall arise where any of the following conditions is met:
the institution owns more than 10 % of the Common Equity Tier 1 instruments issued by that entity;
the institution has close links with that entity and owns Common Equity Tier 1 instruments issued by that entity;
the institution owns Common Equity Tier 1 instruments issued by that entity and the entity is not included in consolidation pursuant to Chapter 2 of Title II of Part One but is included in the same accounting consolidation as the institution for the purposes of financial reporting under the applicable accounting framework.
Article 44
Deduction of holdings of Common Equity Tier 1 instruments of financial sector entities and where an institution has a reciprocal cross holding designed artificially to inflate own funds
Institutions shall make the deductions referred to in points (g), (h) and (i) of Article 36(1) in accordance with the following:
holdings of Common Equity Tier 1 instruments and other capital instruments of financial sector entities shall be calculated on the basis of the gross long positions;
Tier 1 own-fund insurance items shall be treated as holdings of Common Equity Tier 1 instruments for the purposes of deduction.
Article 45
Deduction of holdings of Common Equity Tier 1 instruments of financial sector entities
Institutions shall make the deductions required by points (h) and (i) of Article 36(1) in accordance with the following provisions:
they may calculate direct, indirect and synthetic holdings of Common Equity Tier 1 instruments of the financial sector entities on the basis of the net long position in the same underlying exposure provided that both the following conditions are met:
the maturity date of the short position is either the same as, or later than the maturity date of the long position or the residual maturity of the short position is at least one year;
either both the long position and the short position are held in the trading book or both are held in the non-trading book;
they shall determine the amount to be deducted for direct, indirect and synthetic holdings of index securities by calculating the underlying exposure to the capital instruments of the financial sector entities in those indices.
Article 46
Deduction of holdings of Common Equity Tier 1 instruments where an institution does not have a significant investment in a financial sector entity
For the purposes of point (h) of Article 36(1), institutions shall calculate the applicable amount to be deducted by multiplying the amount referred to in point (a) of this paragraph by the factor derived from the calculation referred to in point (b) of this paragraph:
the aggregate amount by which the direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of the Common Equity Tier 1, Additional Tier 1 and Tier 2 instruments of financial sector entities in which the institution does not have a significant investment exceeds 10 % of the aggregate amount of Common Equity Tier 1 items of the institution calculated after applying the following to Common Equity Tier 1 items:
Articles 32 to 35;
the deductions referred to in points (a) to (g), points (k)(ii) to (v) and point (l) of Article 36(1), excluding the amount to be deducted for deferred tax assets that rely on future profitability and arise from temporary differences;
Articles 44 and 45;
the amount of direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of the Common Equity Tier 1 instruments of those financial sector entities in which the institution does not have a significant investment divided by the aggregate amount of direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of the Common Equity Tier 1, Additional Tier 1 and Tier 2 instruments of those financial sector entities.
The amount to be deducted pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be apportioned across all Common Equity Tier 1 instruments held. Institutions shall determine the amount of each Common Equity Tier 1 instrument that is deducted pursuant to paragraph 1 by multiplying the amount specified in point (a) of this paragraph by the proportion specified in point (b) of this paragraph:
the amount of holdings required to be deducted pursuant to paragraph 1;
the proportion of the aggregate amount of direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of the Common Equity Tier 1 instruments of financial sector entities in which the institution does not have a significant investment represented by each Common Equity Tier 1 instrument held.
Institutions shall determine the amount of each Common Equity Tier 1 instrument that is risk weighted pursuant to paragraph 4 by multiplying the amount specified in point (a) of this paragraph by the amount specified in point (b) of this paragraph:
the amount of holdings required to be risk weighted pursuant to paragraph 4;
the proportion resulting from the calculation in point (b) of paragraph 3.
Article 47
Deduction of holdings of Common Equity Tier 1 instruments where an institution has a significant investment in a financial sector entity
For the purposes of point (i) of Article 36(1), the applicable amount to be deducted from Common Equity Tier 1 items shall exclude underwriting positions held for five working days or fewer and shall be determined in accordance with Articles 44 and 45 and Sub-section 2.
Article 47a
Non-performing exposures
For the purposes of point (m) of Article 36(1), exposure shall include any of the following items, provided they are not included in the trading book of the institution:
a debt instrument, including a debt security, a loan, an advance and a demand deposit;
a loan commitment given, a financial guarantee given or any other commitment given, irrespective of whether it is revocable or irrevocable, with the exception of undrawn credit facilities that may be cancelled unconditionally at any time and without notice, or that effectively provide for automatic cancellation due to deterioration in the borrower's creditworthiness.
For the purposes of point (m) of Article 36(1), the exposure value of a debt instrument that was purchased at a price lower than the amount owed by the debtor shall include the difference between the purchase price and the amount owed by the debtor.
For the purposes of point (m) of Article 36(1), the exposure value of a loan commitment given, a financial guarantee given or any other commitment given as referred to in point (b) of paragraph 1 of this Article shall be its nominal value, which shall represent the institution's maximum exposure to credit risk without taking account of any funded or unfunded credit protection. The nominal value of a loan commitment given shall be the undrawn amount that the institution has committed to lend and the nominal value of a financial guarantee given shall be the maximum amount the entity could have to pay if the guarantee is called on.
The nominal value referred to in the third subparagraph of this paragraph shall not take into account any specific credit risk adjustment, additional value adjustments in accordance with Articles 34 and 105, amounts deducted in accordance with point (m) of Article 36(1) or other own funds reductions related to the exposure.
For the purposes of point (m) of Article 36(1), the following exposures shall be classified as non-performing:
an exposure in respect of which a default is considered to have occurred in accordance with Article 178;
an exposure which is considered to be impaired in accordance with the applicable accounting framework;
an exposure under probation pursuant to paragraph 7, where additional forbearance measures are granted or where the exposure becomes more than 30 days past due;
an exposure in the form of a commitment that, were it drawn down or otherwise used, would likely not be paid back in full without realisation of collateral;
an exposure in form of a financial guarantee that is likely to be called by the guaranteed party, including where the underlying guaranteed exposure meets the criteria to be considered as non-performing.
For the purposes of point (a), where an institution has on-balance-sheet exposures to an obligor that are past due by more than 90 days and that represent more than 20 % of all on-balance-sheet exposures to that obligor, all on- and off-balance-sheet exposures to that obligor shall be considered to be non-performing.
Exposures that have not been subject to a forbearance measure shall cease to be classified as non-performing for the purposes of point (m) of Article 36(1) where all the following conditions are met:
the exposure meets the exit criteria applied by the institution for the discontinuation of the classification as impaired in accordance with the applicable accounting framework and of the classification as defaulted in accordance with Article 178;
the situation of the obligor has improved to the extent that the institution is satisfied that full and timely repayment is likely to be made;
the obligor does not have any amount past due by more than 90 days.
Non-performing exposures subject to forbearance measures shall cease to be classified as non-performing for the purposes of point (m) of Article 36(1) where all the following conditions are met:
the exposures have ceased to be in a situation that would lead to their classification as non-performing under paragraph 3;
at least one year has passed since the date on which the forbearance measures were granted and the date on which the exposures were classified as non-performing, whichever is later;
there is no past-due amount following the forbearance measures and the institution, on the basis of the analysis of the obligor's financial situation, is satisfied about the likelihood of the full and timely repayment of the exposure.
Full and timely repayment may be considered likely where the obligor has executed regular and timely payments of amounts equal to either of the following:
the amount that was past due before the forbearance measure was granted, where there were amounts past due;
the amount that has been written-off under the forbearance measures granted, where there were no amounts past due.
Where a non-performing exposure has ceased to be classified as non-performing pursuant to paragraph 6, such exposure shall be under probation until all the following conditions are met:
at least two years have passed since the date on which the exposure subject to forbearance measures was re-classified as performing;
regular and timely payments have been made during at least half of the period that the exposure would be under probation, leading to the payment of a substantial aggregate amount of principal or interest;
none of the exposures to the obligor is more than 30 days past due.
Article 47b
Forbearance measures
Forbearance measure is a concession by an institution towards an obligor that is experiencing or is likely to experience difficulties in meeting its financial commitments. A concession may entail a loss for the lender and shall refer to either of the following actions:
a modification of the terms and conditions of a debt obligation, where such modification would not have been granted had the obligor not experienced difficulties in meeting its financial commitments;
a total or partial refinancing of a debt obligation, where such refinancing would not have been granted had the obligor not experienced difficulties in meeting its financial commitments.
At least the following situations shall be considered forbearance measures:
new contract terms are more favourable to the obligor than the previous contract terms, where the obligor is experiencing or is likely to experience difficulties in meeting its financial commitments;
new contract terms are more favourable to the obligor than contract terms offered by the same institution to obligors with a similar risk profile at that time, where the obligor is experiencing or is likely to experience difficulties in meeting its financial commitments;
the exposure under the initial contract terms was classified as non-performing before the modification to the contract terms or would have been classified as non-performing in the absence of modification to the contract terms;
the measure results in a total or partial cancellation of the debt obligation;
the institution approves the exercise of clauses that enable the obligor to modify the terms of the contract and the exposure was classified as non-performing before the exercise of those clauses, or would be classified as non-performing were those clauses not exercised;
at or close to the time of the granting of debt, the obligor made payments of principal or interest on another debt obligation with the same institution, which was classified as a non-performing exposure or would have been classified as non-performing in the absence of those payments;
the modification to the contract terms involves repayments made by taking possession of collateral, where such modification constitutes a concession.
The following circumstances are indicators that forbearance measures may have been adopted:
the initial contract was past due by more than 30 days at least once during the three months prior to its modification or would be more than 30 days past due without modification;
at or close to the time of concluding the credit agreement, the obligor made payments of principal or interest on another debt obligation with the same institution that was past due by 30 days at least once during the three months prior to the granting of new debt;
the institution approves the exercise of clauses that enable the obligor to change the terms of the contract, and the exposure is 30 days past due or would be 30 days past due were those clauses not exercised.
Article 47c
Deduction for non-performing exposures
For the purposes of point (m) of Article 36(1), institutions shall determine the applicable amount of insufficient coverage separately for each non-performing exposure to be deducted from Common Equity Tier 1 items by subtracting the amount determined in point (b) of this paragraph from the amount determined in point (a) of this paragraph, where the amount referred to in point (a) exceeds the amount referred to in point (b):
the sum of:
the unsecured part of each non-performing exposure, if any, multiplied by the applicable factor referred to in paragraph 2;
the secured part of each non-performing exposure, if any, multiplied by the applicable factor referred to in paragraph 3;
the sum of the following items provided they relate to the same non-performing exposure:
specific credit risk adjustments;
additional value adjustments in accordance with Articles 34 and 105;
other own funds reductions;
for institutions calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts using the Internal Ratings Based Approach, the absolute value of the amounts deducted pursuant to point (d) of Article 36(1) which relate to non-performing exposures, where the absolute value attributable to each non-performing exposure is determined by multiplying the amounts deducted pursuant to point (d) of Article 36(1) by the contribution of the expected loss amount for the non-performing exposure to total expected loss amounts for defaulted or non-defaulted exposures, as applicable;
where a non-performing exposure is purchased at a price lower than the amount owed by the debtor, the difference between the purchase price and the amount owed by the debtor;
amounts written-off by the institution since the exposure was classified as non-performing.
The secured part of a non-performing exposure is that part of the exposure which, for the purpose of calculating own funds requirements pursuant to Title II of Part Three, is considered to be covered by a funded credit protection or unfunded credit protection or fully and completely secured by mortgages.
The unsecured part of a non-performing exposure corresponds to the difference, if any, between the value of the exposure as referred to in Article 47a(1) and the secured part of the exposure, if any.
For the purposes of point (a)(i) of paragraph 1, the following factors shall apply:
0,35 for the unsecured part of a non-performing exposure to be applied during the period between the first and the last day of the third year following its classification as non-performing;
1 for the unsecured part of a non-performing exposure to be applied as of the first day of the fourth year following its classification as non-performing.
For the purposes of point (a)(ii) of paragraph 1, the following factors shall apply:
0,25 for the secured part of a non-performing exposure to be applied during the period between the first and the last day of the fourth year following its classification as non-performing;
0,35 for the secured part of a non-performing exposure to be applied during the period between the first and the last day of the fifth year following its classification as non-performing;
0,55 for the secured part of a non-performing exposure to be applied during the period between the first and the last day of the sixth year following its classification as non-performing;
0,70 for the part of a non-performing exposure secured by immovable property pursuant to Title II of Part Three or that is a residential loan guaranteed by an eligible protection provider as referred to in Article 201, to be applied during the period between the first and the last day of the seventh year following its classification as non-performing;
0,80 for the part of a non-performing exposure secured by other funded or unfunded credit protection pursuant to Title II of Part Three to be applied during the period between the first and the last day of the seventh year following its classification as non-performing;
0,80 for the part of a non-performing exposure secured by immovable property pursuant to Title II of Part Three or that is a residential loan guaranteed by an eligible protection provider as referred to in Article 201, to be applied during the period between the first and the last day of the eighth year following its classification as non-performing;
1 for the part of a non-performing exposure secured by other funded or unfunded credit protection pursuant to Title II of Part Three to be applied as of the first day of the eighth year following its classification as non-performing;
0,85 for the part of a non-performing exposure secured by immovable property pursuant to Title II of Part Three or that is a residential loan guaranteed by an eligible protection provider as referred to in Article 201, to be applied during the period between the first and the last day of the ninth year following its classification as non-performing;
1 for the part of a non-performing exposure secured by immovable property pursuant to Title II of Part Three or that is a residential loan guaranteed by an eligible protection provider as referred to in Article 201, to be applied as of the first day of the tenth year following its classification as non-performing.
By way of derogation from paragraph 3 of this Article, the following factors shall apply to the part of the non-performing exposure guaranteed or insured by an official export credit agency or guaranteed or counter-guaranteed by an eligible protection provider referred to in points (a) to (e) of Article 201(1), unsecured exposures to which would be assigned a risk weight of 0 % under Chapter 2 of Title II of Part Three:
0 for the secured part of the non-performing exposure to be applied during the period between one year and seven years following its classification as non-performing; and
1 for the secured part of the non-performing exposure to be applied as of the first day of the eighth year following its classification as non-performing.
Those guidelines shall be issued in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
By way of derogation from paragraph 3, where an exposure has, between two and six years following its classification as non-performing, been granted a forbearance measure, the factor applicable in accordance with paragraph 3 on the date on which the forbearance measure is granted shall be applicable for an additional period of one year.
This paragraph shall only apply in relation to the first forbearance measure that has been granted since the classification of the exposure as non-performing.
Sub-Section 2
Exemptions from and alternatives to deduction from Common Equity Tier 1 items
Article 48
Threshold exemptions from deduction from Common Equity Tier 1 items
In making the deductions required pursuant to points (c) and (i) of Article 36(1), institutions are not required to deduct the amounts of the items listed in points (a) and (b) of this paragraph which in aggregate are equal to or less than the threshold amount referred to in paragraph 2:
deferred tax assets that are dependent on future profitability and arise from temporary differences, and in aggregate are equal to or less than 10 % of the Common Equity Tier 1 items of the institution calculated after applying the following:
Articles 32 to 35;
points (a) to (h), points (k)(ii) to (v) and point (l) of Article 36(1), excluding deferred tax assets that rely on future profitability and arise from temporary differences.
where an institution has a significant investment in a financial sector entity, the direct, indirect and synthetic holdings of that institution of the Common Equity Tier 1 instruments of those entities that in aggregate are equal to or less than 10 % of the Common Equity Tier 1 items of the institution calculated after applying the following:
Article 32 to 35;
points (a) to (h), points (k)(ii) to (v) and point (l), of Article 36(1) excluding deferred tax assets that rely on future profitability and arise from temporary differences.
For the purposes of paragraph 1, the threshold amount shall be equal to the amount referred to in point (a) of this paragraph multiplied by the percentage referred to in point (b) of this paragraph:
the residual amount of Common Equity Tier 1 items after applying the adjustments and deductions in Articles 32 to 36 in full and without applying the threshold exemptions specified in this Article;
17,65 %.
For the purposes of paragraph 1, an institution shall determine the portion of deferred tax assets in the total amount of items that is not required to be deducted by dividing the amount specified in point (a) of this paragraph by the amount specified in point (b) of this paragraph:
the amount of deferred tax assets that are dependent on future profitability and arise from temporary differences, and in aggregate are equal to or less than 10 % of the Common Equity Tier 1 items of the institution;
the sum of the following:
the amount referred to in point (a);
the amount of direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of the own funds instruments of financial sector entities in which the institution has a significant investment, and in aggregate are equal to or less than 10 % of the Common Equity Tier 1 items of the institution.
The proportion of significant investments in the total amount of items that is not required to be deducted is equal to one minus the proportion referred to in the first subparagraph.
Article 49
Requirement for deduction where consolidation, supplementary supervision or institutional protection schemes are applied
For the purposes of calculating own funds on an individual basis, a sub-consolidated basis and a consolidated basis, where the competent authorities require or permit institutions to apply method 1, 2 or 3 of Annex I to Directive 2002/87/EC, the competent authorities may permit institutions not to deduct the holdings of own funds instruments of a financial sector entity in which the parent institution, parent financial holding company or parent mixed financial holding company or institution has a significant investment, provided that the conditions laid down in points (a) to (e) of this paragraph are met:
the financial sector entity is an insurance undertaking, a re-insurance undertaking or an insurance holding company;
that insurance undertaking, re-insurance undertaking or insurance holding company is included in the same supplementary supervision under Directive 2002/87/EC as the parent institution, parent financial holding company or parent mixed financial holding company or institution that has the holding;
the institution has received the prior permission of the competent authorities;
prior to granting the permission referred to in point (c), and on a continuing basis, the competent authorities are satisfied that the level of integrated management, risk management and internal control regarding the entities that would be included in the scope of consolidation under method 1, 2 or 3 is adequate;
the holdings in the entity belong to one of the following:
the parent credit institution;
the parent financial holding company;
the parent mixed financial holding company;
the institution;
a subsidiary of one of the entities referred to in points (i) to (iv) that is included in the scope of consolidation pursuant to Chapter 2 of Title II of Part One.
The method chosen shall be applied in a consistent manner over time.
Applying the approach referred to in the first subparagraph shall not entail disproportionate adverse effects on the whole or parts of the financial system in other Member States or in the Union as a whole forming or creating an obstacle to the functioning of the internal market.
This paragraph shall not apply when calculating own funds for the purposes of the requirements laid down in Articles 92a and 92b, which shall be calculated in accordance with the deduction framework set out in Article 72e(4).
This paragraph shall not apply with regard to the deductions set out in Article 72e(5).
Competent authorities may, for the purposes of calculating own funds on an individual or sub-consolidated basis permit institutions not to deduct holdings of own funds instruments in the following cases:
where an institution has a holding in another institution and the conditions referred to in points (i) to (v) are met:
the institutions fall within the same institutional protection scheme referred to in Article 113(7);
the competent authorities have granted the permission referred to in Article 113(7);
the conditions laid down in Article 113(7) are satisfied;
the institutional protection scheme draws up a consolidated balance sheet referred to in point (e) of Article 113(7) or, where it is not required to draw up consolidated accounts, an extended aggregated calculation that is, to the satisfaction of the competent authorities, equivalent to the provisions of Directive 86/635/EEC, which incorporates certain adaptations of the provisions of Directive 83/349/EEC or of Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002, governing the consolidated accounts of groups of credit institutions. The equivalence of that extended aggregated calculation shall be verified by an external auditor and in particular that the multiple use of elements eligible for the calculation of own funds as well as any inappropriate creation of own funds between the members of the institutional protection scheme is eliminated in the calculation. ►M8 The consolidated balance sheet or the extended aggregated calculation shall be reported to the competent authorities with the frequency set out in the implementing technical standards referred to in Article 430(7) ◄ ;
the institutions included in an institutional protection scheme meet together on a consolidated or extended aggregated basis the requirements laid down in Article 92 and carry out reporting of compliance with those requirements in accordance with Article 430. ◄ Within an institutional protection scheme the deduction of the interest owned by co-operative members or legal entities, which are not members of the institutional protection scheme, is not required, provided that the multiple use of elements eligible for the calculation of own funds as well as any inappropriate creation of own funds between the members of the institutional protection scheme and the minority shareholder, when it is an institution, is eliminated.
where a regional credit institution has a holding in its central or another regional credit institution and the conditions laid down in points (a)(i) to (v) are met.
EBA, EIOPA and ESMA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 July 2013.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 and of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 respectively.
Section 4
Common Equity Tier 1 capital
Article 50
Common Equity Tier 1 capital
The Common Equity Tier 1 capital of an institution shall consist of Common Equity Tier 1 items after the application of the adjustments required by Articles 32 to 35, the deductions pursuant to Article 36 and the exemptions and alternatives laid down in Articles 48, 49 and 79.
CHAPTER 3
Additional Tier 1 capital
Section 1
Additional Tier 1 items and instruments
Article 51
Additional Tier 1 items
Additional Tier 1 items shall consist of the following:
capital instruments, where the conditions laid down in Article 52(1) are met;
the share premium accounts related to the instruments referred to in point (a).
Instruments included under point (a) shall not qualify as Common Equity Tier 1 or Tier 2 items.
Article 52
Additional Tier 1 instruments
Capital instruments shall qualify as Additional Tier 1 instruments only if the following conditions are met:
the instruments are directly issued by an institution and fully paid up;
the instruments are not owned by any of the following:
the institution or its subsidiaries;
an undertaking in which the institution has a participation in the form of ownership, direct or by way of control, of 20 % or more of the voting rights or capital of that undertaking;
the acquisition of ownership of the instruments is not funded directly or indirectly by the institution;
the instruments rank below Tier 2 instruments in the event of the insolvency of the institution;
the instruments are neither secured nor subject to a guarantee that enhances the seniority of the claims by any of the following:
the institution or its subsidiaries;
the parent undertaking of the institution or its subsidiaries;
the parent financial holding company or its subsidiaries;
the mixed activity holding company or its subsidiaries;
the mixed financial holding company or its subsidiaries;
any undertaking that has close links with entities referred to in points (i) to (v);
the instruments are not subject to any arrangement, contractual or otherwise, that enhances the seniority of the claim under the instruments in insolvency or liquidation;
the instruments are perpetual and the provisions governing them include no incentive for the institution to redeem them;
where the instruments include one or more early redemption options including call options, the options are exercisable at the sole discretion of the issuer;
the instruments may be called, redeemed or repurchased only where the conditions laid down in Article 77 are met, and not before five years after the date of issuance except where the conditions laid down in Article 78(4) are met;
the provisions governing the instruments do not indicate explicitly or implicitly that the instruments would be called, redeemed or repurchased, as applicable, by the institution other than in the case of the insolvency or liquidation of the institution and the institution does not otherwise provide such an indication;
the institution does not indicate explicitly or implicitly that the competent authority would consent to a request to call, redeem or repurchase the instruments;
distributions under the instruments meet the following conditions:
they are paid out of distributable items;
the level of distributions made on the instruments will not be amended on the basis of the credit standing of the institution or its parent undertaking;
the provisions governing the instruments give the institution full discretion at all times to cancel the distributions on the instruments for an unlimited period and on a non-cumulative basis, and the institution may use such cancelled payments without restriction to meet its obligations as they fall due;
cancellation of distributions does not constitute an event of default of the institution;
the cancellation of distributions imposes no restrictions on the institution;
the instruments do not contribute to a determination that the liabilities of an institution exceed its assets, where such a determination constitutes a test of insolvency under applicable national law;
the provisions governing the instruments require that, upon the occurrence of a trigger event, the principal amount of the instruments be written down on a permanent or temporary basis or the instruments be converted to Common Equity Tier 1 instruments;
the provisions governing the instruments include no feature that could hinder the recapitalisation of the institution;
where the issuer is established in a third country and has been designated in accordance with Article 12 of Directive 2014/59/EU as part of a resolution group the resolution entity of which is established in the Union or where the issuer is established in a Member State, the law or contractual provisions governing the instruments require that, upon a decision by the resolution authority to exercise the write-down and conversion powers referred to in Article 59 of that Directive, the principal amount of the instruments is to be written down on a permanent basis or the instruments are to be converted to Common Equity Tier 1 instruments;
where the issuer is established in a third country and has not been designated in accordance with Article 12 of Directive 2014/59/EU as part of a resolution group the resolution entity of which is established in the Union, the law or contractual provisions governing the instruments require that, upon a decision by the relevant third-country authority, the principal amount of the instruments is to be written down on a permanent basis or the instruments are to be converted into Common Equity Tier 1 instruments;
where the issuer is established in a third country and has been designated in accordance with Article 12 of Directive 2014/59/EU as part of a resolution group the resolution entity of which is established in the Union or where the issuer is established in a Member State, the instruments may only be issued under, or be otherwise subject to the laws of a third country where, under those laws, the exercise of the write-down and conversion powers referred to in Article 59 of that Directive is effective and enforceable on the basis of statutory provisions or legally enforceable contractual provisions that recognise resolution or other write-down or conversion actions;
the instruments are not subject to set-off or netting arrangements that would undermine their capacity to absorb losses.
The condition set out in point (d) of the first subparagraph shall be deemed to be met notwithstanding the fact that the instruments are included in Additional Tier 1 or Tier 2 by virtue of Article 484(3), provided that they rank pari passu.
For the purposes of point (a) of the first subparagraph, only the part of a capital instrument that is fully paid up shall be eligible to qualify as an Additional Tier 1 instrument.
EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify all the following:
the form and nature of incentives to redeem;
the nature of any write up of the principal amount of an Additional Tier 1 instrument following a write down of its principal amount on a temporary basis;
the procedures and timing for the following:
determining that a trigger event has occurred;
writing up the principal amount of an Additional Tier 1 instrument following a write down of its principal amount on a temporary basis;
features of instruments that could hinder the recapitalisation of the institution;
the use of special purpose entities for indirect issuance of own funds instruments.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 July 2013.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 53
Restrictions on the cancellation of distributions on Additional Tier 1 instruments and features that could hinder the recapitalisation of the institution
For the purposes of points (l)(v) and (o) of Article 52(1), the provisions governing Additional Tier 1 instruments shall, in particular, not include the following:
a requirement for distributions on the instruments to be made in the event of a distribution being made on an instrument issued by the institution that ranks to the same degree as, or more junior than, an Additional Tier 1 instrument, including a Common Equity Tier 1 instrument;
a requirement for the payment of distributions on Common Equity Tier 1, Additional Tier 1 or Tier 2 instruments to be cancelled in the event that distributions are not made on those Additional Tier 1 instruments;
an obligation to substitute the payment of interest or dividend by a payment in any other form. The institution shall not otherwise be subject to such an obligation.
Article 54
Write down or conversion of Additional Tier 1 instruments
For the purposes of point (n) of Article 52(1), the following provisions shall apply to Additional Tier 1 instruments:
a trigger event occurs when the Common Equity Tier 1 capital ratio of the institution referred to in point (a) of Article 92(1) falls below either of the following:
5,125 %;
a level higher than 5,125 %, where determined by the institution and specified in the provisions governing the instrument;
institutions may specify in the provisions governing the instrument one or more trigger events in addition to that referred to in point (a);
where the provisions governing the instruments require them to be converted into Common Equity Tier 1 instruments upon the occurrence of a trigger event, those provisions shall specify either of the following:
the rate of such conversion and a limit on the permitted amount of conversion;
a range within which the instruments will convert into Common Equity Tier 1 instruments;
where the provisions governing the instruments require their principal amount to be written down upon the occurrence of a trigger event, the write down shall reduce all the following:
the claim of the holder of the instrument in the insolvency or liquidation of the institution;
the amount required to be paid in the event of the call or redemption of the instrument;
the distributions made on the instrument;
where the Additional Tier 1 instruments have been issued by a subsidiary undertaking established in a third country, the 5,125 % or higher trigger referred to in point (a) shall be calculated in accordance with the national law of that third country or contractual provisions governing the instruments, provided that the competent authority, after consulting EBA, is satisfied that those provisions are at least equivalent to the requirements set out in this Article.
The aggregate amount of Additional Tier 1 instruments that is required to be written down or converted upon the occurrence of a trigger event shall be no less than the lower of the following:
the amount required to restore fully the Common Equity Tier 1 ratio of the institution to 5,125 %;
the full principal amount of the instrument.
When a trigger event occurs institutions shall do the following:
immediately inform the competent authorities;
inform the holders of the Additional Tier 1 instruments;
write down the principal amount of the instruments, or convert the instruments into Common Equity Tier 1 instruments without delay, but no later than within one month, in accordance with the requirement laid down in this Article.
Article 55
Consequences of the conditions for Additional Tier 1 instruments ceasing to be met
The following shall apply where, in the case of an Additional Tier 1 instrument, the conditions laid down in Article 52(1) cease to be met:
that instrument shall immediately cease to qualify as an Additional Tier 1 instrument;
the part of the share premium accounts that relates to that instrument shall immediately cease to qualify as an Additional Tier 1 item.
Section 2
Deductions from Additional Tier 1 items
Article 56
Deductions from Additional Tier 1 items
Institutions shall deduct the following from Additional Tier 1 items:
direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by an institution of own Additional Tier 1 instruments, including own Additional Tier 1 instruments that an institution could be obliged to purchase as a result of existing contractual obligations;
direct, indirect and synthetic holdings of the Additional Tier 1 instruments of financial sector entities with which the institution has reciprocal cross holdings that the competent authority considers to have been designed to inflate artificially the own funds of the institution;
the applicable amount determined in accordance with Article 60 of direct, indirect and synthetic holdings of the Additional Tier 1 instruments of financial sector entities, where an institution does not have a significant investment in those entities;
direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of the Additional Tier 1 instruments of financial sector entities where the institution has a significant investment in those entities, excluding underwriting positions held for five working days or fewer;
the amount of items required to be deducted from Tier 2 items pursuant to Article 66 that exceeds the Tier 2 items of the institution;
any tax charge relating to Additional Tier 1 items foreseeable at the moment of its calculation, except where the institution suitably adjusts the amount of Additional Tier 1 items insofar as such tax charges reduce the amount up to which those items may be applied to cover risks or losses.
Article 57
Deductions of holdings of own Additional Tier 1 instruments
For the purposes of point (a) of Article 56, institutions shall calculate holdings of own Additional Tier 1 instruments on the basis of gross long positions subject to the following exceptions:
institutions may calculate the amount of holdings of own Additional Tier 1 instruments on the basis of the net long position provided that both the following conditions are met:
the long and short positions are in the same underlying exposure and the short positions involve no counterparty risk;
either both the long and the short positions are held in the trading book or both are held in the non-trading book;
institutions shall determine the amount to be deducted for direct, indirect or synthetic holdings of index securities by calculating the underlying exposure to own Additional Tier 1 instruments in those indices;
institutions may net gross long positions in own Additional Tier 1 instruments resulting from holdings of index securities against short positions in own Additional Tier 1 instruments resulting from short positions in the underlying indices, including where those short positions involve counterparty risk, provided that both the following conditions are met:
the long and short positions are in the same underlying indices;
either both the long and the short positions are held in the trading book or both are held in the non-trading book;
Article 58
Deduction of holdings of Additional Tier 1 instruments of financial sector entities and where an institution has a reciprocal cross holding designed artificially to inflate own funds
Institutions shall make the deductions required by points (b), (c) and (d) of Article 56 in accordance with the following:
holdings of Additional Tier 1 instruments shall be calculated on the basis of the gross long positions;
Additional Tier 1 own-fund insurance items shall be treated as holdings of Additional Tier 1 instruments for the purposes of deduction.
Article 59
Deduction of holdings of Additional Tier 1 instruments of financial sector entities
Institutions shall make the deductions required by points (c) and (d) of Article 56 in accordance with the following:
they may calculate direct, indirect and synthetic holdings of Additional Tier 1 instruments of the financial sector entities on the basis of the net long position in the same underlying exposure provided that both the following conditions are met:
the maturity date of the short position is either the same as, or later than the maturity date of the long position or the residual maturity of the short position is at least one year;
either both the short position and the long position are held in the trading book or both are held in the non-trading book.
they shall determine the amount to be deducted for direct, indirect and synthetic holdings of index securities by calculating the underlying exposure to the capital instruments of the financial sector entities in those indices.
Article 60
Deduction of holdings of Additional Tier 1 instruments where an institution does not have a significant investment in a financial sector entity
For the purposes of point (c) of Article 56, institutions shall calculate the applicable amount to be deducted by multiplying the amount referred to in point (a) of this paragraph by the factor derived from the calculation referred to in point (b) of this paragraph:
the aggregate amount by which the direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of the Common Equity Tier 1, Additional Tier 1 and Tier 2 instruments of financial sector entities in which the institution does not have a significant investment exceeds 10 % of the Common Equity Tier 1 items of the institution calculated after applying the following:
Article 32 to 35;
points (a) to (g), points (k)(ii) to (v) and point (l) of Article 36(1), excluding deferred tax assets that rely on future profitability and arise from temporary differences;
Articles 44 and 45;
the amount of direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of the Additional Tier 1 instruments of those financial sector entities in which the institution does not have a significant investment divided by the aggregate amount of all direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of the Common Equity Tier 1, Additional Tier 1 and Tier 2 instruments of those financial sector entities.
The amount to be deducted pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be apportioned across all Additional Tier 1 instruments held. Institutions shall determine the amount of each Additional Tier 1 instrument to be deducted pursuant to paragraph 1 by multiplying the amount specified in point (a) of this paragraph by the proportion specified in point (b) of this paragraph:
the amount of holdings required to be deducted pursuant to paragraph 1;
the proportion of the aggregate amount of direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of the Additional Tier 1 instruments of financial sector entities in which the institution does not have a significant investment represented by each Additional Tier 1 instrument held.
Institutions shall determine the amount of each Additional Tier 1 instrument that is risk weighted pursuant to paragraph 4 by multiplying the amount specified in point (a) of this paragraph by the amount specified in point (b) of this paragraph:
the amount of holdings required to be risk weighted pursuant to paragraph 4;
the proportion resulting from the calculation in point (b) of paragraph 3.
Section 3
Additional Tier 1 capital
Article 61
Additional Tier 1 capital
The Additional Tier 1 capital of an institution shall consist of Additional Tier 1 items after the deduction of the items referred to in Article 56 and the application of Article 79.
CHAPTER 4
Tier 2 capital
Section 1
Tier 2 items and instruments
Article 62
Tier 2 items
Tier 2 items shall consist of the following:
capital instruments where the conditions set out in Article 63 are met, and to the extent specified in Article 64;
the share premium accounts related to instruments referred to in point (a);
for institutions calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts in accordance with Chapter 2 of Title II of Part Three, general credit risk adjustments, gross of tax effects, of up to 1,25 % of risk-weighted exposure amounts calculated in accordance with Chapter 2 of Title II of Part Three;
for institutions calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts under Chapter 3 of Title II of Part Three, positive amounts, gross of tax effects, resulting from the calculation laid down in Articles 158 and 159 up to 0,6 % of risk-weighted exposure amounts calculated under Chapter 3 of Title II of Part Three.
Items included under point (a) shall not qualify as Common Equity Tier 1 or Additional Tier 1 items.
Article 63
Tier 2 instruments
Capital instruments shall qualify as Tier 2 instruments, provided that the following conditions are met:
the instruments are directly issued by an institution and fully paid up;
the instruments are not owned by any of the following:
the institution or its subsidiaries;
an undertaking in which the institution has participation in the form of ownership, direct or by way of control, of 20 % or more of the voting rights or capital of that undertaking;
the acquisition of ownership of the instruments is not funded directly or indirectly by the institution;
the claim on the principal amount of the instruments under the provisions governing the instruments ranks below any claim from eligible liabilities instruments;
the instruments are not secured or are not subject to a guarantee that enhances the seniority of the claim by any of the following:
the institution or its subsidiaries;
the parent undertaking of the institution or its subsidiaries;
the parent financial holding company or its subsidiaries;
the mixed activity holding company or its subsidiaries;
the mixed financial holding company or its subsidiaries;
any undertaking that has close links with entities referred to in points (i) to (v);
the instruments are not subject to any arrangement that otherwise enhances the seniority of the claim under the instruments;
the instruments have an original maturity of at least five years;
the provisions governing the instruments do not include any incentive for their principal amount to be redeemed or repaid, as applicable by the institution prior to their maturity;
where the instruments include one or more early repayment options, including call options, the options are exercisable at the sole discretion of the issuer;
the instruments may be called, redeemed, repaid or repurchased early only where the conditions set out in Article 77 are met, and not before five years after the date of issuance, except where the conditions set out in Article 78(4) are met;
the provisions governing the instruments do not indicate explicitly or implicitly that the instruments would be called, redeemed, repaid or repurchased early, as applicable, by the institution other than in the case of the insolvency or liquidation of the institution and the institution does not otherwise provide such an indication;
the provisions governing the instruments do not give the holder the right to accelerate the future scheduled payment of interest or principal, other than in the case of the insolvency or liquidation of the institution;
the level of interest or dividends payments, as applicable, due on the instruments will not be amended on the basis of the credit standing of the institution or its parent undertaking;
where the issuer is established in a third country and has been designated in accordance with Article 12 of Directive 2014/59/EU as part of a resolution group the resolution entity of which is established in the Union or where the issuer is established in a Member State, the law or contractual provisions governing the instruments require that, upon a decision by the resolution authority to exercise the write-down and conversion powers referred to in Article 59 of that Directive, the principal amount of the instruments is to be written down on a permanent basis or the instruments are to be converted to Common Equity Tier 1 instruments;
where the issuer is established in a third country and has not been designated in accordance with Article 12 of Directive 2014/59/EU as a part of a resolution group the resolution entity of which is established in the Union, the law or contractual provisions governing the instruments require that, upon a decision by the relevant third-country authority, the principal amount of the instruments is to be written down on a permanent basis or the instruments are to be converted into Common Equity Tier 1 instruments;
where the issuer is established in a third country and has been designated in accordance with Article 12 of Directive 2014/59/EU as part of a resolution group the resolution entity of which is established in the Union or where the issuer is established in a Member State, the instruments may only be issued under, or be otherwise subject to the laws of a third country where, under those laws, the exercise of the write-down and conversion powers referred to in Article 59 of that Directive is effective and enforceable on the basis of statutory provisions or legally enforceable contractual provisions that recognise resolution or other write-down or conversion actions;
the instruments are not subject to set-off or netting arrangements that would undermine their capacity to absorb losses.
For the purposes of point (a) of the first paragraph, only the part of the capital instrument that is fully paid up shall be eligible to qualify as a Tier 2 instrument.
Article 64
Amortisation of Tier 2 instruments
The extent to which Tier 2 instruments qualify as Tier 2 items during the final five years of maturity of the instruments is calculated by multiplying the result derived from the calculation referred to in point (a) by the amount referred to in point (b) as follows:
the carrying amount of the instruments on the first day of the final five-year period of their contractual maturity divided by the number of days in that period;
the number of remaining days of contractual maturity of the instruments.
Article 65
Consequences of the conditions for Tier 2 instruments ceasing to be met
Where in the case of a Tier 2 instrument the conditions laid down in Article 63 cease to be met, the following shall apply:
that instrument shall immediately cease to qualify as a Tier 2 instrument;
the part of the share premium accounts that relate to that instrument shall immediately cease to qualify as Tier 2 items.
Section 2
Deductions from Tier 2 items
Article 66
Deductions from Tier 2 items
The following shall be deducted from Tier 2 items:
direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by an institution of own Tier 2 instruments, including own Tier 2 instruments that an institution could be obliged to purchase as a result of existing contractual obligations;
direct, indirect and synthetic holdings of the Tier 2 instruments of financial sector entities with which the institution has reciprocal cross holdings that the competent authority considers to have been designed to inflate artificially the own funds of the institution;
the applicable amount determined in accordance with Article 70 of direct, indirect and synthetic holdings of the Tier 2 instruments of financial sector entities, where an institution does not have a significant investment in those entities;
direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of the Tier 2 instruments of financial sector entities where the institution has a significant investment in those entities, excluding underwriting positions held for fewer than five working days;
the amount of items required to be deducted from eligible liabilities items pursuant to Article 72e that exceeds the eligible liabilities items of the institution.
Article 67
Deductions of holdings of own Tier 2 instruments
For the purposes of point (a) of Article 66, institutions shall calculate holdings on the basis of the gross long positions subject to the following exceptions:
institutions may calculate the amount of holdings on the basis of the net long position provided that both the following conditions are met:
the long and short positions are in the same underlying exposure and the short positions involve no counterparty risk;
either both the long and the short positions are held in the trading book or both are held in the non-trading book;
institutions shall determine the amount to be deducted for direct, indirect and synthetic holdings of index securities by calculating the underlying exposure to own Tier 2 instruments in those indices;
institutions may net gross long positions in own Tier 2 instruments resulting from holdings of index securities against short positions in own Tier 2 instruments resulting from short positions in the underlying indices, including where those short positions involve counterparty risk, provided that both the following conditions are met:
the long and short positions are in the same underlying indices;
either both the long and the short positions are held in the trading book or both are held in the non-trading book.
Article 68
Deduction of holdings of Tier 2 instruments of financial sector entities and where an institution has a reciprocal cross holding designed artificially to inflate own funds
Institutions shall make the deductions required by points (b), (c) and (d) of Article 66 in accordance with the following provisions:
holdings of Tier 2 instruments shall be calculated on the basis of the gross long positions;
holdings of Tier 2 own-fund insurance items and Tier 3 own-fund insurance items shall be treated as holdings of Tier 2 instruments for the purposes of deduction.
Article 69
Deduction of holdings of Tier 2 instruments of financial sector entities
Institutions shall make the deductions required by points (c) and (d) of Article 66 in accordance with the following:
they may calculate direct, indirect and synthetic holdings of Tier 2 instruments of the financial sector entities on the basis of the net long position in the same underlying exposure provided that both the following conditions are met:
the maturity date of the short position is either the same as, or later than the maturity date of the long position or the residual maturity of the short position is at least one year;
either both the long position and the short position are held in the trading book or both are held in the non-trading book;
they shall determine the amount to be deducted for direct, indirect and synthetic holdings of index securities by looking through to the underlying exposure to the capital instruments of the financial sector entities in those indices.
Article 70
Deduction of Tier 2 instruments where an institution does not have a significant investment in a relevant entity
For the purposes of point (c) of Article 66, institutions shall calculate the applicable amount to be deducted by multiplying the amount referred to in point (a) of this paragraph by the factor derived from the calculation referred to in point (b) of this paragraph:
the aggregate amount by which the direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of the Common Equity Tier 1, Additional Tier 1 and Tier 2 instruments of financial sector entities in which the institution does not have a significant investment exceeds 10 % of the Common Equity Tier 1 items of the institution calculated after applying the following:
Articles 32 to 35;
points (a) to (g), points (k)(ii) to (v) and point (l) of Article 36(1), excluding the amount to be deducted for deferred tax assets that rely on future profitability and arise from temporary differences;
Articles 44 and 45;
the amount of direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of the Tier 2 instruments of financial sector entities in which the institution does not have a significant investment divided by the aggregate amount of all direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of the Common Equity Tier 1, Additional Tier 1 and Tier 2 instruments of those financial sector entities.
The amount to be deducted pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be apportioned across each Tier 2 instrument held. Institutions shall determine the amount to be deducted from each Tier 2 instrument that is deducted pursuant to paragraph 1 by multiplying the amount specified in point (a) of this paragraph by the proportion specified in point (b) of this paragraph:
the total amount of holdings required to be deducted pursuant to paragraph 1;
the proportion of the aggregate amount of direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of the Tier 2 instruments of financial sector entities in which the institution does not have a significant investment represented by each Tier 2 instrument held.
Institutions shall determine the amount of each Tier 2 instrument that is risk weighted pursuant to paragraph 4 by multiplying the amount specified in point (a) of this paragraph by the amount specified in point (b) of this paragraph:
the amount of holdings required to be risk weighted pursuant to paragraph 4;
the proportion resulting from the calculation in point (b) of paragraph 3.
Section 3
Tier 2 capital
Article 71
Tier 2 capital
The Tier 2 capital of an institution shall consist of the Tier 2 items of the institution after the deductions referred to in Article 66 and the application of Article 79.
CHAPTER 5
Own funds
Article 72
Own funds
The own funds of an institution shall consist of the sum of its Tier 1 capital and Tier 2 capital.
CHAPTER 5a
Eligible liabilities
Article 72a
Eligible liabilities items
Eligible liabilities items shall consist of the following, unless they fall into any of the categories of excluded liabilities laid down in paragraph 2 of this Article, and to the extent specified in Article 72c:
eligible liabilities instruments where the conditions set out in Article 72b are met, to the extent that they do not qualify as Common Equity Tier 1, Additional Tier 1 or Tier 2 items;
Tier 2 instruments with a residual maturity of at least one year, to the extent that they do not qualify as Tier 2 items in accordance with Article 64.
The following liabilities shall be excluded from eligible liabilities items:
covered deposits;
sight deposits and short term deposits with an original maturity of less than one year;
the part of eligible deposits from natural persons and micro, small and medium-sized enterprises which exceeds the coverage level referred to in Article 6 of Directive 2014/49/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 25 );
deposits that would be eligible deposits from natural persons, micro, small and medium–sized enterprises if they were not made through branches located outside the Union of institutions established in the Union;
secured liabilities, including covered bonds and liabilities in the form of financial instruments used for hedging purposes that form an integral part of the cover pool and that in accordance with national law are secured in a manner similar to covered bonds, provided that all secured assets relating to a covered bond cover pool remain unaffected, segregated and with enough funding and excluding any part of a secured liability or a liability for which collateral has been pledged that exceeds the value of the assets, pledge, lien or collateral against which it is secured;
any liability that arises by virtue of the holding of client assets or client money including client assets or client money held on behalf of collective investment undertakings, provided that such a client is protected under the applicable insolvency law;
any liability that arises by virtue of a fiduciary relationship between the resolution entity or any of its subsidiaries (as fiduciary) and another person (as beneficiary), provided that such a beneficiary is protected under the applicable insolvency or civil law;
liabilities to institutions, excluding liabilities to entities that are part of the same group, with an original maturity of less than seven days;
liabilities with a remaining maturity of less than seven days, owed to:
systems or system operators designated in accordance with Directive 98/26/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 26 );
participants in a system designated in accordance with Directive 98/26/EC and arising from the participation in such a system; or
third-country CCPs recognised in accordance with Article 25 of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012;
a liability to any of the following:
an employee in relation to accrued salary, pension benefits or other fixed remuneration, except for the variable component of the remuneration that is not regulated by a collective bargaining agreement, and except for the variable component of the remuneration of material risk takers as referred to in Article 92(2) of Directive 2013/36/EU;
a commercial or trade creditor where the liability arises from the provision to the institution or the parent undertaking of goods or services that are critical to the daily functioning of the institution's or parent undertaking's operations, including IT services, utilities and the rental, servicing and upkeep of premises;
tax and social security authorities, provided that those liabilities are preferred under the applicable law;
deposit guarantee schemes where the liability arises from contributions due in accordance with Directive 2014/49/EU;
liabilities arising from derivatives;
liabilities arising from debt instruments with embedded derivatives.
For the purposes of point (l) of the first subparagraph, debt instruments containing early redemption options exercisable at the discretion of the issuer or of the holder, and debt instruments with variable interests derived from a broadly used reference rate such as Euribor or Libor, shall not be considered as debt instruments with embedded derivatives solely because of such features.
Article 72b
Eligible liabilities instruments
Liabilities shall qualify as eligible liabilities instruments, provided that all the following conditions are met:
the liabilities are directly issued or raised, as applicable, by an institution and are fully paid up;
the liabilities are not owned by any of the following:
the institution or an entity included in the same resolution group;
an undertaking in which the institution has a direct or indirect participation in the form of ownership, direct or by way of control, of 20 % or more of the voting rights or capital of that undertaking;
the acquisition of ownership of the liabilities is not funded directly or indirectly by the resolution entity;
the claim on the principal amount of the liabilities under the provisions governing the instruments is wholly subordinated to claims arising from the excluded liabilities referred to in Article 72a(2); that subordination requirement shall be considered to be met in any of the following situations:
the contractual provisions governing the liabilities specify that in the event of normal insolvency proceedings as defined in point (47) of Article 2(1) of Directive 2014/59/EU, the claim on the principal amount of the instruments ranks below claims arising from any of the excluded liabilities referred to in Article 72a(2) of this Regulation;
the applicable law specifies that in the event of normal insolvency proceedings as defined in point (47) of Article 2(1) of Directive 2014/59/EU, the claim on the principal amount of the instruments ranks below claims arising from any of the excluded liabilities referred to in Article 72a(2) of this Regulation;
the instruments are issued by a resolution entity which does not have on its balance sheet any excluded liabilities as referred to in Article 72a(2) of this Regulation that rank pari passu or junior to eligible liabilities instruments;
the liabilities are neither secured, nor subject to a guarantee or any other arrangement that enhances the seniority of the claim by any of the following:
the institution or its subsidiaries;
the parent undertaking of the institution or its subsidiaries;
any undertaking that has close links with entities referred to in points (i) and (ii);
the liabilities are not subject to set-off or netting arrangements that would undermine their capacity to absorb losses in resolution;
the provisions governing the liabilities do not include any incentive for their principal amount to be called, redeemed or repurchased prior to their maturity or repaid early by the institution, as applicable, except in the cases referred to in Article 72c(3);
the liabilities are not redeemable by the holders of the instruments prior to their maturity, except in the cases referred to in Article 72c(2);
subject to Article 72c(3) and (4), where the liabilities include one or more early repayment options, including call options, the options are exercisable at the sole discretion of the issuer, except in the cases referred to in Article 72c(2);
the liabilities may only be called, redeemed, repaid or repurchased early where the conditions set out in Articles 77 and 78a are met;
the provisions governing the liabilities do not indicate explicitly or implicitly that the liabilities would be called, redeemed, repaid or repurchased early, as applicable by the resolution entity other than in the case of the insolvency or liquidation of the institution and the institution does not otherwise provide such an indication;
the provisions governing the liabilities do not give the holder the right to accelerate the future scheduled payment of interest or principal, other than in the case of the insolvency or liquidation of the resolution entity;
the level of interest or dividend payments, as applicable, due on the liabilities is not amended on the basis of the credit standing of the resolution entity or its parent undertaking;
for instruments issued after 28 June 2021 the relevant contractual documentation and, where applicable, the prospectus related to the issuance explicitly refer to the possible exercise of the write-down and conversion powers in accordance with Article 48 of Directive 2014/59/EU.
For the purposes of point (a) of the first subparagraph, only the parts of liabilities that are fully paid up shall be eligible to qualify as eligible liabilities instruments.
For the purposes of point (d) of the first subparagraph of this Article, where some of the excluded liabilities referred to in Article 72a(2) are subordinated to ordinary unsecured claims under national insolvency law, inter alia, due to being held by a creditor who has close links with the debtor, by being or having been a shareholder, in a control or group relationship, a member of the management body or related to any of those persons, subordination shall not be assessed by reference to claims arising from such excluded liabilities.
For the purposes of Article 92b, references to the resolution entity in points (c), (k), (l) and (m) of the first subparagraph of this paragraph shall also be understood as references to an institution that is a material subsidiary of a non-EU G-SII.
In addition to the liabilities referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article, the resolution authority may permit liabilities to qualify as eligible liabilities instruments up to an aggregate amount that does not exceed 3,5 % of the total risk exposure amount calculated in accordance with Article 92(3) and (4), provided that:
all the conditions set out in paragraph 2 except for the condition set out in point (d) of the first subparagraph of paragraph 2 are met;
the liabilities rank pari passu with the lowest ranking excluded liabilities referred to in Article 72a(2) with the exception of the excluded liabilities that are subordinated to ordinary unsecured claims under national insolvency law referred to in the third subparagraph of paragraph 2 of this Article; and
the inclusion of those liabilities in eligible liabilities items would not give rise to a material risk of a successful legal challenge or of valid compensation claims as assessed by the resolution authority in relation to the principles referred to in point (g) of Article 34(1) and Article 75 of Directive 2014/59/EU.
The resolution authority may permit liabilities to qualify as eligible liabilities instruments in addition to the liabilities referred to in paragraph 2, provided that:
the institution is not permitted to include in eligible liabilities items liabilities referred to in paragraph 3;
all the conditions set out in paragraph 2, except for the condition set out in point (d) of the first subparagraph of paragraph 2, are met;
the liabilities rank pari passu or are senior to the lowest ranking excluded liabilities referred to in Article 72a(2), with the exception of the excluded liabilities subordinated to ordinary unsecured claims under national insolvency law referred to in the third subparagraph of paragraph 2 of this Article;
on the balance sheet of the institution, the amount of the excluded liabilities referred to in Article 72a(2) which rank pari passu or below those liabilities in insolvency does not exceed 5 % of the amount of the own funds and eligible liabilities of the institution;
the inclusion of those liabilities in eligible liabilities items would not give rise to a material risk of a successful legal challenge or of valid compensation claims as assessed by the resolution authority in relation to the principles referred to in point (g) of Article 34(1) and Article 75 of Directive 2014/59/EU.
EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify:
the applicable forms and nature of indirect funding of eligible liabilities instruments;
the form and nature of incentives to redeem for the purposes of the condition set out in point (g) of the first subparagraph of paragraph 2 of this Article and Article 72c(3).
Those draft regulatory technical standards shall be fully aligned with the delegated act referred to in point (a) of Article 28(5) and in point (a) of Article 52(2).
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 December 2019.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 72c
Amortisation of eligible liabilities instruments
Eligible liabilities instruments with a residual maturity of less than one year shall not qualify as eligible liabilities items.
Article 72d
Consequences of the eligibility conditions ceasing to be met
Where, in the case of an eligible liabilities instrument, the applicable conditions set out in Article 72b cease to be met, the liabilities shall immediately cease to qualify as eligible liabilities instruments.
Liabilities referred to in Article 72b(2) may continue to count as eligible liabilities instruments as long as they qualify as eligible liabilities instruments under Article 72b(3) or (4).
Article 72e
Deductions from eligible liabilities items
Institutions that are subject to Article 92a shall deduct the following from eligible liabilities items:
direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of own eligible liabilities instruments, including own liabilities that that institution could be obliged to purchase as a result of existing contractual obligations;
direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of eligible liabilities instruments of G-SII entities with which the institution has reciprocal cross holdings that the competent authority considers to have been designed to artificially inflate the loss absorption and recapitalisation capacity of the resolution entity;
the applicable amount determined in accordance with Article 72i of direct, indirect and synthetic holdings of eligible liabilities instruments of G-SII entities, where the institution does not have a significant investment in those entities;
direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of eligible liabilities instruments of G-SII entities, where the institution has a significant investment in those entities, excluding underwriting positions held for five business days or fewer.
For the purposes of this Section, institutions may calculate the amount of holdings of the eligible liabilities instruments referred to in Article 72b(3) as follows:
where:
h |
= |
the amount of holdings of the eligible liabilities instruments referred to in Article 72b(3); |
i |
= |
the index denoting the issuing institution; |
Hi |
= |
the total amount of holdings of eligible liabilities of the issuing institution i referred to in Article 72b(3); |
li |
= |
the amount of liabilities included in eligible liabilities items by the issuing institution i within the limits specified in Article 72b(3) according to the latest disclosures by the issuing institution; and |
Li |
= |
the total amount of the outstanding liabilities of the issuing institution i referred to in Article 72b(3) according to the latest disclosures by the issuer. |
Where an EU parent institution or a parent institution in a Member State that is subject to Article 92a has direct, indirect or synthetic holdings of own funds instruments or eligible liabilities instruments of one or more subsidiaries which do not belong to the same resolution group as that parent institution, the resolution authority of that parent institution, after duly considering the opinion of the resolution authorities or relevant third-country authorities of any subsidiaries concerned, may permit the parent institution to deduct such holdings by deducting a lower amount specified by the resolution authority of that parent institution. That adjusted amount shall be at least equal to the amount (m) calculated as follows:
where:
i |
= |
the index denoting the subsidiary; |
OPi |
= |
the amount of own funds instruments issued by subsidiary i and held by the parent institution; |
LPi |
= |
the amount of eligible liabilities instruments issued by subsidiary i and held by the parent institution; |
β |
= |
percentage of own funds instruments and eligible liabilities instruments issued by subsidiary i and held by the parent undertaking, calculated as follows:
|
Oi |
= |
the amount of own funds of subsidiary i, not taking into account the deduction calculated in accordance with this paragraph; |
Li |
= |
the amount of eligible liabilities of subsidiary i, not taking into account the deduction calculated in accordance with this paragraph; |
ri |
= |
the ratio applicable to subsidiary i at the level of its resolution group in accordance with Article 92a(1), point (a), of this Regulation and Article 45c(3), first subparagraph, point (a), of Directive 2014/59/EU or, for third-country subsidiaries, an equivalent resolution requirement applicable to subsidiary i in the third country where it has its head office, insofar as that requirement is met with instruments that would be considered own funds or eligible liabilities under this Regulation; |
aRWAi |
= |
the total risk exposure amount of the G-SII entity i calculated in accordance with Article 92(3), taking into account the adjustments set out in Article 12a or, for third-country subsidiaries, calculated in accordance with the applicable local regulations; |
wi |
= |
the ratio applicable to subsidiary i at the level of its resolution group in accordance with Article 92a(1), point (b), of this Regulation and of Article 45c(3), first subparagraph, point (b), of Directive 2014/59/EU or, for third-country subsidiaries, an equivalent resolution requirement applicable to subsidiary i in the third country where it has its head office, insofar as that requirement is met with instruments that would be considered own funds or eligible liabilities under this Regulation; |
aLREi |
= |
the total exposure measure of the G-SII entity i calculated in accordance with Article 429(4) or, for third-country subsidiaries, calculated in accordance with the applicable local regulations. |
Where the parent institution is allowed to deduct the adjusted amount in accordance with the first subparagraph, the difference between the amount of holdings of own funds instruments and eligible liabilities instruments referred to in the first subparagraph and that adjusted amount shall be deducted by the subsidiary.
Institutions and entities referred to in Article 1(1), points (b), (c) and (d), of Directive 2014/59/EU shall deduct from eligible liabilities items their holdings of own funds instruments and eligible liabilities instruments where all of the following conditions are met:
the own funds instruments and eligible liabilities instruments are held by an institution or entity that is not itself a resolution entity but that is a subsidiary of a resolution entity or of a third-country entity that would be a resolution entity if it were established in the Union;
the institution or entity referred to in point (a) is required to comply with the requirements laid down in Article 92b of this Regulation or in Article 45f of Directive 2014/59/EU;
the own funds instruments and eligible liabilities instruments held by the institution or entity referred to in point (a) were issued by an institution or entity referred to in Article 92b(1) of this Regulation or in Article 45f(1) of Directive 2014/59/EU that is not itself a resolution entity and that belongs to the same resolution group as the institution or entity referred to in point (a).
By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, holdings of own funds instruments and eligible liabilities instruments shall not be deducted where the institution or entity referred to in point (a) of the first subparagraph is required to comply with the requirement referred to in point (b) of the first subparagraph on a consolidated basis and the institution or entity referred to in point (c) of the first subparagraph is included in the consolidation of the institution or entity referred to in point (a) of the first subparagraph in accordance with Part One, Title II, Chapter 2.
For the purposes of this paragraph, the reference to eligible liabilities items shall be understood as a reference to any of the following:
eligible liabilities items taken into account for the purposes of complying with the requirement laid down in Article 92b;
liabilities that meet the conditions set out in Article 45f(2), point (a), of Directive 2014/59/EU.
For the purposes of this paragraph, the reference to own funds instruments and eligible liabilities instruments shall be understood as a reference to any of the following:
own funds instruments and eligible liabilities instruments that meet the conditions set out in Article 92b(2) and (3);
own funds and liabilities that meet the conditions set out in Article 45f(2) of Directive 2014/59/EU.
Article 72f
Deduction of holdings of own eligible liabilities instruments
For the purposes of point (a) of Article 72e(1), institutions shall calculate holdings on the basis of the gross long positions subject to the following exceptions:
institutions may calculate the amount of holdings on the basis of the net long position, provided that both the following conditions are met:
the long and short positions are in the same underlying exposure and the short positions involve no counterparty risk;
either both the long and the short positions are held in the trading book or both are held in the non-trading book;
institutions shall determine the amount to be deducted for direct, indirect and synthetic holdings of index securities by calculating the underlying exposure to own eligible liabilities instruments in those indices;
institutions may net gross long positions in own eligible liabilities instruments resulting from holdings of index securities against short positions in own eligible liabilities instruments resulting from short positions in underlying indices, including where those short positions involve counterparty risk, provided that both the following conditions are met:
the long and short positions are in the same underlying indices;
either both the long and the short positions are held in the trading book or both are held in the non-trading book.
Article 72g
Deduction base for eligible liabilities items
For the purposes of points (b), (c) and (d) of Article 72e(1), institutions shall deduct the gross long positions subject to the exceptions laid down in Articles 72h and 72i.
Article 72h
Deduction of holdings of eligible liabilities of other G-SII entities
Institutions not making use of the exception set out in Article 72j shall make the deductions referred to in points (c) and (d) of Article 72e(1) in accordance with the following:
they may calculate direct, indirect and synthetic holdings of eligible liabilities instruments on the basis of the net long position in the same underlying exposure, provided that both the following conditions are met:
the maturity date of the short position is either the same as, or later than the maturity date of the long position or the residual maturity of the short position is at least one year;
either both the long position and the short position are held in the trading book or both are held in the non-trading book;
they shall determine the amount to be deducted for direct, indirect and synthetic holdings of index securities by looking through to the underlying exposure to the eligible liabilities instruments in those indices.
Article 72i
Deduction of eligible liabilities where the institution does not have a significant investment in G-SII entities
For the purposes of point (c) of Article 72e(1), institutions shall calculate the applicable amount to be deducted by multiplying the amount referred to in point (a) of this paragraph by the factor derived from the calculation referred to in point (b) of this paragraph:
the aggregate amount by which the direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of the Common Equity Tier 1, Additional Tier 1, Tier 2 instruments of financial sector entities and eligible liabilities instruments of G-SII entities in none of which the institution has a significant investment exceeds 10 % of the Common Equity Tier 1 items of the institution after applying the following:
Articles 32 to 35;
points (a) to (g), points (k)(ii) to (k)(v) and point (l) of Article 36(1), excluding the amount to be deducted for deferred tax assets that rely on future profitability and arise from temporary differences;
Articles 44 and 45;
the amount of direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of the eligible liabilities instruments of G-SII entities in which the institution does not have a significant investment divided by the aggregate amount of the direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of the Common Equity Tier 1, Additional Tier 1, Tier 2 instruments of financial sector entities and eligible liabilities instruments of G-SII entities in none of which the resolution entity has a significant investment.
The amount to be deducted pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be apportioned across each eligible liabilities instrument of a G-SII entity held by the institution. Institutions shall determine the amount of each eligible liabilities instrument that is deducted pursuant to paragraph 1 by multiplying the amount specified in point (a) of this paragraph by the proportion specified in point (b) of this paragraph:
the amount of holdings required to be deducted pursuant to paragraph 1;
the proportion of the aggregate amount of direct, indirect and synthetic holdings by the institution of the eligible liabilities instruments of G-SII entities in which the institution does not have a significant investment represented by each eligible liabilities instrument held by the institution.
Article 72j
Trading book exception from deductions from eligible liabilities items
Institutions may decide not to deduct a designated part of their direct, indirect and synthetic holdings of eligible liabilities instruments, that in aggregate and measured on a gross long basis is equal to or less than 5 % of the Common Equity Tier 1 items of the institution after applying Articles 32 to 36, provided that all the following conditions are met:
the holdings are in the trading book;
the eligible liabilities instruments are held for no longer than 30 business days.
Article 72k
Eligible liabilities
The eligible liabilities of an institution shall consist of the eligible liabilities items of the institution after the deductions referred to in Article 72e.
Article 72l
Own funds and eligible liabilities
The own funds and eligible liabilities of an institution shall consist of the sum of its own funds and its eligible liabilities.
CHAPTER 6
General requirements for own funds and eligible liabilities
Article 73
Distributions on instruments
Competent authorities shall grant the prior permission referred to in paragraph 1 only where they consider all the following conditions to be met:
the ability of the institution to cancel payments under the instrument would not be adversely affected by the discretion referred to in paragraph 1, or by the form in which distributions could be made;
the ability of the capital instrument or of the liability to absorb losses would not be adversely affected by the discretion referred to in paragraph 1, or by the form in which distributions could be made;
the quality of the capital instrument or liability would not otherwise be reduced by the discretion referred to in paragraph 1, or by the form in which distributions could be made.
The competent authority shall consult the resolution authority regarding an institution's compliance with those conditions before granting the prior permission referred to in paragraph 1.
Paragraph 4 shall not apply where the institution is a reference entity in that broad market index unless both the following conditions are met:
the institution considers movements in that broad market index not to be significantly correlated to the credit standing of the institution, its parent institution or parent financial holding company or parent mixed financial holding company or parent mixed activity holding company;
the competent authority has not reached a different determination from that referred to in point (a).
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 July 2013.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 74
Holdings of capital instruments issued by regulated financial sector entities that do not qualify as regulatory capital
Institutions shall not deduct from any element of own funds direct, indirect or synthetic holdings of capital instruments issued by a regulated financial sector entity that do not qualify as regulatory capital of that entity. Institutions shall apply risk weights to such holdings in accordance with Chapter 2 or 3 of Title II of Part Three, as applicable.
Article 75
Deduction and maturity requirements for short positions
The maturity requirements for short positions referred to in point (a) of Article 45, point (a) of Article 59, point (a) of Article 69 and point (a) of Article 72h shall be considered to be met in respect of positions held where all the following conditions are met:
the institution has the contractual right to sell on a specific future date to the counterparty providing the hedge the long position that is being hedged;
the counterparty providing the hedge to the institution is contractually obliged to purchase from the institution on that specific future date the long position referred to in point (a).
Article 76
Index holdings of capital instruments and of liabilities
For the purposes of point (a) of Article 42, point (a) of Article 45, point (a) of Article 57, point (a) of Article 59, point (a) of Article 67, point (a) of Article 69, point (a) of Article 72f and point (a) of Article 72h, institutions may reduce the amount of a long position in a capital instrument or in a liability by the portion of an index that is made up of the same underlying exposure that is being hedged, provided that all the following conditions are met:
either both the long position being hedged and the short position in an index used to hedge that long position are held in the trading book or both are held in the non-trading book;
the positions referred to in point (a) are held at fair value on the balance sheet of the institution;
the short position referred to in point (a) qualifies as an effective hedge under the internal control processes of the institution;
the competent authorities assess the adequacy of the internal control processes referred to in point (c) on at least an annual basis and are satisfied with their continuing appropriateness.
Where the competent authority has granted its prior permission, an institution may use a conservative estimate of the underlying exposure of the institution to capital instruments or to liabilities included in indices as an alternative to an institution calculating its exposure to the items referred to in one or more of the following points:
own Common Equity Tier 1, Additional Tier 1, Tier 2 and eligible liabilities instruments included in indices;
Common Equity Tier 1, Additional Tier 1 and Tier 2 instruments of financial sector entities, included in indices;
eligible liabilities instruments of institutions, included in indices.
EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify:
when an estimate used as an alternative to the calculation of underlying exposure referred to in paragraph 2 is sufficiently conservative;
the meaning of operationally burdensome for the purposes of paragraph 3.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 July 2013.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 77
Conditions for reducing own funds and eligible liabilities
An institution shall obtain the prior permission of the competent authority to do any of the following:
reduce, redeem or repurchase Common Equity Tier 1 instruments issued by the institution in a manner that is permitted under applicable national law;
reduce, distribute or reclassify as another own funds item the share premium accounts related to own funds instruments;
effect the call, redemption, repayment or repurchase of Additional Tier 1 or Tier 2 instruments prior to the date of their contractual maturity.
Article 78
Supervisory permission to reduce own funds
The competent authority shall grant permission for an institution to reduce, call, redeem, repay or repurchase Common Equity Tier 1, Additional Tier 1 or Tier 2 instruments, or to reduce, distribute or reclassify related share premium accounts, where either of the following conditions is met:
before or at the same time as any of the actions referred to in Article 77(1), the institution replaces the instruments or the related share premium accounts referred to in Article 77(1) with own funds instruments of equal or higher quality at terms that are sustainable for the income capacity of the institution;
the institution has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the competent authority that the own funds and eligible liabilities of the institution would, following the action referred to in Article 77(1) of this Regulation, exceed the requirements laid down in this Regulation and in Directives 2013/36/EU and 2014/59/EU by a margin that the competent authority considers necessary.
Where an institution provides sufficient safeguards as to its capacity to operate with own funds above the amounts required in this Regulation and in Directive 2013/36/EU, the competent authority may grant that institution a general prior permission to take any of the actions set out in Article 77(1) of this Regulation, subject to criteria that ensure that any such future action will be in accordance with the conditions set out in points (a) and (b) of this paragraph. That general prior permission shall be granted only for a specified period, which shall not exceed one year, after which it may be renewed. The general prior permission shall be granted for a certain predetermined amount, which shall be set by the competent authority. ►C7 In the case of Common Equity Tier 1 instruments, that predetermined amount shall not exceed 3 % of the relevant issue and shall not exceed 10 % of the amount by which Common Equity Tier 1 capital exceeds the sum of the Common Equity Tier 1 capital requirements laid down in this Regulation, in Directives 2013/36/EU and 2014/59/EU and a margin that the competent authority considers necessary. ◄ In the case of Additional Tier 1 or Tier 2 instruments, that predetermined amount shall not exceed 10 % of the relevant issue and shall not exceed 3 % of the total amount of outstanding Additional Tier 1 or Tier 2 instruments, as applicable.
Competent authorities shall withdraw the general prior permission where an institution breaches any of the criteria provided for the purposes of that permission.
Competent authorities may permit institutions to call, redeem, repay or repurchase Additional Tier 1 or Tier 2 instruments or related share premium accounts during the five years following their date of issuance where the conditions set out in paragraph 1 and one of the following conditions is met:
there is a change in the regulatory classification of those instruments that would be likely to result in their exclusion from own funds or reclassification as own funds of lower quality, and both the following conditions are met:
the competent authority considers such a change to be sufficiently certain;
the institution demonstrates to the satisfaction of the competent authority that the regulatory reclassification of those instruments was not reasonably foreseeable at the time of their issuance;
there is a change in the applicable tax treatment of those instruments which the institution demonstrates to the satisfaction of the competent authority is material and was not reasonably foreseeable at the time of their issuance;
the instruments and related share premium accounts are grandfathered under Article 494b;
before or at the same time as the action referred to in Article 77(1), the institution replaces the instruments or related share premium accounts referred to in Article 77(1) with own funds instruments of equal or higher quality at terms that are sustainable for the income capacity of the institution and the competent authority has permitted that action on the basis of the determination that it would be beneficial from a prudential point of view and justified by exceptional circumstances;
the Additional Tier 1 or Tier 2 instruments are repurchased for market making purposes.
EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify the following:
the meaning of ‘sustainable for the income capacity of the institution’;
the appropriate bases of limitation of redemption referred to in paragraph 3;
the process including the limits and procedures for granting approval in advance by competent authorities for an action listed in Article 77(1), and data requirements for an application by an institution for the permission of the competent authority to carry out an action listed therein, including the process to be applied in the case of redemption of shares issued to members of cooperative societies, and the time period for processing such an application.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 July 2013.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 78a
Permission to reduce eligible liabilities instruments
The resolution authority shall grant permission for an institution to call, redeem, repay or repurchase eligible liabilities instruments where one of the following conditions is met:
before or at the same time as any of the actions referred to in Article 77(2), the institution replaces the eligible liabilities instruments with own funds or eligible liabilities instruments of equal or higher quality at terms that are sustainable for the income capacity of the institution;
the institution has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the resolution authority that the own funds and eligible liabilities of the institution would, following the action referred to in Article 77(2) of this Regulation, exceed the requirements for own funds and eligible liabilities laid down in this Regulation and in Directives 2013/36/EU and 2014/59/EU by a margin that the resolution authority, in agreement with the competent authority, considers necessary;
the institution has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the resolution authority that the partial or full replacement of the eligible liabilities with own funds instruments is necessary to ensure compliance with the own funds requirements laid down in this Regulation and in Directive 2013/36/EU for continuing authorisation.
Where an institution provides sufficient safeguards as to its capacity to operate with own funds and eligible liabilities above the amount of the requirements laid down in this Regulation and in Directives 2013/36/EU and 2014/59/EU, the resolution authority, after consulting the competent authority, may grant that institution a general prior permission to effect calls, redemptions, repayments or repurchases of eligible liabilities instruments, subject to criteria that ensure that any such future action will be in accordance with the conditions set out in points (a) and (b) of this paragraph. That general prior permission shall be granted only for a specified period, which shall not exceed one year, after which it may be renewed. The general prior permission shall be granted for a certain predetermined amount, which shall be set by the resolution authority. Resolution authorities shall inform the competent authorities about any general prior permission granted.
The resolution authority shall withdraw the general prior permission where an institution breaches any of the criteria provided for the purposes of that permission.
EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify the following:
the process of cooperation between the competent authority and the resolution authority;
the procedure, including the time limits and information requirements, for granting the permission in accordance with the first subparagraph of paragraph 1;
the procedure, including the time limits and information requirements, for granting the general prior permission in accordance with the second subparagraph of paragraph 1;
the meaning of ‘sustainable for the income capacity of the institution’.
For the purposes of point (d) of the first subparagraph of this paragraph, the draft regulatory technical standards shall be fully aligned with the delegated act referred to in Article 78.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 December 2019.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 79
Temporary waiver from deduction from own funds and eligible liabilities
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 July 2013.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 79a
Assessment of compliance with the conditions for own funds and eligible liabilities instruments
Institutions shall have regard to the substantial features of instruments and not only their legal form when assessing compliance with the requirements laid down in Part Two. The assessment of the substantial features of an instrument shall take into account all arrangements related to the instruments, even where those are not explicitly set out in the terms and conditions of the instruments themselves, for the purpose of determining that the combined economic effects of such arrangements are compliant with the objective of the relevant provisions.
Article 80
Continuing review of the quality of own funds and eligible liabilities instruments
Competent authorities shall, without delay and upon request by EBA, forward all information to EBA that EBA considers relevant concerning new capital instruments or new types of liabilities issued in order to enable EBA to monitor the quality of own funds and eligible liabilities instruments issued by institutions across the Union.
A notification shall include the following:
a detailed explanation of the nature and extent of the shortfall identified;
technical advice on the action by the Commission that EBA considers to be necessary;
significant developments in the methodology of EBA for stress testing the solvency of institutions.
EBA shall provide technical advice to the Commission on any significant changes it considers to be required to the definition of own funds and eligible liabilities as a result of any of the following:
relevant developments in market standards or practice;
changes in relevant legal or accounting standards;
significant developments in the methodology of EBA for stress testing the solvency of institutions.
TITLE II
MINORITY INTEREST AND ADDITIONAL TIER 1 AND TIER 2 INSTRUMENTS ISSUED BY SUBSIDIARIES
Article 81
Minority interests that qualify for inclusion in consolidated Common Equity Tier 1 capital
Minority interests shall comprise the sum of Common Equity Tier 1 items of a subsidiary where the following conditions are met:
the subsidiary is one of the following:
an institution;
an undertaking that is subject by virtue of applicable national law to the requirements of this Regulation and of Directive 2013/36/EU;
an intermediate financial holding company or intermediate mixed financial holding company that is subject to the requirements of this Regulation on a sub‐consolidated basis, or an intermediate investment holding company that is subject to the requirements of Regulation (EU) 2019/2033 on a consolidated basis;
an investment firm;
an intermediate financial holding company in a third country, provided that that intermediate financial holding company is subject to prudential requirements as stringent as those applied to credit institutions of that third country and provided that the Commission has adopted a decision in accordance with Article 107(4) determining that those prudential requirements are at least equivalent to those of this Regulation;
the subsidiary is included fully in the consolidation pursuant to Chapter 2 of Title II of Part One;
the Common Equity Tier 1 items, referred to in the introductory part of this paragraph, are owned by persons other than the undertakings included in the consolidation pursuant to Chapter 2 of Title II of Part One.
Article 82
Qualifying Additional Tier 1, Tier 1, Tier 2 capital and qualifying own funds
Qualifying Additional Tier 1, Tier 1, Tier 2 capital and qualifying own funds shall comprise the minority interest, Additional Tier 1 or Tier 2 instruments, as applicable, plus the related share premium accounts, of a subsidiary where the following conditions are met:
the subsidiary is one of the following:
an institution;
an undertaking that is subject by virtue of applicable national law to the requirements of this Regulation and of Directive 2013/36/EU;
an intermediate financial holding company or intermediate mixed financial holding company that is subject to the requirements of this Regulation on a sub‐consolidated basis, or an intermediate investment holding company that is subject to the requirements of Regulation (EU) 2019/2033 on a consolidated basis;
an investment firm;
an intermediate financial holding company in a third country, provided that that intermediate financial holding company is subject to prudential requirements as stringent as those applied to credit institutions of that third country and provided that the Commission has adopted a decision in accordance with Article 107(4) determining that those prudential requirements are at least equivalent to those of this Regulation;
the subsidiary is included fully in the scope of consolidation pursuant to Chapter 2 of Title II of Part One;
the Common Equity Tier 1 items, Additional Tier 1 items and Tier 2 items referred to in the introductory part of this paragraph, are owned by persons other than the undertakings included in the consolidation pursuant to Chapter 2 of Title II of Part One.
Article 83
Qualifying Additional Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital issued by a special purpose entity
Additional Tier 1 and Tier 2 instruments issued by a special purpose entity, and the related share premium accounts, are included until 31 December 2021 in qualifying Additional Tier 1, Tier 1 or Tier 2 capital or qualifying own funds, as applicable, only where the following conditions are met:
the special purpose entity issuing those instruments is included fully in the consolidation pursuant to Chapter 2 of Title II of Part One;
the instruments, and the related share premium accounts, are included in qualifying Additional Tier 1 capital only where the conditions laid down in Article 52(1) are satisfied;
the instruments, and the related share premium accounts, are included in qualifying Tier 2 capital only where the conditions laid down in Article 63 are satisfied;
the only asset of the special purpose entity is its investment in the own funds of the parent undertaking or a subsidiary thereof that is included fully in the consolidation pursuant to Chapter 2 of Title II of Part One, the form of which satisfies the relevant conditions laid down in Articles 52(1) or 63, as applicable.
Where the competent authority considers the assets of a special purpose entity other than its investment in the own funds of the parent undertaking or a subsidiary thereof that is included in the scope of consolidation pursuant to Chapter 2 of Title II of Part One, to be minimal and insignificant for such an entity, the competent authority may waive the condition specified in point (d) of the first subparagraph.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 July 2013.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 84
Minority interests included in consolidated Common Equity Tier 1 capital
Institutions shall determine the amount of minority interests of a subsidiary that is included in consolidated Common Equity Tier 1 capital by subtracting from the minority interests of that undertaking the result of multiplying the amount referred to in point (a) by the percentage referred to in point (b) as follows:
the Common Equity Tier 1 capital of the subsidiary minus the lower of the following:
the amount of Common Equity Tier 1 capital of that subsidiary required to meet the following:
the amount of consolidated Common Equity Tier 1 capital that relates to that subsidiary that is required on a consolidated basis to meet the sum of the requirement laid down in point (a) of Article 92(1) of this Regulation, the requirements referred to in Articles 458 and 459 of this Regulation, the specific own funds requirements referred to in Article 104 of Directive 2013/36/EU, the combined buffer requirement defined in point (6) of Article 128 of that Directive, and any additional local supervisory regulations in third countries insofar as those requirements are to be met by Common Equity Tier 1 capital;
the minority interests of the subsidiary expressed as a percentage of all Common Equity Tier 1 items of that undertaking.
An institution may choose not to undertake this calculation for a subsidiary referred to in Article 81(1). Where an institution takes such a decision, the minority interest of that subsidiary may not be included in consolidated Common Equity Tier 1 capital.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 July 2013.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Competent authorities may grant a waiver from the application of this Article to a parent financial holding company that satisfies all the following conditions:
its principal activity is to acquire holdings;
it is subject to prudential supervision on a consolidated basis;
it consolidates a subsidiary institution in which it has only a minority holding by virtue of the control relationship defined in Article 1 of Directive 83/349/EEC;
more than 90 % of the consolidated required Common Equity Tier 1 capital arises from the subsidiary institution referred to in point c) calculated on a sub-consolidated basis.
Where, after 28 June 2013, a parent financial holding company that meets the conditions laid down in the first subparagraph becomes a parent mixed financial holding company, competent authorities may grant the waiver referred to in the first subparagraph to that parent mixed financial holding company provided that it meets the conditions laid down in that subparagraph.
Article 85
Qualifying Tier 1 instruments included in consolidated Tier 1 capital
Institutions shall determine the amount of qualifying Tier 1 capital of a subsidiary that is included in consolidated own funds by subtracting from the qualifying Tier 1 capital of that undertaking the result of multiplying the amount referred to in point (a) by the percentage referred to in point (b) as follows:
the Tier 1 capital of the subsidiary minus the lower of the following:
the amount of Tier 1 capital of the subsidiary required to meet the following:
the amount of consolidated Tier 1 capital that relates to the subsidiary that is required on a consolidated basis to meet the sum of the requirement laid down in point (b) of Article 92(1) of this Regulation, the requirements referred to in Articles 458 and 459 of this Regulation, the specific own funds requirements referred to in Article 104 of Directive 2013/36/EU, the combined buffer requirement defined in point (6) of Article 128 of that Directive, and any additional local supervisory regulations in third countries insofar as those requirements are to be met by Tier 1 Capital;
the qualifying Tier 1 capital of the subsidiary expressed as a percentage of all Common Equity Tier 1 and Additional Tier 1 items of that undertaking.
An institution may choose not to undertake this calculation for a subsidiary referred to in Article 81(1). Where an institution takes such a decision, the qualifying Tier 1 capital of that subsidiary may not be included in consolidated Tier 1 capital.
Article 86
Qualifying Tier 1 capital included in consolidated Additional Tier 1 capital
Without prejudice to Article 84 (5) or (6), institutions shall determine the amount of qualifying Tier 1 capital of a subsidiary that is included in consolidated Additional Tier 1 capital by subtracting from the qualifying Tier 1 capital of that undertaking included in consolidated Tier 1 capital the minority interests of that undertaking that are included in consolidated Common Equity Tier 1 capital.
Article 87
Qualifying own funds included in consolidated own funds
Institutions shall determine the amount of qualifying own funds of a subsidiary that is included in consolidated own funds by subtracting from the qualifying own funds of that undertaking the result of multiplying the amount referred to in point (a) by the percentage referred to in point (b) as follows:
the own funds of the subsidiary minus the lower of the following:
the amount of own funds of the subsidiary required to meet the following:
the amount of own funds that relates to the subsidiary that is required on a consolidated basis to meet the sum of the requirement laid down in point (c) of Article 92(1) of this Regulation, the requirements referred to in Articles 458 and 459 of this Regulation, the specific own funds requirements referred to in Article 104 of Directive 2013/36/EU, the combined buffer requirement defined in point (6) of Article 128 of that Directive, and any additional local supervisory own funds requirement in third countries;
the qualifying own funds of the undertaking, expressed as a percentage of the sum of all the Common Equity Tier 1 items, Additional Tier 1 items and Tier 2 items, excluding the amounts referred to in points (c) and (d) of Article 62, of that undertaking.
An institution may choose not to undertake this calculation for a subsidiary referred to in Article 81(1). Where an institution takes such a decision, the qualifying own funds of that subsidiary may not be included in consolidated own funds.
Article 88
Qualifying own funds instruments included in consolidated Tier 2 capital
Without prejudice to Article 84(5) or (6), institutions shall determine the amount of qualifying own funds of a subsidiary that is included in consolidated Tier 2 capital by subtracting from the qualifying own funds of that undertaking that are included in consolidated own funds the qualifying Tier 1 capital of that undertaking that is included in consolidated Tier 1 capital.
Article 88a
Qualifying eligible liabilities instruments
Liabilities issued by a subsidiary established in the Union that belongs to the same resolution group as the resolution entity shall qualify for inclusion in the consolidated eligible liabilities instruments of an institution subject to Article 92a, provided that all the following conditions are met:
they are issued in accordance with point (a) of Article 45f(2) of Directive 2014/59/EU;
they are bought by an existing shareholder that is not part of the same resolution group as long as the exercise of the write-down or conversion powers in accordance with Articles 59 to 62 of Directive 2014/59/EU does not affect the control of the subsidiary by the resolution entity;
they do not exceed the amount determined by subtracting the amount referred to in point (i) from the amount referred to in point (ii):
the sum of the liabilities issued to and bought by the resolution entity either directly or indirectly through other entities in the same resolution group and the amount of own funds instruments issued in accordance with point (b) of Article 45f(2) of Directive 2014/59/EU;
the amount required in accordance with Article 45f(1) of Directive 2014/59/EU.
TITLE III
QUALIFYING HOLDINGS OUTSIDE THE FINANCIAL SECTOR
Article 89
Risk weighting and prohibition of qualifying holdings outside the financial sector
A qualifying holding, the amount of which exceeds 15 % of the eligible capital of the institution, in an undertaking which is not one of the following shall be subject to the provisions laid down in paragraph 3:
a financial sector entity;
an undertaking, that is not a financial sector entity, carrying on activities which the competent authority considers to be any of the following:
a direct extension of banking;
ancillary to banking;
leasing, factoring, the management of unit trusts, the management of data processing services or any other similar activity.
Competent authorities shall apply the requirements laid down in point (a) or (b) to qualifying holdings of institutions referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2:
for the purpose of calculating the capital requirement in accordance with Part Three, institutions shall apply a risk weight of 1 250 % to the greater of the following:
the amount of qualifying holdings referred to in paragraph 1 in excess of 15 % of eligible capital;
the total amount of qualifying holdings referred to in paragraph 2 that exceed 60 % of the eligible capital of the institution;
the competent authorities shall prohibit institutions from having qualifying holdings referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 the amount of which exceeds the percentages of eligible capital laid down in those paragraphs.
Competent authorities shall publish their choice of (a) or (b).
For the purposes of point (b) of paragraph 1, EBA shall issue guidelines specifying the following concepts:
activities that are a direct extension of banking;
activities ancillary to banking;
similar activities.
Those guidelines shall be adopted in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 90
Alternative to 1 250 % risk weight
As an alternative to applying a 1 250 % risk weight to the amounts in excess of the limits specified in Article 89(1) and (2), institutions may deduct those amounts from Common Equity Tier 1 items in accordance with point (k) of Article 36(1).
Article 91
Exceptions
Shares of undertakings not referred to in points (a) and (b) of Article 89(1) shall not be included in calculating the eligible capital limits specified in that Article where any of the following conditions is met:
those shares are held temporarily during a financial assistance operation as referred to in Article 79;
the holding of those shares is an underwriting position held for five working days or fewer;
those shares are held in the own name of the institution and on behalf of others.
PART THREE
CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS
TITLE I
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS, VALUATION AND REPORTING
CHAPTER 1
Required level of own funds
Section 1
Own funds requirements for institutions
Article 92
Own funds requirements
Subject to Articles 93 and 94, institutions shall at all times satisfy the following own funds requirements:
a Common Equity Tier 1 capital ratio of 4,5 %;
a Tier 1 capital ratio of 6 %;
a total capital ratio of 8 %;
a leverage ratio of 3 %.
A G-SII shall meet the leverage ratio buffer requirement with Tier 1 capital only. Tier 1 capital that is used to meet the leverage ratio buffer requirement shall not be used towards meeting any of the leverage based requirements set out in this Regulation and in Directive 2013/36/EU, unless explicitly otherwise provided therein.
Where a G-SII does not meet the leverage ratio buffer requirement, it shall be subject to the capital conservation requirement in accordance with Article 141b of Directive 2013/36/EU.
Where a G-SII does not meet at the same time the leverage ratio buffer requirement and the combined buffer requirement as defined in point (6) of Article 128 of Directive 2013/36/EU, it shall be subject to the higher of the capital conservation requirements in accordance with Articles 141 and 141b of that Directive.
Institutions shall calculate their capital ratios as follows:
the Common Equity Tier 1 capital ratio is the Common Equity Tier 1 capital of the institution expressed as a percentage of the total risk exposure amount;
the Tier 1 capital ratio is the Tier 1 capital of the institution expressed as a percentage of the total risk exposure amount;
the total capital ratio is the own funds of the institution expressed as a percentage of the total risk exposure amount.
Total risk exposure amount shall be calculated as the sum of points (a) to (f) of this paragraph after taking into account the provisions laid down in paragraph 4:
the risk-weighted exposure amounts for credit risk and dilution risk, calculated in accordance with Title II and Article 379, in respect of all the business activities of an institution, excluding risk-weighted exposure amounts from the trading book business of the institution;
the own funds requirements for the trading-book business of an institution for the following:
market risk as determined in accordance with Title IV of this Part, excluding the approaches set out in Chapters 1a and 1b of that Title;
large exposures exceeding the limits specified in Articles 395 to 401, to the extent that an institution is permitted to exceed those limits, as determined in accordance with Part Four;
the own funds requirements for market risk as determined in Title IV of this Part, excluding the approaches set out in Chapters 1a and 1b of that Title, for all business activities that are subject to foreign exchange risk or commodity risk;
the own funds requirements calculated in accordance with Title V of this Part, with the exception of Article 379 for settlement risk;
the own funds requirements calculated in accordance with Title VI for credit valuation adjustment risk of OTC derivative instruments other than credit derivatives recognised to reduce risk-weighted exposure amounts for credit risk;
the own funds requirements determined in accordance with Title III for operational risk;
the risk-weighted exposure amounts determined in accordance with Title II for counterparty risk arising from the trading book business of the institution for the following types of transactions and agreements:
contracts listed in Annex II and credit derivatives;
repurchase transactions, securities or commodities lending or borrowing transactions based on securities or commodities;
margin lending transactions based on securities or commodities;
long settlement transactions.
The following provisions shall apply in the calculation of the total risk exposure amount referred to in paragraph 3:
the own funds requirements referred to in points (c), (d) and (e) of that paragraph shall include those arising from all the business activities of an institution;
institutions shall multiply the own funds requirements set out in points (b) to (e) of that paragraph by 12,5.
Article 92a
Requirements for own funds and eligible liabilities for G-SIIs
Subject to Articles 93 and 94 and to the exceptions set out in paragraph 2 of this Article, institutions identified as resolution entities and that are G-SII entities shall at all times satisfy the following requirements for own funds and eligible liabilities:
a risk-based ratio of 18 %, representing the own funds and eligible liabilities of the institution expressed as a percentage of the total risk exposure amount calculated in accordance with Article 92(3) and (4);
a non-risk-based ratio of 6,75 %, representing the own funds and eligible liabilities of the institution expressed as a percentage of the total exposure measure referred to in Article 429(4).
The requirements laid down in paragraph 1 shall not apply in the following cases:
within the three years following the date on which the institution or the group of which the institution is part has been identified as a G-SII;
within the two years following the date on which the resolution authority has applied the bail-in tool in accordance with Directive 2014/59/EU;
within the two years following the date on which the resolution entity has put in place an alternative private sector measure referred to in point (b) of Article 32(1) of Directive 2014/59/EU by which capital instruments and other liabilities have been written down or converted into Common Equity Tier 1 items in order to recapitalise the resolution entity without the application of resolution tools.
▼M15 —————
Article 92b
Requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities for non-EU G-SIIs
An eligible liabilities instrument shall only be taken into account for the purpose of complying with paragraph 1 where it fulfils all the following additional conditions:
in the event of normal insolvency proceedings as defined in point (47) of Article 2(1) of Directive 2014/59/EU, the claim resulting from the liability ranks below claims resulting from liabilities that do not fulfil the conditions set out in paragraph 2 of this Article and that do not qualify as own funds;
it is subject to the write-down or conversion powers in accordance with Articles 59 to 62 of Directive 2014/59/EU.
Article 93
Initial capital requirement on going concern
▼M9 —————
Article 94
Derogation for small trading book business
By way of derogation from point (b) of Article 92(3), institutions may calculate the own funds requirement for their trading-book business in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article, provided that the size of the institutions' on- and off-balance-sheet trading-book business is equal to or less than both of the following thresholds on the basis of an assessment carried out on a monthly basis using the data as of the last day of the month:
5 % of the institution's total assets;
EUR 50 million.
Where both conditions set out in points (a) and (b) of paragraph 1 are met, institutions may calculate the own funds requirement for their trading-book business as follows:
for the contracts listed in point 1 of Annex II, contracts relating to equities which are referred to in point 3 of that Annex and credit derivatives, institutions may exempt those positions from the own funds requirement referred to in point (b) of Article 92(3);
for trading book positions other than those referred to in point (a) of this paragraph, institutions may replace the own funds requirement referred to in point (b) of Article 92(3) with the requirement calculated in accordance with point (a) of Article 92(3).
Institutions shall calculate the size of their on- and off-balance-sheet trading book business on the basis of data as of the last day of each month for the purposes of paragraph 1 in accordance with the following requirements:
all the positions assigned to the trading book in accordance with Article 104 shall be included in the calculation except for the following:
positions concerning foreign exchange and commodities;
positions in credit derivatives that are recognised as internal hedges against non-trading book credit risk exposures or counterparty risk exposures and the credit derivate transactions that perfectly offset the market risk of those internal hedges as referred to in Article 106(3);
all positions included in the calculation in accordance with point (a) shall be valued at their market value on that given date; where the market value of a position is not available on a given date, institutions shall take a fair value for the position on that date; where the market value and fair value of a position are not available on a given date, institutions shall take the most recent of the market value or fair value for that position;
the absolute value of long positions shall be summed with the absolute value of short positions.
An institution shall cease to calculate the own funds requirements of its trading-book business in accordance with paragraph 2 within three months of one of the following occurring:
the institution does not meet the conditions set out in point (a) or (b) of paragraph 1 for three consecutive months;
the institution does not meet the conditions set out in point (a) or (b) of paragraph 1 during more than 6 out of the last 12 months.
In developing those draft regulatory technical standards, EBA shall take into consideration the method developed for the regulatory technical standards mandated in accordance with Article 279a(3), point (b).
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 10 July 2025.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Section 2
Own funds requirements for investment firms with limited authorisation to provide investment services
Article 95
Own funds requirements for investment firms with limited authorisation to provide investment services
Investment firms referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and firms referred to in point (2)(c) of Article 4(1) that provide the investment services and activities listed in points (2) and (4) of Section A of Annex I to Directive 2004/39/EC shall calculate the total risk exposure amount as the higher of the following:
the sum of the items referred to in points (a) to (d) and (f) of Article 92(3) after applying Article 92(4);
12,5 multiplied by the amount specified in Article 97.
Firms referred to in point (2)(c) of Article 4(1) that provide the investment services and activities listed in points (2) and (4) of Section A of Annex I to Directive 2004/39/EC shall meet the requirements in Article 92(1) and (2) based on the total risk exposure amount referred to in the first subparagraph.
Competent authorities may set the own funds requirements for firms referred to in point (2)(c) of Article 4(1) that provide the investment services and activities listed in points (2) and (4) of Section A of Annex I to Directive 2004/39/EC as the own funds requirements that would be binding on those firms according to the national transposition measures in force on 31 December 2013 for Directives 2006/49/EC and 2006/48/EC.
Article 96
Own funds requirements for investment firms which hold initial capital as laid down in Article 28(2) of Directive 2013/36/EU
For the purposes of Article 92(3), the following categories of investment firm which hold initial capital in accordance with Article 28(2) of Directive 2013/36/EU shall use the calculation of the total risk exposure amount specified in paragraph 2 of this Article:
investment firms that deal on own account only for the purpose of fulfilling or executing a client order or for the purpose of gaining entrance to a clearing and settlement system or a recognised exchange when acting in an agency capacity or executing a client order;
investment firms that meet all the following conditions:
they do not hold client money or securities;
they undertake only dealing on own account;
they have no external customers;
their execution and settlement transactions take place under the responsibility of a clearing institution and are guaranteed by that clearing institution.
For investment firms referred to in paragraph 1, total risk exposure amount shall be calculated as the sum of the following:
points (a) to (d) and (f) of Article 92(3) after applying Article 92(4);
the amount referred to in Article 97 multiplied by 12,5.
Article 97
Own Funds based on Fixed Overheads
EBA in consultation with ESMA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify in greater detail the following:
the calculation of the requirement to hold eligible capital of at least one quarter of the fixed overheads of the previous year;
the conditions for the adjustment by the competent authority of the requirement to hold eligible capital of at least one quarter of the fixed overheads of the previous year;
the calculation of projected fixed overheads in the case of an investment firm that has not completed business for one year.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 1 March 2014.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 98
Own funds for investment firms on a consolidated basis
In the case of the investment firms referred to in Article 95(1) in a group, where that group does not include credit institutions, a parent investment firm in a Member State shall apply Article 92 at a consolidated level as follows:
using the calculation of total risk exposure amount specified in Article 95(2);
own funds calculated on the basis of the consolidated situation of the parent investment firm or that of the financial holding company or mixed financial holding company, as applicable.
In the case of investment firms referred to in Article 96(1) in a group, where that group does not include credit institutions, a parent investment firm in a Member State and an investment firm controlled by a financial holding company or mixed financial holding company shall apply Article 92 on a consolidated basis as follows:
it shall use the calculation of total risk exposure amount specified in Article 96(2);
it shall use own funds calculated on the basis of the consolidated situation of the parent investment firm or that of the financial holding company or mixed financial holding company, as applicable, and in compliance with Chapter 2 of Title II of Part One.
▼M8 —————
CHAPTER 3
Trading book
Article 102
Requirements for the trading book
Article 103
Management of the trading book
Institutions shall have in place clearly defined policies and procedures for the overall management of the trading book. Those policies and procedures shall at least address:
the activities which the institution considers to be trading business and as constituting part of the trading book for own funds requirement purposes;
the extent to which a position can be marked-to-market daily by reference to an active, liquid two-way market;
for positions that are marked-to-model, the extent to which the institution can:
identify all material risks of the position;
hedge all material risks of the position with instruments for which an active, liquid two-way market exists;
derive reliable estimates for the key assumptions and parameters used in the model;
the extent to which the institution can, and is required to, generate valuations for the position that can be validated externally in a consistent manner;
the extent to which legal restrictions or other operational requirements would impede the institution's ability to effect a liquidation or hedge of the position in the short term;
the extent to which the institution can, and is required to, actively manage the risks of positions within its trading operation;
the extent to which the institution may reclassify risk or positions between the non-trading and trading books and the requirements for such reclassifications as referred to in Article 104a.
In managing its positions or portfolios of positions in the trading book, the institution shall comply with all the following requirements:
the institution shall have in place a clearly documented trading strategy for the position or portfolios in the trading book, which shall be approved by senior management and include the expected holding period;
the institution shall have in place clearly defined policies and procedures for the active management of positions or portfolios in the trading book; those policies and procedures shall include the following:
which positions or portfolios of positions may be entered into by each trading desk or, as the case may be, by designated dealers;
the setting of position limits and monitoring them for appropriateness;
ensuring that dealers have the autonomy to enter into and manage the position within agreed limits and according to the approved strategy;
ensuring that positions are reported to senior management as an integral part of the institution's risk management process;
ensuring that positions are actively monitored with reference to market information sources and an assessment is made of the marketability or hedgeability of the position or its component risks, including the assessment, the quality and availability of market inputs to the valuation process, level of market turnover, sizes of positions traded in the market;
active anti-fraud procedures and controls;
the institution shall have in place clearly defined policies and procedures to monitor the positions against the institution's trading strategy, including the monitoring of turnover and positions for which the originally intended holding period has been exceeded.
Article 104
Inclusion in the trading book
▼M8 —————
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 10 July 2027.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 104a
Reclassification of a position
EBA shall monitor the range of supervisory practices and shall issue by 10 July 2027 guidelines, in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, on what exceptional circumstances entail for the purposes of the first subparagraph of this paragraph and of paragraph 5 of this Article. Until EBA issues those guidelines, competent authorities shall notify EBA of, and shall provide a rationale for, their decisions on whether or not to permit an institution to reclassify a position as referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article.
The decision referred to in the first subparagraph shall be approved by the management body.
Where the competent authority has granted permission for the reclassification of a position in accordance with paragraph 2, the institution which received that permission shall:
publicly disclose, without delay,
information that its position has been reclassified, and
where the effect of that reclassification is a reduction in the institution's own funds requirements, the size of that reduction; and
where the effect of that reclassification is a reduction in the institution's own funds requirements, not recognise that effect until the position matures, unless the institution's competent authority permits it to recognise that effect at an earlier date.
Article 104b
Requirements for trading desk
Institutions' trading desks shall at all times meet all the following requirements:
each trading desk shall have a clear and distinctive business strategy and a risk management structure that is adequate for its business strategy;
each trading desk shall have a clear organisational structure; positions in a given trading desk shall be managed by designated dealers within the institution; each dealer shall have dedicated functions in the trading desk; each dealer shall be assigned to one trading desk only;
position limits shall be set within each trading desk according to the business strategy of that trading desk;
reports on the activities, profitability, risk management and regulatory requirements at the trading desk level shall be produced at least on a weekly basis and communicated to the management body on a regular basis;
each trading desk shall have a clear annual business plan including a well-defined remuneration policy on the basis of sound criteria used for performance measurement;
reports on maturing positions, intra-day trading limit breaches, daily trading limit breaches and actions taken by the institution to address those breaches, as well as assessments of market liquidity, shall be prepared for each trading desk on a monthly basis and made available to the competent authorities.
Article 104c
Treatment of foreign exchange risk hedges of capital ratios
EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify:
the risk positions that an institution can deliberately take in order to hedge, at least partially, against the adverse movements of foreign exchange rates on any of its capital ratios referred to in paragraph 1;
how to determine the maximum amount referred to in paragraph 1, point (a), of this Article and the manner in which an institution is to exclude that amount for each of the approaches referred to in Article 325(1);
the criteria to be met by an institution’s risk management framework referred to in paragraph 1, point (c), in order to be considered appropriate for the purposes of this Article.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 10 July 2026.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 105
Requirements for prudent valuation
Institutions shall establish and maintain systems and controls sufficient to provide prudent and reliable valuation estimates. Those systems and controls shall include at least the following elements:
documented policies and procedures for the process of valuation, including clearly defined responsibilities of the various areas involved in the determination of the valuation, sources of market information and review of their appropriateness, guidelines for the use of unobservable inputs reflecting the institution's assumptions of what market participants would use in pricing the position, frequency of independent valuation, timing of closing prices, procedures for adjusting valuations, month end and ad-hoc verification procedures;
reporting lines for the department accountable for the valuation process that are clear and independent of the front office, which shall ultimately be to the management body.
Institutions shall comply with the following requirements when marking to model:
senior management shall be aware of the elements of the trading book or of other fair-valued positions which are subject to mark to model and shall understand the materiality of the uncertainty thereby created in the reporting of the risk/performance of the business;
institutions shall source market inputs, where possible, in line with market prices, and shall assess the appropriateness of the market inputs of the particular position being valued and the parameters of the model on a frequent basis;
where available, institutions shall use valuation methodologies which are accepted market practice for particular financial instruments or commodities;
where the model is developed by the institution itself, it shall be based on appropriate assumptions, which have been assessed and challenged by suitably qualified parties independent of the development process;
institutions shall have in place formal change control procedures and shall hold a secure copy of the model and use it periodically to check valuations;
risk management shall be aware of the weaknesses of the models used and how best to reflect those in the valuation output; and
institutions' models shall be subject to periodic review to determine the accuracy of their performance, which shall include assessing the continued appropriateness of assumptions, analysis of profit and loss versus risk factors, and comparison of actual close out values to model outputs.
For the purposes of point (d) of the first subparagraph, the model shall be developed or approved independently of the trading desks and shall be independently tested, including validation of the mathematics, assumptions and software implementation.
Institutions shall establish and maintain procedures for calculating an adjustment to the current valuation of any less liquid positions, which can in particular arise from market events or institution-related situations such as concentrated positions and/or positions for which the originally intended holding period has been exceeded. Institutions shall, where necessary, make such adjustments in addition to any changes to the value of the position required for financial reporting purposes and shall design such adjustments to reflect the illiquidity of the position. Under those procedures, institutions shall consider several factors when determining whether a valuation adjustment is necessary for less liquid positions. Those factors include the following:
the additional amount of time it would take to hedge out the position or the risks within the position beyond the liquidity horizons that have been assigned to the risk factors of the position in accordance with Article 325bd;
the volatility and average of bid/offer spreads;
the availability of market quotes (number and identity of market makers) and the volatility and average of trading volumes including trading volumes during periods of market stress;
market concentrations;
the ageing of positions;
the extent to which valuation relies on marking-to-model;
the impact of other model risks.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 July 2013.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 106
Internal Hedges
An internal hedge shall in particular meet the following requirements:
it shall not be primarily intended to avoid or reduce own funds requirements;
it shall be properly documented and subject to particular internal approval and audit procedures;
it shall be dealt with at market conditions;
the market risk that is generated by the internal hedge shall be dynamically managed in the trading book within the authorised limits;
it shall be carefully monitored in accordance with adequate procedures.
Both an internal hedge recognised in accordance with the first subparagraph and the credit derivative entered into with the third party shall be included in the trading book for the purpose of calculating the own funds requirements for market risk.
Both an internal hedge recognised in accordance with the first subparagraph and the equity derivative entered into with the eligible third party protection provider shall be included in the trading book for the purpose of calculating the own funds requirements for market risk.
Where an institution hedges non-trading book interest rate risk exposures using an interest rate risk position booked in its trading book, that interest rate risk position shall be considered to be an internal hedge for the purpose of assessing the interest rate risk arising from non-trading positions in accordance with Articles 84 and 98 of Directive 2013/36/EU where the following conditions are met:
the position has been assigned to a separate portfolio from the other trading book position, the business strategy of which is solely dedicated to manage and mitigate the market risk of internal hedges of interest rate risk exposure; for that purpose, the institution may assign to that portfolio other interest rate risk positions entered into with third parties, or its own trading book as long as the institution perfectly offsets the market risk of those interest rate risk positions entered into with its own trading book by entering into opposite interest rate risk positions with third parties;
for the purposes of the reporting requirements set out in Article 430b(3), the position has been assigned to a trading desk established in accordance with Article 104b the business strategy of which is solely dedicated to manage and mitigate the market risk of internal hedges of interest rate risk exposure; for that purpose, that trading desk may enter into other interest rate risk positions with third parties or other trading desks of the institution, as long as those other trading desks perfectly offset the market risk of those other interest rate risk positions by entering into opposite interest rate risk positions with third parties;
the institution has fully documented how the position mitigates the interest rate risk arising from non-trading book positions for the purposes of the requirements laid down in Articles 84 and 98 of Directive 2013/36/EU.
TITLE II
CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS FOR CREDIT RISK
CHAPTER 1
General principles
Article 107
Approaches to credit risk
For trade exposures and for default fund contributions to a central counterparty, institutions shall apply the treatment set out in Chapter 6, Section 9 to calculate their risk-weighted exposure amounts for the purposes of points (a) and (f) of Article 92(3). For all other types of exposures to a central counterparty, institutions shall treat those exposures as follows:
as exposures to an institution for other types of exposures to a qualifying CCP;
as exposures to a corporate for other types of exposures to a non-qualifying CCP.
Article 108
Use of credit risk mitigation technique under the Standardised Approach and the IRB Approach
Article 109
Treatment of securitisation positions
Institutions shall calculate the risk-weighted exposure amount for a position they hold in a securitisation in accordance with Chapter 5.
Article 110
Treatment of credit risk adjustment
For the purposes of this Article and Chapters 2 and 3, general and specific credit risk adjustments shall exclude funds for general banking risk.
Institutions using the IRB Approach that apply the Standardised Approach for a part of their exposures on consolidated or individual basis, in accordance with Articles 148 and 150 shall determine the part of general credit risk adjustment that shall be assigned to the treatment of general credit risk adjustment under the Standardised Approach and to the treatment of general credit risk adjustment under the IRB Approach as follows:
where applicable, when an institution included in the consolidation exclusively applies the IRB Approach, general credit risk adjustments of this institution shall be assigned to the treatment set out in paragraph 2;
where applicable, when an institution included in the consolidation exclusively applies the Standardised Approach, general credit risk adjustment of this institution shall be assigned to the treatment set out in paragraph 1;
the remainder of credit risk adjustment shall be assigned on a pro rata basis according to the proportion of risk weighted exposure amounts subject to the Standardised Approach and subject to the IRB Approach.
EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify the calculation of specific credit risk adjustments and general credit risk adjustments under the applicable accounting framework for the following:
exposure value under the Standardised Approach referred to in Article 111;
exposure value under the IRB Approach referred to in Articles 166 to 168;
treatment of expected loss amounts referred to in Article 159;
exposure value for the calculation of the risk-weighted exposure amounts for securitisation position referred to in Articles 246 and 266;
the determination of default under Article 178.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 July 2013.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
CHAPTER 2
Standardised approach
Section 1
General principles
Article 111
Exposure value
The exposure value of an asset item shall be its accounting value remaining after specific credit risk adjustments in accordance with Article 110, additional value adjustments in accordance with Articles 34 and 105, amounts deducted in accordance with point (m) Article 36(1) and other own funds reductions related to the asset item have been applied. The exposure value of an off-balance sheet item listed in Annex I shall be the following percentage of its nominal value after reduction of specific credit risk adjustments and amounts deducted in accordance with point (m) Article 36(1):
100 % if it is a full-risk item;
50 % if it is a medium-risk item;
20 % if it is a medium/low-risk item;
0 % if it is a low-risk item.
The off-balance sheet items referred to in the second sentence of the first subparagraph shall be assigned to risk categories as indicated in Annex I.
When an institution is using the Financial Collateral Comprehensive Method under Article 223, the exposure value of securities or commodities sold, posted or lent under a repurchase transaction or under a securities or commodities lending or borrowing transaction, and margin lending transactions shall be increased by the volatility adjustment appropriate to such securities or commodities as prescribed in Articles 223 to 225.
EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify:
the criteria that institutions are to use to assign off-balance-sheet items, with the exception of items already included in Annex I, to the buckets 1 to 5 referred to in Annex I;
the factors that might constrain institutions’ ability to cancel the unconditionally cancellable commitments referred to in Annex I;
the process for notifying EBA about institutions’ classification of other off-balance-sheet items carrying similar risks as those referred to in Annex I.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 10 July 2025.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 112
Exposure classes
Each exposure shall be assigned to one of the following exposure classes:
exposures to central governments or central banks;
exposures to regional governments or local authorities;
exposures to public sector entities;
exposures to multilateral development banks;
exposures to international organisations;
exposures to institutions;
exposures to corporates;
retail exposures;
exposures secured by mortgages on immovable property;
exposures in default;
exposures associated with particularly high risk;
exposures in the form of covered bonds;
items representing securitisation positions;
exposures to institutions and corporates with a short-term credit assessment;
exposures in the form of units or shares in collective investment undertakings (‘CIUs’);
equity exposures;
other items.
Article 113
Calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts
With the exception of exposures giving rise to Common Equity Tier 1, Additional Tier 1 or Tier 2 items, an institution may, subject to the prior approval of the competent authorities, decide not to apply the requirements of paragraph 1 of this Article to the exposures of that institution to a counterparty which is its parent undertaking, its subsidiary, a subsidiary of its parent undertaking or an undertaking linked by a relationship within the meaning of Article 12(1) of Directive 83/349/EEC. Competent authorities are empowered to grant approval if the following conditions are fulfilled:
the counterparty is an institution, a financial institution or an ancillary services undertaking subject to appropriate prudential requirements;
the counterparty is included in the same consolidation as the institution on a full basis;
the counterparty is subject to the same risk evaluation, measurement and control procedures as the institution;
the counterparty is established in the same Member State as the institution;
there is no current or foreseen material practical or legal impediment to the prompt transfer of own funds or repayment of liabilities from the counterparty to the institution.
Where the institution, in accordance with this paragraph, is authorised not to apply the requirements of paragraph 1, it may assign a risk weight of 0 %.
With the exception of exposures giving rise to Common Equity Tier 1, Additional Tier 1 and Tier 2 items, institutions may, subject to the prior permission of the competent authorities, not apply the requirements of paragraph 1 of this Article to exposures to counterparties with which the institution has entered into an institutional protection scheme that is a contractual or statutory liability arrangement which protects those institutions and in particular ensures their liquidity and solvency to avoid bankruptcy where necessary. Competent authorities are empowered to grant permission if the following conditions are fulfilled:
the requirements set out in points (a), (d) and (e) of paragraph 6 are met;
the arrangements ensure that the institutional protection scheme is able to grant support necessary under its commitment from funds readily available to it;
the institutional protection scheme disposes of suitable and uniformly stipulated systems for the monitoring and classification of risk, which gives a complete overview of the risk situations of all the individual members and the institutional protection scheme as a whole, with corresponding possibilities to take influence; those systems shall suitably monitor defaulted exposures in accordance with Article 178(1);
the institutional protection scheme conducts its own risk review which is communicated to the individual members;
the institutional protection scheme draws up and publishes on an annual basis, a consolidated report comprising the balance sheet, the profit-and-loss account, the situation report and the risk report, concerning the institutional protection scheme as a whole, or a report comprising the aggregated balance sheet, the aggregated profit-and-loss account, the situation report and the risk report, concerning the institutional protection scheme as a whole;
members of the institutional protection scheme are obliged to give advance notice of at least 24 months if they wish to end the institutional protection scheme;
the multiple use of elements eligible for the calculation of own funds (hereinafter referred to as ‘multiple gearing’) as well as any inappropriate creation of own funds between the members of the institutional protection scheme shall be eliminated;
the institutional protection scheme shall be based on a broad membership of credit institutions of a predominantly homogeneous business profile;
the adequacy of the systems referred to in points (c) and (d) is approved and monitored at regular intervals by the relevant competent authorities.
Where the institution, in accordance with this paragraph, decides not to apply the requirements of paragraph 1, it may assign a risk weight of 0 %.
Section 2
Risk weights
Article 114
Exposures to central governments or central banks
Exposures to central governments and central banks for which a credit assessment by a nominated ECAI is available shall be assigned a risk weight in accordance with Table 1 which corresponds to the credit assessment of the ECAI in accordance with Article 136.
Table 1
Credit quality step |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
Risk weight |
0 % |
20 % |
50 % |
100 % |
100 % |
150 % |
▼M11 —————
For the purposes of this paragraph, the Commission may adopt, by way of implementing acts, and subject to the examination procedure referred to in Article 464(2), a decision as to whether a third country applies supervisory and regulatory arrangements at least equivalent to those applied in the Union. In the absence of such a decision, until 1 January 2015, institutions may continue to apply the treatment set out in this paragraph to the exposures to the central government or central bank of the third country where the relevant competent authorities had approved the third country as eligible for that treatment before 1 January 2014.
Article 115
Exposures to regional governments or local authorities
EBA shall maintain a publicly available database of all regional governments and local authorities within the Union which relevant competent authorities treat as exposures to their central governments.
For the purposes of this paragraph, the Commission may adopt, by way of implementing acts, and subject to the examination procedure referred to in Article 464(2), a decision as to whether a third country applies supervisory and regulatory arrangements at least equivalent to those applied in the Union. In the absence of such a decision, until 1 January 2015, institutions may continue to apply the treatment set out in this paragraph to the third country where the relevant competent authorities had approved the third country as eligible for that treatment before 1 January 2014.
Article 116
Exposures to public sector entities
Exposures to public sector entities for which a credit assessment by a nominated ECAI is not available shall be assigned a risk weight in accordance with the credit quality step to which exposures to the central government of the jurisdiction in which the public sector entity is incorporated are assigned in accordance with the following Table 2:
Table 2
Credit quality step to which central government is assigned |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
Risk weight |
20 % |
50 % |
100 % |
100 % |
100 % |
150 % |
For exposures to public sector entities incorporated in countries where the central government is unrated, the risk weight shall be 100 %.
For the purposes of this paragraph, the Commission may adopt, by way of implementing acts, and subject to the examination procedure referred to in Article 464(2), a decision as to whether a third country applies supervisory and regulatory arrangements at least equivalent to those applied in the Union. In the absence of such a decision, until 1 January 2015, institutions may continue to apply the treatment set out in this paragraph to the third country where the relevant competent authorities had approved the third country as eligible for that treatment before 1 January 2014.
Article 117
Exposures to multilateral development banks
The Inter-American Investment Corporation, the Black Sea Trade and Development Bank, the Central American Bank for Economic Integration and the CAF-Development Bank of Latin America shall be considered multilateral development banks.
Exposures to the following multilateral development banks shall be assigned a 0 % risk weight:
the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development;
the International Finance Corporation;
the Inter-American Development Bank;
the Asian Development Bank;
the African Development Bank;
the Council of Europe Development Bank;
the Nordic Investment Bank;
the Caribbean Development Bank;
the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development;
the European Investment Bank;
the European Investment Fund;
the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency;
the International Finance Facility for Immunisation;
the Islamic Development Bank;
the International Development Association;
the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.
The Commission is empowered to amend this Regulation by adopting delegated acts in accordance with Article 462 amending, in accordance with international standards, the list of multilateral development banks referred to in the first subparagraph.
Article 118
Exposures to international organisations
Exposures to the following international organisations shall be assigned a 0 % risk weight:
the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community;
the International Monetary Fund;
the Bank for International Settlements;
the European Financial Stability Facility;
the European Stability Mechanism;
an international financial institution established by two or more Member States, which has the purpose to mobilise funding and provide financial assistance to the benefit of its members that are experiencing or threatened by severe financing problems.
Article 119
Exposures to institutions
Exposure to an institution in the form of minimum reserves required by the ECB or by the central bank of a Member State to be held by an institution may be risk-weighted as exposures to the central bank of the Member State in question provided:
the reserves are held in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1745/2003 of the European Central Bank of 12 September 2003 on the application of minimum reserves ( 27 ) or in accordance with national requirements in all material respects equivalent to that Regulation;
in the event of the bankruptcy or insolvency of the institution where the reserves are held, the reserves are fully repaid to the institution in a timely manner and are not made available to meet other liabilities of the institution.
Exposures to financial institutions authorised and supervised by the competent authorities and subject to prudential requirements comparable to those applied to institutions in terms of robustness shall be treated as exposures to institutions.
For the purposes of this paragraph, the prudential requirements laid down in Regulation (EU) 2019/2033 shall be considered to be comparable to those applied to institutions in terms of robustness.
Article 120
Exposures to rated institutions
Exposures to institutions with a residual maturity of more than three months for which a credit assessment by a nominated ECAI is available shall be assigned a risk weight in accordance with Table 3 which corresponds to the credit assessment of the ECAI in accordance with Article 136.
Table 3
Credit quality step |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
Risk weight |
20 % |
50 % |
50 % |
100 % |
100 % |
150 % |
Exposures to an institution of up to three months residual maturity for which a credit assessment by a nominated ECAI is available shall be assigned a risk-weight in accordance with Table 4 which corresponds to the credit assessment of the ECAI in accordance with Article 136:
Table 4
Credit quality step |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
Risk weight |
20 % |
20 % |
20 % |
50 % |
50 % |
150 % |
The interaction between the treatment of short term credit assessment under Article 131 and the general preferential treatment for short term exposures set out in paragraph 2 shall be as follows:
If there is no short-term exposure assessment, the general preferential treatment for short-term exposures as specified in paragraph 2 shall apply to all exposures to institutions of up to three months residual maturity;
If there is a short-term assessment and such an assessment determines the application of a more favourable or identical risk weight than the use of the general preferential treatment for short-term exposures, as specified in paragraph 2, then the short-term assessment shall be used for that specific exposure only. Other short-term exposures shall follow the general preferential treatment for short-term exposures, as specified in paragraph 2;
If there is a short-term assessment and such an assessment determines a less favourable risk weight than the use of the general preferential treatment for short-term exposures, as specified in paragraph 2, then the general preferential treatment for short-term exposures shall not be used and all unrated short-term claims shall be assigned the same risk weight as that applied by the specific short-term assessment.
Article 121
Exposures to unrated institutions
Exposures to institutions for which a credit assessment by a nominated ECAI is not available shall be assigned a risk weight in accordance with the credit quality step to which exposures to the central government of the jurisdiction in which the institution is incorporated are assigned in accordance with Table 5.
Table 5
Credit quality step to which central government is assigned |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
Risk weight of exposure |
20 % |
50 % |
100 % |
100 % |
100 % |
150 % |
Article 122
Exposures to corporates
Exposures for which a credit assessment by a nominated ECAI is available shall be assigned a risk weight in accordance with Table 6 which corresponds to the credit assessment of the ECAI in accordance with Article 136.
Table 6
Credit quality step |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
Risk weight |
20 % |
50 % |
100 % |
100 % |
150 % |
150 % |
Article 122a
Specialised lending exposures
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 10 July 2026.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 123
Retail exposures
Exposures that comply with the following criteria shall be assigned a risk weight of 75 %:
the exposure shall be either to a natural person or persons, or to a small or medium-sized enterprise (SME);
the exposure shall be one of a significant number of exposures with similar characteristics such that the risks associated with such lending are substantially reduced;
the total amount owed to the institution and parent undertakings and its subsidiaries, including any exposure in default, by the obligor client or group of connected clients, but excluding exposures fully and completely secured on residential property collateral that have been assigned to the exposure class laid down in point (i) of Article 112, shall not, to the knowledge of the institution, exceed EUR 1 million. The institution shall take reasonable steps to acquire this knowledge.
Securities shall not be eligible for the retail exposure class.
Exposures that do not comply with the criteria referred to in points (a) to (c) of the first subparagraph shall not be eligible for the retail exposures class.
The present value of retail minimum lease payments is eligible for the retail exposure class.
Exposures due to loans granted by a credit institution to pensioners or employees with a permanent contract against the unconditional transfer of part of the borrower's pension or salary to that credit institution shall be assigned a risk weight of 35 %, provided that all the following conditions are met:
in order to repay the loan, the borrower unconditionally authorises the pension fund or employer to make direct payments to the credit institution by deducting the monthly payments on the loan from the borrower's monthly pension or salary;
the risks of death, inability to work, unemployment or reduction of the net monthly pension or salary of the borrower are properly covered through an insurance policy underwritten by the borrower to the benefit of the credit institution;
the monthly payments to be made by the borrower on all loans that meet the conditions set out in points (a) and (b) do not in aggregate exceed 20 % of the borrower's net monthly pension or salary;
the maximum original maturity of the loan is equal to or less than ten years.
By 10 July 2025, EBA shall issue guidelines, in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, to specify proportionate diversification methods under which an exposure is to be considered as one of a significant number of similar exposures as specified in the first subparagraph, point (c), of this paragraph.
Article 124
Exposures secured by mortgages on immovable property
The part of an exposure that is treated as fully secured by immovable property shall not be greater than the pledged amount of the market value or in those Member States that have laid down rigorous criteria for the assessment of the mortgage lending value in statutory or regulatory provisions, the mortgage lending value of the immovable property in question.
Where the authority designated by the Member State for the application of this Article is the competent authority, it shall ensure that the relevant national bodies and authorities which have a macroprudential mandate are duly informed of the competent authority's intention to make use of this Article, and are appropriately involved in the assessment of financial stability concerns in its Member State in accordance with paragraph 2.
Where the authority designated by the Member State for the application of this Article is different from the competent authority, the Member State shall adopt the necessary provisions to ensure proper coordination and exchange of information between the competent authority and the designated authority for the proper application of this Article. In particular, authorities shall be required to cooperate closely and to share all the information that may be necessary for the adequate performance of the duties imposed upon the designated authority pursuant to this Article. That cooperation shall aim at avoiding any form of duplicative or inconsistent action between the competent authority and the designated authority, as well as ensuring that the interaction with other measures, in particular measures taken under Article 458 of this Regulation and Article 133 of Directive 2013/36/EU, is duly taken into account.
Based on the data collected under Article 430a and on any other relevant indicators, the authority designated in accordance with paragraph 1a of this Article shall periodically, and at least annually, assess whether the risk weight of 35 % for exposures to one or more property segments secured by mortgages on residential property referred to in Article 125 located in one or more parts of the territory of the Member State of the relevant authority and the risk weight of 50 % for exposures secured by mortgages on commercial immovable property referred to in Article 126 located in one or more parts of the territory of the Member State of the relevant authority are appropriately based on:
the loss experience of exposures secured by immovable property;
forward-looking immovable property markets developments.
Where, on the basis of the assessment referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph, the authority designated in accordance with paragraph 1a of this Article concludes that the risk weights set out in Article 125(2) or 126(2) do not adequately reflect the actual risks related to exposures to one or more property segments fully secured by mortgages on residential property or on commercial immovable property located in one or more parts of the territory of the Member State of the relevant authority, and if it considers that the inadequacy of the risk weights could adversely affect current or future financial stability in its Member State, it may increase the risk weights applicable to those exposures within the ranges determined in the fourth subparagraph of this paragraph or impose stricter criteria than those set out in Article 125(2) or 126(2).
The authority designated in accordance with paragraph 1a of this Article shall notify EBA and the ESRB of any adjustments to risk weights and criteria applied pursuant to this paragraph. Within one month of receipt of that notification, EBA and the ESRB shall provide their opinion to the Member State concerned. EBA and the ESRB shall publish the risk weights and criteria for exposures referred to in Articles 125, 126 and point (a) of Article 199(1) as implemented by the relevant authority.
For the purposes of the second subparagraph of this paragraph, the authority designated in accordance with paragraph 1a may set the risk weights within the following ranges:
35 % to 150 % for exposures secured by mortgages on residential property;
50 % to 150 % for exposures secured by mortgages on commercial immovable property.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 31 December 2019.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
The ESRB may, by means of recommendations in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010, and in close cooperation with EBA, give guidance to authorities designated in accordance with paragraph 1a of this Article on the following:
factors which could ‘adversely affect current or future financial stability’ referred to in the second subparagraph of paragraph 2; and
indicative benchmarks that the authority designated in accordance with paragraph 1a is to take into account when determining higher risk weights.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 10 January 2026.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
The ESRB may, by means of recommendations, in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010, and in close cooperation with EBA, give guidance to authorities designated in accordance with paragraph 8 of this Article on both of the following:
factors which could ‘adversely affect current or future financial stability’ referred to in paragraph 9, second subparagraph;
indicative benchmarks that the authority designated in accordance with paragraph 8 is to take into account when determining higher risk weights.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 10 July 2025.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 125
Exposures fully and completely secured by mortgages on residential property
Unless otherwise decided by the competent authorities in accordance with Article 124(2), exposures fully and completely secured by mortgages on residential property shall be treated as follows:
exposures or any part of an exposure fully and completely secured by mortgages on residential property which is or shall be occupied or let by the owner, or the beneficial owner in the case of personal investment companies, shall be assigned a risk weight of 35 %;
exposures to a tenant under a property leasing transaction concerning residential property under which the institution is the lessor and the tenant has an option to purchase, shall be assigned a risk weight of 35 % provided that the exposure of the institution is fully and completely secured by its ownership of the property.
Institutions shall consider an exposure or any part of an exposure as fully and completely secured for the purposes of paragraph 1 only if the following conditions are met:
the value of the property shall not materially depend upon the credit quality of the borrower. Institutions may exclude situations where purely macro-economic factors affect both the value of the property and the performance of the borrower from their determination of the materiality of such dependence;
the risk of the borrower shall not materially depend upon the performance of the underlying property or project, but on the underlying capacity of the borrower to repay the debt from other sources, and as a consequence, the repayment of the facility shall not materially depend on any cash flow generated by the underlying property serving as collateral. For those other sources, institutions shall determine maximum loan-to-income ratios as part of their lending policy and obtain suitable evidence of the relevant income when granting the loan;
the requirements set out in Article 208 and the valuation rules set out in Article 229(1) are met;
unless otherwise determined under Article 124(2), the part of the loan to which the 35 % risk weight is assigned does not exceed 80 % of the market value of the property in question or 80 % of the mortgage lending value of the property in question in those Member States that have laid down rigorous criteria for the assessment of the mortgage lending value in statutory or regulatory provisions.
Institutions may derogate from point (b) of paragraph 2 for exposures fully and completely secured by mortgages on residential property which is situated within the territory of a Member State, where the competent authority of that Member State has published evidence showing that a well-developed and long-established residential property market is present in that territory with loss rates which do not exceed the following limits:
losses stemming from lending collateralised by residential property up to 80 % of the market value or 80 % of the mortgage lending value, unless otherwise decided under Article 124(2), do not exceed 0,3 % of the outstanding loans collateralised by residential property in any given year;
overall losses stemming from lending collateralised by residential property do not exceed 0,5 % of the outstanding loans collateralised by residential property in any given year.
Article 126
Exposures fully and completely secured by mortgages on commercial immovable property
Unless otherwise decided by the competent authorities in accordance with Article 124(2), exposures fully and completely secured by mortgages on commercial immovable property shall be treated as follows:
exposures or any part of an exposure fully and completely secured by mortgages on offices or other commercial premises may be assigned a risk weight of 50 %;
exposures related to property leasing transactions concerning offices or other commercial premises under which the institution is the lessor and the tenant has an option to purchase may be assigned a risk weight of 50 % provided that the exposure of the institution is fully and completely secured by its ownership of the property.
Institutions shall consider an exposure or any part of an exposure as fully and completely secured for the purposes of paragraph 1 only if the following conditions are met:
the value of the property shall not materially depend upon the credit quality of the borrower. Institutions may exclude situations where purely macro-economic factors affect both the value of the property and the performance of the borrower from their determination of the materiality of such dependence;
the risk of the borrower shall not materially depend upon the performance of the underlying property or project, but on the underlying capacity of the borrower to repay the debt from other sources, and as a consequence, the repayment of the facility shall not materially depend on any cash flow generated by the underlying property serving as collateral;
the requirements set out in Article 208 and the valuation rules set out in Article 229(1) are met;
the 50 % risk weight unless otherwise provided under Article 124(2) shall be assigned to the part of the loan that does not exceed 50 % of the market value of the property or 60 % of the mortgage lending value unless otherwise provided under Article 124(2) of the property in question in those Member States that have laid down rigorous criteria for the assessment of the mortgage lending value in statutory or regulatory provisions.
Institutions may derogate from point (b) of paragraph 2 for exposures fully and completely secured by mortgages on commercial immovable property which is situated within the territory of a Member State, where the competent authority of that Member State has published evidence showing that a well-developed and long-established commercial immovable property market is present in that territory with loss rates which do not exceed the following limits:
losses stemming from lending collateralised by commercial immovable property up to 50 % of the market value or 60 % of the mortgage lending value, unless otherwise determined under Article 124(2), do not exceed 0,3 % of the outstanding loans collateralised by commercial immovable property;
overall losses stemming from lending collateralised by commercial immovable property do not exceed 0,5 % of the outstanding loans collateralised by commercial immovable property.
Article 126a
Land acquisition, development and construction exposures
Article 127
Exposures in default
The unsecured part of any item where the obligor has defaulted in accordance with Article 178, or in the case of retail exposures, the unsecured part of any credit facility which has defaulted in accordance with Article 178 shall be assigned a risk weight of:
150 %, where the sum of specific credit risk adjustments and of the amounts deducted in accordance with point (m) Article 36(1) is less than 20 % of the unsecured part of the exposure value if those specific credit risk adjustments and deductions were not applied;
100 %, where the sum of the specific credit risk adjustments and of the amounts deducted in accordance with point (m) Article 36(1) is no less than 20 % of the unsecured part of the exposure value if those specific credit risk adjustments and deductions were not applied.
For the purpose of calculating the specific credit risk adjustments referred to in the first subparagraph for an exposure that is purchased when already in default, institutions shall include in the calculation any positive difference between the amount owed by the obligor on that exposure and the sum of the additional own funds reduction if that exposure were fully written off and any already existing own funds reductions related to that exposure.
▼M17 —————
Article 128
Items associated with particular high risk
For the purposes of this Article, institutions shall treat any of the following exposures as exposures associated with particularly high risks:
investments in venture capital firms, except where those investments are treated in accordance with Article 132;
investments in private equity, except where those investments are treated in accordance with Article 132;
speculative immovable property financing.
When assessing whether an exposure other than exposures referred to in paragraph 2 is associated with particularly high risks, institutions shall take into account the following risk characteristics:
there is a high risk of loss as a result of a default of the obligor;
it is impossible to assess adequately whether the exposure falls under point (a).
EBA shall issue guidelines specifying which types of exposures are associated with particularly high risk and under which circumstances.
Those guidelines shall be adopted in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 129
Exposures in the form of covered bonds
►M10 To be eligible for the preferential treatment set out in paragraphs 4 and 5 of this Article, covered bonds as defined in point (1) of Article 3 of Directive (EU) 2019/2162 of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 28 ) shall meet the requirements set out in paragraphs 3, 3a and 3b of this Article and shall be collateralised by any of the following eligible assets: ◄
exposures to or guaranteed by central governments, the ESCB central banks, public sector entities, regional governments or local authorities in the Union;
exposures to or guaranteed by third country central governments, third-country central banks, multilateral development banks, international organisations that qualify for the credit quality step 1 as set out in this Chapter, and exposures to or guaranteed by third-country public sector entities, third-country regional governments or third-country local authorities that are risk weighted as exposures to institutions or central governments and central banks in accordance with Article 115(1) or (2), or Article 116(1), (2) or (4) respectively and that qualify for the credit quality step 1 as set out in this Chapter, and exposures within the meaning of this point that qualify as a minimum for the credit quality step 2 as set out in this Chapter, provided that they do not exceed 20 % of the nominal amount of outstanding covered bonds of the issuing institutions;
exposures to credit institutions that qualify for credit quality step 1 or credit quality step 2, or exposures to credit institutions that qualify for credit quality step 3 where those exposures are in the form of:
short‐term deposits with an original maturity not exceeding 100 days, where used to meet the cover pool liquidity buffer requirement of Article 16 of Directive (EU) 2019/2162; or
derivative contracts that meet the requirements of Article 11(1) of that Directive, where permitted by the competent authorities;
loans secured by residential property up to the lesser of the principal amount of the liens that are combined with any prior liens and 80 % of the value of the pledged properties;
residential loans fully guaranteed by an eligible protection provider referred to in Article 201 qualifying for the credit quality step 2 or above as set out in this Chapter, where the portion of each of the loans that is used to meet the requirement set out in this paragraph for collateralisation of the covered bond does not represent more than 80 % of the value of the corresponding residential property located in France, and where a loan-to-income ratio respects at most 33 % when the loan has been granted. There shall be no mortgage liens on the residential property when the loan is granted, and for the loans granted from 1 January 2014 the borrower shall be contractually committed not to grant such liens without the consent of the credit institution that granted the loan. The loan-to-income ratio represents the share of the gross income of the borrower that covers the reimbursement of the loan, including the interests. The protection provider shall be either a financial institution authorised and supervised by the competent authorities and subject to prudential requirements comparable to those applied to institutions in terms of robustness or an institution or an insurance undertaking. It shall establish a mutual guarantee fund or equivalent protection for insurance undertakings to absorb credit risk losses, whose calibration shall be periodically reviewed by the competent authorities. Both the credit institution and the protection provider shall carry out a creditworthiness assessment of the borrower;
loans secured by commercial immovable property up to the lesser of the principal amount of the liens that are combined with any prior liens and 60 % of the value of the pledged properties. Loans secured by commercial immovable property are eligible where the loan‐to‐value ratio of 60 % is exceeded up to a maximum level of 70 % if the value of the total assets pledged as collateral for the covered bonds exceed the nominal amount outstanding on the covered bond by at least 10 %, and the bondholders’ claim meets the legal certainty requirements set out in Chapter 4. The bondholders’ claim shall take priority over all other claims on the collateral;
loans secured by maritime liens on ships up to the difference between 60 % of the value of the pledged ship and the value of any prior maritime liens.
For the purposes of paragraph 1a, exposures caused by the transmission and management of the payments of the obligors of loans secured by pledged properties of debt securities or by the transmission and management of liquidation proceeds in respect of such loans shall not be comprised in calculating the limits referred to in that paragraph.
▼M10 —————
For the purposes of point (c) of the first subparagraph of paragraph 1, the following shall apply:
for exposures to credit institutions that qualify for credit quality step 1, the exposure shall not exceed 15 % of the nominal amount of outstanding covered bonds of the issuing credit institution;
for exposures to credit institutions that qualify for credit quality step 2, the exposure shall not exceed 10 % of the nominal amount of outstanding covered bonds of the issuing credit institution;
for exposures to credit institutions that qualify for credit quality step 3 that take the form of short‐term deposits, as referred to in point (c)(i) of the first subparagraph of paragraph 1 of this Article, or the form of derivative contracts, as referred to in point (c)(ii) of the first subparagraph of paragraph 1 of this Article, the total exposure shall not exceed 8 % of the nominal amount of outstanding covered bonds of the issuing credit institution; the competent authorities designated pursuant to Article 18(2) of Directive (EU) 2019/2162 may, after consulting EBA, allow exposures to credit institutions that qualify for credit quality step 3 in the form of derivative contracts, provided that significant potential concentration problems in the Member States concerned due to the application of credit quality step 1 and 2 requirements referred to in this paragraph can be documented;
the total exposure to credit institutions that qualify for credit quality step 1, 2 or 3 shall not exceed 15 % of the nominal amount of outstanding covered bonds of the issuing credit institution and the total exposure to credit institutions that qualify for credit quality step 2 or 3 shall not exceed 10 % of the nominal amount of outstanding covered bonds of the issuing credit institution.
In addition to being collateralised by the eligible assets listed in paragraph 1 of this Article, covered bonds shall be subject to a minimum level of 5 % of overcollateralisation as defined in point (14) of Article 3 of Directive (EU) 2019/2162.
For the purposes of the first subparagraph of this paragraph, the total nominal amount of all cover assets as defined in point (4) of Article 3 of that Directive shall be at least of the same value as the total nominal amount of outstanding covered bonds (‘nominal principle’), and shall consist of eligible assets as set out in paragraph 1 of this Article.
Member States may set a lower minimum level of overcollateralisation for covered bonds or authorise their competent authorities to set such a level, provided that:
either the calculation of overcollateralisation is based on a formal approach where the underlying risk of the assets is taken into account, or the valuation of the assets is subject to the mortgage lending value; and
the minimum level of overcollateralisation is not lower than 2 %, based on the nominal principle referred to in Article 15(6) and (7) of Directive (EU) 2019/2162.
The assets contributing to a minimum level of overcollateralisation shall not be subject to the limits on exposure size set out in paragraph 1a and shall not count towards those limits.
Covered bonds for which a credit assessment by a nominated ECAI is available shall be assigned a risk weight in accordance with Table 6a which corresponds to the credit assessment of the ECAI in accordance with Article 136.
Table 6a
Credit quality step |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
Risk weight |
10 % |
20 % |
20 % |
50 % |
50 % |
100 % |
Covered bonds for which a credit assessment by a nominated ECAI is not available shall be assigned a risk weight on the basis of the risk weight assigned to senior unsecured exposures to the institution which issues them. The following correspondence between risk weights shall apply:
if the exposures to the institution are assigned a risk weight of 20 %, the covered bond shall be assigned a risk weight of 10 %;
if the exposures to the institution are assigned a risk weight of 50 %, the covered bond shall be assigned a risk weight of 20 %;
if the exposures to the institution are assigned a risk weight of 100 %, the covered bond shall be assigned a risk weight of 50 %;
if the exposures to the institution are assigned a risk weight of 150 %, the covered bond shall be assigned a risk weight of 100 %.
Article 130
Items representing securitisation positions
Risk-weighted exposure amounts for securitisation positions shall be determined in accordance with Chapter 5.
Article 131
Exposures to institutions and corporates with a short-term credit assessment
Exposures to institutions and exposures to corporates for which a short-term credit assessment by a nominated ECAI is available shall be assigned a risk weight in accordance with Table 7 which corresponds to the credit assessment of the ECAI in accordance with Article 136.
Table 7
Credit Quality Step |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
Risk weight |
20 % |
50 % |
100 % |
150 % |
150 % |
150 % |
Article 132
Own funds requirements for exposures in the form of units or shares in CIUs
Subject to Article 132b(2), institutions that do not apply the look-through approach or the mandate-based approach shall assign a risk weight of 1 250 % (‘fall-back approach’) to their exposures in the form of units or shares in a CIU.
Institutions may calculate the risk-weighted exposure amount for their exposures in the form of units or shares in a CIU by using a combination of the approaches referred to in this paragraph, provided that the conditions for using those approaches are met.
Institutions may determine the risk-weighted exposure amount of a CIU's exposures in accordance with the approaches set out in Article 132a where all the following conditions are met:
the CIU is one of the following:
an undertaking for collective investment in transferable securities (UCITS), governed by Directive 2009/65/EC;
an AIF managed by an EU AIFM registered under Article 3(3) of Directive 2011/61/EU;
an AIF managed by an EU AIFM authorised under Article 6 of Directive 2011/61/EU;
an AIF managed by a non-EU AIFM authorised under Article 37 of Directive 2011/61/EU;
a non-EU AIF managed by a non-EU AIFM and marketed in accordance with Article 42 of Directive 2011/61/EU;
a non-EU AIF not marketed in the Union and managed by a non-EU AIFM established in a third country that is covered by a delegated act referred to in Article 67(6) of Directive 2011/61/EU;
the CIU's prospectus or equivalent document includes the following:
the categories of assets in which the CIU is authorised to invest;
where investment limits apply, the relative limits and the methodologies to calculate them;
reporting by the CIU or the CIU management company to the institution complies with the following requirements:
the exposures of the CIU are reported at least as frequently as those of the institution;
the granularity of the financial information is sufficient to allow the institution to calculate the CIU's risk -weighted exposure amount in accordance with the approach chosen by the institution;
where the institution applies the look-through approach, information about the underlying exposures is verified by an independent third party.
By way of derogation from point (a) of the first subparagraph of this paragraph, multilateral and bilateral development banks and other institutions that co-invest in a CIU with multilateral or bilateral development banks may determine the risk-weighted exposure amount of that CIU's exposures in accordance with the approaches set out in Article 132a, provided that the conditions set out in points (b) and (c) of the first subparagraph of this paragraph are met and that the CIU's investment mandate limits the types of assets that the CIU can invest in to assets that promote sustainable development in developing countries.
Institutions shall notify their competent authority of the CIUs to which they apply the treatment referred to in the second subparagraph.
By way of derogation from point (c)(i) of the first subparagraph, where the institution determines the risk-weighted exposure amount of a CIU's exposures in accordance with the mandate-based approach, the reporting by the CIU or the CIU management company to the institution may be limited to the investment mandate of the CIU and any changes thereof and may be done only when the institution incurs the exposure to the CIU for the first time and when there is a change in the investment mandate of the CIU.
Institutions that do not have adequate data or information to calculate the risk-weighted exposure amount of a CIU's exposures in accordance with the approaches set out in Article 132a may rely on the calculations of a third party, provided that all the following conditions are met:
the third party is one of the following:
the depository institution or the depository financial institution of the CIU, provided that the CIU exclusively invests in securities and deposits all securities at that depository institution or depository financial institution;
for CIUs not covered by point (i) of this point, the CIU management company, provided that the company meets the condition set out in point (a) of paragraph 3;
the third party carries out the calculation in accordance with the approaches set out in Article 132a(1), (2) or (3), as applicable;
an external auditor has confirmed the correctness of the third party's calculation.
Institutions that rely on third-party calculations shall multiply the risk-weighted exposure amount of a CIU's exposures resulting from those calculations by a factor of 1,2.
By way of derogation from the second subparagraph, where the institution has unrestricted access to the detailed calculations carried out by the third party, the factor of 1,2 shall not apply. The institution shall provide those calculations to its competent authority upon request.
the institutions measure the value of their holdings of units or shares in a CIU at historical cost but measure the value of the underlying assets of the CIU at fair value if they apply the look-through approach;
a change in the market value of the units or shares for which institutions measure the value at historical cost changes neither the amount of own funds of those institutions nor the exposure value associated with those holdings.
Article 132a
Approaches for calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts of CIUs
Institutions shall carry out the calculations referred to in the first subparagraph under the assumption that the CIU first incurs exposures to the maximum extent allowed under its mandate or relevant law in the exposures attracting the highest own funds requirement and then continues incurring exposures in descending order until the maximum total exposure limit is reached, and that the CIU applies leverage to the maximum extent allowed under its mandate or relevant law, where applicable.
Institutions shall carry out the calculations referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with the methods set out in this Chapter, in Chapter 5, and in Section 3, 4 or 5 of Chapter 6 of this Title.
By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, an institution may exclude from the calculation of the own funds requirement for credit valuation adjustment risk derivative exposures which would not be subject to that requirement if they were incurred directly by the institution.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 March 2020.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 132b
Exclusions from the approaches for calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts of CIUs
Article 132c
Treatment of off-balance-sheet exposures to CIUs
Institutions shall calculate the risk-weighted exposure amount for their off-balance-sheet items with the potential to be converted into exposures in the form of units or shares in a CIU by multiplying the exposure values of those exposures calculated in accordance with Article 111, with the following risk weight:
for all exposures for which institutions use one of the approaches set out in Article 132a:
where:
|
= |
the risk weight; |
i |
= |
the index denoting the CIU: |
RWAEi |
= |
the amount calculated in accordance with Article 132a for a CIUi; |
|
= |
the exposure value of the exposures of CIUi; |
Ai |
= |
the accounting value of assets of CIUi; and |
EQi |
= |
the accounting value of the equity of CIUi. |
Institutions shall calculate the risk-weighted exposure amount for off-balance-sheet exposures arising from minimum value commitments that meet all the conditions set out in paragraph 3 of this Article by multiplying the exposure value of those exposures by a conversion factor of 20 % and the risk weight derived under Article 132 or 152.
Institutions shall determine the risk-weighted exposure amount for off-balance-sheet exposures arising from minimum value commitments in accordance with paragraph 2 where all the following conditions are met:
the off-balance-sheet exposure of the institution is a minimum value commitment for an investment into units or shares of one or more CIUs under which the institution is only obliged to pay out under the minimum value commitment where the market value of the underlying exposures of the CIU or CIUs is below a predetermined threshold at one or more points in time, as specified in the contract;
the CIU is any of the following:
a UCITS as defined in Directive 2009/65/EC; or
an AIF as defined in point (a) of Article 4(1) of Directive 2011/61/EU which solely invests in transferable securities or in other liquid financial assets referred to in Article 50(1) of Directive 2009/65/EC, where the mandate of the AIF does not allow a leverage higher than that allowed under Article 51(3) of Directive 2009/65/EC;
the current market value of the underlying exposures of the CIU underlying the minimum value commitment without considering the effect of the off-balance-sheet minimum value commitments covers or exceeds the present value of the threshold specified in the minimum value commitment;
when the excess of the market value of the underlying exposures of the CIU or CIUs over the present value of the minimum value commitment declines, the institution, or another undertaking in so far as it is covered by the supervision on a consolidated basis to which the institution itself is subject in accordance with this Regulation and Directive 2013/36/EU or Directive 2002/87/EC, can influence the composition of the underlying exposures of the CIU or CIUs or limit the potential for a further reduction of the excess in other ways;
the ultimate direct or indirect beneficiary of the minimum value commitment is typically a retail client as defined in point (11) of Article 4(1) of Directive 2014/65/EU.;
Article 133
Equity exposures
The following exposures shall be considered equity exposures:
non-debt exposures conveying a subordinated, residual claim on the assets or income of the issuer;
debt exposures and other securities, partnerships, derivatives, or other vehicles, the economic substance of which is similar to the exposures specified in point (a).
Article 134
Other items
Section 3
Recognition and mapping of credit risk assessment
Sub-Section 1
Recognition of ECAIs
Article 135
Use of credit assessments by ECAIs
On the basis of that report, the Commission shall, where appropriate, submit a legislative proposal to the European Parliament and to the Council by 10 January 2026.
Sub-Section 2
Mapping of ECAI's credit assessments
Article 136
Mapping of ECAI's credit assessments
EBA, EIOPA and ESMA shall submit those draft implementing technical standards to the Commission by 1 July 2014 and shall submit revised draft implementing technical standards where necessary.
Power is conferred on the Commission to adopt the implementing technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 and of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 respectively.
When determining the mapping of credit assessments, EBA, EIOPA and ESMA shall comply with the following requirements:
in order to differentiate between the relative degrees of risk expressed by each credit assessment, EBA, EIOPA and ESMA shall consider quantitative factors such as the long-term default rate associated with all items assigned the same credit assessment. For recently established ECAIs and for those that have compiled only a short record of default data, EBA, EIOPA and ESMA shall ask the ECAI what it believes to be the long-term default rate associated with all items assigned the same credit assessment;
in order to differentiate between the relative degrees of risk expressed by each credit assessment, EBA, EIOPA and ESMA shall consider qualitative factors such as the pool of issuers that the ECAI covers, the range of credit assessments that the ECAI assigns, each credit assessment meaning and the ECAI's definition of default;
EBA, EIOPA and ESMA shall compare default rates experienced for each credit assessment of a particular ECAI and compare them with a benchmark built on the basis of default rates experienced by other ECAIs on a population of issuers that present an equivalent level of credit risk;
where the default rates experienced for the credit assessment of a particular ECAI are materially and systematically higher then the benchmark, EBA, EIOPA and ESMA shall assign a higher credit quality step in the credit quality assessment scale to the ECAI credit assessment;
where EBA, EIOPA and ESMA have increased the associated risk weight for a specific credit assessment of a particular ECAI, and where default rates experienced for that ECAI's credit assessment are no longer materially and systematically higher than the benchmark, EBA, EIOPA and ESMA may restore the original credit quality step in the credit quality assessment scale for the ECAI credit assessment.
EBA, EIOPA and ESMA shall submit those draft implementing technical standards to the Commission by 1 July 2014.
Power is conferred on the Commission to adopt the implementing technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010 and of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 respectively.
Sub-Section 3
Use of credit assessments by Export Credit Agencies
Article 137
Use of credit assessments by export credit agencies
For the purpose of Article 114, institutions may use credit assessments of an Export Credit Agency that the institution has nominated, if either of the following conditions is met:
it is a consensus risk score from export credit agencies participating in the OECD ‘Arrangement on Guidelines for Officially Supported Export Credits’;
the Export Credit Agency publishes its credit assessments, and the Export Credit Agency subscribes to the OECD agreed methodology, and the credit assessment is associated with one of the eight minimum export insurance premiums that the OECD agreed methodology establishes. An institution may revoke its nomination of an Export Credit Agency. An institution shall substantiate the revocation if there are concrete indications that the intention underlying the revocation is to reduce the capital adequacy requirements.
Exposures for which a credit assessment by an Export Credit Agency is recognised for risk weighting purposes shall be assigned a risk weight in accordance with Table 9.
Table 9
MEIP |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
Risk weight |
0 % |
0 % |
20 % |
50 % |
100 % |
100 % |
100 % |
150 % |
Section 4
Use of the ECAI credit assessments for the determination of risk weights
Article 138
General requirements
An institution may nominate one or more ECAIs to be used for the determination of risk weights to be assigned to assets and off-balance sheet items. An institution may revoke its nomination of an ECAI. An institution shall substantiate the revocation if there are concrete indications that the intention underlying the revocation is to reduce the capital adequacy requirements. Credit assessments shall not be used selectively. An institution shall use solicited credit assessments. However it may use unsolicited credit assessments if EBA has confirmed that unsolicited credit assessments of an ECAI do not differ in quality from solicited credit assessments of this ECAI. EBA shall refuse or revoke this confirmation in particular if the ECAI has used an unsolicited credit assessment to put pressure on the rated entity to place an order for a credit assessment or other services. In using credit assessment, institutions shall comply with the following requirements:
an institution which decides to use the credit assessments produced by an ECAI for a certain class of items shall use those credit assessments consistently for all exposures belonging to that class;
an institution which decides to use the credit assessments produced by an ECAI shall use them in a continuous and consistent way over time;
an institution shall only use ECAIs credit assessments that take into account all amounts both in principal and in interest owed to it;
where only one credit assessment is available from a nominated ECAI for a rated item, that credit assessment shall be used to determine the risk weight for that item;
where two credit assessments are available from nominated ECAIs and the two correspond to different risk weights for a rated item, the higher risk weight shall be assigned;
where more than two credit assessments are available from nominated ECAIs for a rated item, the two assessments generating the two lowest risk weights shall be referred to. If the two lowest risk weights are different, the higher risk weight shall be assigned. If the two lowest risk weights are the same, that risk weight shall be assigned.
Article 139
Issuer and issue credit assessment
Where no directly applicable credit assessment exists for a certain item, but a credit assessment exists for a specific issuing programme or facility to which the item constituting the exposure does not belong or a general credit assessment exists for the issuer, then that credit assessment shall be used in either of the following cases:
it produces a higher risk weight than would otherwise be the case and the exposure in question ranks pari passu or junior in all respects to the specific issuing program or facility or to senior unsecured exposures of that issuer, as relevant;
it produces a lower risk weight and the exposure in question ranks pari passu or senior in all respects to the specific issuing programme or facility or to senior unsecured exposures of that issuer, as relevant.
In all other cases, the exposure shall be treated as unrated.
Article 140
Long-term and short-term credit assessments
Any short-term credit assessment shall only apply to the item the short-term credit assessment refers to, and it shall not be used to derive risk weights for any other item, except in the following cases:
if a short-term rated facility is assigned a 150 % risk weight, then all unrated unsecured exposures on that obligor whether short-term or long-term shall also be assigned a 150 % risk weight;
if a short-term rated facility is assigned a 50 % risk-weight, no unrated short-term exposure shall be assigned a risk weight lower than 100 %.
Article 141
Domestic and foreign currency items
A credit assessment that refers to an item denominated in the obligor's domestic currency cannot be used to derive a risk weight for another exposure on that same obligor that is denominated in a foreign currency.
When an exposure arises through an institution's participation in a loan that has been extended by a multilateral development bank whose preferred creditor status is recognised in the market, the credit assessment on the obligors' domestic currency item may be used for risk weighting purposes.
CHAPTER 3
Internal Ratings Based Approach
Section 1
Permission by competent authorities to use the IRB approach
Article 142
Definitions
For the purposes of this Chapter, the following definitions shall apply:
‘rating system’ means all of the methods, processes, controls, data collection and IT systems that support the assessment of credit risk, the assignment of exposures to rating grades or pools, and the quantification of default and loss estimates that have been developed for a certain type of exposures;
‘type of exposures’ means a group of homogeneously managed exposures which are formed by a certain type of facilities and which may be limited to a single entity or a single sub-set of entities within a group provided that the same type of exposures is managed differently in other entities of the group;
‘business unit’ means any separate organisational or legal entities, business lines, geographical locations;
‘large financial sector entity’ means any financial sector entity which meets the following conditions:
its total assets, calculated on an individual or consolidated basis, are greater than or equal to a EUR 70 billion threshold, using the most recent audited financial statement or consolidated financial statement in order to determine asset size; and
it is, or one of its subsidiaries is, subject to prudential regulation in the Union or to the laws of a third country which applies prudential supervisory and regulatory requirements at least equivalent to those applied in the Union;
‘unregulated financial sector entity’ means an entity that is not a regulated financial sector entity but that performs, as its main business, one or more of the activities listed in Annex I to Directive 2013/36/EU or in Annex I to Directive 2004/39/EC;
‘obligor grade’ means a risk category within the obligor rating scale of a rating system, to which obligors are assigned on the basis of a specified and distinct set of rating criteria, from which estimates of probability of default (PD) are derived;
‘facility grade’ means a risk category within a rating system's facility scale, to which exposures are assigned on the basis of a specified and distinct set of rating criteria, from which own estimates of LGD are derived.
▼M5 —————
Article 143
Permission to use the IRB Approach
Institutions shall obtain the prior permission of the competent authorities for the following:
material changes to the range of application of a rating system or an internal models approach to equity exposures that the institution has received permission to use;
material changes to a rating system or an internal models approach to equity exposures that the institution has received permission to use.
The range of application of a rating system shall comprise all exposures of the relevant type of exposure for which that rating system was developed.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 10 January 2026.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 144
Competent authorities' assessment of an application to use an IRB Approach
The competent authority shall grant permission pursuant to Article 143 for an institution to use the IRB Approach, including to use own estimates of LGD and conversion factors, only if the competent authority is satisfied that requirements laid down in this Chapter are met, in particular those laid down in Section 6, and that the systems of the institution for the management and rating of credit risk exposures are sound and implemented with integrity and, in particular, that the institution has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the competent authority that the following standards are met:
the institution's rating systems provide for a meaningful assessment of obligor and transaction characteristics, a meaningful differentiation of risk and accurate and consistent quantitative estimates of risk;
internal ratings and default and loss estimates used in the calculation of own funds requirements and associated systems and processes play an essential role in the risk management and decision-making process, and in the credit approval, internal capital allocation and corporate governance functions of the institution;
the institution has a credit risk control unit responsible for its rating systems that is appropriately independent and free from undue influence;
the institution collects and stores all relevant data to provide effective support to its credit risk measurement and management process;
the institution documents its rating systems and the rationale for their design and validates its rating systems;
the institution has validated each rating system and each internal models approach for equity exposures during an appropriate time period prior to the permission to use this rating system or internal models approach to equity exposures, has assessed during this time period whether the rating system or internal models approaches for equity exposures are suited to the range of application of the rating system or internal models approach for equity exposures, and has made necessary changes to these rating systems or internal models approaches for equity exposures following from its assessment;
the institution has calculated under the IRB Approach the own funds requirements resulting from its risk parameters estimates and is able to submit the reporting as required by Article 430;
the institution has assigned and continues with assigning each exposure in the range of application of a rating system to a rating grade or pool of this rating system; the institution has assigned and continues with assigning each exposure in the range of application of an approach for equity exposures to this internal models approach.
The requirements to use an IRB Approach, including own estimates of LGD and conversion factors, apply also where an institution has implemented a rating system, or model used within a rating system, that it has purchased from a third-party vendor.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 10 July 2026.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 145
Prior experience of using IRB approaches
Article 146
Measures to be taken where the requirements of this Chapter cease to be met
Where an institution ceases to comply with the requirements laid down in this Chapter, it shall notify the competent authority and do one of the following:
present to the satisfaction of the competent authority a plan for a timely return to compliance and realise this plan within a period agreed with the competent authority;
demonstrate to the satisfaction of the competent authorities that the effect of non-compliance is immaterial.
Article 147
Methodology to assign exposures to exposure classes
Each exposure shall be assigned to one of the following exposure classes:
exposures to central governments and central banks;
exposures to institutions;
exposures to corporates;
retail exposures;
equity exposures;
items representing securitisation positions;
other non credit-obligation assets.
The following exposures shall be assigned to the class laid down in point (a) of paragraph 2:
exposures to regional governments, local authorities or public sector entities which are treated as exposures to central governments under Articles 115 and 116;
exposures to multilateral development banks referred to in Article 117(2);
exposures to International Organisations which attract a risk weight of 0 % under Article 118.
The following exposures shall be assigned to the class laid down in point (b) of paragraph 2:
exposures to regional governments and local authorities which are not treated as exposures to central governments in accordance with Article 115(2) and (4);
exposures to public sector entities which are not treated as exposures to central governments in accordance with Article 116(4);
exposures to multilateral development banks which are not assigned a 0 % risk weight under Article 117; and
exposures to financial institutions which are treated as exposures to institutions in accordance with Article 119(5).
To be eligible for the retail exposure class laid down in point (d) of paragraph 2, exposures shall meet the following criteria:
they shall be one of the following:
exposures to one or more natural persons;
exposures to an SME, provided in that case that the total amount owed to the institution and parent undertakings and its subsidiaries, including any past due exposure, by the obligor client or group of connected clients, but excluding exposures secured on residential property collateral, shall not, to the knowledge of the institution, which shall have taken reasonable steps to confirm the situation, exceed EUR 1 million;
they are treated by the institution in its risk management consistently over time and in a similar manner;
they are not managed just as individually as exposures in the corporate exposure class;
they each represent one of a significant number of similarly managed exposures.
In addition to the exposures listed in the first subparagraph, the present value of retail minimum lease payments shall be included in the retail exposure class.
The following exposures shall be assigned to the equity exposure class laid down in point (e) of paragraph 2:
non-debt exposures conveying a subordinated, residual claim on the assets or income of the issuer;
debt exposures and other securities, partnerships, derivatives, or other vehicles, the economic substance of which is similar to the exposures specified in point (a).
Within the corporate exposure class laid down in point (c) of paragraph 2, institutions shall separately identify as specialised lending exposures, exposures which possess the following characteristics:
the exposure is to an entity which was created specifically to finance or operate physical assets or is an economically comparable exposure;
the contractual arrangements give the lender a substantial degree of control over the assets and the income that they generate;
the primary source of repayment of the obligation is the income generated by the assets being financed, rather than the independent capacity of a broader commercial enterprise.
Article 148
Conditions for implementing the IRB Approach across different classes of exposure and business units
Subject to the prior permission of the competent authorities, implementation may be carried out sequentially across the different exposure classes referred to in Article 147 within the same business unit, across different business units in the same group or for the use of own estimates of LGDs or conversion factors for the calculation of risk weights for exposures to corporates, institutions, and central governments and central banks.
In the case of the retail exposure class referred to in Article 147(5), implementation may be carried out sequentially across the categories of exposures to which the different correlations in Article 154 correspond.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 31 December 2014.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 149
Conditions to revert to the use of less sophisticated approaches
An institution that uses the IRB Approach for a particular exposure class or type of exposure shall not stop using that approach and use instead the Standardised Approach for the calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts unless the following conditions are met:
the institution has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the competent authority that the use of the Standardised Approach is not proposed in order to reduce the own funds requirement of the institution, is necessary on the basis of nature and complexity of the institution's total exposures of this type and would not have a material adverse impact on the solvency of the institution or its ability to manage risk effectively;
the institution has received the prior permission of the competent authority.
Institutions which have obtained permission under Article 151(9) to use own estimates of LGDs and conversion factors, shall not revert to the use of LGD values and conversion factors referred to in Article 151(8) unless the following conditions are met:
the institution has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the competent authority that the use of LGDs and conversion factors laid down in Article 151(8) for a certain exposure class or type of exposure is not proposed in order to reduce the own funds requirement of the institution, is necessary on the basis of nature and complexity of the institution's total exposures of this type and would not have a material adverse impact on the solvency of the institution or its ability to manage risk effectively;
the institution has received the prior permission of the competent authority.
Article 150
Conditions for permanent partial use
Where institutions have received the prior permission of the competent authorities, institutions permitted to use the IRB Approach in the calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts and expected loss amounts for one or more exposure classes may apply the Standardised Approach for the following exposures:
the exposure class laid down in Article 147(2)(a), where the number of material counterparties is limited and it would be unduly burdensome for the institution to implement a rating system for these counterparties;
the exposure class laid down in Article 147(2)(b), where the number of material counterparties is limited and it would be unduly burdensome for the institution to implement a rating system for these counterparties;
exposures in non-significant business units as well as exposure classes or types of exposures that are immaterial in terms of size and perceived risk profile;
exposures to central governments and central banks of the Member States and their regional governments, local authorities, administrative bodies and public sector entities provided that:
there is no difference in risk between the exposures to that central government and central bank and those other exposures because of specific public arrangements; and
exposures to central governments and central banks are assigned a 0 % risk weight under Article 114(2) or (4);
exposures of an institution to a counterparty which is its parent undertaking, its subsidiary or a subsidiary of its parent undertaking provided that the counterparty is an institution or a financial holding company, mixed financial holding company, financial institution, asset management company or ancillary services undertaking subject to appropriate prudential requirements or an undertaking linked by a relationship within the meaning of Article 12(1) of Directive 83/349/EEC;
exposures between institutions which meet the requirements set out in Article 113(7);
equity exposures to entities whose credit obligations are assigned a 0 % risk weight under Chapter 2 including those publicly sponsored entities where a 0 % risk weight can be applied;
equity exposures incurred under legislative programmes to promote specified sectors of the economy that provide significant subsidies for the investment to the institution and involve some form of government oversight and restrictions on the equity investments where such exposures may in aggregate be excluded from the IRB Approach only up to a limit of 10 % of own funds;
the exposures identified in Article 119(4) meeting the conditions specified therein;
State and State-reinsured guarantees referred to in Article 215(2).
The competent authorities shall permit the application of Standardised Approach for equity exposures referred to in points (g) and (h) of the first subparagraph which have been permitted for that treatment in other Member States. EBA shall publish on its website and regularly update a list of the exposures referred to in those points to be treated according to the Standardised Approach.
In addition to the exposures referred to in paragraph 1, second subparagraph, an institution may, subject to the competent authority’s prior permission, apply the Standardised Approach for the following exposures where the IRB Approach is applied for other types of exposures within the same exposure class:
exposures to central governments and central banks of the Member States and their regional governments, local authorities, and public sector entities, provided that:
there is no difference in risk between the exposures to that central government and central bank and those other exposures because of specific public arrangements; and
exposures to central governments and central banks are assigned a 0 % risk weight under Article 114(2) or (4);
exposures of an institution to a counterparty which is its parent undertaking, its subsidiary or a subsidiary of its parent undertaking, provided that the counterparty is an institution or a financial holding company, mixed financial holding company, financial institution, asset management company or ancillary services undertaking subject to appropriate prudential requirements or an undertaking linked by a relationship within the meaning of Article 22(7) of Directive 2013/34/EU;
exposures between institutions which meet the requirements set out in Article 113(7).
An institution that is permitted to use the IRB Approach for the calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts for only some types of exposures within an exposure class shall apply the Standardised Approach for the remaining types of exposures within that exposure class.
In addition to the exposures referred to in paragraph 1, second subparagraph, of this Article and in this paragraph, an institution may apply the Standardised Approach for exposures to churches and religious communities which meet the requirements set out in Article 115(3).
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 31 December 2014.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Those guidelines shall be adopted in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Section 2
Calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts
Sub-Section 1
Treatment by type of exposure class
Article 151
Treatment by exposure class
Article 152
Treatment of exposures in the form of units or shares in CIUs
By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, an institution may exclude from the calculation of the own funds requirement for credit valuation adjustment risk derivative exposures which would not be subject to that requirement if they were incurred directly by the institution.
Institutions that apply the look-through approach in accordance with paragraphs 2 and 3 of this Article and that meet the conditions for permanent partial use in accordance with Article 150, or that do not meet the conditions for using the methods set out in this Chapter or one or more of the methods set out in Chapter 5 for all or parts of the underlying exposures of the CIU, shall calculate risk-weighted exposure amounts and expected loss amounts in accordance with the following principles:
for exposures assigned to the equity exposure class referred to in point (e) of Article 147(2), institutions shall apply the simple risk-weight approach set out in Article 155(2);
for exposures assigned to the items representing securitisation positions referred to in point (f) of Article 147(2), institutions shall apply the treatment set out in Article 254 as if those exposures were directly held by those institutions;
for all other underlying exposures, institutions shall apply the Standardised Approach laid down in Chapter 2 of this Title.
For the purposes of point (a) of the first subparagraph, where the institution is unable to differentiate between private equity exposures, exchange-traded exposures and other equity exposures, it shall treat the exposures concerned as other equity exposures.
Institutions that do not have adequate data or information to calculate the risk-weighted amount of a CIU in accordance with the approaches set out in paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and 5 may rely on the calculations of a third party, provided that all the following conditions are met:
the third party is one of the following:
the depository institution or the depository financial institution of the CIU, provided that the CIU exclusively invests in securities and deposits all securities at that depository institution or depository financial institution;
for CIUs not covered by point (i) of this point, the CIU management company, provided that the CIU management company meets the criteria set out in point (a) of Article 132(3);
for exposures other than those listed in points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 4 of this Article, the third party carries out the calculation in accordance with the look-through approach set out in Article 132a(1);
for exposures listed in points (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 4, the third party carries out the calculation in accordance with the approaches set out therein;
an external auditor has confirmed the correctness of the third party's calculation.
Institutions that rely on third-party calculations shall multiply the risk weighted exposure amounts of a CIU's exposures resulting from those calculations by a factor of 1,2.
By way of derogation from the second subparagraph, where the institution has unrestricted access to the detailed calculations carried out by the third party, the 1,2 factor shall not apply. The institution shall provide those calculations to its competent authority upon request.
Sub-Section 2
Calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts for credit risk
Article 153
Risk-weighted exposure amounts for exposures to corporates, institutions and central governments and central banks
Subject to the application of the specific treatments laid down in paragraphs 2, 3 and 4, the risk-weighted exposure amounts for exposures to corporates, institutions and central governments and central banks shall be calculated according to the following formulae:
Risk – weighted exposure amount = RW · exposure value
where the risk weight RW is defined as
if PD = 0, RW shall be 0;
if PD = 1, i.e., for defaulted exposures:
where the expected loss best estimate (hereinafter referred to as ‘ELBE ’) shall be the institution's best estimate of expected loss for the defaulted exposure in accordance with Article 181(1)(h);
if 0 < PD < 1
where:
N(x) |
= |
the cumulative distribution function for a standard normal random variable (i.e. the probability that a normal random variable with mean zero and variance of one is less than or equal to x); |
G(Z) |
= |
denotes the inverse cumulative distribution function for a standard normal random variable (i.e. the value x such that N(x) = z) |
R |
= |
denotes the coefficient of correlation, is defined as
|
b |
= |
the maturity adjustment factor, which is defined as
|
The risk-weighted exposure amount for each exposure which meets the requirements set out in Articles 202 and 217 may be adjusted in accordance with the following formula:
Risk – weighted exposure amount = RW · exposure value · (0.15 + 160 · PDpp )
where:
PDpp |
= |
PD of the protection provider. |
RW shall be calculated using the relevant risk weight formula set out in point 1 for the exposure, the PD of the obligor and the LGD of a comparable direct exposure to the protection provider. The maturity factor (b) shall be calculated using the lower of the PD of the protection provider and the PD of the obligor.
For exposures to companies where the total annual sales for the consolidated group of which the firm is a part is less than EUR 50 million, institutions may use the following correlation formula in paragraph 1 (iii) for the calculation of risk weights for corporate exposures. In this formula S is expressed as total annual sales in millions of euro with EUR 5 million ≤ S ≤ EUR 50 million. Reported sales of less than EUR 5 million shall be treated as if they were equivalent to EUR 5 million. For purchased receivables the total annual sales shall be the weighted average by individual exposures of the pool.
Institutions shall substitute total assets of the consolidated group for total annual sales when total annual sales are not a meaningful indicator of firm size and total assets are a more meaningful indicator than total annual sales.
For specialised lending exposures in respect of which an institution is not able to estimate PDs or the institutions' PD estimates do not meet the requirements set out in Section 6, the institution shall assign risk weights to these exposures in accordance with Table 1, as follows:
Table 1
Remaining Maturity |
Category 1 |
Category 2 |
Category 3 |
Category 4 |
Category 5 |
Less than 2,5 years |
50 % |
70 % |
115 % |
250 % |
0 % |
Equal or more than 2,5 years |
70 % |
90 % |
115 % |
250 % |
0 % |
In assigning risk weights to specialised lending exposures institutions shall take into account the following factors: financial strength, political and legal environment, transaction and/or asset characteristics, strength of the sponsor and developer, including any public private partnership income stream, and security package.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 10 July 2026.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 154
Risk-weighted exposure amounts for retail exposures
The risk-weighted exposure amounts for retail exposures shall be calculated in accordance with the following formulae:
Risk – weighted exposure amount = RW · exposure value
where the risk weight RW is defined as follows:
if PD = 1, i.e., for defaulted exposures, RW shall be
where ELBE shall be the institution's best estimate of expected loss for the defaulted exposure in accordance with Article 181(1)(h);
if 0 < PD < 1, i.e., for any possible value for PD other than under (i)
where:
N(x) |
= |
the cumulative distribution function for a standard normal random variable (i.e. the probability that a normal random variable with mean zero and variance of one is less than or equal to x); |
G(Z) |
= |
the inverse cumulative distribution function for a standard normal random variable (i.e. the value x such that N(x) = z); |
R |
= |
the coefficient of correlation defined as
|
Exposures shall qualify as qualifying revolving retail exposures if they meet the following conditions:
the exposures are to individuals;
the exposures are revolving, unsecured, and to the extent they are not drawn immediately and unconditionally, cancellable by the institution. In this context revolving exposures are defined as those where customers' outstanding balances are permitted to fluctuate based on their decisions to borrow and repay, up to a limit established by the institution. Undrawn commitments may be considered as unconditionally cancellable if the terms permit the institution to cancel them to the full extent allowable under consumer protection and related legislation;
the maximum exposure to a single individual in the sub-portfolio is EUR 100 000 or less;
the use of the correlation of this paragraph is limited to portfolios that have exhibited low volatility of loss rates, relative to their average level of loss rates, especially within the low PD bands;
the treatment as a qualifying revolving retail exposure shall be consistent with the underlying risk characteristics of the sub-portfolio.
By way of derogation from point (b), the requirement to be unsecured does not apply in respect of collateralised credit facilities linked to a wage account. In this case amounts recovered from the collateral shall not be taken into account in the LGD estimate.
Competent authorities shall review the relative volatility of loss rates across the qualifying revolving retail sub-portfolios, as well the aggregate qualifying revolving retail portfolio, and shall share information on the typical characteristics of qualifying revolving retail loss rates across Member States.
To be eligible for the retail treatment, purchased receivables shall comply with the requirements set out in Article 184 and the following conditions:
the institution has purchased the receivables from unrelated third party sellers, and its exposure to the obligor of the receivable does not include any exposures that are directly or indirectly originated by the institution itself;
the purchased receivables shall be generated on an arm's-length basis between the seller and the obligor. As such, inter-company accounts receivables and receivables subject to contra-accounts between firms that buy and sell to each other are ineligible;
the purchasing institution has a claim on all proceeds from the purchased receivables or a pro-rata interest in the proceeds; and
the portfolio of purchased receivables is sufficiently diversified.
Article 155
Risk-weighted exposure amounts for equity exposures
Institutions may treat equity exposures to ancillary services undertakings in accordance with the treatment of other non credit- obligation assets.
Under the simple risk weight approach, the risk-weighted exposure amount shall be calculated in accordance with the formula:
Risk – weighted exposure amount = RW * exposure value,
where:
Risk weight (RW) = 190 % for private equity exposures in sufficiently diversified portfolios.
Risk weight (RW) = 290 % for exchange traded equity exposures.
Risk weight (RW) = 370 % for all other equity exposures.
Short cash positions and derivative instruments held in the non-trading book are permitted to offset long positions in the same individual stocks provided that these instruments have been explicitly designated as hedges of specific equity exposures and that they provide a hedge for at least another year. Other short positions are to be treated as if they are long positions with the relevant risk weight assigned to the absolute value of each position. In the context of maturity mismatched positions, the method is that for corporate exposures as set out in Article 162(5).
Institutions may recognise unfunded credit protection obtained on an equity exposure in accordance with the methods set out in Chapter 4.
At the individual exposure level the sum of the expected loss amount multiplied by 12,5 and the risk-weighted exposure amount shall not exceed the exposure value multiplied by 12,5.
Institutions may recognise unfunded credit protection obtained on an equity exposure in accordance with the methods set out in Chapter 4. This shall be subject to an LGD of 90 % on the exposure to the provider of the hedge. For private equity exposures in sufficiently diversified portfolios an LGD of 65 % may be used. For these purposes M shall be five years.
Under the internal models approach, the risk-weighted exposure amount shall be the potential loss on the institution's equity exposures as derived using internal value-at-risk models subject to the 99th percentile, one-tailed confidence interval of the difference between quarterly returns and an appropriate risk-free rate computed over a long-term sample period, multiplied by 12,5. The risk-weighted exposure amounts at the equity portfolio level shall not be less than the total of the sums of the following:
the risk-weighted exposure amounts required under the PD/LGD Approach; and
the corresponding expected loss amounts multiplied by 12,5.
The amounts referred to in point (a) and (b) shall be calculated on the basis of the PD values set out in Article 165(1) and the corresponding LGD values set out in Article 165(2).
Institutions may recognise unfunded credit protection obtained on an equity position.
Article 156
Risk-weighted exposure amounts for other non credit-obligation assets
The risk-weighted exposure amounts for other non credit-obligation assets shall be calculated in accordance with the following formula:
Risk – weighted exposure amount = 100 % · exposure value,
except for:
cash in hand and equivalent cash items as well as gold bullion held in own vault or on an allocated basis to the extent backed by bullion liabilities, in which case a 0 % risk-weight shall be assigned;
when the exposure is a residual value of leased assets in which case it shall be calculated as follows:
where t is the greater of 1 and the nearest number of whole years of the lease remaining.
Sub-Section 3
Calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts for dilution risk of purchased receivables
Article 157
Risk-weighted exposure amounts for dilution risk of purchased receivables
EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to further specify:
the methodology for the calculation of risk-weighted exposure amount for dilution risk of purchased receivables, including recognition of credit risk mitigation in accordance with Article 160(4), and the conditions for the use of own estimates and parameters of the fall-back approach;
the assessment of the immateriality criterion for the type of exposures referred to in paragraph 5.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 10 July 2027.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Section 3
Expected loss amounts
Article 158
Treatment by exposure type
The expected loss (EL) and expected loss amounts for exposures to corporates, institutions, central governments and central banks and retail exposures shall be calculated in accordance with the following formulae:
Expected loss (EL) = PD * LGD
Expected loss amount |
= |
EL [multiplied by] exposure value. |
For defaulted exposures (PD = 100 %) where institutions use own estimates of LGDs, EL shall be ELBE, the institution's best estimate of expected loss for the defaulted exposure in accordance with Article 181(1)(h).
For exposures subject to the treatment set out in Article 153(3), EL shall be 0 %.
The EL values for specialised lending exposures where institutions use the methods set out in Article 153(5) for assigning risk weights shall be assigned in accordance with Table 2.
Table 2
Remaining Maturity |
Category 1 |
Category 2 |
Category 3 |
Category 4 |
Category 5 |
Less than 2,5 years |
0 % |
0,4 % |
2,8 % |
8 % |
50 % |
Equal to or more than 2,5 years |
0,4 % |
0,8 % |
2,8 % |
8 % |
50 % |
The expected loss amounts for equity exposures where the risk-weighted exposure amounts are calculated in accordance with the simple risk weight approach shall be calculated in accordance with the following formula:
Expected loss amount = EL · exposure value
The EL values shall be the following:
Expected loss (EL) = 0,8 % for private equity exposures in sufficiently diversified portfolios
Expected loss (EL) = 0,8 % for exchange traded equity exposures
Expected loss (EL) = 2,4 % for all other equity exposures.
The expected loss and expected loss amounts for equity exposures where the risk-weighted exposure amounts are calculated in accordance with the PD/LGD approach shall be calculated in accordance with the following formula:
Expected loss (EL) = PD · LGD
Expected loss amount = EL · exposure value
The expected loss amounts for dilution risk of purchased receivables shall be calculated in accordance with the following formula:
Expected loss (EL) = PD · LGD
Expected loss amount = EL · exposure value
Article 159
Treatment of expected loss amounts
Institutions shall subtract the expected loss amounts calculated in accordance with Article 158(5), (6) and (10) from the general and specific credit risk adjustments in accordance with Article 110, additional value adjustments in accordance with Articles 34 and 105 and other own funds reductions related to those exposures except for the deductions made in accordance with point (m) Article 36(1). Discounts on balance sheet exposures purchased when in default in accordance with Article 166(1) shall be treated in the same manner as specific credit risk adjustments. Specific credit risk adjustments on exposures in default shall not be used to cover expected loss amounts on other exposures. Expected loss amounts for securitised exposures and general and specific credit risk adjustments related to those exposures shall not be included in that calculation.
Section 4
PD, LGD and maturity
Sub-Section 1
Exposures to corporates, institutions and central governments and central banks
Article 160
Probability of default (PD)
For purchased corporate receivables in respect of which an institution is not able to estimate PDs or an institution's PD estimates do not meet the requirements set out in Section 6, the PDs for these exposures shall be determined in accordance with the following methods:
for senior claims on purchased corporate receivables PD shall be the institutions estimate of EL divided by LGD for these receivables;
for subordinated claims on purchased corporate receivables PD shall be the institution's estimate of EL;
an institution that has received the permission of the competent authority to use own LGD estimates for corporate exposures pursuant to Article 143 and that can decompose its EL estimates for purchased corporate receivables into PDs and LGDs in a manner that the competent authority considers to be reliable, may use the PD estimate that results from this decomposition.
Institutions may take into account unfunded credit protection in the PD in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 4. For dilution risk, in addition to the protection providers referred to in Article 201(1)(g) the seller of the purchased receivables is eligible if the following conditions are met:
the corporate entity has a credit assessment by an ECAI which has been determined by EBA to be associated with credit quality step 3 or above under the rules for the risk weighting of exposures to corporates under Chapter 2;
the corporate entity, in the case of institutions calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts and expected loss amounts under the IRB Approach, does not have a credit assessment by a recognised ECAI and is internally rated as having a PD equivalent to that associated with the credit assessments of ECAIs determined by EBA to be associated with credit quality step 3 or above under the rules for the risk weighting of exposures to corporates under Chapter 2.
An institution that has received the permission of the competent authority pursuant to Article 143 to use own LGD estimates for dilution risk of purchased corporate receivables, may recognise unfunded credit protection by adjusting PDs subject to Article 161(3).
Article 161
Loss Given Default (LGD)
Institutions shall use the following LGD values:
senior exposures without eligible collateral: 45 %;
subordinated exposures without eligible collateral: 75 %;
institutions may recognise funded and unfunded credit protection in the LGD in accordance with Chapter 4;
covered bonds eligible for the treatment set out in Article 129(4) or (5) may be assigned an LGD value of 11,25 %;
for senior purchased corporate receivables exposures where an institution is not able to estimate PDs or the institution's PD estimates do not meet the requirements set out in Section 6: 45 %;
for subordinated purchased corporate receivables exposures where an institution is not able to estimate PDs or the institution's PD estimates do not meet the requirements set out in Section 6: 100 %;
for dilution risk of purchased corporate receivables: 75 %.
Article 162
Maturity
Alternatively, as part of the permission referred to in Article 143, the competent authorities shall decide on whether the institution shall use maturity (M) for each exposure as set out under paragraph 2.
Institutions that have received the permission of the competent authority to use own LGDs and own conversion factors for exposures to corporates, institutions or central governments and central banks pursuant to Article 143 shall calculate M for each of these exposures as set out in points (a) to (e) of this paragraph and subject to paragraphs 3 to 5 of this Article. M shall be no greater than five years except in the cases specified in Article 384(1) where M as specified there shall be used:
for an instrument subject to a cash flow schedule, M shall be calculated in accordance with the following formula:
where CFt denotes the cash flows (principal, interest payments and fees) contractually payable by the obligor in period t;
for derivatives subject to a master netting agreement, M shall be the weighted average remaining maturity of the exposure, where M shall be at least 1 year, and the notional amount of each exposure shall be used for weighting the maturity;
for exposures arising from fully or nearly-fully collateralised derivative instruments listed in Annex II and fully or nearly-fully collateralised margin lending transactions which are subject to a master netting agreement, M shall be the weighted average remaining maturity of the transactions where M shall be at least 10 days;
for repurchase transactions or securities or commodities lending or borrowing transactions which are subject to a master netting agreement, M shall be the weighted average remaining maturity of the transactions where M shall be at least five days. The notional amount of each transaction shall be used for weighting the maturity;
an institution that has received the permission of the competent authority pursuant to Article 143 to use own PD estimates for purchased corporate receivables, for drawn amounts M shall equal the purchased receivables exposure weighted average maturity, where M shall be at least 90 days. This same value of M shall also be used for undrawn amounts under a committed purchase facility provided that the facility contains effective covenants, early amortisation triggers, or other features that protect the purchasing institution against a significant deterioration in the quality of the future receivables it is required to purchase over the facility's term. Absent such effective protections, M for undrawn amounts shall be calculated as the sum of the longest-dated potential receivable under the purchase agreement and the remaining maturity of the purchase facility, where M shall be at least 90 days;
for any instrument other than those referred to in this paragraph or when an institution is not in a position to calculate M as set out in point (a), M shall be the maximum remaining time (in years) that the obligor is permitted to take to fully discharge its contractual obligations, where M shall be at least one year;
for institutions using the Internal Model Method set out in Section 6 of Chapter 6 to calculate the exposure values, M shall be calculated for exposures to which they apply this method and for which the maturity of the longest-dated contract contained in the netting set is greater than one year in accordance with the following formula:
where:
|
= |
a dummy variable whose value at future period tk is equal to 0 if tk > 1 year and to 1 if tk ≤ 1; |
|
= |
the expected exposure at the future period tk; |
|
= |
the effective expected exposure at the future period tk; |
|
= |
the risk-free discount factor for future time period tk; |
an institution that uses an internal model to calculate a one-sided credit valuation adjustment (CVA) may use, subject to the permission of the competent authorities, the effective credit duration estimated by the internal model as M.
Subject to paragraph 2, for netting sets in which all contracts have an original maturity of less than one year the formula in point (a) shall apply;
for institutions using the Internal Model Method set out in Section 6 of Chapter 6, to calculate the exposure values and having an internal model permission for specific risk associated with traded debt positions in accordance with Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 5, M shall be set to 1 in the formula laid out in Article 153(1), provided that an institution can demonstrate to the competent authorities that its internal model for Specific risk associated with traded debt positions applied in Article 383 contains effects of rating migrations;
for the purposes of Article 153(3), M shall be the effective maturity of the credit protection but at least 1 year.
Where the documentation requires daily re-margining and daily revaluation and includes provisions that allow for the prompt liquidation or set off of collateral in the event of default or failure to remargin, M shall be at least one-day for:
fully or nearly-fully collateralised derivative instruments listed in Annex II;
fully or nearly-fully collateralised margin lending transactions;
repurchase transactions, securities or commodities lending or borrowing transactions.
In addition, for qualifying short-term exposures which are not part of the institution's ongoing financing of the obligor, M shall be at least one-day. Qualifying short term exposures shall include the following:
exposures to institutions or investment firms arising from the settlement of foreign exchange obligations;
self-liquidating short-term trade finance transactions connected to the exchange of goods or services with a residual maturity of up to one year as referred to in point (80) of Article 4(1);
exposures arising from settlement of securities purchases and sales within the usual delivery period or two business days;
exposures arising from cash settlements by wire transfer and settlements of electronic payment transactions and prepaid cost, including overdrafts arising from failed transactions that do not exceed a short, fixed agreed number of business days.
Sub-Section 2
Retail exposures
Article 163
Probability of default (PD)
Article 164
Loss Given Default (LGD)
The exposure-weighted average LGD for all retail exposures secured by commercial immovable property and not benefiting from guarantees from central governments shall not be lower than 15 %.
Where the authority designated by the Member State for the application of this Article is the competent authority, it shall ensure that the relevant national bodies and authorities which have a macroprudential mandate are duly informed of the competent authority's intention to make use of this Article, and are appropriately involved in the assessment of financial stability concerns in its Member State in accordance with paragraph 6.
Where the authority designated by the Member State for the application of this Article is different from the competent authority, the Member State shall adopt the necessary provisions to ensure proper coordination and exchange of information between the competent authority and the designated authority for the proper application of this Article. In particular, authorities shall be required to cooperate closely and to share all the information that may be necessary for the adequate performance of the duties imposed upon the designated authority pursuant to this Article. That cooperation shall aim at avoiding any form of duplicative or inconsistent action between the competent authority and the designated authority, as well as ensuring that the interaction with other measures, in particular measures taken under Article 458 of this Regulation and Article 133 of Directive 2013/36/EU, is duly taken into account.
Where, on the basis of the assessment referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph, the authority designated in accordance with paragraph 5 concludes that the minimum LGD values referred to in paragraph 4 are not adequate, and if it considers that the inadequacy of LGD values could adversely affect current or future financial stability in its Member State, it may set higher minimum LGD values for those exposures located in one or more parts of the territory of the Member State of the relevant authority. Those higher minimum values may also be applied at the level of one or more property segments of such exposures.
The authority designated in accordance with paragraph 5 shall notify EBA and the ESRB before making the decision referred to in this paragraph. Within one month of receipt of that notification EBA and the ESRB shall provide their opinion to the Member State concerned. EBA and the ESRB shall publish those LGD values.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 31 December 2019.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
The ESRB may, by means of recommendations in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1092/2010, and in close cooperation with EBA, give guidance to authorities designated in accordance with paragraph 5 of this Article on the following:
factors which could ‘adversely affect current or future financial stability’ referred to in paragraph 6; and
indicative benchmarks that the authority designated in accordance with paragraph 5 is to take into account when determining higher minimum LGD values.
Sub-Section 3
Equity exposures subject to PD/LGD method
Article 165
Equity exposures subject to the PD/LGD method
The following minimum PDs shall apply:
0,09 % for exchange traded equity exposures where the investment is part of a long-term customer relationship;
0,09 % for non-exchange traded equity exposures where the returns on the investment are based on regular and periodic cash flows not derived from capital gains;
0,40 % for exchange traded equity exposures including other short positions as set out in Article 155(2);
1,25 % for all other equity exposures including other short positions as set out in Article 155(2).
Section 5
Exposure value
Article 166
Exposures to corporates, institutions, central governments and central banks and retail exposures
This rule also applies to assets purchased at a price different than the amount owed.
For purchased assets, the difference between the amount owed and the accounting value remaining after specific credit risk adjustments have been applied that has been recorded on the balance-sheet of the institutions when purchasing the asset is denoted discount if the amount owed is larger, and premium if it is smaller.
The exposure value for the following items shall be calculated as the committed but undrawn amount multiplied by a conversion factor. Institutions shall use the following conversion factors in accordance with Article 151(8) for exposures to corporates, institutions, central governments and central banks:
for credit lines that are unconditionally cancellable at any time by the institution without prior notice, or that effectively provide for automatic cancellation due to deterioration in a borrower's creditworthiness, a conversion factor of 0 % shall apply. To apply a conversion factor of 0 %, institutions shall actively monitor the financial condition of the obligor, and their internal control systems shall enable them to immediately detect deterioration in the credit quality of the obligor. Undrawn credit lines may be considered as unconditionally cancellable if the terms permit the institution to cancel them to the full extent allowable under consumer protection and related legislation;
for short-term letters of credit arising from the movement of goods, a conversion factor of 20 % shall apply for both the issuing and confirming institutions;
for undrawn purchase commitments for revolving purchased receivables that are able to be unconditionally cancelled or that effectively provide for automatic cancellation at any time by the institution without prior notice, a conversion factor of 0 % shall apply. To apply a conversion factor of 0 %, institutions shall actively monitor the financial condition of the obligor, and their internal control systems shall enable them to immediately detect a deterioration in the credit quality of the obligor;
for other credit lines, note issuance facilities (NIFs), and revolving underwriting facilities (RUFs), a conversion factor of 75 % shall apply.
Institutions which meet the requirements for the use of own estimates of conversion factors as specified in Section 6 may use their own estimates of conversion factors across different product types as mentioned in points (a) to (d), subject to permission of the competent authorities.
For all off-balance sheet items other than those mentioned in paragraphs 1 to 8, the exposure value shall be the following percentage of its value:
100 % if it is a full risk item;
50 % if it is a medium-risk item;
20 % if it is a medium/low-risk item;
0 % if it is a low-risk item.
For the purposes of this paragraph the off-balance sheet items shall be assigned to risk categories as indicated in Annex I.
Article 167
Equity exposures
Article 168
Other non credit-obligation assets
The exposure value of other non credit-obligation assets shall be the accounting value remaining after specific credit risk adjustment have been applied
Section 6
Requirements for the IRB approach
Sub-Section 1
Rating systems
Article 169
General principles
Article 170
Structure of rating systems
The structure of rating systems for exposures to corporates, institutions and central governments and central banks shall comply with the following requirements:
a rating system shall take into account obligor and transaction risk characteristics;
a rating system shall have an obligor rating scale which reflects exclusively quantification of the risk of obligor default. The obligor rating scale shall have a minimum of 7 grades for non-defaulted obligors and one for defaulted obligors;
an institution shall document the relationship between obligor grades in terms of the level of default risk each grade implies and the criteria used to distinguish that level of default risk;
institutions with portfolios concentrated in a particular market segment and range of default risk shall have enough obligor grades within that range to avoid undue concentrations of obligors in a particular grade. Significant concentrations within a single grade shall be supported by convincing empirical evidence that the obligor grade covers a reasonably narrow PD band and that the default risk posed by all obligors in the grade falls within that band;
to be permitted by the competent authority to use own estimates of LGDs for own funds requirement calculation, a rating system shall incorporate a distinct facility rating scale which exclusively reflects LGD related transaction characteristics. The facility grade definition shall include both a description of how exposures are assigned to the grade and of the criteria used to distinguish the level of risk across grades;
significant concentrations within a single facility grade shall be supported by convincing empirical evidence that the facility grade covers a reasonably narrow LGD band, respectively, and that the risk posed by all exposures in the grade falls within that band.
The structure of rating systems for retail exposures shall comply with the following requirements:
rating systems shall reflect both obligor and transaction risk, and shall capture all relevant obligor and transaction characteristics;
the level of risk differentiation shall ensure that the number of exposures in a given grade or pool is sufficient to allow for meaningful quantification and validation of the loss characteristics at the grade or pool level. The distribution of exposures and obligors across grades or pools shall be such as to avoid excessive concentrations;
the process of assigning exposures to grades or pools shall provide for a meaningful differentiation of risk, for a grouping of sufficiently homogenous exposures, and shall allow for accurate and consistent estimation of loss characteristics at grade or pool level. For purchased receivables the grouping shall reflect the seller's underwriting practices and the heterogeneity of its customers.
Institutions shall consider the following risk drivers when assigning exposures to grades or pools:
obligor risk characteristics;
transaction risk characteristics, including product or collateral types or both. Institutions shall explicitly address cases where several exposures benefit from the same collateral;
delinquency, except where an institution demonstrates to the satisfaction of its competent authority that delinquency is not a material driver of risk for the exposure.
Article 171
Assignment to grades or pools
An institution shall have specific definitions, processes and criteria for assigning exposures to grades or pools within a rating system that comply with the following requirements:
the grade or pool definitions and criteria shall be sufficiently detailed to allow those charged with assigning ratings to consistently assign obligors or facilities posing similar risk to the same grade or pool. This consistency shall exist across lines of business, departments and geographic locations;
the documentation of the rating process shall allow third parties to understand the assignments of exposures to grades or pools, to replicate grade and pool assignments and to evaluate the appropriateness of the assignments to a grade or a pool;
the criteria shall also be consistent with the institution's internal lending standards and its policies for handling troubled obligors and facilities.
Article 172
Assignment of exposures
For exposures to corporates, institutions and central governments and central banks, and for equity exposures where an institution uses the PD/LGD approach set out in Article 155(3), assignment of exposures shall be carried out in accordance with the following criteria:
each obligor shall be assigned to an obligor grade as part of the credit approval process;
for those exposures for which an institution has received the permission of the competent authority to use own estimates of LGDs and conversion factors pursuant to Article 143, each exposure shall also be assigned to a facility grade as part of the credit approval process;
institutions using the methods set out in Article 153(5) for assigning risk weights for specialised lending exposures shall assign each of these exposures to a grade in accordance with Article 170(2);
each separate legal entity to which the institution is exposed shall be separately rated. An institution shall have appropriate policies regarding the treatment of individual obligor clients and groups of connected clients;
separate exposures to the same obligor shall be assigned to the same obligor grade, irrespective of any differences in the nature of each specific transaction. However, where separate exposures are allowed to result in multiple grades for the same obligor, the following shall apply:
country transfer risk, this being dependent on whether the exposures are denominated in local or foreign currency;
the treatment of associated guarantees to an exposure may be reflected in an adjusted assignment to an obligor grade;
consumer protection, bank secrecy or other legislation prohibit the exchange of client data.
Article 173
Integrity of assignment process
For exposures to corporates, institutions and central governments and central banks, and for equity exposures where an institution uses the PD/LGD approach set out in Article 155(3), the assignment process shall meet the following requirements of integrity:
Assignments and periodic reviews of assignments shall be completed or approved by an independent party that does not directly benefit from decisions to extend the credit;
Institutions shall review assignments at least annually and adjust the assignment where the result of the review does not justify carrying forward the current assignment. High risk obligors and problem exposures shall be subject to more frequent review. Institutions shall undertake a new assignment if material information on the obligor or exposure becomes available;
An institution shall have an effective process to obtain and update relevant information on obligor characteristics that affect PDs, and on transaction characteristics that affect LGDs or conversion factors.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 10 July 2026.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 174
Use of models
If an institution uses statistical models and other mechanical methods to assign exposures to obligors or facilities grades or pools, the following requirements shall be met:
the model shall have good predictive power and capital requirements shall not be distorted as a result of its use. The input variables shall form a reasonable and effective basis for the resulting predictions. The model shall not have material biases;
the institution shall have in place a process for vetting data inputs into the model, which includes an assessment of the accuracy, completeness and appropriateness of the data;
the data used to build the model shall be representative of the population of the institution's actual obligors or exposures;
the institution shall have a regular cycle of model validation that includes monitoring of model performance and stability; review of model specification; and testing of model outputs against outcomes;
the institution shall complement the statistical model by human judgement and human oversight to review model-based assignments and to ensure that the models are used appropriately. Review procedures shall aim at finding and limiting errors associated with model weaknesses. Human judgements shall take into account all relevant information not considered by the model. The institution shall document how human judgement and model results are to be combined.
Article 175
Documentation of rating systems
Where the institution employs statistical models in the rating process, the institution shall document their methodologies. This material shall:
provide a detailed outline of the theory, assumptions and mathematical and empirical basis of the assignment of estimates to grades, individual obligors, exposures, or pools, and the data source(s) used to estimate the model;
establish a rigorous statistical process including out-of-time and out-of-sample performance tests for validating the model;
indicate any circumstances under which the model does not work effectively.
Article 176
Data maintenance
For exposures to corporates, institutions and central governments and central banks, and for equity exposures where an institution uses the PD/LGD approach set out in Article 155(3), institutions shall collect and store:
complete rating histories on obligors and recognised guarantors;
the dates the ratings were assigned;
the key data and methodology used to derive the rating;
the person responsible for the rating assignment;
the identity of obligors and exposures that defaulted;
the date and circumstances of such defaults;
data on the PDs and realised default rates associated with rating grades and ratings migration.
Institutions using own estimates of LGDs and conversion factors shall collect and store:
complete histories of data on the facility ratings and LGD and conversion factor estimates associated with each rating scale;
the dates on which the ratings were assigned and the estimates were made;
the key data and methodology used to derive the facility ratings and LGD and conversion factor estimates;
the person who assigned the facility rating and the person who provided LGD and conversion factor estimates;
data on the estimated and realised LGDs and conversion factors associated with each defaulted exposure;
data on the LGD of the exposure before and after evaluation of the effects of a guarantee/or credit derivative, for those institutions that reflect the credit risk mitigating effects of guarantees or credit derivatives through LGD;
data on the components of loss for each defaulted exposure.
For retail exposures, institutions shall collect and store:
data used in the process of allocating exposures to grades or pools;
data on the estimated PDs, LGDs and conversion factors associated with grades or pools of exposures;
the identity of obligors and exposures that defaulted;
for defaulted exposures, data on the grades or pools to which the exposure was assigned over the year prior to default and the realised outcomes on LGD and conversion factor;
data on loss rates for qualifying revolving retail exposures.
Article 177
Stress tests used in assessment of capital adequacy
Sub-Section 2
Risk quantification
Article 178
Default of an obligor
A default shall be considered to have occurred with regard to a particular obligor when either or both of the following have taken place:
the institution considers that the obligor is unlikely to pay its credit obligations to the institution, the parent undertaking or any of its subsidiaries in full, without recourse by the institution to actions such as realising security;
the obligor is more than 90 days past due on any material credit obligation to the institution, the parent undertaking or any of its subsidiaries. Competent authorities may replace the 90 days with 180 days for exposures secured by residential property or SME commercial immovable property in the retail exposure class, as well as exposures to public sector entities. The 180 days shall not apply for the purposes of point (m) Article 36(1) or Article 127.
In the case of retail exposures, institutions may apply the definition of default laid down in points (a) and (b) of the first subparagraph at the level of an individual credit facility rather than in relation to the total obligations of a borrower.
The following shall apply for the purposes of point (b) of paragraph 1:
for overdrafts, days past due commence once an obligor has breached an advised limit, has been advised a limit smaller than current outstandings, or has drawn credit without authorisation and the underlying amount is material;
for the purposes of point (a), an advised limit comprises any credit limit determined by the institution and about which the obligor has been informed by the institution;
days past due for credit cards commence on the minimum payment due date;
materiality of a credit obligation past due shall be assessed against a threshold, defined by the competent authorities. This threshold shall reflect a level of risk that the competent authority considers to be reasonable;
institutions shall have documented policies in respect of the counting of days past due, in particular in respect of the re-ageing of the facilities and the granting of extensions, amendments or deferrals, renewals, and netting of existing accounts. These policies shall be applied consistently over time, and shall be in line with the internal risk management and decision processes of the institution.
For the purpose of point (a) of paragraph 1, elements to be taken as indications of unlikeliness to pay shall include the following:
the institution puts the credit obligation on non-accrued status;
the institution recognises a specific credit adjustment resulting from a significant perceived decline in credit quality subsequent to the institution taking on the exposure;
the institution sells the credit obligation at a material credit-related economic loss;
the institution consents to a distressed restructuring of the credit obligation where this is likely to result in a diminished financial obligation caused by the material forgiveness, or postponement, of principal, interest or, where relevant fees. This includes, in the case of equity exposures assessed under a PD/LGD Approach, distressed restructuring of the equity itself;
the institution has filed for the obligor's bankruptcy or a similar order in respect of an obligor's credit obligation to the institution, the parent undertaking or any of its subsidiaries;
the obligor has sought or has been placed in bankruptcy or similar protection where this would avoid or delay repayment of a credit obligation to the institution, the parent undertaking or any of its subsidiaries.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 31 December 2014.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
By 10 July 2025, EBA shall issue guidelines, in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, to update the guidelines referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph. In particular, that update shall take due account of the necessity to encourage institutions to engage in proactive, preventive and meaningful debt restructuring to support obligors.
In developing those guidelines, EBA shall duly consider the need for granting a sufficient flexibility to institutions when specifying what constitutes a diminished financial obligation for the purposes of paragraph 3, point (d).
Article 179
Overall requirements for estimation
In quantifying the risk parameters to be associated with rating grades or pools, institutions shall apply the following requirements:
an institution's own estimates of the risk parameters PD, LGD, conversion factor and EL shall incorporate all relevant data, information and methods. The estimates shall be derived using both historical experience and empirical evidence, and not based purely on judgemental considerations. The estimates shall be plausible and intuitive and shall be based on the material drivers of the respective risk parameters. The less data an institution has, the more conservative it shall be in its estimation;
an institution shall be able to provide a breakdown of its loss experience in terms of default frequency, LGD, conversion factor, or loss where EL estimates are used, by the factors it sees as the drivers of the respective risk parameters. The institution's estimates shall be representative of long run experience;
any changes in lending practice or the process for pursuing recoveries over the observation periods referred to in Article 180(1)(h) and (2)(e), Article 181(1)(j) and (2), and Article 182(2) and (3) shall be taken into account. An institution's estimates shall reflect the implications of technical advances and new data and other information, as it becomes available. Institutions shall review their estimates when new information comes to light but at least on an annual basis;
the population of exposures represented in the data used for estimation, the lending standards used when the data was generated and other relevant characteristics shall be comparable with those of the institution's exposures and standards. The economic or market conditions that underlie the data shall be relevant to current and foreseeable conditions. The number of exposures in the sample and the data period used for quantification shall be sufficient to provide the institution with confidence in the accuracy and robustness of its estimates;
for purchased receivables the estimates shall reflect all relevant information available to the purchasing institution regarding the quality of the underlying receivables, including data for similar pools provided by the seller, by the purchasing institution, or by external sources. The purchasing institution shall evaluate any data relied upon which is provided by the seller;
an institution shall add to its estimates a margin of conservatism that is related to the expected range of estimation errors. Where methods and data are considered to be less satisfactory, the expected range of errors is larger, the margin of conservatism shall be larger.
Where institutions use different estimates for the calculation of risk weights and for internal purposes, it shall be documented and be reasonable. If institutions can demonstrate to their competent authorities that for data that have been collected prior to 1 January 2007 appropriate adjustments have been made to achieve broad equivalence with the definition of default laid down in Article 178 or with loss, competent authorities may permit the institutions some flexibility in the application of the required standards for data.
Where an institution uses data that is pooled across institutions it shall meet the following requirements:
the rating systems and criteria of other institutions in the pool are similar to its own;
the pool is representative of the portfolio for which the pooled data is used;
the pooled data is used consistently over time by the institution for its estimates;
the institution shall remain responsible for the integrity of its rating systems;
the institution shall maintain sufficient in-house understanding of its rating systems, including the ability to effectively monitor and audit the rating process.
Article 180
Requirements specific to PD estimation
In quantifying the risk parameters to be associated with rating grades or pools, institutions shall apply the following requirements specific to PD estimation to exposures to corporates, institutions and central governments and central banks and for equity exposures where an institution uses the PD/LGD approach set out in Article 155(3):
institutions shall estimate PDs by obligor grade from long run averages of one-year default rates. PD estimates for obligors that are highly leveraged or for obligors whose assets are predominantly traded assets shall reflect the performance of the underlying assets based on periods of stressed volatilities;
for purchased corporate receivables institutions may estimate the EL by obligor grade from long run averages of one-year realised default rates;
if an institution derives long run average estimates of PDs and LGDs for purchased corporate receivables from an estimate of EL, and an appropriate estimate of PD or LGD, the process for estimating total losses shall meet the overall standards for estimation of PD and LGD set out in this part, and the outcome shall be consistent with the concept of LGD as set out in Article 181(1)(a);
institutions shall use PD estimation techniques only with supporting analysis. Institutions shall recognise the importance of judgmental considerations in combining results of techniques and in making adjustments for limitations of techniques and information;
to the extent that an institution uses data on internal default experience for the estimation of PDs, the estimates shall be reflective of underwriting standards and of any differences in the rating system that generated the data and the current rating system. Where underwriting standards or rating systems have changed, the institution shall add a greater margin of conservatism in its estimate of PD;
to the extent that an institution associates or maps its internal grades to the scale used by an ECAI or similar organisations and then attributes the default rate observed for the external organisation's grades to the institution's grades, mappings shall be based on a comparison of internal rating criteria to the criteria used by the external organisation and on a comparison of the internal and external ratings of any common obligors. Biases or inconsistencies in the mapping approach or underlying data shall be avoided. The criteria of the external organisation underlying the data used for quantification shall be oriented to default risk only and not reflect transaction characteristics. The analysis undertaken by the institution shall include a comparison of the default definitions used, subject to the requirements in Article 178. The institution shall document the basis for the mapping;
to the extent that an institution uses statistical default prediction models it is allowed to estimate PDs as the simple average of default-probability estimates for individual obligors in a given grade. The institution's use of default probability models for this purpose shall meet the standards specified in Article 174;
irrespective of whether an institution is using external, internal, or pooled data sources, or a combination of the three, for its PD estimation, the length of the underlying historical observation period used shall be at least five years for at least one source. If the available observation period spans a longer period for any source, and this data is relevant, this longer period shall be used. This point also applies to the PD/LGD Approach to equity. Subject to the permission of competent authorities, institutions which have not received the permission of the competent authority pursuant to Article 143 to use own estimates of LGDs or conversion factors may use, when they implement the IRB Approach, relevant data covering a period of two years. The period to be covered shall increase by one year each year until relevant data cover a period of five years.
For retail exposures, the following requirements shall apply:
institutions shall estimate PDs by obligor grade or pool from long run averages of one-year default rates;
PD estimates may also be derived from an estimate of total losses and appropriate estimates of LGDs;
institutions shall regard internal data for assigning exposures to grades or pools as the primary source of information for estimating loss characteristics. Institutions may use external data (including pooled data) or statistical models for quantification provided that the following strong links both exist:
between the institution's process of assigning exposures to grades or pools and the process used by the external data source; and
between the institution's internal risk profile and the composition of the external data;
if an institution derives long run average estimates of PD and LGD for retail exposures from an estimate of total losses and an appropriate estimate of PD or LGD, the process for estimating total losses shall meet the overall standards for estimation of PD and LGD set out in this part, and the outcome shall be consistent with the concept of LGD as set out in point (a) of Article 181(1);
irrespective of whether an institution is using external, internal or pooled data sources or a combination of the three, for their estimation of loss characteristics, the length of the underlying historical observation period used shall be at least five years for at least one source. If the available observation spans a longer period for any source, and these data are relevant, this longer period shall be used. An institution need not give equal importance to historic data if more recent data is a better predictor of loss rates. Subject to the permission of the competent authorities, institutions may use, when they implement the IRB Approach, relevant data covering a period of two years. The period to be covered shall increase by one year each year until relevant data cover a period of five years;
institutions shall identify and analyse expected changes of risk parameters over the life of credit exposures (seasoning effects).
For purchased retail receivables, institutions may use external and internal reference data. Institutions shall use all relevant data sources as points of comparison.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 10 July 2026.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 181
Requirements specific to own-LGD estimates
In quantifying the risk parameters to be associated with rating grades or pools, institutions shall apply the following requirements specific to own-LGD estimates:
institutions shall estimate LGDs by facility grade or pool on the basis of the average realised LGDs by facility grade or pool using all observed defaults within the data sources (default weighted average);
institutions shall use LGD estimates that are appropriate for an economic downturn if those are more conservative than the long-run average. To the extent a rating system is expected to deliver realised LGDs at a constant level by grade or pool over time, institutions shall make adjustments to their estimates of risk parameters by grade or pool to limit the capital impact of an economic downturn;
an institution shall consider the extent of any dependence between the risk of the obligor and that of the collateral or collateral provider. Cases where there is a significant degree of dependence shall be addressed in a conservative manner;
currency mismatches between the underlying obligation and the collateral shall be treated conservatively in the institution's assessment of LGD;
to the extent that LGD estimates take into account the existence of collateral, these estimates shall not solely be based on the collateral's estimated market value. LGD estimates shall take into account the effect of the potential inability of institutions to expeditiously gain control of their collateral and liquidate it;
to the extent that LGD estimates take into account the existence of collateral, institutions shall establish internal requirements for collateral management, legal certainty and risk management that are generally consistent with those set out in Chapter 4, Section 3;
to the extent that an institution recognises collateral for determining the exposure value for counterparty credit risk in accordance with Chapter 6, Section 5 or 6, any amount expected to be recovered from the collateral shall not be taken into account in the LGD estimates;
for the specific case of exposures already in default, the institution shall use the sum of its best estimate of expected loss for each exposure given current economic circumstances and exposure status and its estimate of the increase of loss rate caused by possible additional unexpected losses during the recovery period, i.e. between date of default and final liquidation of the exposure;
to the extent that unpaid late fees have been capitalised in the institution's income statement, they shall be added to the institution's measure of exposure and loss;
for exposures to corporates, institutions and central governments and central banks, estimates of LGD shall be based on data over a minimum of five years, increasing by one year each year after implementation until a minimum of seven years is reached, for at least one data source. If the available observation period spans a longer period for any source, and the data is relevant, this longer period shall be used.
For the purposes of the first subparagraph, point (a), of this paragraph institutions shall adequately take into account recoveries realised in the course of the relevant recovery processes from any type of funded credit protection as well as from unfunded credit protection not falling under the definition in Article 142(1), point (10).
For the purposes of the first subparagraph, point (c), cases where there is a significant degree of dependence shall be addressed in a conservative manner.
For the purposes of the first subparagraph, point (e), LGD estimates shall take into account the effect of the potential inability of institutions to expeditiously gain control of their collateral and liquidate it.
For retail exposures, institutions may do the following:
derive LGD estimates from realised losses and appropriate estimates of PDs;
reflect future drawings either in their conversion factors or in their LGD estimates;
For purchased retail receivables use external and internal reference data to estimate LGDs.
For retail exposures, estimates of LGD shall be based on data over a minimum of five years. An institution need not give equal importance to historic data if more recent data is a better predictor of loss rates. Subject to the permission of the competent authorities, institutions may use, when they implement the IRB Approach, relevant data covering a period of two years. The period to be covered shall increase by one year each year until relevant data cover a period of five years.
EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify the following:
the nature, severity and duration of an economic downturn referred to in paragraph 1;
the conditions according to which a competent authority may permit an institution pursuant to paragraph 2 to use relevant data covering a period of two years when the institution implements the IRB Approach.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 31 December 2014.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
For the purpose of calculating loss, EBA shall, by 31 December 2025, issue updated guidelines, in accordance with Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, on the following:
with regard to cases that return to non-defaulted status, specifying how artificial cash flow is to be treated and whether it is more appropriate for institutions to discount the artificial cash flow over the actual period of default;
assessing whether the calibration and application of the discount rate is appropriate for the calculation of economic loss across all exposures.
Article 182
Requirements specific to own-conversion factor estimates
In quantifying the risk parameters to be associated with rating grades or pools, institutions shall apply the following requirements specific to own-conversion factor estimates:
institutions shall estimate conversion factors by facility grade or pool on the basis of the average realised conversion factors by facility grade or pool using the default weighted average resulting from all observed defaults within the data sources;
institutions shall use conversion factor estimates that are appropriate for an economic downturn if those are more conservative than the long-run average. To the extent a rating system is expected to deliver realised conversion factors at a constant level by grade or pool over time, institutions shall make adjustments to their estimates of risk parameters by grade or pool to limit the capital impact of an economic downturn;
institutions' estimates of conversion factors shall reflect the possibility of additional drawings by the obligor up to and after the time a default event is triggered. The conversion factor estimate shall incorporate a larger margin of conservatism where a stronger positive correlation can reasonably be expected between the default frequency and the magnitude of conversion factor;
in arriving at estimates of conversion factors institutions shall consider their specific policies and strategies adopted in respect of account monitoring and payment processing. Institutions shall also consider their ability and willingness to prevent further drawings in circumstances short of payment default, such as covenant violations or other technical default events;
institutions shall have adequate systems and procedures in place to monitor facility amounts, current outstandings against committed lines and changes in outstandings per obligor and per grade. The institution shall be able to monitor outstanding balances on a daily basis;
if institutions use different estimates of conversion factors for the calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts and internal purposes it shall be documented and be reasonable.
For retail exposures, estimates of conversion factors shall be based on data over a minimum of five years. By way of derogation from point (a) of paragraph 1, an institution need not give equal importance to historic data if more recent data is a better predictor of draw downs. Subject to the permission of competent authorities, institutions may use, when they implement the IRB Approach, relevant data covering a period of two years. The period to be covered shall increase by one year each year until relevant data cover a period of five years.
EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify the following:
the nature, severity and duration of an economic downturn referred to in paragraph 1;
conditions according to which a competent authority may permit and institution to use relevant data covering a period of two years at the time an institution first implements the IRB Approach.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 31 December 2014.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 183
Requirements for assessing the effect of guarantees and credit derivatives for exposures to corporates, institutions and central governments and central banks where own estimates of LGD are used and for retail exposures
The following requirements shall apply in relation to eligible guarantors and guarantees:
institutions shall have clearly specified criteria for the types of guarantors they recognise for the calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts;
for recognised guarantors the same rules as for obligors as set out in Articles 171, 172 and 173 shall apply;
the guarantee shall be evidenced in writing, non-cancellable on the part of the guarantor, in force until the obligation is satisfied in full (to the extent of the amount and tenor of the guarantee) and legally enforceable against the guarantor in a jurisdiction where the guarantor has assets to attach and enforce a judgement. Conditional guarantees prescribing conditions under which the guarantor may not be obliged to perform may be recognised subject to permission of the competent authorities. The assignment criteria shall adequately address any potential reduction in the risk mitigation effect.
The criteria shall be plausible and intuitive. They shall address the guarantor's ability and willingness to perform under the guarantee, the likely timing of any payments from the guarantor, the degree to which the guarantor's ability to perform under the guarantee is correlated with the obligor's ability to repay, and the extent to which residual risk to the obligor remains.
The criteria shall address the payout structure of the credit derivative and conservatively assess the impact this has on the level and timing of recoveries. The institution shall consider the extent to which other forms of residual risk remain.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 31 December 2014.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 184
Requirements for purchased receivables
The institution shall monitor both the quality of the purchased receivables and the financial condition of the seller and servicer. The following shall apply:
the institution shall assess the correlation among the quality of the purchased receivables and the financial condition of both the seller and servicer, and have in place internal policies and procedures that provide adequate safeguards to protect against any contingencies, including the assignment of an internal risk rating for each seller and servicer;
the institution shall have clear and effective policies and procedures for determining seller and servicer eligibility. The institution or its agent shall conduct periodic reviews of sellers and servicers in order to verify the accuracy of reports from the seller or servicer, detect fraud or operational weaknesses, and verify the quality of the seller's credit policies and servicer's collection policies and procedures. The findings of these reviews shall be documented;
the institution shall assess the characteristics of the purchased receivables pools, including over-advances; history of the seller's arrears, bad debts, and bad debt allowances; payment terms, and potential contra accounts;
the institution shall have effective policies and procedures for monitoring on an aggregate basis single-obligor concentrations both within and across purchased receivables pools;
the institution shall ensure that it receives from the servicer timely and sufficiently detailed reports of receivables ageings and dilutions to ensure compliance with the institution's eligibility criteria and advancing policies governing purchased receivables, and provide an effective means with which to monitor and confirm the seller's terms of sale and dilution.
Sub-Section 3
Validation of internal estimates
Article 185
Validation of internal estimates
Institutions shall validate their internal estimates subject to the following requirements:
institutions shall have robust systems in place to validate the accuracy and consistency of rating systems, processes, and the estimation of all relevant risk parameters. The internal validation process shall enable the institution to assess the performance of internal rating and risk estimation systems consistently and meaningfully;
institutions shall regularly compare realised default rates with estimated PDs for each grade and, where realised default rates are outside the expected range for that grade, institutions shall specifically analyse the reasons for the deviation. Institutions using own estimates of LGDs and conversion factors shall also perform analogous analysis for these estimates. Such comparisons shall make use of historical data that cover as long a period as possible. The institution shall document the methods and data used in such comparisons. This analysis and documentation shall be updated at least annually;
institutions shall also use other quantitative validation tools and comparisons with relevant external data sources. The analysis shall be based on data that are appropriate to the portfolio, are updated regularly, and cover a relevant observation period. Institutions' internal assessments of the performance of their rating systems shall be based on as long a period as possible;
the methods and data used for quantitative validation shall be consistent through time. Changes in estimation and validation methods and data (both data sources and periods covered) shall be documented;
institutions shall have sound internal standards for situations where deviations in realised PDs, LGDs, conversion factors and total losses, where EL is used, from expectations, become significant enough to call the validity of the estimates into question. These standards shall take account of business cycles and similar systematic variability in default experience. Where realised values continue to be higher than expected values, institutions shall revise estimates upward to reflect their default and loss experience;
Sub-Section 4
Requirements for equity exposures under the internal models approach
Article 186
Own funds requirement and risk quantification
For the purpose of calculating own funds requirements institutions shall meet the following standards:
the estimate of potential loss shall be robust to adverse market movements relevant to the long-term risk profile of the institution's specific holdings. The data used to represent return distributions shall reflect the longest sample period for which data is available and meaningful in representing the risk profile of the institution's specific equity exposures. The data used shall be sufficient to provide conservative, statistically reliable and robust loss estimates that are not based purely on subjective or judgmental considerations. The shock employed shall provide a conservative estimate of potential losses over a relevant long-term market or business cycle. The institution shall combine empirical analysis of available data with adjustments based on a variety of factors in order to attain model outputs that achieve appropriate realism and conservatism. In constructing value at risk (VaR) models estimating potential quarterly losses, institutions may use quarterly data or convert shorter horizon period data to a quarterly equivalent using an analytically appropriate method supported by empirical evidence and through a well-developed and documented thought process and analysis. Such an approach shall be applied conservatively and consistently over time. Where only limited relevant data is available the institution shall add appropriate margins of conservatism;
the models used shall capture adequately all of the material risks embodied in equity returns including both the general market risk and specific risk exposure of the institution's equity portfolio. The internal models shall adequately explain historical price variation, capture both the magnitude and changes in the composition of potential concentrations, and be robust to adverse market environments. The population of risk exposures represented in the data used for estimation shall be closely matched to or at least comparable with those of the institution's equity exposures;
the internal model shall be appropriate for the risk profile and complexity of an institution's equity portfolio. Where an institution has material holdings with values that are highly non-linear in nature the internal models shall be designed to capture appropriately the risks associated with such instruments;
mapping of individual positions to proxies, market indices, and risk factors shall be plausible, intuitive, and conceptually sound;
institutions shall demonstrate through empirical analyses the appropriateness of risk factors, including their ability to cover both general and specific risk;
the estimates of the return volatility of equity exposures shall incorporate relevant and available data, information, and methods. Independently reviewed internal data or data from external sources including pooled data shall be used;
a rigorous and comprehensive stress-testing programme shall be in place.
Article 187
Risk management process and controls
With regard to the development and use of internal models for own funds requirement purposes, institutions shall establish policies, procedures, and controls to ensure the integrity of the model and modelling process. These policies, procedures, and controls shall include the following:
full integration of the internal model into the overall management information systems of the institution and in the management of the non-trading book equity portfolio. Internal models shall be fully integrated into the institution's risk management infrastructure if they are particularly used in measuring and assessing equity portfolio performance including the risk-adjusted performance, allocating economic capital to equity exposures and evaluating overall capital adequacy and the investment management process;
established management systems, procedures, and control functions for ensuring the periodic and independent review of all elements of the internal modelling process, including approval of model revisions, vetting of model inputs, and review of model results, such as direct verification of risk computations. These reviews shall assess the accuracy, completeness, and appropriateness of model inputs and results and focus on both finding and limiting potential errors associated with known weaknesses and identifying unknown model weaknesses. Such reviews may be conducted by an internal independent unit, or by an independent external third party;
adequate systems and procedures for monitoring investment limits and the risk exposures of equity exposures;
the units responsible for the design and application of the model shall be functionally independent from the units responsible for managing individual investments;
parties responsible for any aspect of the modelling process shall be adequately qualified. Management shall allocate sufficient skilled and competent resources to the modelling function.
Article 188
Validation and documentation
Institutions shall have robust systems in place to validate the accuracy and consistency of their internal models and modelling processes. All material elements of the internal models and the modelling process and validation shall be documented.
The validation and documentation of institutions' internal models and modelling processes shall be subject to the following requirements:
institutions shall use the internal validation process to assess the performance of its internal models and processes in a consistent and meaningful way;
the methods and data used for quantitative validation shall be consistent over time. Changes in estimation and validation methods and changes to data sources and periods covered, shall be documented;
institutions shall regularly compare actual equity returns computed using realised and unrealised gains and losses with modelled estimates. Such comparisons shall make use of historical data that cover as long a period as possible. The institution shall document the methods and data used in such comparisons. This analysis and documentation shall be updated at least annually;
institutions shall make use of other quantitative validation tools and comparisons with external data sources. The analysis shall be based on data that are appropriate to the portfolio, are updated regularly, and cover a relevant observation period. Institutions' internal assessments of the performance of their models shall be based on as long a period as possible;
institutions shall have sound internal standards for addressing situations where comparison of actual equity returns with the models estimates calls the validity of the estimates or of the models as such into question. These standards shall take account of business cycles and similar systematic variability in equity returns. All adjustments made to internal models in response to model reviews shall be documented and consistent with the institution's model review standards;
the internal model and the modelling process shall be documented, including the responsibilities of parties involved in the modelling, and the model approval and model review processes.
Sub-Section 5
Internal governance and oversight
Article 189
Corporate Governance
Senior management shall be subject to the following requirements:
they shall provide notice to the management body or a designated committee thereof of material changes or exceptions from established policies that will materially impact the operations of the institution's rating systems;
they shall have a good understanding of the rating systems designs and operations;
they shall ensure, on an ongoing basis that the rating systems are operating properly.
Senior management shall be regularly informed by the credit risk control units about the performance of the rating process, areas needing improvement, and the status of efforts to improve previously identified deficiencies.
Article 190
Credit risk control
The areas of responsibility for the credit risk control unit or units shall include:
testing and monitoring grades and pools;
production and analysis of summary reports of the institution's rating systems;
implementing procedures to verify that grade and pool definitions are consistently applied across departments and geographic areas;
reviewing and documenting any changes to the rating process, including the reasons for the changes;
reviewing the rating criteria to evaluate if they remain predictive of risk. Changes to the rating process, criteria or individual rating parameters shall be documented and retained;
active participation in the design or selection, implementation and validation of models used in the rating process;
oversight and supervision of models used in the rating process;
ongoing review and alterations to models used in the rating process.
Institutions using pooled data in accordance with Article 179(2) may outsource the following tasks:
production of information relevant to testing and monitoring grades and pools;
production of summary reports of the institution's rating systems;
production of information relevant to a review of the rating criteria to evaluate if they remain predictive of risk;
documentation of changes to the rating process, criteria or individual rating parameters;
production of information relevant to ongoing review and alterations to models used in the rating process.
Article 191
Internal Audit
Internal audit or another comparable independent auditing unit shall review at least annually the institution's rating systems and its operations, including the operations of the credit function and the estimation of PDs, LGDs, ELs and conversion factors. Areas of review shall include adherence to all applicable requirements.
CHAPTER 4
Credit risk mitigation
Section 1
Definitions and general requirements
Article 192
Definitions
For the purposes of this Chapter, the following definitions shall apply:
‘lending institution’ means the institution which has the exposure in question;
‘secured lending transaction’ means any transaction giving rise to an exposure secured by collateral which does not include a provision conferring upon the institution the right to receive margin at least daily;
‘capital market-driven transaction’ means any transaction giving rise to an exposure secured by collateral which includes a provision conferring upon the institution the right to receive margin at least daily;
‘underlying CIU’ means a CIU in the shares or units of which another CIU has invested.
Article 193
Principles for recognising the effect of credit risk mitigation techniques
Where an institution calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts under the Standardised Approach has more than one form of credit risk mitigation covering a single exposure it shall do both of the following:
subdivide the exposure into parts covered by each type of credit risk mitigation tool;
calculate the risk-weighted exposure amount for each part obtained in point (a) separately in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 2 and this Chapter.
When an institution calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts under the Standardised Approach covers a single exposure with credit protection provided by a single protection provider and that protection has differing maturities, it shall do both of the following:
subdivide the exposure into parts covered by each credit risk mitigation tool;
calculate the risk-weighted exposure amount for each part obtained in point (a) separately in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 2 and this Chapter.
Article 194
Principles governing the eligibility of credit risk mitigation techniques
The lending institution shall provide, upon request of the competent authority, the most recent version of the independent, written and reasoned legal opinion or opinions that it used to establish whether its credit protection arrangement or arrangements meet the condition laid down in the first subparagraph.
Institutions may recognise funded credit protection in the calculation of the effect of credit risk mitigation only where the assets relied upon for protection meet both of the following conditions:
they are included in the list of eligible assets set out in Articles 197 to 200, as applicable;
they are sufficiently liquid and their value over time sufficiently stable to provide appropriate certainty as to the credit protection achieved having regard to the approach used to calculate risk-weighted exposure amounts and to the degree of recognition allowed.
In the case of unfunded credit protection, a protection agreement shall qualify as an eligible protection agreement only where it meets both the following conditions:
it is included in the list of eligible protection agreements set out in Articles 203 and 204(1);
it is legally effective and enforceable in the relevant jurisdictions, to provide appropriate certainty as to the credit protection achieved having regard to the approach used to calculate risk-weighted exposure amounts and to the degree of recognition allowed;
the protection provider meets the criteria laid down in paragraph 5.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 30 September 2014.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Section 2
Eligible forms of credit risk mitigation
Sub-Section 1
Funded credit protection
Article 195
On-balance sheet netting
An institution may use on-balance sheet netting of mutual claims between itself and its counterparty as an eligible form of credit risk mitigation.
Without prejudice to Article 196, eligibility is limited to reciprocal cash balances between the institution and the counterparty. Institutions may amend risk-weighted exposure amounts and, as relevant, expected loss amounts only for loans and deposits that they have received themselves and that are subject to an on-balance sheet netting agreement.
Article 196
Master netting agreements covering repurchase transactions or securities or commodities lending or borrowing transactions or other capital market-driven transactions
Institutions adopting the Financial Collateral Comprehensive Method set out in Article 223 may take into account the effects of bilateral netting contracts covering repurchase transactions, securities or commodities lending or borrowing transactions, or other capital market-driven transactions with a counterparty. Without prejudice to Article 299, the collateral taken and securities or commodities borrowed within such agreements or transactions shall comply with the eligibility requirements for collateral set out in Articles 197 and 198.
Article 197
Eligibility of collateral under all approaches and methods
Institutions may use the following items as eligible collateral under all approaches and methods:
cash on deposit with, or cash assimilated instruments held by, the lending institution;
debt securities issued by central governments or central banks, which securities have a credit assessment by an ECAI or export credit agency recognised as eligible for the purposes of Chapter 2 which has been determined by EBA to be associated with credit quality step 4 or above under the rules for the risk weighting of exposures to central governments and central banks under Chapter 2;
debt securities issued by institutions or investment firms, which securities have a credit assessment by an ECAI which has been determined by EBA to be associated with credit quality step 3 or above under the rules for the risk weighting of exposures to institutions under Chapter 2;
debt securities issued by other entities which securities have a credit assessment by an ECAI which has been determined by EBA to be associated with credit quality step 3 or above under the rules for the risk weighting of exposures to corporates under Chapter 2;
debt securities with a short-term credit assessment by an ECAI which has been determined by EBA to be associated with credit quality step 3 or above under the rules for the risk weighting of short term exposures under Chapter 2;
equities or convertible bonds that are included in a main index;
gold;
securitisation positions that are not resecuritisation positions and which are subject to a 100 % risk weight or lower in accordance with Article 261 to Article 264.
For the purposes of point (b) of paragraph 1, ‘debt securities issued by central governments or central banks’ shall include all the following:
debt securities issued by regional governments or local authorities, exposures to which are treated as exposures to the central government in whose jurisdiction they are established under Article 115(2);
debt securities issued by public sector entities which are treated as exposures to central governments in accordance with Article 116(4);
debt securities issued by multilateral development banks to which a 0 % risk weight is assigned under Article 117(2);
debt securities issued by international organisations which are assigned a 0 % risk weight under Article 118.
For the purposes of point (c) of paragraph 1, ‘debt securities issued by institutions’ shall include all the following:
debt securities issued by regional governments or local authorities other than those debt securities referred to in point (a) of paragraph 2;
debt securities issued by public sector entities, exposures to which are treated in accordance with Article 116(1) and (2);
debt securities issued by multilateral development banks other than those to which a 0 % risk weight is assigned under Article 117(2).
An institution may use debt securities that are issued by other institutions or investment firms and that do not have a credit assessment by an ECAI as eligible collateral where those debt securities fulfil all the following criteria:
they are listed on a recognised exchange;
they qualify as senior debt;
all other rated issues by the issuing institution of the same seniority have a credit assessment by an ECAI which has been determined by EBA to be associated with credit quality step 3 or above under the rules for the risk weighting of exposures to institutions or short term exposures under Chapter 2;
the lending institution has no information to suggest that the issue would justify a credit assessment below that indicated in point (c);
the market liquidity of the instrument is sufficient for these purposes.
Institutions may use units or shares in CIUs as eligible collateral where all the following conditions are satisfied:
the units or shares have a daily public price quote;
the CIUs are limited to investing in instruments that are eligible for recognition under paragraphs 1 and 4;
the CIUs meet the conditions laid down in Article 132(3).
Where a CIU invests in shares or units of another CIU, conditions laid down in points (a) to (c) of the first subparagraph shall apply equally to any such underlying CIU.
The use by a CIU of derivative instruments to hedge permitted investments shall not prevent units or shares in that undertaking from being eligible as collateral.
Where any underlying CIU has underlying CIUs of its own, institutions may use units or shares in the original CIU as eligible collateral provided that they apply the methodology laid down in the first subparagraph.
Where non-eligible assets can have a negative value due to liabilities or contingent liabilities resulting from ownership, institutions shall do both of the following:
calculate the total value of the non-eligible assets;
where the amount obtained under point (a) is negative, subtract the absolute value of that amount from the total value of the eligible assets.
ESMA shall develop draft implementing technical standards to specify the following:
the main indices referred to in point (f) of paragraph 1 of this Article, in point (a) of Article 198(1), in Article 224(1) and (4), and in point (e) of Article 299(2);
the recognised exchanges referred to in point (a) of paragraph 4 of this Article, in point (a) of Article 198(1), in Article 224(1) and (4), in point (e) of Article 299(2), in point (k) of Article 400(2), in point (e) of Article 416(3), in point (c) of Article 428(1), and in point 12 of Annex III in accordance with the conditions laid down in point (72) of Article 4(1).
ESMA shall submit those draft implementing technical standards to the Commission by 31 December 2014.
Power is conferred on the Commission to adopt the implementing technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010.
Article 198
Additional eligibility of collateral under the Financial Collateral Comprehensive Method
In addition to the collateral established in Article 197, where an institution uses the Financial Collateral Comprehensive Method set out in Article 223, that institution may use the following items as eligible collateral:
equities or convertible bonds not included in a main index but traded on a recognised exchange;
units or shares in CIUs where both the following conditions are met:
the units or shares have a daily public price quote;
the CIU is limited to investing in instruments that are eligible for recognition under Article 197(1) and (4) and the items mentioned in point (a) of this subparagraph.
In the case a CIU invests in units or shares of another CIU, conditions (a) and (b) of this paragraph equally apply to any such underlying CIU.
The use by a CIU of derivative instruments to hedge permitted investments shall not prevent units or shares in that undertaking from being eligible as collateral.
Where non-eligible assets can have a negative value due to liabilities or contingent liabilities resulting from ownership, institutions shall do both of the following:
calculate the total value of the non-eligible assets;
where the amount obtained under point (a) is negative, subtract the absolute value of that amount from the total value of the eligible assets.
Article 199
Additional eligibility for collateral under the IRB Approach
In addition to the collateral referred to in Articles 197 and 198, institutions that calculate risk-weighted exposure amounts and expected loss amounts under the IRB Approach may also use the following forms of collateral:
immovable property collateral in accordance with paragraphs 2, 3 and 4;
receivables in accordance with paragraph 5;
other physical collateral in accordance with paragraphs 6 and 8;
leasing in accordance with paragraph 7.
Unless otherwise specified under Article 124(2), institutions may use as eligible collateral residential property which is or will be occupied or let by the owner, or the beneficial owner in the case of personal investment companies, and commercial immovable property, including offices and other commercial premises, where both the following conditions are met:
the value of the property does not materially depend upon the credit quality of the obligor. Institutions may exclude situations where purely macro-economic factors affect both the value of the property and the performance of the borrower from their determination of the materiality of such dependence;
the risk of the borrower does not materially depend upon the performance of the underlying property or project, but on the underlying capacity of the borrower to repay the debt from other sources, and as a consequence the repayment of the facility does not materially depend on any cash flow generated by the underlying property serving as collateral.
Institutions may derogate from point (b) of paragraph 2 for exposures secured by residential property situated within the territory of a Member State, where the competent authority of that Member State has published evidence showing that a well-developed and long-established residential property market is present in that territory with loss rates that do not exceed any of the following limits:
losses stemming from loans collateralised by residential property up to 80 % of the market value or 80 % of the mortgage lending value, unless ◄ otherwise provided under Article 124(2), do not exceed 0,3 % of the outstanding loans collateralised by residential property in any given year;
overall losses stemming from loans collateralised by residential property do not exceed 0,5 % of the outstanding loans collateralised by residential property in any given year.
Where either of the conditions in points (a) and (b) of the first subparagraph is not met in a given year, institutions shall not use the treatment set out in that subparagraph until both conditions are satisfied in a subsequent year.
Institutions may derogate from point (b) of paragraph 2 for commercial immovable property situated within the territory of a Member State, where the competent authority of that Member State has published evidence showing that a well-developed and long-established commercial immovable property market is present in that territory with loss rates that do not exceed any of the following limits:
losses stemming from loans collateralised by commercial immovable property up to 50 % of the market value or 60 % of the mortgage lending value do not exceed ◄ 0,3 % of the outstanding loans collateralised by commercial immovable property in any given year;
overall losses stemming from loans collateralised by commercial immovable property do not exceed 0,5 % of the outstanding loans collateralised by commercial immovable property in any given year.
Where either of the conditions in points (a) and (b) of the first subparagraph is not met in a given year, institutions shall not use the treatment set out in that subparagraph until both conditions are satisfied in a subsequent year.
Competent authorities shall permit an institution to use as eligible collateral physical collateral of a type other than those indicated in paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 where all the following conditions are met:
there are liquid markets, evidenced by frequent transactions taking into account the asset type, for the disposal of the collateral in an expeditious and economically efficient manner. Institutions shall carry out the assessment of this condition periodically and where information indicates material changes in the market;
there are well-established, publicly available market prices for the collateral. Institutions may consider market prices as well-established where they come from reliable sources of information such as public indices and reflect the price of the transactions under normal conditions. Institutions may consider market prices as publicly available, where these prices are disclosed, easily accessible, and obtainable regularly and without any undue administrative or financial burden;
the institution analyses the market prices, time and costs required to realise the collateral and the realised proceeds from the collateral;
the institution demonstrates that the realised proceeds from the collateral are not below 70 % of the collateral value in more than 10 % of all liquidations for a given type of collateral. Where there is material volatility in the market prices, the institution demonstrates to the satisfaction of the competent authorities that its valuation of the collateral is sufficiently conservative.
Institutions shall document the fulfilment of the conditions specified in points (a) to (d) of the first subparagraph and those specified in Article 210.
Article 200
Other funded credit protection
Institutions may use the following other funded credit protection as eligible collateral:
cash on deposit with, or cash assimilated instruments held by, a third party institution in a non-custodial arrangement and pledged to the lending institution;
life insurance policies pledged to the lending institution;
instruments issued by a third‐party institution or by an investment firm which are to be repurchased by that institution or by that investment firm on request.
Sub-Section 2
Unfunded credit protection
Article 201
Eligibility of protection providers under all approaches
Institutions may use the following parties as eligible providers of unfunded credit protection:
central governments and central banks;
regional governments or local authorities;
multilateral development banks;
international organisations exposures to which a 0 % risk weight under Article 117 is assigned;
public sector entities, claims on which are treated in accordance with Article 116;
institutions, and financial institutions for which exposures to the financial institution are treated as exposures to institutions in accordance with Article 119(5);
other corporate entities, including parent undertakings, subsidiaries and affiliated corporate entities of the institution, where either of the following conditions is met:
those other corporate entities have a credit assessment by an ECAI;
in the case of institutions calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts and expected loss amounts under the IRB Approach, those other corporate entities do not have a credit assessment by a recognised ECAI and are internally rated by the institution;
qualifying central counterparties.
Competent authorities shall publish and maintain the list of those financial institutions that are eligible providers of unfunded credit protection under point (f) of paragraph 1, or the guiding criteria for identifying such eligible providers of unfunded credit protection, together with a description of the applicable prudential requirements, and share their list with other competent authorities in accordance with Article 117 of Directive 2013/36/EU.
Article 202
Eligibility of protection providers under the IRB Approach which qualify for the treatment set out in Article 153(3)
An institution may use institutions, investment firms, insurance and reinsurance undertakings and export credit agencies as eligible providers of unfunded credit protection which qualify for the treatment set out in Article 153(3) where they meet all the following conditions:
they have sufficient expertise in providing unfunded credit protection;
they are regulated in a manner equivalent to the rules laid down in this Regulation, or had, at the time the credit protection was provided, a credit assessment by a recognised ECAI which had been determined by EBA to be associated with credit quality step 3 or above in accordance with the rules for the risk weighting of exposures to corporates set out in Chapter 2;
they had, at the time the credit protection was provided, or for any period of time thereafter, an internal rating with a PD equivalent to or lower than that associated with credit quality step 2 or above in accordance with the rules for the risk weighting of exposures to corporates set out in Chapter 2;
they have an internal rating with a PD equivalent to or lower than that associated with credit quality step 3 or above in accordance with the rules for the risk weighting of exposures to corporates set out in Chapter 2.
For the purpose of this Article, credit protection provided by export credit agencies shall not benefit from any explicit central government counter-guarantee.
Article 203
Eligibility of guarantees as unfunded credit protection
Institutions may use guarantees as eligible unfunded credit protection.
Sub-Section 3
Types of derivatives
Article 204
Eligible types of credit derivatives
Institutions may use the following types of credit derivatives, and instruments that may be composed of such credit derivatives or that are economically effectively similar, as eligible credit protection:
credit default swaps;
total return swaps;
credit linked notes to the extent of their cash funding.
Where an institution buys credit protection through a total return swap and records the net payments received on the swap as net income, but does not record the offsetting deterioration in the value of the asset that is protected either through reductions in fair value or by an addition to reserves, that credit protection does not qualify as eligible credit protection.
Where an internal hedge has been conducted in accordance with the first subparagraph and the requirements in this Chapter have been met, institutions shall apply the rules set out in Sections 4 to 6 for the calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts and expected loss amounts where they acquire unfunded credit protection.
Article 204a
Eligible types of equity derivatives
Where an institution buys credit protection through a total return swap and records the net payments received on the swap as net income, but does not record the offsetting deterioration in the value of the asset that is protected either through reductions in fair value or by an addition to reserves, that credit protection shall not qualify as eligible credit protection.
Where an internal hedge has been conducted in accordance with the first subparagraph and the requirements in this Chapter have been met, institutions shall apply the rules set out in Sections 4 to 6 of this Chapter for the calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts and expected loss amounts where they acquire unfunded credit protection.
Section 3
Requirements
Sub-Section 1
Funded credit protection
Article 205
Requirements for on-balance sheet netting agreements other than master netting agreements referred to in Article 206
On-balance sheet netting agreements other than master netting agreements referred to in Article 206 shall qualify as an eligible form of credit risk mitigation where all the following conditions are met:
those agreements are legally effective and enforceable in all relevant jurisdictions, including in the event of the insolvency or bankruptcy of a counterparty;
institutions are able to determine at any time the assets and liabilities that are subject to those agreements;
institutions monitor and control the risks associated with the termination of the credit protection on an ongoing basis;
institutions monitor and control the relevant exposures on a net basis and do so on an ongoing basis.
Article 206
Requirements for master netting agreements covering repurchase transactions or securities or commodities lending or borrowing transactions or other capital market driven transactions
Master netting agreements covering repurchase transactions, securities or commodities lending or borrowing transactions or other capital market driven transactions shall qualify as an eligible form of credit risk mitigation where the collateral provided under those agreements meets all the requirements laid down in Article 207(2) to (4) and where all the following conditions are met:
they are legally effective and enforceable in all relevant jurisdictions, including in the event of the bankruptcy or insolvency of the counterparty;
they give the non-defaulting party the right to terminate and close-out in a timely manner all transactions under the agreement upon the event of default, including in the event of the bankruptcy or insolvency of the counterparty;
they provide for the netting of gains and losses on transactions closed out under an agreement so that a single net amount is owed by one party to the other.
Article 207
Requirements for financial collateral
Securities issued by the obligor, or any related group entity, shall not qualify as eligible collateral. This notwithstanding, the obligor's own issues of covered bonds falling within the terms of Article 129 qualify as eligible collateral when they are posted as collateral for a repurchase transaction, provided that they comply with the condition set out in the first subparagraph.
Institutions shall have conducted sufficient legal review confirming the enforceability of the collateral arrangements in all relevant jurisdictions. They shall re-conduct such review as necessary to ensure continuing enforceability.
Institutions shall fulfil all the following operational requirements:
they shall properly document the collateral arrangements and have in place clear and robust procedures for the timely liquidation of collateral;
they shall use robust procedures and processes to control risks arising from the use of collateral, including risks of failed or reduced credit protection, valuation risks, risks associated with the termination of the credit protection, concentration risk arising from the use of collateral and the interaction with the institution's overall risk profile;
they shall have in place documented policies and practices concerning the types and amounts of collateral accepted;
they shall calculate the market value of the collateral, and revalue it accordingly, at least once every six months and whenever they have reason to believe that a significant decrease in the market value of the collateral has occurred;
where the collateral is held by a third party, they shall take reasonable steps to ensure that the third party segregates the collateral from its own assets;
they shall ensure that they devote sufficient resources to the orderly operation of margin agreements with OTC derivatives and securities-financing counterparties, as measured by the timeliness and accuracy of their outgoing margin calls and response time to incoming margin calls;
they shall have in place collateral management policies to control, monitor and report the following:
the risks to which margin agreements expose them;
the concentration risk to particular types of collateral assets;
the reuse of collateral including the potential liquidity shortfalls resulting from the reuse of collateral received from counterparties;
the surrender of rights on collateral posted to counterparties.
Article 208
Requirements for immovable property collateral
The following requirements on legal certainly shall be met:
a mortgage or charge is enforceable in all jurisdictions which are relevant at the time of the conclusion of the credit agreement and shall be properly filed on a timely basis;
all legal requirements for establishing the pledge have been fulfilled;
the protection agreement and the legal process underpinning it enable the institution to realise the value of the protection within a reasonable timeframe.
The following requirements on monitoring of property values and on property valuation shall be met:
institutions monitor the value of the property on a frequent basis and at a minimum once every year for commercial immovable property and once every three years for residential property. Institutions carry out more frequent monitoring where the market is subject to significant changes in conditions;
the property valuation is reviewed when information available to institutions indicates that the value of the property may have declined materially relative to general market prices and that review is carried out by a valuer who possesses the necessary qualifications, ability and experience to execute a valuation and who is independent from the credit decision process. For loans exceeding EUR 3 million or 5 % of the own funds of an institution, the property valuation shall be reviewed by such valuer at least every three years.
Institutions may use statistical methods to monitor the value of the immovable property and to identify immovable property that needs revaluation.
Article 209
Requirements for receivables
The following requirements on legal certainty shall be met:
the legal mechanism by which the collateral is provided to a lending institution shall be robust and effective and ensure that that institution has clear rights over the collateral including the right to the proceeds from the sale of the collateral;
institutions shall take all steps necessary to fulfil local requirements in respect of the enforceability of security interest. Lending institutions shall have a first priority claim over the collateral although such claims may still be subject to the claims of preferential creditors provided for in legislative provisions;
institutions shall have conducted sufficient legal review confirming the enforceability of the collateral arrangements in all relevant jurisdictions;
institutions shall properly document their collateral arrangements and shall have in place clear and robust procedures for the timely collection of collateral;
institutions shall have in place procedures that ensure that any legal conditions required for declaring the default of a borrower and timely collection of collateral are observed;
in the event of a borrower's financial distress or default, institutions shall have legal authority to sell or assign the receivables to other parties without consent of the receivables obligors.
The following requirements on risk management shall be met:
an institution shall have in place a sound process for determining the credit risk associated with the receivables. Such a process shall include analyses of a borrower's business and industry and the types of customers with whom that borrower does business. Where the institution relies on its borrowers to ascertain the credit risk of the customers, the institution shall review the borrowers' credit practices to ascertain their soundness and credibility;
the difference between the amount of the exposure and the value of the receivables shall reflect all appropriate factors, including the cost of collection, concentration within the receivables pool pledged by an individual borrower, and potential concentration risk within the institution's total exposures beyond that controlled by the institution's general methodology. Institutions shall maintain a continuous monitoring process appropriate to the receivables. They shall also review, on a regular basis, compliance with loan covenants, environmental restrictions, and other legal requirements;
receivables pledged by a borrower shall be diversified and not be unduly correlated with that borrower. Where there is material positive correlation, institutions shall take into account the attendant risks in the setting of margins for the collateral pool as a whole;
institutions shall not use receivables from affiliates of a borrower, including subsidiaries and employees, as eligible credit protection;
institution shall have in place a documented process for collecting receivable payments in distressed situations. Institutions shall have in place the requisite facilities for collection even when they normally rely on their borrowers for collections.
Article 210
Requirements for other physical collateral
Physical collateral other than immovable property collateral shall qualify as eligible collateral under the IRB Approach where all the following conditions are met:
the collateral arrangement under which the physical collateral is provided to an institution shall be legally effective and enforceable in all relevant jurisdictions and shall enable that institution to realise the value of the collateral within a reasonable timeframe;
with the sole exception of permissible first priority claims referred to in Article 209(2)(b), only first liens on, or charges over, collateral shall qualify as eligible collateral and an institution shall have priority over all other lenders to the realised proceeds of the collateral;
institutions shall monitor the value of the collateral on a frequent basis and at least once every year. Institutions shall carry out more frequent monitoring where the market is subject to significant changes in conditions;
the loan agreement shall include detailed descriptions of the collateral as well as detailed specifications of the manner and frequency of revaluation;
institutions shall clearly document in internal credit policies and procedures available for examination the types of physical collateral they accept and the policies and practices they have in place in respect of the appropriate amount of each type of collateral relative to the exposure amount;
institutions' credit policies with regard to the transaction structure shall address the following:
appropriate collateral requirements relative to the exposure amount;
the ability to liquidate the collateral readily;
the ability to establish objectively a price or market value;
the frequency with which the value can readily be obtained, including a professional appraisal or valuation;
the volatility or a proxy of the volatility of the value of the collateral.
when conducting valuation and revaluation, institutions shall take fully into account any deterioration or obsolescence of the collateral, paying particular attention to the effects of the passage of time on fashion- or date-sensitive collateral;
institutions shall have the right to physically inspect the collateral. They shall also have in place policies and procedures addressing their exercise of the right to physical inspection;
the collateral taken as protection shall be adequately insured against the risk of damage and institutions shall have in place procedures to monitor this.
Article 211
Requirements for treating lease exposures as collateralised
Institutions shall treat exposures arising from leasing transactions as collateralised by the type of property leased, where all the following conditions are met:
the conditions set out in Article 208 or 210, as applicable, for the type of property leased to qualify as eligible collateral are met;
the lessor has in place robust risk management with respect to the use to which the leased asset is put, its location, its age and the planned duration of its use, including appropriate monitoring of the value of the security;
the lessor has legal ownership of the asset and is able to exercise its rights as owner in a timely fashion;
where this has not already been ascertained in calculating the LGD level, the difference between the value of the unamortised amount and the market value of the security is not so large as to overstate the credit risk mitigation attributed to the leased assets.
Article 212
Requirements for other funded credit protection
Cash on deposit with, or cash assimilated instruments held by, a third party institution shall be eligible for the treatment set out in Article 232(1), where all the following conditions are met:
the borrower's claim against the third party institution is openly pledged or assigned to the lending institution and such pledge or assignment is legally effective and enforceable in all relevant jurisdictions and is unconditional and irrevocable;
the third party institution is notified of the pledge or assignment;
as a result of the notification, the third party institution is able to make payments solely to the lending institution or to other parties only with the lending institution's prior consent.
Life insurance policies pledged to the lending institution shall qualify as eligible collateral where all the following conditions are met:
the life insurance policy is openly pledged or assigned to the lending institution;
the company providing the life insurance is notified of the pledge or assignment and, as a result of the notification, may not pay amounts payable under the contract without the prior consent of the lending institution;
the lending institution has the right to cancel the policy and receive the surrender value in the event of the default of the borrower;
the lending institution is informed of any non-payments under the policy by the policy-holder;
the credit protection is provided for the maturity of the loan. Where this is not possible because the insurance relationship ends before the loan relationship expires, the institution shall ensure that the amount deriving from the insurance contract serves the institution as security until the end of the duration of the credit agreement;
the pledge or assignment is legally effective and enforceable in all jurisdictions which are relevant at the time of the conclusion of the credit agreement;
the surrender value is declared by the company providing the life insurance and is non-reducible;
the surrender value is to be paid by the company providing the life insurance in a timely manner upon request;
the surrender value shall not be requested without the prior consent of the institution;
the company providing the life insurance is subject to Directive 2009/138/EC or is subject to supervision by a competent authority of a third country which applies supervisory and regulatory arrangements at least equivalent to those applied in the Union.
Sub-Section 2
Unfunded credit protection and credit linked notes
Article 213
Requirements common to guarantees and credit derivatives
Subject to Article 214(1), credit protection deriving from a guarantee or credit derivative shall qualify as eligible unfunded credit protection where all the following conditions are met:
the credit protection is direct;
the extent of the credit protection is clearly defined and incontrovertible;
the credit protection contract does not contain any clause, the fulfilment of which is outside the direct control of the lender, that:
would allow the protection provider to cancel the protection unilaterally;
would increase the effective cost of protection as a result of a deterioration in the credit quality of the protected exposure;
could prevent the protection provider from being obliged to pay out in a timely manner in the event that the original obligor fails to make any payments due, or when the leasing contract has expired for the purposes of recognising guaranteed residual value under Articles 134(7) and 166(4);
could allow the maturity of the credit protection to be reduced by the protection provider;
the credit protection contract is legally effective and enforceable in all jurisdictions which are relevant at the time of the conclusion of the credit agreement.
An institution shall have conducted sufficient legal review confirming the enforceability of the unfunded credit protection in all relevant jurisdictions. It shall repeat such review as necessary to ensure continuing enforceability.
Article 214
Sovereign and other public sector counter-guarantees
Institutions may treat the exposures referred to in paragraph 2 as protected by a guarantee provided by the entities listed in that paragraph, provided that all the following conditions are satisfied:
the counter-guarantee covers all credit risk elements of the claim;
both the original guarantee and the counter-guarantee meet the requirements for guarantees set out in Articles 213 and 215(1), except that the counter-guarantee need not be direct;
the cover is robust and nothing in the historical evidence suggests that the coverage of the counter-guarantee is less than effectively equivalent to that of a direct guarantee by the entity in question.
The treatment set out in paragraph 1 shall apply to exposures protected by a guarantee which is counter-guaranteed by any of the following entities:
a central government or a central bank;
a regional government or a local authority;
a public sector entity, claims on which are treated as claims on the central government in accordance with Article 116(4);
a multilateral development bank or an international organisation, to which a 0 % risk weight is assigned under or by virtue of Articles 117(2) and 118 respectively;
a public sector entity, claims on which are treated in accordance with Article 116(1) and (2).
Article 215
Additional requirements for guarantees
Guarantees shall qualify as eligible unfunded credit protection where all the conditions in Article 213 and all the following conditions are met:
on the qualifying default of or non-payment by the counterparty, the lending institution has the right to pursue, in a timely manner, the guarantor for any monies due under the claim in respect of which the protection is provided and the payment by the guarantor shall not be subject to the lending institution first having to pursue the obligor;
In the case of unfunded credit protection covering residential mortgage loans, the requirements in Article 213(1)(c)(iii) and in the first subparagraph of this point have only to be satisfied within 24 months;
the guarantee is an explicitly documented obligation assumed by the guarantor;
either of the following conditions is met:
the guarantee covers all types of payments the obligor is expected to make in respect of the claim;
where certain types of payment are excluded from the guarantee, the lending institution has adjusted the value of the guarantee to reflect the limited coverage.
In the case of guarantees provided in the context of mutual guarantee schemes or provided by or counter-guaranteed by entities listed in Article 214(2), the requirements in point (a) of paragraph 1 of this Article shall be considered to be satisfied where either of the following conditions is met:
the lending institution has the right to obtain in a timely manner a provisional payment by the guarantor that meets both the following conditions:
it represents a robust estimate of the amount of the loss, including losses resulting from the non-payment of interest and other types of payment which the borrower is obliged to make, that the lending institution is likely to incur;
it is proportional to the coverage of the guarantee;
the lending institution can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the competent authorities that the effects of the guarantee, which shall also cover losses resulting from the non-payment of interest and other types of payments which the borrower is obliged to make, justify such treatment.
Article 216
Additional requirements for credit derivatives
Credit derivatives shall qualify as eligible unfunded credit protection where all the conditions in Article 213 and all the following conditions are met:
the credit events specified in the credit derivative contract include:
the failure to pay the amounts due under the terms of the underlying obligation that are in effect at the time of such failure, with a grace period that is equal to or shorter than the grace period in the underlying obligation;
the bankruptcy, insolvency or inability of the obligor to pay its debts, or its failure or admission in writing of its inability generally to pay its debts as they become due, and analogous events;
the restructuring of the underlying obligation involving forgiveness or postponement of principal, interest or fees that results in a credit loss event;
where credit derivatives allow for cash settlement:
institutions have in place a robust valuation process in order to estimate loss reliably;
there is a clearly specified period for obtaining post-credit-event valuations of the underlying obligation;
where the protection purchaser's right and ability to transfer the underlying obligation to the protection provider is required for settlement, the terms of the underlying obligation provide that any required consent to such transfer shall not be unreasonably withheld;
the identity of the parties responsible for determining whether a credit event has occurred is clearly defined;
the determination of the credit event is not the sole responsibility of the protection provider;
the protection buyer has the right or ability to inform the protection provider of the occurrence of a credit event.
Where the credit events do not include restructuring of the underlying obligation as described in point (a)(iii), the credit protection may nonetheless be eligible subject to a reduction in the value as specified in Article 233(2);
A mismatch between the underlying obligation and the reference obligation under the credit derivative or between the underlying obligation and the obligation used for purposes of determining whether a credit event has occurred is permissible only where both the following conditions are met:
the reference obligation or the obligation used for the purpose of determining whether a credit event has occurred, as the case may be, ranks pari passu with or is junior to the underlying obligation;
the underlying obligation and the reference obligation or the obligation used for the purpose of determining whether a credit event has occurred, as the case may be, share the same obligor and legally enforceable cross-default or cross-acceleration clauses are in place.
Article 217
Requirements to qualify for the treatment set out in Article 153(3)
To be eligible for the treatment set out in Article 153(3), credit protection deriving from a guarantee or credit derivative shall meet the following conditions:
the underlying obligation is to one of the following exposures:
a corporate exposure as referred to in Article 147, excluding insurance and reinsurance undertakings;
an exposure to a regional government, local authority or public sector entity which is not treated as an exposure to a central government or a central bank in accordance with Article 147;
an exposure to an SME, classified as a retail exposure in accordance with Article 147(5);
the underlying obligors are not members of the same group as the protection provider;
the exposure is hedged by one of the following instruments:
single-name unfunded credit derivatives or single-name guarantees;
first-to-default basket products;
nth-to-default basket products;
the credit protection meets the requirements set out in Articles 213, 215 and 216, as applicable;
the risk weight that is associated with the exposure prior to the application of the treatment set out in Article 153(3), does not already factor in any aspect of the credit protection;
an institution has the right and expectation to receive payment from the protection provider without having to take legal action in order to pursue the counterparty for payment. To the extent possible, the institution shall take steps to satisfy itself that the protection provider is willing to pay promptly should a credit event occur;
the purchased credit protection absorbs all credit losses incurred on the hedged portion of an exposure that arise due to the occurrence of credit events outlined in the contract;
where the payout structure of the credit protection provides for physical settlement, there is legal certainty with respect to the deliverability of a loan, bond, or contingent liability;
where an institution intends to deliver an obligation other than the underlying exposure, it shall ensure that the deliverable obligation is sufficiently liquid so that the institution would have the ability to purchase it for delivery in accordance with the contract;
the terms and conditions of credit protection arrangements are legally confirmed in writing by both the protection provider and the institution;
institutions have in place a process to detect excessive correlation between the creditworthiness of a protection provider and the obligor of the underlying exposure due to their performance being dependent on common factors beyond the systematic risk factor;
in the case of protection against dilution risk, the seller of purchased receivables is not a member of the same group as the protection provider.
Section 4
Calculating the effects of credit risk mitigation
Sub-Section 1
Funded credit protection
Article 218
Credit linked notes
Investments in credit linked notes issued by the lending institution may be treated as cash collateral for the purpose of calculating the effect of funded credit protection in accordance with this Sub-section, provided that the credit default swap embedded in the credit linked note qualifies as eligible unfunded credit protection. For the purpose of determining whether the credit default swap embedded in a credit linked note qualifies as eligible unfunded credit protection, the institution may consider the condition in point (c) of Article 194(6) to be met.
Article 219
On-balance sheet netting
Loans to and deposits with the lending institution subject to on-balance sheet netting are to be treated by that institution as cash collateral for the purpose of calculating the effect of funded credit protection for those loans and deposits of the lending institution subject to on-balance sheet netting which are denominated in the same currency.
Article 220
Using the Supervisory Volatility Adjustments Approach or the Own Estimates Volatility Adjustments Approach for master netting agreements
The use of the Own Estimates Approach shall be subject to the same conditions and requirements as apply under the Financial Collateral Comprehensive Method.
For the purpose of calculating E*, institutions shall:
calculate the net position in each group of securities or in each type of commodity by subtracting the amount in point (ii) from the amount in point (i):
the total value of a group of securities or of commodities of the same type lent, sold or provided under the master netting agreement;
the total value of a group of securities or of commodities of the same type borrowed, purchased or received under the master netting agreement;
calculate the net position in each currency, other than the settlement currency of the master netting agreement, by subtracting the amount in point (ii) from the amount in point (i):
the sum of the total value of securities denominated in that currency lent, sold or provided under the master netting agreement and the amount of cash in that currency lent or transferred under that agreement;
the sum of the total value of securities denominated in that currency borrowed, purchased or received under the master netting agreement and the amount of cash in that currency borrowed or received under that agreement;
apply the volatility adjustment appropriate to a given group of securities or to a cash position to the absolute value of the positive or negative net position in the securities in that group;
apply the foreign exchange risk (fx) volatility adjustment to the net positive or negative position in each currency other than the settlement currency of the master netting agreement.
Institutions shall calculate E* in accordance with the following formula:
where:
Ei |
= |
the exposure value for each separate exposure i under the agreement that would apply in the absence of the credit protection, where institutions calculate risk-weighted exposure amounts under the Standardised Approach or where they calculate the risk-weighted exposure amounts and expected loss amounts under the IRB Approach; |
Ci |
= |
the value of securities in each group or commodities of the same type borrowed, purchased or received or the cash borrowed or received in respect of each exposure i; |
|
= |
the net position (positive or negative) in a given group of securities j; |
|
= |
the net position (positive or negative) in a given currency k other than the settlement currency of the agreement as calculated under point (b) of paragraph 2; |
|
= |
the volatility adjustment appropriate to a particular group of securities j; |
|
= |
the foreign exchange volatility adjustment for currency k. |
Article 221
Using the internal models approach for master netting agreements
Institutions that have received permission for an internal risk-measurement model under Title IV, Chapter 5 may use the internal models approach. Where an institution has not received such permission, it may still apply for permission to the competent authorities to use an internal models approach for the purposes of this Article.
Competent authorities shall permit an institution to use an internal models approach only where they are satisfied that the institution's system for managing the risks arising from the transactions covered by the master netting agreement is conceptually sound and implemented with integrity and where the following qualitative standards are met:
the internal risk-measurement model used for calculating the potential price volatility for the transactions is closely integrated into the daily risk-management process of the institution and serves as the basis for reporting risk exposures to the senior management of the institution;
the institution has a risk control unit that meets all the following requirements:
it is independent from business trading units and reports directly to senior management;
it is responsible for designing and implementing the institution's risk-management system;
it produces and analyses daily reports on the output of the risk-measurement model and on the appropriate measures to be taken in terms of position limits;
the daily reports produced by the risk-control unit are reviewed by a level of management with sufficient authority to enforce reductions of positions taken and of overall risk exposure;
the institution has sufficient staff skilled in the use of sophisticated models in the risk control unit;
the institution has established procedures for monitoring and ensuring compliance with a documented set of internal policies and controls concerning the overall operation of the risk-measurement system;
the institution's models have a proven track record of reasonable accuracy in measuring risks demonstrated through the back-testing of its output using at least one year of data;
the institution frequently conducts a rigorous programme of stress testing and the results of these tests are reviewed by senior management and reflected in the policies and limits it sets;
the institution conducts, as part of its regular internal auditing process, an independent review of its risk-measurement system. This review shall include both the activities of the business trading units and of the independent risk-control unit;
at least once a year, the institution conducts a review of its risk-management system;
the internal model meets the requirements set out in Article 292(8) and (9) and in Article 294.
An institution may use empirical correlations within risk categories and across risk categories where its system for measuring correlations is sound and implemented with integrity.
Institutions using the internal models approach shall calculate E* in accordance with the following formula:
where:
Ei |
= |
the exposure value for each separate exposure i under the agreement that would apply in the absence of the credit protection, where institutions calculate the risk-weighted exposure amounts under the Standardised Approach or where they calculate risk-weighted exposure amounts and expected loss amounts under the IRB Approach; |
Ci |
= |
the value of the securities borrowed, purchased or received or the cash borrowed or received in respect of each such exposure i. |
When calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts using internal models, institutions shall use the previous business day's model output.
The calculation of the potential change in value referred to in paragraph 6 shall be subject to all the following standards:
it shall be carried out at least daily;
it shall be based on a 99th percentile, one-tailed confidence interval;
it shall be based on a 5-day equivalent liquidation period, except in the case of transactions other than securities repurchase transactions or securities lending or borrowing transactions where a 10-day equivalent liquidation period shall be used;
it shall be based on an effective historical observation period of at least one year except where a shorter observation period is justified by a significant upsurge in price volatility;
the data set used in the calculation shall be updated every three months.
Where an institution has a repurchase transaction, a securities or commodities lending or borrowing transaction and margin lending or similar transaction or netting set which meets the criteria set out in Article 285(2), (3) and (4), the minimum holding period shall be brought in line with the margin period of risk that would apply under those paragraphs, in combination with Article 285(5).
EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify the following:
what constitutes an immaterial portfolio for the purpose of paragraph 3;
the criteria for determining whether an internal model is sound and implemented with integrity for the purpose of paragraphs 4 and 5 and master netting agreements.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 31 December 2015.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 222
Financial Collateral Simple Method
The risk weight of the collateralised portion shall be at least 20 % except as specified in paragraphs 4 to 6. Institutions shall apply to the remainder of the exposure value the risk weight that they would assign to an unsecured exposure to the counterparty under Chapter 2.
Institutions shall assign a risk weight of 10 %, to the extent of the collateralisation, to the exposure values of such transactions collateralised by debt securities issued by central governments or central banks which are assigned a 0 % risk weight under Chapter 2.
For transactions other than those referred to in paragraphs 4 and 5, institutions may assign a 0 % risk weight where the exposure and the collateral are denominated in the same currency, and either of the following conditions is met:
the collateral is cash on deposit or a cash assimilated instrument;
the collateral is in the form of debt securities issued by central governments or central banks eligible for a 0 % risk weight under Article 114, and its market value has been discounted by 20 %.
For the purpose of paragraphs 5 and 6 debt securities issued by central governments or central banks shall include:
debt securities issued by regional governments or local authorities exposures to which are treated as exposures to the central government in whose jurisdiction they are established under Article 115;
debt securities issued by multilateral development banks to which a 0 % risk weight is assigned under or by virtue of Article 117(2);
debt securities issued by international organisations which are assigned a 0 % risk weight under Article 118;
debt securities issued by public sector entities which are treated as exposures to central governments in accordance with Article 116(4).
Article 223
Financial Collateral Comprehensive Method
Where collateral is denominated in a currency that differs from the currency in which the underlying exposure is denominated, institutions shall add an adjustment reflecting currency volatility to the volatility adjustment appropriate to the collateral as set out in Articles 224 to 227.
In the case of OTC derivatives transactions covered by netting agreements recognised by the competent authorities under Chapter 6, institutions shall apply a volatility adjustment reflecting currency volatility when there is a mismatch between the collateral currency and the settlement currency. Even where multiple currencies are involved in the transactions covered by the netting agreement, institutions shall apply a single volatility adjustment.
Institutions shall calculate the volatility-adjusted value of the collateral (CVA) they need to take into account as follows:
where:
C |
= |
the value of the collateral; |
HC |
= |
the volatility adjustment appropriate to the collateral, as calculated under Articles 224 and 227; |
Hfx |
= |
the volatility adjustment appropriate to currency mismatch, as calculated under Articles 224 and 227. |
Institutions shall use the formula in this paragraph when calculating the volatility-adjusted value of the collateral for all transactions except for those transactions subject to recognised master netting agreements to which the provisions set out in Articles 220 and 221 apply.
Institutions shall calculate the volatility-adjusted value of the exposure (EVA) they need to take into account as follows:
where:
E |
= |
the exposure value as would be determined under Chapter 2 or Chapter 3, as applicable, where the exposure was not collateralised; |
HE |
= |
the volatility adjustment appropriate to the exposure, as calculated under Articles 224 and 227. |
In the case of OTC derivative transactions, institutions using the method laid down in Section 6 of Chapter 6 shall calculate EVA as follows:
For the purpose of calculating E in paragraph 3, the following shall apply:
for institutions calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts under the Standardised Approach, the exposure value of an off-balance sheet item listed in Annex I shall be 100 % of that item's value rather than the exposure value indicated in Article 111(1);
for institutions calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts under the IRB Approach, they shall calculate the exposure value of the items listed in Article 166(8) to (10) by using a conversion factor of 100 % rather than the conversion factors or percentages indicated in those paragraphs.
Institutions shall calculate the fully adjusted value of the exposure (E*), taking into account both volatility and the risk-mitigating effects of collateral as follows:
where:
EVA |
= |
the volatility adjusted value of the exposure as calculated in paragraph 3; |
CVAM |
= |
CVA further adjusted for any maturity mismatch in accordance with the provisions of Section 5; |
In the case of OTC derivative transactions, institutions using the methods laid down in Sections 3, 4 and 5 of Chapter 6 shall take into account the risk-mitigating effects of collateral in accordance with the provisions laid down in Sections 3, 4 and 5 of Chapter 6, as applicable.
An institution may choose to use the Supervisory Volatility Adjustments Approach or the Own Estimates Approach independently of the choice it has made between the Standardised Approach and the IRB Approach for the calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts.
However, where an institution uses the Own Estimates Approach, it shall do so for the full range of instrument types, excluding immaterial portfolios where it may use the Supervisory Volatility Adjustments Approach.
Where the collateral consists of a number of eligible items, institutions shall calculate the volatility adjustment (H) as follows:
where:
ai |
= |
the proportion of the value of an eligible item i in the total value of collateral; |
Hi |
= |
the volatility adjustment applicable to eligible item i. |
Article 224
Supervisory volatility adjustment under the Financial Collateral Comprehensive Method
The volatility adjustments to be applied by institutions under the Supervisory Volatility Adjustments Approach, assuming daily revaluation, shall be those set out in Tables 1 to 4 of this paragraph.
VOLATILITY ADJUSTMENTS
Table 1
Credit quality step with which the credit assessment of the debt security is associated |
Residual Maturity |
Volatility adjustments for debt securities issued by entities described in Article 197(1)(b) |
Volatility adjustments for debt securities issued by entities described in Article 197(1) (c) and (d) |
Volatility adjustments for securitisation positions and meeting the criteria in Article 197(1) (h) |
||||||
|
|
20-day liquidation period (%) |
10-day liquidation period (%) |
5-day liquidation period (%) |
20-day liquidation period (%) |
10-day liquidation period (%) |
5-day liquidation period (%) |
20-day liquidation period (%) |
10-day liquidation period (%) |
5-day liquidation period (%) |
1 |
≤ 1 year |
0,707 |
0,5 |
0,354 |
1,414 |
1 |
0,707 |
2,829 |
2 |
1,414 |
|
>1 ≤ 5 years |
2,828 |
2 |
1,414 |
5,657 |
4 |
2,828 |
11,314 |
8 |
5,657 |
|
> 5 years |
5,657 |
4 |
2,828 |
11,314 |
8 |
5,657 |
22,628 |
16 |
11,313 |
2-3 |
≤ 1 year |
1,414 |
1 |
0,707 |
2,828 |
2 |
1,414 |
5,657 |
4 |
2,828 |
|
>1 ≤ 5 years |
4,243 |
3 |
2,121 |
8,485 |
6 |
4,243 |
16,971 |
12 |
8,485 |
|
> 5 years |
8,485 |
6 |
4,243 |
16,971 |
12 |
8,485 |
33,942 |
24 |
16,970 |
4 |
≤ 1 year |
21,213 |
15 |
10,607 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
|
>1 ≤ 5 years |
21,213 |
15 |
10,607 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
|
> 5 years |
21,213 |
15 |
10,607 |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
N/A |
Table 2
Credit quality step with which the credit assessment of a short term debt security is associated |
Volatility adjustments for debt securities issued by entities described in Article 197(1)(b) with short-term credit assessments |
Volatility adjustments for debt securities issued by entities described in Article 197(1) (c) and (d) with short-term credit assessments |
Volatility adjustments for securitisation positions and meeting the criteria in Article 197(1)(h) |
||||||
|
20-day liquidation period (%) |
10-day liquidation period (%) |
5-day liquidation period (%) |
20-day liquidation period (%) |
10-day liquidation period (%) |
5-day liquidation period (%) |
20-day liquidation period (%) |
10-day liquidation period (%) |
5-day liquidation period (%) |
1 |
0,707 |
0,5 |
0,354 |
1,414 |
1 |
0,707 |
2,829 |
2 |
1,414 |
2-3 |
1,414 |
1 |
0,707 |
2,828 |
2 |
1,414 |
5,657 |
4 |
2,828 |
Table 3
Other collateral or exposure types
|
20-day liquidation period (%) |
10-day liquidation period (%) |
5-day liquidation period (%) |
Main Index Equities, Main Index Convertible Bonds |
21,213 |
15 |
10,607 |
Other Equities or Convertible Bonds listed on a recognised exchange |
35,355 |
25 |
17,678 |
Cash |
0 |
0 |
0 |
Gold |
21,213 |
15 |
10,607 |
Table 4
Volatility adjustment for currency mismatch
20-day liquidation period (%) |
10-day liquidation period (%) |
5-day liquidation period %) |
11,314 |
8 |
5,657 |
The calculation of volatility adjustments in accordance with paragraph 1 shall be subject to the following conditions:
for secured lending transactions the liquidation period shall be 20 business days;
for repurchase transactions, except insofar as such transactions involve the transfer of commodities or guaranteed rights relating to title to commodities, and securities lending or borrowing transactions the liquidation period shall be 5 business days;
for other capital market driven transactions, the liquidation period shall be 10 business days.
Where an institution has a transaction or netting set which meets the criteria set out in Article 285(2), (3) and (4), the minimum holding period shall be brought in line with the margin period of risk that would apply under those paragraphs.
For the purpose of determining the credit quality step with which a credit assessment of the debt security is associated referred to in the first subparagraph, Article 197(7) also applies.
Where the assets in which the fund has invested are not known to the institution, the volatility adjustment is the highest volatility adjustment that would apply to any of the assets in which the fund has the right to invest.
Article 225
Own estimates of volatility adjustments under the Financial Collateral Comprehensive Method
For debt securities that have a credit assessment from an ECAI equivalent to investment grade or better, institutions may calculate a volatility estimate for each category of security.
For debt securities that have a credit assessment from an ECAI equivalent to below investment grade, and for other eligible collateral, institutions shall calculate the volatility adjustments for each individual item.
Institutions using the Own Estimates Approach shall estimate volatility of the collateral or foreign exchange mismatch without taking into account any correlations between the unsecured exposure, collateral or exchange rates.
In determining relevant categories, institutions shall take into account the type of issuer of the security, the external credit assessment of the securities, their residual maturity, and their modified duration. Volatility estimates shall be representative of the securities included in the category by the institution.
The calculation of the volatility adjustments shall be subject to all the following criteria:
institutions shall base the calculation on a 99th percentile, one-tailed confidence interval;
institutions shall base the calculation on the following liquidation periods:
20 business days for secured lending transactions;
5 business days for repurchase transactions, except insofar as such transactions involve the transfer of commodities or guaranteed rights relating to title to commodities and securities lending or borrowing transactions;
10 business days for other capital market driven transactions;
institutions may use volatility adjustment numbers calculated in accordance with shorter or longer liquidation periods, scaled up or down to the liquidation period set out in point (b) for the type of transaction in question, using the square root of time formula:
where:
TM |
= |
the relevant liquidation period; |
HM |
= |
the volatility adjustment based on the liquidation period TM; |
HN |
= |
the volatility adjustment based on the liquidation period TN. |
institutions shall take into account the illiquidity of lower-quality assets. They shall adjust the liquidation period upwards in cases where there is doubt concerning the liquidity of the collateral. They shall also identify where historical data may understate potential volatility. Such cases shall be dealt with by means of a stress scenario;
the length of the historical observation period institutions use for calculating volatility adjustments shall be at least one year. For institutions that use a weighting scheme or other methods for the historical observation period, the length of the effective observation period shall be at least one year. The competent authorities may also require an institution to calculate its volatility adjustments using a shorter observation period where, in the competent authorities' judgement, this is justified by a significant upsurge in price volatility;
institutions shall update their data sets and calculate volatility adjustments at least once every three months. They shall also reassess their data sets whenever market prices are subject to material changes.
The estimation of volatility adjustments shall meet all the following qualitative criteria:
an institutions shall use the volatility estimates in the day-to-day risk management process including in relation to its internal exposure limits;
where the liquidation period used by an institution in its day-to-day risk management process is longer than that set out in this Section for the type of transaction in question, that institution shall scale up its volatility adjustments in accordance with the square root of time formula set out in point (c) of paragraph 2;
an institution shall have in place established procedures for monitoring and ensuring compliance with a documented set of policies and controls for the operation of its system for the estimation of volatility adjustments and for the integration of such estimations into its risk management process;
an independent review of the institution's system for the estimation of volatility adjustments shall be carried out regularly within the institution's own internal auditing process. A review of the overall system for the estimation of volatility adjustments and for the integration of those adjustments into the institution's risk management process shall take place at least once a year. The subject of that review shall include at least the following:
the integration of estimated volatility adjustments into daily risk management;
the validation of any significant change in the process for the estimation of volatility adjustments;
the verification of the consistency, timeliness and reliability of data sources used to run the system for the estimation of volatility adjustments, including the independence of such data sources;
the accuracy and appropriateness of the volatility assumptions.
Article 226
Scaling up of volatility adjustment under the Financial Collateral Comprehensive Method
The volatility adjustments set out in Article 224 are the volatility adjustments an institution shall apply where there is daily revaluation. Similarly, where an institution uses its own estimates of the volatility adjustments in accordance with Article 225, it shall calculate them in the first instance on the basis of daily revaluation. Where the frequency of revaluation is less than daily, institutions shall apply larger volatility adjustments. Institutions shall calculate them by scaling up the daily revaluation volatility adjustments, using the following square-root-of-time formula:
where:
H |
= |
the volatility adjustment to be applied; |
HM |
= |
the volatility adjustment where there is daily revaluation; |
NR |
= |
the actual number of business days between revaluations; |
TM |
= |
the liquidation period for the type of transaction in question. |
Article 227
Conditions for applying a 0 % volatility adjustment under the Financial Collateral Comprehensive Method
Institutions may apply a 0 % volatility adjustment where all the following conditions are met:
both the exposure and the collateral are cash or debt securities issued by central governments or central banks within the meaning of Article 197(1)(b) and eligible for a 0 % risk weight under Chapter 2;
both the exposure and the collateral are denominated in the same currency;
either the maturity of the transaction is no more than one day or both the exposure and the collateral are subject to daily marking-to-market or daily re-margining;
the time between the last marking-to-market before a failure to re-margin by the counterparty and the liquidation of the collateral is no more than four business days;
the transaction is settled in a settlement system proven for that type of transaction;
the documentation covering the agreement or transaction is standard market documentation for repurchase transactions or securities lending or borrowing transactions in the securities concerned;
the transaction is governed by documentation specifying that where the counterparty fails to satisfy an obligation to deliver cash or securities or to deliver margin or otherwise defaults, then the transaction is immediately terminable;
the counterparty is considered a core market participant by the competent authorities.
The core market participants referred to in point (h) of paragraph 2 shall include the following entities:
the entities mentioned in Article 197(1)(b) exposures to which are assigned a 0 % risk weight under Chapter 2;
institutions;
investment firms;
other financial undertakings within the meaning of points (25)(b) and (d) of Article 13 of Directive 2009/138/EC exposures to which are assigned a 20 % risk weight under the Standardised Approach or which, in the case of institutions calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts and expected loss amounts under the IRB Approach, do not have a credit assessment by a recognised ECAI and are internally rated by the institution;
regulated CIUs that are subject to capital or leverage requirements;
regulated pension funds;
recognised clearing organisations.
Article 228
Calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts and expected loss amounts under the Financial Collateral Comprehensive method
Under the IRB Approach, institutions shall use the effective LGD (LGD*) as the LGD for the purposes of Chapter 3. Institutions shall calculate LGD* as follows:
where:
LGD |
= |
the LGD that would apply to the exposure under Chapter 3 where the exposure was not collateralised; |
E |
= |
the exposure value in accordance with Article 223(3); |
E* |
= |
the fully adjusted exposure value in accordance with Article 223(5). |
Article 229
Valuation principles for other eligible collateral under the IRB Approach
In those Member States that have laid down rigorous criteria for the assessment of the mortgage lending value in statutory or regulatory provisions the immovable property may instead be valued by an independent valuer at or at less than the mortgage lending value. Institutions shall require the independent valuer not to take into account speculative elements in the assessment of the mortgage lending value and to document that value in a transparent and clear manner.
The value of the collateral shall be the market value or mortgage lending value reduced as appropriate to reflect the results of the monitoring required under Article 208(3) and to take account of any prior claims on the immovable property.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 10 July 2027.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 230
Calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts and expected loss amounts for other eligible collateral under the IRB Approach
Where the ratio of the value of the collateral (C) to the exposure value (E) is below the required minimum collateralisation level of the exposure (C*) as laid down in Table 5, LGD* shall be the LGD laid down in Chapter 3 for uncollateralised exposures to the counterparty. For this purpose, institutions shall calculate the exposure value of the items listed in Article 166(8) to (10) by using a conversion factor or percentage of 100 % rather than the conversion factors or percentages indicated in those paragraphs.
Where the ratio of the value of the collateral to the exposure value exceeds a second, higher threshold level of C** as laid down in Table 5, LGD* shall be that prescribed in Table 5.
Where the required level of collateralisation C** is not achieved in respect of the exposure as a whole, institutions shall consider the exposure to be two exposures — one corresponding to the part in respect of which the required level of collateralisation C** is achieved and one corresponding to the remainder.
The applicable LGD* and required collateralisation levels for the secured parts of exposures are set out in Table 5 of this paragraph.
Table 5
Minimum LGD for secured parts of exposures
|
LGD* for senior exposure |
LGD* for subordinated exposures |
Required minimum collateralisation level of the exposure (C*) |
Required minimum collateralisation level of the exposure (C**) |
Receivables |
35 % |
65 % |
0 % |
125 % |
Residential property/commercial immovable property |
35 % |
65 % |
30 % |
140 % |
Other collateral |
40 % |
70 % |
30 % |
140 % |
Article 231
Calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts and expected loss amounts in the case of mixed pools of collateral
An institution shall calculate the value of LGD* that it shall use as the LGD for the purposes of Chapter 3 in accordance with paragraphs 2 and 3 where both the following conditions are met:
the institution uses the IRB Approach to calculate risk-weighted exposure amounts and expected loss amounts;
an exposure is collateralised by both financial collateral and other eligible collateral.
Article 232
Other funded credit protection
Where the conditions set out in Article 212(2) are met, institutions shall subject the portion of the exposure collateralised by the current surrender value of life insurance policies pledged to the lending institution to the following treatment:
where the exposure is subject to the Standardised Approach, it shall be risk-weighted by using the risk weights specified in paragraph 3;
where the exposure is subject to the IRB Approach but not subject to the institution's own estimates of LGD, it shall be assigned an LGD of 40 %.
In the event of a currency mismatch, institutions shall reduce the current surrender value in accordance with Article 233(3), the value of the credit protection being the current surrender value of the life insurance policy.
For the purposes of point (a) of paragraph 2, institutions shall assign the following risk weights on the basis of the risk weight assigned to a senior unsecured exposure to the undertaking providing the life insurance:
a risk weight of 20 %, where the senior unsecured exposure to the undertaking providing the life insurance is assigned a risk weight of 20 %;
a risk weight of 35 %, where the senior unsecured exposure to the undertaking providing the life insurance is assigned a risk weight of 50 %;
a risk weight of 70 %, where the senior unsecured exposure to the undertaking providing the life insurance is assigned a risk weight of 100 %;
a risk weight of 150 %, where the senior unsecured exposure to the undertaking providing the life insurance is assigned a risk weight of 150 %.
Institutions may treat instruments repurchased on request that are eligible under Article 200(c) as a guarantee by the issuing institution. The value of the eligible credit protection shall be the following:
where the instrument will be repurchased at its face value, the value of the protection shall be that amount;
where the instrument will be repurchased at market price, the value of the protection shall be the value of the instrument valued in the same way as the debt securities that meet the conditions in Article 197(4).
Sub-Section 2
Unfunded credit protection
Article 233
Valuation
In the case of credit derivatives which do not include as a credit event restructuring of the underlying obligation involving forgiveness or postponement of principal, interest or fees that result in a credit loss event the following shall apply:
where the amount that the protection provider has undertaken to pay is not higher than the exposure value, institutions shall reduce the value of the credit protection calculated under paragraph 1 by 40 %;
where the amount that the protection provider has undertaken to pay is higher than the exposure value, the value of the credit protection shall be no higher than 60 % of the exposure value.
Where unfunded credit protection is denominated in a currency different from that in which the exposure is denominated, institutions shall reduce the value of the credit protection by the application of a volatility adjustment as follows:
where:
G* |
= |
the amount of credit protection adjusted for foreign exchange risk, |
G |
= |
the nominal amount of the credit protection; |
Hfx |
= |
the volatility adjustment for any currency mismatch between the credit protection and the underlying obligation determined in accordance with paragraph 4. |
Where there is no currency mismatch Hfx is equal to zero.
Article 234
Calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts and expected loss amounts in the event of partial protection and tranching
Where an institution transfers a part of the risk of a loan in one or more tranches, the rules set out in Chapter 5 shall apply. Institutions may consider materiality thresholds on payments below which no payment shall be made in the event of loss to be equivalent to retained first loss positions and to give rise to a tranched transfer of risk.
Article 235
Calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts under the Standardised Approach
For the purposes of Article 113(3) institutions shall calculate the risk-weighted exposure amounts in accordance with the following formula:
where:
E |
= |
the exposure value in accordance with Article 111; for this purpose, the exposure value of an off-balance sheet item listed in Annex I shall be 100 % of its value rather than the exposure value indicated in Article 111(1); |
GA |
= |
the amount of credit risk protection as calculated under Article 233(3) (G*) further adjusted for any maturity mismatch as laid down in Section 5; |
r |
= |
the risk weight of exposures to the obligor as specified under Chapter 2; |
g |
= |
the risk weight of exposures to the protection provider as specified under Chapter 2. |
Article 236
Calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts and expected loss amounts under the IRB Approach
Section 5
Maturity mismatches
Article 237
Maturity mismatch
Where there is a maturity mismatch the credit protection shall not qualify as eligible where either of the following conditions is met:
the original maturity of the protection is less than one year;
the exposure is a short term exposure specified by the competent authorities as being subject to a one-day floor rather than a one-year floor in respect of the maturity value (M) under Article 162(3).
Article 238
Maturity of credit protection
Article 239
Valuation of protection
For transactions subject to funded credit protection under the Financial Collateral Comprehensive Method, institutions shall reflect the maturity of the credit protection and of the exposure in the adjusted value of the collateral in accordance with the following formula:
where:
CVA |
= |
the volatility adjusted value of the collateral as specified in Article 223(2) or the amount of the exposure, whichever is lower; |
t |
= |
the number of years remaining to the maturity date of the credit protection calculated in accordance with Article 238, or the value of T, whichever is lower; |
T |
= |
the number of years remaining to the maturity date of the exposure calculated in accordance with Article 238, or five years, whichever is lower; |
t* |
= |
0,25. |
Institutions shall use CVAM as CVA further adjusted for maturity mismatch in the formula for the calculation of the fully adjusted value of the exposure (E*) set out in Article 223(5).
For transactions subject to unfunded credit protection, institutions shall reflect the maturity of the credit protection and of the exposure in the adjusted value of the credit protection in accordance with the following formula:
where:
GA |
= |
G* adjusted for any maturity mismatch; |
G* |
= |
the amount of the protection adjusted for any currency mismatch; |
t |
= |
is the number of years remaining to the maturity date of the credit protection calculated in accordance with Article 238, or the value of T, whichever is lower; |
T |
= |
is the number of years remaining to the maturity date of the exposure calculated in accordance with Article 238, or five years, whichever is lower; |
t* |
= |
0,25. |
Institutions shall use GA as the value of the protection for the purposes of Articles 233 to 236.
Section 6
Basket CRM techniques
Article 240
First-to-default credit derivatives
Where an institution obtains credit protection for a number of exposures under terms that the first default among the exposures shall trigger payment and that this credit event shall terminate the contract, the institution may amend the calculation of the risk-weighted exposure amount and, as relevant, the expected loss amount of the exposure which would, in the absence of the credit protection, produce the lowest risk-weighted exposure amount in accordance with this Chapter:
for institutions using the Standardised Approach, the risk-weighted exposure amount shall be that calculated under the Standardised Approach;
for institutions using the IRB Approach, the risk-weighted exposure amount shall be the sum of the risk-weighted exposure amount calculated under the IRB Approach and 12,5 times the expected loss amount.
The treatment set out in this Article applies only where the exposure value is less than or equal to the value of the credit protection.
Article 241
Nth-to-default credit derivatives
Where the nth default among the exposures triggers payment under the credit protection, the institution purchasing the protection may only recognise the protection for the calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts and, as applicable, expected loss amounts where protection has also been obtained for defaults 1 to n-1 or when n-1 defaults have already occurred. In such cases, the institution may amend the calculation of the risk-weighted exposure amount and, as applicable, the expected loss amount of the exposure which would, in the absence of the credit protection, produce the n-th lowest risk-weighted exposure amount in accordance with this Chapter. Institutions shall calculate the nth lowest amount as specified in points (a) and (b) of Article 240.
The treatment set out in this Article applies only where the exposure value is less than or equal to the value of the credit protection.
All exposures in the basket shall meet the requirements laid down in Article 204(2) and Article 216(1)(d).
CHAPTER 5
Securitisation
Article 242
Definitions
For the purposes of this Chapter, the following definitions apply:
‘clean-up call option’ means a contractual option that entitles the originator to call the securitisation positions before all of the securitised exposures have been repaid, either by repurchasing the underlying exposures remaining in the pool in the case of traditional securitisations or by terminating the credit protection in the case of synthetic securitisations, in both cases when the amount of outstanding underlying exposures falls to or below certain pre-specified level;
‘credit-enhancing interest-only strip’ means an on-balance sheet asset that represents a valuation of cash flows related to future margin income and is a subordinated tranche in the securitisation;
‘liquidity facility’ means a liquidity facility as defined in point (14) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402;
‘unrated position’ means a securitisation position which does not have an eligible credit assessment in accordance with Section 4;
‘rated position’ means a securitisation position which has an eligible credit assessment in accordance with Section 4;
‘senior securitisation position’ means a position backed or secured by a first claim on the whole of the underlying exposures, disregarding for these purposes amounts due under interest rate or currency derivative contracts, fees or other similar payments, and irrespective of any difference in maturity with one or more other senior tranches with which that position shares losses on a pro-rata basis;
‘IRB pool’ means a pool of underlying exposures of a type in relation to which the institution has permission to use the IRB Approach and is able to calculate risk- weighted exposure amounts in accordance with Chapter 3 for all of these exposures;
‘mixed pool’ means a pool of underlying exposures of a type in relation to which the institution has permission to use the IRB Approach and is able to calculate risk- weighted exposure amounts in accordance with Chapter 3 for some, but not all, of the exposures;
‘overcollateralisation’ means any form of credit enhancement by virtue of which underlying exposures are posted in value which is higher than the value of the securitisation positions;
‘simple, transparent and standardised securitisation’ or ‘STS securitisation’ means a securitisation that meets the requirements set out in Article 18 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402;
‘asset-backed commercial paper programme’ or ‘ABCP programme’ means an asset backed commercial paper programme or ABCP programme as defined in point (7) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402;
‘asset-backed commercial paper transaction’ or ‘ABCP transaction’ means an asset-backed commercial paper transaction or ABCP transaction as defined in point (8) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402;
‘traditional securitisation’ means a traditional securitisation as defined in point (9) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402;
‘synthetic securitisation’ means a synthetic securitisation as defined in point (10) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402;
‘revolving exposure’ means a revolving exposure as defined in point (15) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402;
‘early amortisation provision’ means an early amortisation provision as defined in point (17) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402;
‘first loss tranche’ means a first loss tranche as defined in point (18) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402;
‘mezzanine securitisation position’ means a position in the securitisation which is subordinated to the senior securitisation position and more senior than the first loss tranche, and which is subject to a risk weight lower than 1 250 % and higher than 25 % in accordance with Subsections 2 and 3 of Section 3;
‘promotional entity’ means any undertaking or entity established by a Member State’s central, regional or local government, which grants promotional loans or grants promotional guarantees, whose primary goal is not to make profit or maximise market share but to promote that government’s public policy objectives, provided that, subject to State aid rules, that government has an obligation to protect the economic basis of the undertaking or entity and maintain its viability throughout its lifetime, or that at least 90 % of its original capital or funding or the promotional loan it grants is directly or indirectly guaranteed by the Member State’s central, regional or local government;
‘synthetic excess spread’ means a synthetic excess spread as defined in point (29) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402.
Article 243
Criteria for STS securitisations qualifying for differentiated capital treatment
Positions in an ABCP programme or ABCP transaction that qualify as positions in an STS securitisation shall be eligible for the treatment set out in Articles 260, 262 and 264 where the following requirements are met:
the underlying exposures meet, at the time of their inclusion in the ABCP programme, to the best knowledge of the originator or the original lender, the conditions for being assigned, under the Standardised Approach and taking into account any eligible credit risk mitigation, a risk weight equal to or smaller than 75 % on an individual exposure basis where the exposure is a retail exposure or 100 % for any other exposures; and
the aggregate exposure value of all exposures to a single obligor at ABCP programme level does not exceed 2 % of the aggregate exposure value of all exposures within the ABCP programme at the time the exposures were added to the ABCP programme. For the purposes of this calculation, loans or leases to a group of connected clients, to the best knowledge of the sponsor, shall be considered as exposures to a single obligor.
In the case of trade receivables, point (b) of the first subparagraph shall not apply where the credit risk of those trade receivables is fully covered by eligible credit protection in accordance with Chapter 4, provided that in that case the protection provider is an institution, an investment firm, an insurance undertaking or a reinsurance undertaking.
In the case of securitised residual leasing values, point (b) of the first subparagraph shall not apply where those values are not exposed to refinancing or resell risk due to a legally enforceable commitment to repurchase or refinance the exposure at a pre-determined amount by a third party eligible under Article 201(1).
By way of derogation from point (a) of the first subparagraph, where an institution applies Article 248(3) or has been granted permission to apply the Internal Assessment Approach in accordance with Article 265, the risk weight that institution would assign to a liquidity facility that completely covers the ABCP issued under the programme is equal to or smaller than 100 %.
Positions in a securitisation, other than an ABCP programme or ABCP transaction, that qualify as positions in an STS securitisation, shall be eligible for the treatment set out in Articles 260, 262 and 264 where the following requirements are met:
at the time of inclusion in the securitisation, the aggregate exposure value of all exposures to a single obligor in the pool does not exceed 2 % of the exposure values of the aggregate outstanding exposure values of the pool of underlying exposures. For the purposes of this calculation, loans or leases to a group of connected clients shall be considered as exposures to a single obligor.
In the case of securitised residual leasing values, the first subparagraph of this point shall not apply where those values are not exposed to refinancing or resell risk due to a legally enforceable commitment to repurchase or refinance the exposure at a pre-determined amount by a third party eligible under Article 201(1);
at the time of their inclusion in the securitisation, the underlying exposures meet the conditions for being assigned, under the Standardised Approach and taking into account any eligible credit risk mitigation, a risk weight equal to or smaller than:
40 % on an exposure value-weighted average basis for the portfolio where the exposures are loans secured by residential mortgages or fully guaranteed residential loans, as referred to in point (e) of Article 129(1);
50 % on an individual exposure basis where the exposure is a loan secured by a commercial mortgage;
75 % on an individual exposure basis where the exposure is a retail exposure;
for any other exposures, 100 % on an individual exposure basis;
where points (b)(i) and (b)(ii) apply, the loans secured by lower ranking security rights on a given asset shall only be included in the securitisation where all loans secured by prior ranking security rights on that asset are also included in the securitisation;
where point (b)(i) of this paragraph applies, no loan in the pool of underlying exposures shall have a loan-to-value ratio higher than 100 %, at the time of inclusion in the securitisation, measured in accordance with point (d)(i) of Article 129(1) and Article 229(1).
Article 244
Traditional securitisation
The originator institution of a traditional securitisation may exclude underlying exposures from its calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts and, where relevant, expected loss amounts if either of the following conditions is fulfilled:
significant credit risk associated with the underlying exposures has been transferred to third parties;
the originator institution applies a 1 250 % risk weight to all securitisation positions it holds in the securitisation or deducts these securitisation positions from Common Equity Tier 1 items in accordance with point (k) of Article 36(1).
Significant credit risk shall be considered as transferred in either of the following cases:
the risk-weighted exposure amounts of the mezzanine securitisation positions held by the originator institution in the securitisation do not exceed 50 % of the risk-weighted exposure amounts of all mezzanine securitisation positions existing in this securitisation;
the originator institution does not hold more than 20 % of the exposure value of the first loss tranche in the securitisation, provided that both of the following conditions are met:
the originator can demonstrate that the exposure value of the first loss tranche exceeds a reasoned estimate of the expected loss on the underlying exposures by a substantial margin;
there are no mezzanine securitisation positions.
Where the possible reduction in risk-weighted exposure amounts, which the originator institution would achieve by the securitisation under points (a) or (b), is not justified by a commensurate transfer of credit risk to third parties, competent authorities may decide on a case-by-case basis that significant credit risk shall not be considered as transferred to third parties.
By way of derogation from paragraph 2, competent authorities may allow originator institutions to recognise significant credit risk transfer in relation to a securitisation where the originator institution demonstrates in each case that the reduction in own funds requirements which the originator achieves by the securitisation is justified by a commensurate transfer of credit risk to third parties. Permission may only be granted where the institution meets both of the following conditions:
the institution has adequate internal risk management policies and methodologies to assess the transfer of credit risk;
the institution has also recognised the transfer of credit risk to third parties in each case for the purposes of the institution’s internal risk management and its internal capital allocation.
In addition to the requirements set out in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, all of the following conditions shall be met:
the transaction documentation reflects the economic substance of the securitisation;
the securitisation positions do not constitute payment obligations of the originator institution;
the underlying exposures are placed beyond the reach of the originator institution and its creditors in a manner that meets the requirement set out in Article 20(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402;
the originator institution does not retain control over the underlying exposures. It shall be considered that control is retained over the underlying exposures where the originator has the right to repurchase from the transferee the previously transferred exposures in order to realise their benefits or if it is otherwise required to re-assume transferred risk. The originator institution’s retention of servicing rights or obligations in respect of the underlying exposures shall not of itself constitute control of the exposures;
the securitisation documentation does not contain terms or conditions that:
require the originator institution to alter the underlying exposures to improve the average quality of the pool; or
increase the yield payable to holders of positions or otherwise enhance the positions in the securitisation in response to a deterioration in the credit quality of the underlying exposures;
where applicable, the transaction documentation makes it clear that the originator or the sponsor may only purchase or repurchase securitisation positions or repurchase, restructure or substitute the underlying exposures beyond their contractual obligations where such arrangements are executed in accordance with prevailing market conditions and the parties to them act in their own interest as free and independent parties (arm’s length);
where there is a clean-up call option, that option shall also meet all of the following conditions:
it can be exercised at the discretion of the originator institution;
it may only be exercised when 10 % or less of the original value of the underlying exposures remains unamortised;
it is not structured to avoid allocating losses to credit enhancement positions or other positions held by investors in the securitisation and is not otherwise structured to provide credit enhancement;
the originator institution has received an opinion from a qualified legal counsel confirming that the securitisation complies with the conditions set out in point (c) of this paragraph.
The EBA shall monitor the range of supervisory practices in relation to the recognition of significant risk transfer in traditional securitisations in accordance with this Article. In particular, the EBA shall review:
the conditions for the transfer of significant credit risk to third parties in accordance with paragraphs 2, 3 and 4;
the interpretation of ‘commensurate transfer of credit risk to third parties’ for the purposes of the competent authorities’ assessment provided for in the second subparagraph of paragraph 2 and in paragraph 3;
the requirements for the competent authorities’ assessment of securitisation transactions in relation to which the originator seeks recognition of significant credit risk transfer to third parties in accordance with paragraph 2 or 3.
The EBA shall report its findings to the Commission by 2 January 2021. The Commission may, having taken into account the report from the EBA, adopt a delegated act in accordance with Article 462, to supplement this Regulation by further specifying the items listed in points (a), (b) and (c) of this paragraph.
Article 245
Synthetic securitisation
The originator institution of a synthetic securitisation may calculate risk-weighted exposure amounts, and, where relevant, expected loss amounts with respect to the underlying exposures in accordance with Articles 251 and 252, where either of the following conditions is met:
significant credit risk has been transferred to third parties either through funded or unfunded credit protection;
the originator institution applies a 1 250 % risk weight to all securitisation positions that it retains in the securitisation or deducts these securitisation positions from Common Equity Tier 1 items in accordance with point (k) of Article 36(1).
Significant credit risk shall be considered as transferred in either of the following cases:
the risk-weighted exposure amounts of the mezzanine securitisation positions held by the originator institution in the securitisation do not exceed 50 % of the risk-weighted exposure amounts of all mezzanine securitisation positions existing in this securitisation;
the originator institution does not hold more than 20 % of the exposure value of the first loss tranche in the securitisation, provided that both of the following conditions are met:
the originator can demonstrate that the exposure value of the first loss tranche exceeds a reasoned estimate of the expected loss on the underlying exposures by a substantial margin;
there are no mezzanine securitisation positions.
Where the possible reduction in risk-weighted exposure amounts, which the originator institution would achieve by the securitisation, is not justified by a commensurate transfer of credit risk to third parties, competent authorities may decide on a case-by-case basis that significant credit risk shall not be considered as transferred to third parties.
By way of derogation from paragraph 2, competent authorities may allow originator institutions to recognise significant credit risk transfer in relation to a securitisation where the originator institution demonstrates in each case that the reduction in own funds requirements which the originator achieves by the securitisation is justified by a commensurate transfer of credit risk to third parties. Permission may only be granted where the institution meets both of the following conditions:
the institution has adequate internal risk-management policies and methodologies to assess the transfer of risk;
the institution has also recognised the transfer of credit risk to third parties in each case for the purposes of the institution’s internal risk management and its internal capital allocation.
In addition to the requirements set out in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, all of the following conditions shall be met:
the transaction documentation reflects the economic substance of the securitisation;
the credit protection by virtue of which credit risk is transferred complies with Article 249;
the securitisation documentation does not contain terms or conditions that:
impose significant materiality thresholds below which credit protection is deemed not to be triggered if a credit event occurs;
allow for the termination of the protection due to deterioration of the credit quality of the underlying exposures;
require the originator institution to alter the composition of the underlying exposures to improve the average quality of the pool; or
increase the institution’s cost of credit protection or the yield payable to holders of positions in the securitisation in response to a deterioration in the credit quality of the underlying pool;
the credit protection is enforceable in all relevant jurisdictions;
where applicable, the transaction documentation makes it clear that the originator or the sponsor may only purchase or repurchase securitisation positions or repurchase, restructure or substitute the underlying exposures beyond their contractual obligations where such arrangements are executed in accordance with prevailing market conditions and the parties to them act in their own interest as free and independent parties (arm’s length);
where there is a clean-up call option, that option meets all the following conditions:
it may be exercised at the discretion of the originator institution;
it may only be exercised when 10 % or less of the original value of the underlying exposures remains unamortised;
it is not structured to avoid allocating losses to credit enhancement positions or other positions held by investors in the securitisation and is not otherwise structured to provide credit enhancement;
the originator institution has received an opinion from a qualified legal counsel confirming that the securitisation complies with the conditions set out in point (d) of this paragraph;
The EBA shall monitor the range of supervisory practices in relation to the recognition of significant risk transfer in synthetic securitisations in accordance with this Article. In particular, the EBA shall review:
the conditions for the transfer of significant credit risk to third parties in accordance with paragraphs 2, 3 and 4;
the interpretation of ‘commensurate transfer of credit risk to third parties’ for the purposes of the competent authorities’ assessment provided for in the second subparagraph of paragraph 2 and in paragraph 3; and
the requirements for the competent authorities’ assessment of securitisation transactions in relation to which the originator seeks recognition of significant credit risk transfer to third parties in accordance with paragraph 2 or 3.
The EBA shall report its findings to the Commission by 2 January 2021. The Commission may, having taken into account the report from the EBA, adopt a delegated act in accordance with Article 462, to supplement this Regulation by further specifying the items listed in points (a), (b) and (c) of this paragraph.
Article 246
Operational requirements for early amortisation provisions
Where the securitisation includes revolving exposures and early amortisation provisions or similar provisions, significant credit risk shall only be considered transferred by the originator institution where the requirements laid down in Articles 244 and 245 are met and the early amortisation provision, once triggered, does not:
subordinate the institution’s senior or pari passu claim on the underlying exposures to the other investors’ claims;
subordinate further the institution’s claim on the underlying exposures relative to other parties’ claims; or
otherwise increase the institution’s exposure to losses associated with the underlying revolving exposures.
Article 247
Calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts
Where an originator institution has transferred significant credit risk associated with the underlying exposures of the securitisation in accordance with Section 2, that institution may:
in the case of a traditional securitisation, exclude the underlying exposures from its calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts, and, as relevant, expected loss amounts;
in the case of a synthetic securitisation, calculate risk-weighted exposure amounts, and, where relevant, expected loss amounts, with respect to the underlying exposures in accordance with Articles 251 and 252.
Where the originator institution has not transferred significant credit risk or has decided not to apply paragraph 1, it shall not be required to calculate risk-weighted exposure amounts for any position it may have in the securitisation but shall continue including the underlying exposures in its calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts and, where relevant, expected loss amounts as if they had not been securitised.
Article 248
Exposure value
The exposure value of a securitisation position shall be calculated as follows:
the exposure value of an on-balance sheet securitisation position shall be its accounting value remaining after any relevant specific credit risk adjustments on the securitisation position have been applied in accordance with Article 110;
the exposure value of an off-balance sheet securitisation position shall be its nominal value less any relevant specific credit risk adjustments on the securitisation position in accordance with Article 110, multiplied by the relevant conversion factor as set out in this point. The conversion factor shall be 100 %, except in the case of cash advance facilities. To determine the exposure value of the undrawn portion of the cash advance facilities, a conversion factor of 0 % may be applied to the nominal amount of a liquidity facility that is unconditionally cancellable provided that repayment of draws on the facility are senior to any other claims on the cash flows arising from the underlying exposures and the institution has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the competent authority that it is applying an appropriately conservative method for measuring the amount of the undrawn portion;
the exposure value for the counterparty credit risk of a securitisation position that results from a derivative instrument listed in Annex II, shall be determined in accordance with Chapter 6;
an originator institution may deduct from the exposure value of a securitisation position which is assigned 1 250 % risk weight in accordance with Subsection 3 or deducted from Common Equity Tier 1 in accordance with point (k) of Article 36(1), the amount of the specific credit risk adjustments on the underlying exposures in accordance with Article 110, and any non-refundable purchase price discounts connected with such underlying exposures to the extent that such discounts have caused the reduction of own funds;
the exposure value of a synthetic excess spread shall include, as applicable, the following:
any income from the securitised exposures already recognised by the originator institution in its income statement under the applicable accounting framework that the originator institution has contractually designated to the transaction as synthetic excess spread and that is still available to absorb losses;
any synthetic excess spread that is contractually designated by the originator institution in any previous periods and that is still available to absorb losses;
any synthetic excess spread that is contractually designated by the originator institution for the current period and that is still available to absorb losses;
any synthetic excess spread contractually designated by the originator institution for future periods.
For the purposes of this point, any amount that is provided as collateral or credit enhancement in relation to the synthetic securitisation and that is already subject to an own funds requirement in accordance with this Chapter shall not be included in the exposure value.
The EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify what constitutes an appropriately conservative method for measuring the amount of the undrawn portion referred to in point (b) of the first subparagraph.
The EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 18 January 2019.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the third subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Where the positions partially overlap, the institution may split the position into two parts and recognise the overlap in relation to one part only in accordance with the first subparagraph. Alternatively, the institution may treat the positions as if they were fully overlapping by expanding for capital calculation purposes the position that produces the higher risk-weighted exposure amounts.
The institution may also recognise an overlap between the specific risk own funds requirements for positions in the trading book and the own funds requirements for securitisation positions in the non-trading book, provided that the institution is able to calculate and compare the own funds requirements for the relevant positions.
For the purposes of this paragraph, two positions shall be deemed to be overlapping where they are mutually offsetting in such a manner that the institution is able to preclude the losses arising from one position by performing the obligations required under the other position.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 10 October 2021.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 249
Recognition of credit risk mitigation for securitisation positions
Eligible unfunded credit protection and unfunded credit protection providers shall be limited to those which are eligible in accordance with Chapter 4 and recognition of credit risk mitigation shall be subject to compliance with the relevant requirements as laid down under Chapter 4.
Institutions which are allowed to apply the IRB Approach to a direct exposure to the protection provider may assess eligibility in accordance with the first subparagraph based on the equivalence of the PD for the protection provider to the PD associated with the credit quality steps referred to in Article 136.
By way of derogation from paragraph 2, SSPEs shall be eligible protection providers where all of the following conditions are met:
the SSPE owns assets that qualify as eligible financial collateral in accordance with Chapter 4;
the assets referred to in point (a) are not subject to claims or contingent claims ranking ahead or pari passu with the claim or contingent claim of the institution receiving unfunded credit protection; and
all the requirements for the recognition of financial collateral set out in Chapter 4 are met.
Where a securitisation position benefits from full credit protection or a partial credit protection on a pro-rata basis, the following requirements shall apply:
the institution providing credit protection shall calculate risk-weighted exposure amounts for the portion of the securitisation position benefiting from credit protection in accordance with Subsection 3 as if it held that portion of the position directly;
the institution buying credit protection shall calculate risk-weighted exposure amounts in accordance with Chapter 4 for the protected portion.
In all cases not covered by paragraph 6, the following requirements shall apply:
the institution providing credit protection shall treat the portion of the position benefiting from credit protection as a securitisation position and shall calculate risk-weighted exposure amounts as if it held that position directly in accordance with Subsection 3, subject to paragraphs 8, 9 and 10;
the institution buying credit protection shall calculate risk-weighted exposure amounts for the protected portion of the position referred to in point (a) in accordance with Chapter 4. The institution shall treat the portion of the securitisation position not benefiting from credit protection as a separate securitisation position and shall calculate risk-weighted exposure amounts in accordance with Subsection 3, subject to paragraphs 8, 9 and 10.
Institutions using the Securitisation External Ratings Based Approach (SEC-ERBA) under Subsection 3 for the original securitisation position shall calculate risk-weighted exposure amounts for the positions derived in accordance with paragraph 7 as follows:
where the derived position has the higher seniority, it shall be assigned the risk weight of the original securitisation position;
where the derived position has the lower seniority, it may be assigned an inferred rating in accordance with Article 263(7). In that case, thickness input T shall only be computed on the basis of the derived position. Where a rating may not be inferred, the institution shall apply the higher of the risk weight resulting from either:
applying the SEC-SA in accordance with paragraph 8 and Subsection 3; or
the risk weight of the original securitisation position under the SEC-ERBA.
Article 250
Implicit support
A transaction shall not be considered as support for the purposes of paragraph 1 where the transaction has been duly taken into account in the assessment of significant credit risk transfer and both parties have executed the transaction acting in their own interest as free and independent parties (arm’s length). For these purposes, the institution shall undertake a full credit review of the transaction and, at a minimum, take into account all of the following items:
the repurchase price;
the institution’s capital and liquidity position before and after repurchase;
the performance of the underlying exposures;
the performance of the securitisation positions;
the impact of support on the losses expected to be incurred by the originator relative to investors.
If an originator institution or a sponsor institution fails to comply with paragraph 1 in respect of a securitisation, the institution shall include all of the underlying exposures of that securitisation in its calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts as if they had not been securitised and disclose:
that it has provided support to the securitisation in breach of paragraph 1; and
the impact of the support provided in terms of own funds requirements.
Article 251
Originator institutions’ calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts securitised in a synthetic securitisation
Article 252
Treatment of maturity mismatches in synthetic securitisations
For the purposes of calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts in accordance with Article 251, any maturity mismatch between the credit protection by which the transfer of risk is achieved and the underlying exposures shall be calculated as follows:
the maturity of the underlying exposures shall be taken to be the longest maturity of any of those exposures subject to a maximum of 5 years. The maturity of the credit protection shall be determined in accordance with Chapter 4;
an originator institution shall ignore any maturity mismatch in calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts for securitisation positions subject to a risk weight of 1 250 % in accordance with this Section. For all other positions, the maturity mismatch treatment set out in Chapter 4 shall be applied in accordance with the following formula:
where:
RW* |
= |
risk-weighted exposure amounts for the purposes of point (a) of Article 92(3); |
RWAss |
= |
risk-weighted exposure amounts for the underlying exposures as if they had not been securitised, calculated on a pro-rata basis; |
RWSP |
= |
risk-weighted exposure amounts calculated under Article 251 as if there was no maturity mismatch; |
T |
= |
maturity of the underlying exposures, expressed in years; |
t |
= |
maturity of credit protection, expressed in years; |
t* |
= |
0,25 |
Article 253
Reduction in risk-weighted exposure amounts
Article 254
Hierarchy of methods
Institutions shall use one of the methods set out in Subsection 3 to calculate risk-weighted exposure amounts in accordance with the following hierarchy:
where the conditions set out in Article 258 are met, an institution shall use the SEC-IRBA in accordance with Articles 259 and 260;
where the SEC-IRBA may not be used, an institution shall use the SEC-SA in accordance with Articles 261 and 262;
where the SEC-SA may not be used, an institution shall use the SEC-ERBA in accordance with Articles 263 and 264 for rated positions or positions in respect of which an inferred rating may be used.
For rated positions or positions in respect of which an inferred rating may be used, an institution shall use the SEC-ERBA instead of the SEC-SA in each of the following cases:
where the application of the SEC-SA would result in a risk weight higher than 25 % for positions qualifying as positions in an STS securitisation;
where the application of the SEC-SA would result in a risk weight higher than 25 % or the application of the SEC-ERBA would result in a risk weight higher than 75 % for positions not qualifying as positions in an STS securitisation;
for securitisation transactions backed by pools of auto loans, auto leases and equipment leases.
For the purposes of the first subparagraph, an institution shall notify its decision to the competent authority no later than 17 November 2018.
Any subsequent decision to further change the approach applied to all of its rated securitisation positions shall be notified by the institution to its competent authority before the 15th November immediately following that decision.
In the absence of any objection by the competent authority by 15 December immediately following the deadline referred to in the second or third subparagraph, as appropriate, the decision notified by the institution shall take effect from 1 January of the following year and shall be valid until a subsequently notified decision comes into effect. An institution shall not use different approaches in the course of the same year.
Article 255
Determination of KIRB and KSA
For KIRB calculation purposes, the risk-weighted exposure amounts that would be calculated under Chapter 3 in respect of the underlying exposures shall include:
the amount of expected losses associated with all the underlying exposures of the securitisation including defaulted underlying exposures that are still part of the pool in accordance with Chapter 3; and
the amount of unexpected losses associated with all the underlying exposures including defaulted underlying exposures in the pool in accordance with Chapter 3.
Where losses from dilution and credit risks are treated in an aggregate manner in the securitisation, institutions shall combine the respective KIRB for dilution and credit risk into a single KIRB for the purposes of Subsection 3. The presence of a single reserve fund or overcollateralisation available to cover losses from either credit or dilution risk may be regarded as an indication that these risks are treated in an aggregate manner.
Where dilution and credit risk are not treated in an aggregate manner in the securitisation, institutions shall modify the treatment set out in the second subparagraph to combine the respective KIRB for dilution and credit risk in a prudent manner.
For the purposes of this paragraph, institutions shall calculate the exposure value of the underlying exposures without netting any specific credit risk adjustments and additional value adjustments in accordance with Articles 34 and 110 and other own funds reductions.
In the case of funded synthetic securitisations, any material proceeds from the issuance of credit-linked notes or other funded obligations of the SSPE that serve as collateral for the repayment of the securitisation positions shall be included in the calculation of KIRB or KSA if the credit risk of the collateral is subject to the tranched loss allocation.
The EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to further specify the conditions to allow institutions to calculate KIRB for the pools of underlying exposures in accordance with paragraph 4, in particular with regard to:
internal credit policy and models for calculating KIRB for securitisations;
use of different risk factors relating to the pool of underlying exposures and, where sufficient accurate or reliable data on that pool are not available, of proxy data to estimate PD and LGD; and
due diligence requirements to monitor the actions and policies of sellers of receivables or other originators.
The EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 18 January 2019.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the second subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 256
Determination of attachment point (A) and detachment point (D)
The attachment point (A) shall be expressed as a decimal value between zero and one and shall be equal to the greater of zero and the ratio of the outstanding balance of the pool of underlying exposures in the securitisation minus the outstanding balance of all tranches that rank senior or pari passu to the tranche containing the relevant securitisation position including the exposure itself to the outstanding balance of all the underlying exposures in the securitisation.
The detachment point (D) shall be expressed as a decimal value between zero and one and shall be equal to the greater of zero and the ratio of the outstanding balance of the pool of underlying exposures in the securitisation minus the outstanding balance of all tranches that rank senior to the tranche containing the relevant securitisation position to the outstanding balance of all the underlying exposures in the securitisation.
Article 257
Determination of tranche maturity (MT)
For the purposes of Subsection 3 and subject to paragraph 2, institutions may measure the maturity of a tranche (MT) as either:
the weighted average maturity of the contractual payments due under the tranche in accordance with the following formula:
where CFt denotes all contractual payments (principal, interests and fees) payable by the borrower during period t; or
the final legal maturity of the tranche in accordance with the following formula:
where ML is the final legal maturity of the tranche.
Article 258
Conditions for the use of the Internal Ratings Based Approach (SEC-IRBA)
Institutions shall use the SEC-IRBA to calculate risk-weighted exposure amounts in relation to a securitisation position where the following conditions are met:
the position is backed by an IRB pool or a mixed pool, provided that, in the latter case, the institution is able to calculate KIRB in accordance with Section 3 on a minimum of 95 % of the underlying exposure amount;
there is sufficient information available in relation to the underlying exposures of the securitisation for the institution to be able to calculate KIRB; and
the institution has not been precluded from using the SEC-IRBA in relation to a specified securitisation position in accordance with paragraph 2.
Competent authorities may on a case-by-case basis preclude the use of the SEC-IRBA where securitisations have highly complex or risky features. For these purposes, the following may be regarded as highly complex or risky features:
credit enhancement that can be eroded for reasons other than portfolio losses;
pools of underlying exposures with a high degree of internal correlation as a result of concentrated exposures to single sectors or geographical areas;
transactions where the repayment of the securitisation positions is highly dependent on risk drivers not reflected in KIRB; or
highly complex loss allocations between tranches.
Article 259
Calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts under the SEC-IRBA
Under the SEC-IRBA, the risk-weighted exposure amount for a securitisation position shall be calculated by multiplying the exposure value of the position calculated in accordance with Article 248 by the applicable risk weight determined as follows, in all cases subject to a floor of 15 %:
RW = 1 250 % |
when D ≤ KIRB |
|
when A ≥ KIRB |
|
when A < KIRB < D |
where:
KIRB |
is the capital charge of the pool of underlying exposures as defined in Article 255 |
D |
is the detachment point as determined in accordance with Article 256 |
A |
is the attachment point as determined in accordance with Article 256 |
where:
a |
= |
– (1/(p * KIRB)) |
u |
= |
D – KIRB |
l |
= |
max (A – KIRB; 0) |
where:
where:
N |
is the effective number of exposures in the pool of underlying exposures, calculated in accordance with paragraph 4; |
LGD |
is the exposure-weighted average loss-given-default of the pool of underlying exposures, calculated in accordance with paragraph 5; |
MT |
is the maturity of the tranche as determined in accordance with Article 257. |
The parameters A, B, C, D, and E shall be determined according to the following look-up table:
|
A |
B |
C |
D |
E |
|
Non-retail |
Senior, granular (N ≥ 25) |
0 |
3,56 |
-1,85 |
0,55 |
0,07 |
Senior, non-granular (N < 25) |
0,11 |
2,61 |
-2,91 |
0,68 |
0,07 |
|
Non-senior, granular (N ≥ 25) |
0,16 |
2,87 |
-1,03 |
0,21 |
0,07 |
|
Non-senior, non-granular (N < 25) |
0,22 |
2,35 |
-2,46 |
0,48 |
0,07 |
|
Retail |
Senior |
0 |
0 |
-7,48 |
0,71 |
0,24 |
Non-senior |
0 |
0 |
-5,78 |
0,55 |
0,27 |
The effective number of exposures (N) shall be calculated as follows:
where EADi represents the exposure value associated with the ith exposure in the pool.
Multiple exposures to the same obligor shall be consolidated and treated as a single exposure.
The exposure-weighted average LGD shall be calculated as follows:
where LGDi represents the average LGD associated with all exposures to the ith obligor.
Where credit and dilution risks for purchased receivables are managed in an aggregate manner in a securitisation, the LGD input shall be construed as a weighted average of the LGD for credit risk and 100 % LGD for dilution risk. The weights shall be the stand-alone IRB Approach capital requirements for credit risk and dilution risk, respectively. For these purposes, the presence of a single reserve fund or overcollateralisation available to cover losses from either credit or dilution risk may be regarded as an indication that these risks are managed in an aggregate manner.
Where the share of the largest underlying exposure in the pool (C1) is no more than 3 %, institutions may use the following simplified method to calculate N and the exposure-weighted average LGDs:
LGD = 0,50
where
Cm |
denotes the share of the pool corresponding to the sum of the largest m exposures; and |
m |
is set by the institution. |
If only C1 is available and this amount is no more than 0,03, then the institution may set LGD as 0,50 and N as 1/C1.
Where the position is backed by a mixed pool and the institution is able to calculate KIRB on at least 95 % of the underlying exposure amounts in accordance with point (a) of Article 258(1), the institution shall calculate the capital charge for the pool of underlying exposures as:
where
d is the share of the exposure amount of underlying exposures for which the institution can calculate KIRB over the exposure amount of all underlying exposures.
For the purposes of the first subparagraph, the reference position shall be the position that is pari passu in all respects to the derivative or, in the absence of such pari passu position, the position that is immediately subordinate to the derivative.
Article 260
Treatment of STS securitisations under the SEC-IRBA
Under the SEC-IRBA, the risk weight for a position in an STS securitisation shall be calculated in accordance with Article 259, subject to the following modifications:
risk-weight floor for senior securitisation positions = 10 %
Article 261
Calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts under the Standardised Approach (SEC-SA)
Under the SEC-SA, the risk-weighted exposure amount for a position in a securitisation shall be calculated by multiplying the exposure value of the position as calculated in accordance with Article 248 by the applicable risk weight determined as follows, in all cases subject to a floor of 15 %:
RW = 1 250 % |
when D ≤ KA |
|
when A ≥ KA |
|
when A < KA < D |
where:
D |
is the detachment point as determined in accordance with Article 256; |
A |
is the attachment point as determined in accordance with Article 256; |
KA |
is a parameter calculated in accordance with paragraph 2; |
where:
a |
= |
– (1/(p · KA)) |
u |
= |
D – KA |
l |
= |
max (A – KA; 0) |
p |
= |
1 for a securitisation exposure that is not a re-securitisation exposure |
For the purposes of paragraph 1, KA shall be calculated as follows:
where:
KSA is the capital charge of the underlying pool as defined in Article 255;
W = ratio of:
the sum of the nominal amount of underlying exposures in default, to
the sum of the nominal amount of all underlying exposures.
For these purposes, an exposure in default shall mean an underlying exposure which is either: (i) 90 days or more past due; (ii) subject to bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings; (iii) subject to foreclosure or similar proceeding; or (iv) in default in accordance with the securitisation documentation.
Where an institution does not know the delinquency status for 5 % or less of underlying exposures in the pool, the institution may use the SEC-SA subject to the following adjustment in the calculation KA:
Where the institution does not know the delinquency status for more than 5 % of underlying exposures in the pool, the position in the securitisation must be risk-weighted at 1 250 %.
For the purposes of this paragraph, the reference position shall be the position that is pari passu in all respects to the derivative or, in the absence of such pari passu position, the position that is immediately subordinate to the derivative.
Article 262
Treatment of STS securitisations under the SEC-SA
Under the SEC-SA the risk weight for a position in an STS securitisation shall be calculated in accordance with Article 261, subject to the following modifications:
Article 263
Calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts under the External Ratings Based Approach (SEC-ERBA)
For exposures with short-term credit assessments or when a rating based on a short-term credit assessment may be inferred in accordance with paragraph 7, the following risk weights shall apply:
Table 1
Credit Quality Step |
1 |
2 |
3 |
All other ratings |
Risk weight |
15 % |
50 % |
100 % |
1 250 % |
For exposures with long-term credit assessments or when a rating based on a long-term credit assessment may be inferred in accordance with paragraph 7 of this Article, the risk weights set out in Table 2 shall apply, adjusted as applicable for tranche maturity (MT) in accordance with Article 257 and paragraph 4 of this Article and for tranche thickness for non-senior tranches in accordance with paragraph 5 of this Article:
Table 2
Credit Quality Step |
Senior tranche |
Non-senior (thin) tranche |
||
Tranche maturity (MT) |
Tranche maturity (MT) |
|||
1 year |
5 years |
1 year |
5 years |
|
1 |
15 % |
20 % |
15 % |
70 % |
2 |
15 % |
30 % |
15 % |
90 % |
3 |
25 % |
40 % |
30 % |
120 % |
4 |
30 % |
45 % |
40 % |
140 % |
5 |
40 % |
50 % |
60 % |
160 % |
6 |
50 % |
65 % |
80 % |
180 % |
7 |
60 % |
70 % |
120 % |
210 % |
8 |
75 % |
90 % |
170 % |
260 % |
9 |
90 % |
105 % |
220 % |
310 % |
10 |
120 % |
140 % |
330 % |
420 % |
11 |
140 % |
160 % |
470 % |
580 % |
12 |
160 % |
180 % |
620 % |
760 % |
13 |
200 % |
225 % |
750 % |
860 % |
14 |
250 % |
280 % |
900 % |
950 % |
15 |
310 % |
340 % |
1 050 % |
1 050 % |
16 |
380 % |
420 % |
1 130 % |
1 130 % |
17 |
460 % |
505 % |
1 250 % |
1 250 % |
All other |
1 250 % |
1 250 % |
1 250 % |
1 250 % |
In order to account for tranche thickness, institutions shall calculate the risk weight for non-senior tranches as follows:
where
T = tranche thickness measured as D – A
where
D |
is the detachment point as determined in accordance with Article 256 |
A |
is the attachment point as determined in accordance with Article 256 |
For the purposes of using inferred ratings, institutions shall attribute to an unrated position an inferred rating equivalent to the credit assessment of a rated reference position which meets all of the following conditions:
the reference position ranks pari passu in all respects to the unrated securitisation position or, in the absence of a pari passu ranking position, the reference position is immediately subordinate to the unrated position;
the reference position does not benefit from any third-party guarantees or other credit enhancements that are not available to the unrated position;
the maturity of the reference position shall be equal to or longer than that of the unrated position in question;
on an ongoing basis, any inferred rating shall be updated to reflect any changes in the credit assessment of the reference position.
For the purposes of the first subparagraph, the reference position shall be the position that is pari passu in all respects to the derivative or, in the absence of such pari passu position, the position that is immediately subordinate to the derivative.
Article 264
Treatment of STS securitisations under the SEC-ERBA
For exposures with short-term credit assessments or when a rating based on a short-term credit assessment may be inferred in accordance with Article 263(7), the following risk weights shall apply:
Table 3
Credit Quality Step |
1 |
2 |
3 |
All other ratings |
Risk weight |
10 % |
30 % |
60 % |
1 250 % |
For exposures with long-term credit assessments or when a rating based on a long-term credit assessment may be inferred in accordance with Article 263(7), risk weights shall be determined in accordance with Table 4, adjusted for tranche maturity (MT) in accordance with Article 257 and Article 263(4) and for tranche thickness for non-senior tranches in accordance with Article 263(5):
Table 4
Credit Quality Step |
Senior tranche |
Non-senior (thin) tranche |
||
Tranche maturity (MT) |
Tranche maturity (MT) |
|||
1 year |
5 years |
1 year |
5 years |
|
1 |
10 % |
10 % |
15 % |
40 % |
2 |
10 % |
15 % |
15 % |
55 % |
3 |
15 % |
20 % |
15 % |
70 % |
4 |
15 % |
25 % |
25 % |
80 % |
5 |
20 % |
30 % |
35 % |
95 % |
6 |
30 % |
40 % |
60 % |
135 % |
7 |
35 % |
40 % |
95 % |
170 % |
8 |
45 % |
55 % |
150 % |
225 % |
9 |
55 % |
65 % |
180 % |
255 % |
10 |
70 % |
85 % |
270 % |
345 % |
11 |
120 % |
135 % |
405 % |
500 % |
12 |
135 % |
155 % |
535 % |
655 % |
13 |
170 % |
195 % |
645 % |
740 % |
14 |
225 % |
250 % |
810 % |
855 % |
15 |
280 % |
305 % |
945 % |
945 % |
16 |
340 % |
380 % |
1 015 % |
1 015 % |
17 |
415 % |
455 % |
1 250 % |
1 250 % |
All other |
1 250 % |
1 250 % |
1 250 % |
1 250 % |
Article 265
Scope and operational requirements for the Internal Assessment Approach
Where an institution has received permission to apply the Internal Assessment Approach in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article, and a specific position in an ABCP programme or ABCP transaction falls within the scope of application covered by such permission, the institution shall apply that approach to calculate the risk-weighted exposure amount of that position.
The competent authorities shall grant institutions permission to apply the Internal Assessment Approach within a clearly defined scope of application where all of the following conditions are met:
all positions in the commercial paper issued from the ABCP programme are rated positions;
the internal assessment of the credit quality of the position reflects the publicly available assessment methodology of one or more ECAIs for the rating of securitisation positions backed by underlying exposures of the type securitised;
the commercial paper issued from the ABCP programme is predominantly issued to third-party investors;
the institution’s internal assessment process is at least as conservative as the publicly available assessments of those ECAIs which have provided an external rating for the commercial paper issued from the ABCP programme, in particular with regard to stress factors and other relevant quantitative elements;
the institution’s internal assessment methodology takes into account all relevant publicly available rating methodologies of the ECAIs that rate the commercial paper of the ABCP programme and includes rating grades corresponding to the credit assessments of ECAIs. The institution shall document in its internal records an explanatory statement describing how the requirements set out in this point have been met and shall update such statement on a regular basis;
the institution uses the internal assessment methodology for internal risk management purposes, including in its decision-making, management information and internal capital allocation processes;
internal or external auditors, an ECAI, or the institution’s internal credit review or risk management function perform regular reviews of the internal assessment process and the quality of the internal assessments of the credit quality of the institution’s exposures to an ABCP programme or ABCP transaction;
the institution tracks the performance of its internal ratings over time to evaluate the performance of its internal assessment methodology and makes adjustments, as necessary, to that methodology when the performance of the exposures routinely diverges from that indicated by the internal ratings;
the ABCP programme includes underwriting and liability management standards in the form of guidelines to the programme administrator on, at least:
the asset eligibility criteria, subject to point (j);
the types and monetary value of the exposures arising from the provision of liquidity facilities and credit enhancements;
the loss distribution between the securitisation positions in the ABCP programme or ABCP transaction;
the legal and economic isolation of the transferred assets from the entity selling the assets;
the asset eligibility criteria in the ABCP programme provide for, at least:
exclusion of the purchase of assets that are significantly past due or defaulted;
limitation of excessive concentration to individual obligor or geographic area; and
limitation of the tenor of the assets to be purchased;
an analysis of the asset seller’s credit risk and business profile is performed including, at least, an assessment of the seller’s:
past and expected future financial performance;
current market position and expected future competitiveness;
leverage, cash flow, interest coverage and debt rating; and
underwriting standards, servicing capabilities, and collection processes;
the ABCP programme has collection policies and processes that take into account the operational capability and credit quality of the servicer and comprises features that mitigate performance-related risks of the seller and the servicer. For the purposes of this point, performance-related risks may be mitigated through triggers based on the seller or servicer’s current credit quality to prevent commingling of funds in the event of the seller’s or servicer’s default;
the aggregated estimate of loss on an asset pool that may be purchased under the ABCP programme takes into account all sources of potential risk, such as credit and dilution risk;
where the seller-provided credit enhancement is sized based only on credit-related losses and dilution risk is material for the particular asset pool, the ABCP programme comprises a separate reserve for dilution risk;
the size of the required enhancement level in the ABCP programme is calculated taking into account several years of historical information, including losses, delinquencies, dilutions, and the turnover rate of the receivables;
the ABCP programme comprises structural features in the purchase of exposures in order to mitigate potential credit deterioration of the underlying portfolio. Such features may include wind-down triggers specific to a pool of exposures;
the institution evaluates the characteristics of the underlying asset pool, such as its weighted-average credit score, and identifies any concentrations to an individual obligor or geographic area and the granularity of the asset pool.
Institutions which have received permission to apply the Internal Assessment Approach shall not revert to the use of other methods for positions that fall within scope of application of the Internal Assessment Approach unless both of the following conditions are met:
the institution has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the competent authority that the institution has good cause to do so;
the institution has received the prior permission of the competent authority.
Article 266
Calculation of risk-weighted exposure amounts under the Internal Assessment Approach
Article 267
Maximum risk weight for senior securitisation positions: look-through approach
In the case of mixed pools the maximum risk weight shall be calculated as follows:
where the institution applies the SEC-IRBA, the Standardised Approach portion and the IRB Approach portion of the underlying pool shall each be assigned the corresponding Standardised Approach risk weight and IRB Approach risk weight respectively;
where the institution applies the SEC-SA or the SEC-ERBA, the maximum risk weight for senior securitisation positions shall be equal to the Standardised Approach weighted-average risk weight of the underlying exposures.
For the purposes of this Article, the risk weight that would be applicable under the IRB Approach in accordance with Chapter 3 shall include the ratio of:
expected losses multiplied by 12,5 to
the exposure value of the underlying exposures.
Article 268
Maximum capital requirements
The maximum capital requirement shall be the result of multiplying the amount calculated in accordance with paragraphs 1 or 2 by the largest proportion of interest that the institution holds in the relevant tranches (V), expressed as a percentage and calculated as follows:
for an institution that has one or more securitisation positions in a single tranche, V shall be equal to the ratio of the nominal amount of the securitisation positions that the institution holds in that given tranche to the nominal amount of the tranche;
for an institution that has securitisation positions in different tranches, V shall be equal to the maximum proportion of interest across tranches. For these purposes, the proportion of interest for each of the different tranches shall be calculated as set out in point (a).
Article 269
Re-securitisations
For a position in a re-securitisation, institutions shall apply the SEC-SA in accordance with Article 261, with the following changes:
W = 0 for any exposure to a securitisation tranche within the pool of underlying exposures;
p = 1,5;
the resulting risk weight shall be subject to a risk-weight floor of 100 %.
Article 269a
Treatment of non-performing exposures (NPE) securitisations
For the purposes of this Article:
‘NPE securitisation’ means an NPE securitisation as defined in point (25) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402;
‘qualifying traditional NPE securitisation’ means a traditional NPE securitisation where the non-refundable purchase price discount is at least 50 % of the outstanding amount of the underlying exposures at the time they were transferred to the SSPE.
Institutions shall perform the calculation in accordance with the following formula:
where:
CRmax |
= |
the maximum capital requirement in the case of a qualifying traditional NPE securitisation; |
RWEAIRB |
= |
the sum of risk-weighted exposure amounts of the underlying exposures subject to the IRB Approach; |
ELIRB |
= |
the sum of expected loss amounts of the underlying exposures subject to the IRB Approach; |
NRPPD |
= |
the non-refundable purchase price discount; |
EVIRB |
= |
the sum of exposure values of the underlying exposures that are subject to the IRB Approach; |
EVPool |
= |
the sum of exposure values of all underlying exposures in the pool; |
SCRAIRB |
= |
for originator institutions, the specific credit risk adjustments made by the institution with respect to those underlying exposures subject to the IRB Approach only if and to the extent these adjustments exceed the NRPPD; for investor institutions the amount is zero; |
RWEASA |
= |
the sum of risk-weighted exposure amounts of the underlying exposures subject to the Standardised Approach. |
For the purposes of the first subparagraph, originator institutions that apply the SEC-IRBA to a position and that are permitted to use own estimates of LGD and conversion factors for all underlying exposures subject to the IRB Approach in accordance with Chapter 3, shall deduct the non-refundable purchase price discount and, where applicable, any additional specific credit risk adjustments from the expected losses and exposure values of the underlying exposures associated with a senior position in a qualifying traditional NPE securitisation, in accordance with the following formula:
where:
RWmax |
= |
the risk weight, before applying the floor, applicable to a senior position in a qualifying traditional NPE securitisation when the look-through approach is used; |
RWEAIRB |
= |
the sum of risk-weighted exposure amounts of the underlying exposures subject to the IRB Approach; |
RWEASA |
= |
the sum of risk-weighted exposure amounts of the underlying exposures subject to the Standardised Approach; |
ELIRB |
= |
the sum of expected loss amounts of the underlying exposures subject to the IRB Approach; |
NRPPD |
= |
the non-refundable purchase price discount; |
EVIRB |
= |
the sum of exposure values of the underlying exposures that are subject to the IRB Approach; |
EVpool |
= |
the sum of exposure values of all underlying exposures in the pool; |
EVSA |
= |
the sum of exposure values of the underlying exposures that are subject to the Standardised Approach; |
SCRAIRB |
= |
the specific credit risk adjustments made by the originator institution with respect to the underlying exposures subject to the IRB Approach only if and to the extent these adjustments exceed the NRPPD. |
For the purposes of this Article, the non-refundable purchase price discount shall be calculated by subtracting the amount referred to in point (b) from the amount referred to in point (a):
the outstanding amount of the underlying exposures of the NPE securitisation at the time those exposures were transferred to the SSPE;
the sum of the following:
the initial sale price of the tranches or, where applicable, parts of the tranches of the NPE securitisation sold to third party investors; and
the outstanding amount, at the time the underlying exposures were transferred to the SSPE, of the tranches or, where applicable, parts of tranches of that securitisation held by the originator.
For the purposes of paragraphs 5 and 6, throughout the life of the transaction, the calculation of the non-refundable purchase price discount shall be adjusted downwards taking into account the realised losses. Any reduction in the outstanding amount of the underlying exposures resulting from realised losses shall reduce the non-refundable purchase price discount, subject to a floor of zero.
Where a discount is structured in such a way that it can be refunded in whole or in part to the originator, such discount shall not count as a non-refundable purchase price discount for the purposes of this Article.
Article 270
Senior positions in STS on-balance sheet securitisations
An originator institution may calculate the risk-weighted exposure amounts of a securitisation position in an STS on-balance sheet securitisation as referred to in Article 26a(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2402 in accordance with Article 260, 262 or 264 of this Regulation, as applicable, where that position meets both of the following conditions:
the securitisation meets the requirements set out in Article 243(2);
the position qualifies as the senior securitisation position.
EBA shall monitor the application of paragraph 1 in particular with regard to:
the market volume and market share of STS on-balance sheet securitisations in respect of which the originator institution applies paragraph 1, across different asset classes;
the observed allocation of losses to the senior tranche and to other tranches of STS on-balance sheet securitisations, where the originator institution applies paragraph 1 in respect of the senior position held in such securitisations;
the impact of the application of paragraph 1 on the leverage of institutions;
the impact of the use of STS on-balance sheet securitisations in respect of which the originator institution applies paragraph 1 on the issuance of capital instruments by the respective originator institutions.
Article 270a
Additional risk weight
Power is conferred on the Commission to adopt the implementing technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 270b
Use of credit assessments by ECAIs
Institutions may use only credit assessments to determine the risk weight of a securitisation position in accordance with this Chapter where the credit assessment has been issued or has been endorsed by an ECAI in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1060/2009.
Article 270c
Requirements to be met by the credit assessments of ECAIs
For the purposes of calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts in accordance with Section 3, institutions shall only use a credit assessment of an ECAI where all of the following conditions are met:
there is no mismatch between the types of payments reflected in the credit assessment and the types of payments to which the institution is entitled under the contract giving rise to the securitisation position in question;
the ECAI publishes the credit assessments and information on loss and cash-flow analysis, sensitivity of ratings to changes in the underlying ratings assumptions, including the performance of underlying exposures, and on the procedures, methodologies, assumptions, and key elements underpinning the credit assessments in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1060/2009. For the purposes of this point, information shall be considered as publicly available where it is published in accessible format. Information that is made available only to a limited number of entities shall not be considered as publicly available;
the credit assessments are included in the ECAI’s transition matrix;
the credit assessments are not based or partly based on unfunded support provided by the institution itself. Where a position is based or partly based on unfunded support, the institution shall consider that position as if it were unrated for the purposes of calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts for this position in accordance with Section 3;
the ECAI has committed to publishing explanations on how the performance of underlying exposures affects the credit assessment.
Article 270d
Use of credit assessments
An institution shall use the credit assessments of its securitisation positions in a consistent and non-selective manner and, for these purposes, shall comply with the following requirements:
an institution shall not use an ECAI’s credit assessments for its positions in some tranches and another ECAI’s credit assessments for its positions in other tranches within the same securitisation that may or may not be rated by the first ECAI;
where a position has two credit assessments by nominated ECAIs, the institution shall use the less favourable credit assessment;
where a position has three or more credit assessments by nominated ECAIs, the two most favourable credit assessments shall be used. Where the two most favourable assessments are different, the less favourable of the two shall be used;
an institution shall not actively solicit the withdrawal of less favourable ratings.
Article 270e
Securitisation mapping
The EBA shall develop draft implementing technical standards to map in an objective and consistent manner the credit quality steps set out in this Chapter relative to the relevant credit assessments of all ECAIs. For the purposes of this Article, the EBA shall in particular:
differentiate between the relative degrees of risk expressed by each assessment;
consider quantitative factors, such as default or loss rates and the historical performance of credit assessments of each ECAI across different asset classes;
consider qualitative factors such as the range of transactions assessed by the ECAI, its methodology and the meaning of its credit assessments in particular whether such assessments take into account expected loss or first Euro loss, and timely payment of interests or ultimate payment of interests;
seek to ensure that securitisation positions to which the same risk weight is applied on the basis of the credit assessments of ECAIs are subject to equivalent degrees of credit risk.
The EBA shall submit those draft implementing technical standards to the Commission by 1 July 2014.
Power is conferred on the Commission to adopt the implementing technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
CHAPTER 6
Counterparty credit risk
Section 1
Definitions
Article 271
Determination of the exposure value
Article 272
Definitions
For the purposes of this Chapter and of Title VI of this Part, the following definitions shall apply:
‘counterparty credit risk’ or ‘CCR’ means the risk that the counterparty to a transaction could default before the final settlement of the transaction's cash flows;
‘long settlement transactions’ means transactions where a counterparty undertakes to deliver a security, a commodity, or a foreign exchange amount against cash, other financial instruments, or commodities, or vice versa, at a settlement or delivery date specified by contract that is later than the market standard for this particular type of transaction or five business days after the date on which the institution enters into the transaction, whichever is earlier;
‘margin lending transactions’ means transactions in which an institution extends credit in connection with the purchase, sale, carrying or trading of securities. Margin lending transactions do not include other loans that are secured by collateral in the form of securities;
‘netting set’ means a group of transactions between an institution and a single counterparty that is subject to a legally enforceable bilateral netting arrangement that is recognised under Section 7 and Chapter 4.
Each transaction that is not subject to a legally enforceable bilateral netting arrangement which is recognised under Section 7 shall be treated as its own netting set for the purposes of this Chapter.
Under the Internal Model Method set out in Section 6, all netting sets with a single counterparty may be treated as a single netting set if negative simulated market values of the individual netting sets are set to 0 in the estimation of expected exposure (hereinafter referred to as ‘EE’);
‘risk position’ means a risk number that is assigned to a transaction under the Standardised Method set out in Section5 following a predetermined algorithm;
‘hedging set’ means a group of transactions within a single netting set for which full or partial offsetting is allowed for determining the potential future exposure under the methods set out in Section 3 or 4 of this Chapter;
‘margin agreement’ means an agreement or provisions of an agreement under which one counterparty must supply collateral to a second counterparty when an exposure of that second counterparty to the first counterparty exceeds a specified level;
‘one way margin agreement’ means a margin agreement under which an institution is required to post variation margin to a counterparty but is not entitled to receive variation margin from that counterparty or vice-versa;
‘margin threshold’ means the largest amount of an exposure that remains outstanding before one party has the right to call for collateral;
‘margin period of risk’ means the time period from the most recent exchange of collateral covering a netting set of transactions with a defaulting counterparty until the transactions are closed out and the resulting market risk is re-hedged;
‘effective maturity’ under the Internal Model Method for a netting set with maturity greater than one year means the ratio of the sum of expected exposure over the life of the transactions in the netting set discounted at the risk-free rate of return, divided by the sum of expected exposure over one year in the netting set discounted at the risk-free rate.
This effective maturity may be adjusted to reflect rollover risk by replacing expected exposure with effective expected exposure for forecasting horizons under one year;
‘cross-product netting’ means the inclusion of transactions of different product categories within the same netting set pursuant to the cross-product netting rules set out in this Chapter;
‘current market value’ or ‘CMV’ means the net market value of all the transactions within a netting set gross of any collateral held or posted where positive and negative market values are netted in computing the CMV;
‘net independent collateral amount’ or ‘NICA’ means the sum of the volatility-adjusted value of net collateral received or posted, as applicable, to the netting set other than variation margin;
‘distribution of market values’ means the forecast of the probability distribution of net market values of transactions within a netting set for a future date (the forecasting horizon), given the realised market value of those transactions at the date of the forecast;
‘distribution of exposures’ means the forecast of the probability distribution of market values that is generated by setting forecast instances of negative net market values equal to zero;
‘risk-neutral distribution’ means a distribution of market values or exposures over a future time period where the distribution is calculated using market implied values such as implied volatilities;
‘actual distribution’ means a distribution of market values or exposures at a future time period where the distribution is calculated using historic or realised values such as volatilities calculated using past price or rate changes;
‘current exposure’ means the larger of zero and the market value of a transaction or portfolio of transactions within a netting set with a counterparty that would be lost upon the default of the counterparty, assuming no recovery on the value of those transactions in insolvency or liquidation;
‘peak exposure’ means a high percentile of the distribution of exposures at particular future date before the maturity date of the longest transaction in the netting set;
‘expected exposure’ (hereinafter referred to as ‘EE’) means the average of the distribution of exposures at a particular future date before the longest maturity transaction in the netting set matures;
‘effective expected exposure at a specific date’ (hereinafter referred to as ‘Effective EE’) means the maximum expected exposure that occurs at that date or any prior date. Alternatively, it may be defined for a specific date as the greater of the expected exposure at that date or the effective expected exposure at any prior date;
‘expected positive exposure’ (hereinafter referred to as ‘EPE’) means the weighted average over time of expected exposures, where the weights are the proportion of the entire time period that an individual expected exposure represents.
When calculating the own funds requirement, institutions shall take the average over the first year or, if all the contracts within the netting set mature within less than one year, over the time period until the contract with the longest maturity in the netting set has matured;
‘effective expected positive exposure’ (hereinafter referred to as ‘Effective EPE’) means the weighted average of effective expected exposure over the first year of a netting set or, if all the contracts within the netting set mature within less than one year, over the time period of the longest maturity contract in the netting set, where the weights are the proportion of the entire time period that an individual expected exposure represents;
‘rollover risk’ means the amount by which EPE is understated when future transactions with a counterparty are expected to be conducted on an ongoing basis.
The additional exposure generated by those future transactions is not included in calculation of EPE;
‘counterparty’ for the purposes of Section 7 means any legal or natural person that enters into a netting agreement, and has the contractual capacity to do so;
‘contractual cross product netting agreement’ means a bilateral contractual agreement between an institution and a counterparty which creates a single legal obligation (based on netting of covered transactions) covering all bilateral master agreements and transactions belonging to different product categories that are included within the agreement;
For the purposes of this definition, ‘different product categories’ means:
repurchase transactions, securities and commodities lending and borrowing transactions;
margin lending transactions;
the contracts listed in Annex II;
‘payment leg’ means the payment agreed in an OTC derivative transaction with a linear risk profile which stipulates the exchange of a financial instrument for a payment.
In the case of transactions that stipulate the exchange of payment against payment, those two payment legs shall consist of the contractually agreed gross payments, including the notional amount of the transaction.
Section 2
Methods for calculating the exposure value
Article 273
Methods for calculating the exposure value
An institution which does not meet the conditions set out in Article 273a(1) shall not use the method set out in Section 4. An institution which does not meet the conditions set out in Article 273a(2) shall not use the method set out in Section 5.
Institutions may use in combination the methods set out in Sections 3 to 6 on a permanent basis within a group. A single institution shall not use in combination the methods set out in Sections 3 to 6 on a permanent basis.
Where permitted by the competent authorities in accordance with Article 283(1) and (2), an institution may determine the exposure value for the following items using the Internal Model Method set out in Section 6:
the contracts listed in Annex II;
repurchase transactions;
securities or commodities lending or borrowing transactions;
margin lending transactions;
long settlement transactions.
When an institution purchases protection through a credit derivative against a non-trading book exposure or against a counterparty risk exposure, it may calculate its own funds requirement for the hedged exposure in accordance with either of the following:
Articles 233 to 236;
in accordance with Article 153(3), or Article 183, where permission has been granted in accordance with Article 143.
The exposure value for CCR for those credit derivatives shall be zero, unless an institution applies the approach in point (h)(ii) of Article 299(2).
By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, where one margin agreement applies to multiple netting sets with that counterparty and the institution is using one of the methods set out in Sections 3 to 6 to calculate the exposure value of those netting sets, the exposure value shall be calculated in accordance with the relevant Section.
For a given counterparty, the exposure value for a given netting set of OTC derivative instruments listed in Annex II calculated in accordance with this Chapter shall be the greater of zero and the difference between the sum of exposure values across all netting sets with the counterparty and the sum of credit valuation adjustments for that counterparty being recognised by the institution as an incurred write-down. The credit valuation adjustments shall be calculated without taking into account any offsetting debit value adjustment attributed to the own credit risk of the firm that has been already excluded from own funds in accordance with point (c) of Article 33(1).
For the purposes of the first subparagraph, two OTC derivative contracts are perfectly matching when they meet all the following conditions:
their risk positions are opposite;
their features, with the exception of the trade date, are identical;
their cash flows fully offset each other.
Article 273a
Conditions for using simplified methods for calculating the exposure value
An institution may calculate the exposure value of its derivative positions in accordance with the method set out in Section 4, provided that the size of its on- and off-balance-sheet derivative business is equal to or less than both of the following thresholds on the basis of an assessment carried out on a monthly basis using the data as of the last day of the month:
10 % of the institution's total assets;
EUR 300 million.
An institution may calculate the exposure value of its derivative positions in accordance with the method set out in Section 5, provided that the size of its on- and off-balance-sheet derivative business is equal to or less than both of the following thresholds on the basis of an assessment carried out on a monthly basis using the data as of the last day of the month:
5 % of the institution's total assets;
EUR 100 million.
For the purposes of paragraphs 1 and 2, institutions shall calculate the size of their on- and off-balance-sheet derivative business on the basis of data as of the last day of each month in accordance with the following requirements:
derivative positions shall be valued at their market values on that given date; where the market value of a position is not available on a given date, institutions shall take a fair value for the position on that date; where the market value and fair value of a position are not available on a given date, institutions shall take the most recent of the market value or fair value for that position;
the absolute value of long derivative positions shall be summed with the absolute value of short derivative positions;
all derivative positions shall be included, except credit derivatives that are recognised as internal hedges against non-trading book credit risk exposures.
Article 273b
Non-compliance with the conditions for using simplified methods for calculating the exposure value of derivatives
An institution shall cease to calculate the exposure values of its derivative positions in accordance with Section 4 or 5, as applicable, within three months of one of the following occurring:
the institution does not meet the conditions set out in point (a) of Article 273a(1) or (2), as applicable, or the conditions set out in point (b) of Article 273a(1) or (2), as applicable, for three consecutive months;
the institution does not meet the conditions set out in point (a) of Article 273a(1) or (2), as applicable, or the conditions set out in point (b) of Article 273a(1) or (2), as applicable, for more than six of the preceding 12 months.
Article 274
Exposure value
An institution may calculate a single exposure value at netting set level for all the transactions covered by a contractual netting agreement where all the following conditions are met:
the netting agreement belongs to one of the types of contractual netting agreements referred to in Article 295;
the netting agreement has been recognised by competent authorities in accordance with Article 296;
the institution has fulfilled the obligations laid down in Article 297 in respect of the netting agreement.
Where any of the conditions set out in the first subparagraph are not met, the institution shall treat each transaction as if it was its own netting set.
Institutions shall calculate the exposure value of a netting set under the standardised approach for counterparty credit risk as follows:
RC |
= |
the replacement cost calculated in accordance with Article 275; and |
PFE |
= |
the potential future exposure calculated in accordance with Article 278; |
α |
= |
1,4. |
Institutions may set to zero the exposure value of a netting set that satisfies all the following conditions:
the netting set is solely composed of sold options;
the current market value of the netting set is at all times negative;
the premium of all the options included in the netting set has been received upfront by the institution to guarantee the performance of the contracts;
the netting set is not subject to any margin agreement.
Article 275
Replacement cost
Institutions shall calculate the replacement cost RC for netting sets that are not subject to a margin agreement, in accordance with the following formula:
Institutions shall calculate the replacement cost for single netting sets that are subject to a margin agreement in accordance with the following formula:
RC |
= |
the replacement cost; |
VM |
= |
the volatility-adjusted value of the net variation margin received or posted, as applicable, to the netting set on a regular basis to mitigate changes in the netting set's CMV; |
TH |
= |
the margin threshold applicable to the netting set under the margin agreement below which the institution cannot call for collateral; and |
MTA |
= |
the minimum transfer amount applicable to the netting set under the margin agreement. |
Institutions shall calculate the replacement cost for multiple netting sets that are subject to the same margin agreement in accordance with the following formula:
where:
RC |
= |
the replacement cost; |
i |
= |
the index that denotes the netting sets that are subject to the single margin agreement; |
CMVi |
= |
the CMV of netting set i; |
VMMA |
= |
the sum of the volatility-adjusted value of collateral received or posted, as applicable, to multiple netting sets on a regular basis to mitigate changes in their CMV; and |
NICAMA |
= |
the sum of the volatility-adjusted value of collateral received or posted, as applicable, to multiple netting sets other than VMMA. |
For the purposes of the first subparagraph, NICAMA may be calculated at trade level, at netting set level or at the level of all the netting sets to which the margin agreement applies depending on the level at which the margin agreement applies.
Article 276
Recognition and treatment of collateral
For the purposes of this Section, institutions shall calculate the collateral amounts of VM, VMMA, NICA and NICAMA, by applying all the following requirements:
where all the transactions included in a netting set belong to the trading book, only collateral that is eligible under Articles 197 and 299 shall be recognised;
where a netting set contains at least one transaction that belongs to the non-trading book, only collateral that is eligible under Article 197 shall be recognised;
collateral received from a counterparty shall be recognised with a positive sign and collateral posted to a counterparty shall be recognised with a negative sign;
the volatility-adjusted value of any type of collateral received or posted shall be calculated in accordance with Article 223; for the purposes of that calculation, institutions shall not use the method set out in Article 225;
the same collateral item shall not be included in both VM and NICA at the same time;
the same collateral item shall not be included in both VMMA and NICAMA at the same time;
any collateral posted to the counterparty that is segregated from the assets of that counterparty and, as a result of that segregation, is bankruptcy remote in the event of the default or insolvency of that counterparty shall not be recognised in the calculation of NICA and NICAMA.
For the calculation of the volatility-adjusted value of collateral posted referred to in point (d) of paragraph 1 of this Article, institutions shall replace the formula set out in Article 223(2) with the following formula:
For the purposes of point (d) of paragraph 1, institutions shall set the liquidation period relevant for the calculation of the volatility-adjusted value of any collateral received or posted in accordance with one of the following time horizons:
one year for the netting sets referred to in Article 275(1);
the margin period of risk determined in accordance with point (b) of Article 279c(1) for the netting sets referred to in Article 275(2) and (3).
Article 277
Mapping of transactions to risk categories
Institutions shall map each transaction of a netting set to one of the following risk categories to determine the potential future exposure of the netting set referred to in Article 278:
interest rate risk;
foreign exchange risk;
credit risk;
equity risk;
commodity risk;
other risks.
Notwithstanding paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, when mapping transactions to the risk categories listed in paragraph 1, institutions shall apply the following requirements:
where the primary risk driver of a transaction, or the most material risk driver in a given risk category for transactions referred to in paragraph 3, is an inflation variable, institutions shall map the transaction to the interest rate risk category;
where the primary risk driver of a transaction, or the most material risk driver in a given risk category for transactions referred to in paragraph 3, is a climatic conditions variable, institutions shall map the transaction to the commodity risk category.
EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify:
the method for identifying transactions with only one material risk driver;
the method for identifying transactions with more than one material risk driver and for identifying the most material of those risk drivers for the purposes of paragraph 3.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 28 December 2019.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 277a
Hedging sets
Institutions shall establish the relevant hedging sets for each risk category of a netting set and assign each transaction to those hedging sets as follows:
transactions mapped to the interest rate risk category shall be assigned to the same hedging set only where their primary risk driver, or the most material risk driver in the given risk category for transactions referred to in Article 277(3), is denominated in the same currency;
transactions mapped to the foreign exchange risk category shall be assigned to the same hedging set only where their primary risk driver, or the most material risk driver in the given risk category for transactions referred to in Article 277(3), is based on the same currency pair;
all the transactions mapped to the credit risk category shall be assigned to the same hedging set;
all the transactions mapped to the equity risk category shall be assigned to the same hedging set;
transactions mapped to the commodity risk category shall be assigned to one of the following hedging sets on the basis of the nature of their primary risk driver or the most material risk driver in the given risk category for transactions referred to in Article 277(3):
energy;
metals;
agricultural goods;
other commodities;
climatic conditions;
transactions mapped to the other risks category shall be assigned to the same hedging set only where their primary risk driver, or the most material risk driver in the given risk category for transactions referred to in Article 277(3), is identical.
For the purposes of point (a) of the first subparagraph of this paragraph, transactions mapped to the interest rate risk category that have an inflation variable as the primary risk driver shall be assigned to separate hedging sets, other than the hedging sets established for transactions mapped to the interest rate risk category that do not have an inflation variable as the primary risk driver. Those transactions shall be assigned to the same hedging set only where their primary risk driver, or the most material risk driver in the given risk category for transactions referred to in Article 277(3), is denominated in the same currency.
By way of derogation from paragraph 1 of this Article, institutions shall establish separate individual hedging sets in each risk category for the following transactions:
transactions for which the primary risk driver, or the most material risk driver in the given risk category for transactions referred to in Article 277(3), is either the market implied volatility or the realised volatility of a risk driver or the correlation between two risk drivers;
transactions for which the primary risk driver, or the most material risk driver in the given risk category for transactions referred to in Article 277(3), is the difference between two risk drivers mapped to the same risk category or transactions that consist of two payment legs denominated in the same currency and for which a risk driver from the same risk category of the primary risk driver is contained in the other payment leg than the one containing the primary risk driver.
For the purposes of point (a) of the first subparagraph of this paragraph, institutions shall assign transactions to the same hedging set of the relevant risk category only where their primary risk driver, or the most material risk driver in the given risk category for transactions referred to in Article 277(3), is identical.
For the purposes of point (b) of the first subparagraph, institutions shall assign transactions to the same hedging set of the relevant risk category only where the pair of risk drivers in those transactions as referred to therein is identical and the two risk drivers contained in this pair are positively correlated. Otherwise, institutions shall assign transactions referred to in point (b) of the first subparagraph to one of the hedging sets established in accordance with paragraph 1, on the basis of only one of the two risk drivers referred to in point (b) of the first subparagraph.
Article 278
Potential future exposure
Institutions shall calculate the potential future exposure of a netting set as follows:
where:
PFE |
= |
the potential future exposure; |
a |
= |
the index that denotes the risk categories included in the calculation of the potential future exposure of the netting set; |
AddOn(a) |
= |
the add-on for risk category a calculated in accordance with Articles 280a to 280f, as applicable; and |
multiplier |
= |
the multiplication factor calculated in accordance with the formula referred to in paragraph 3. |
For the purpose of this calculation, institutions shall include the add-on of a given risk category in the calculation of the potential future exposure of a netting set where at least one transaction of the netting set has been mapped to that risk category.
For the purposes of paragraph 1, the multiplier shall be calculated as follows:
multiplier = |
|
1 if z ≥ 0 |
|
|
where:
z = |
|
CMV – NICA for the netting sets referred to in Article 275(1) |
|
CMV – VM – NICA for the netting sets referred to in Article 275(2) |
|||
CMVi – NICAi for the netting sets referred to in Article 275(3) |
NICAi |
= |
the net independent collateral amount calculated only for transactions that are included in netting set i. NICAi shall be calculated at trade level or at netting set level depending on the margin agreement. |
Article 279
Calculation of the risk position
For the purpose of calculating the risk category add-ons referred to in Articles 280a to 280f, institutions shall calculate the risk position of each transaction of a netting set as follows:
δ |
= |
the supervisory delta of the transaction calculated in accordance with the formula laid down in Article 279a; |
AdjNot |
= |
the adjusted notional amount of the transaction calculated in accordance with Article 279b; and |
MF |
= |
the maturity factor of the transaction calculated in accordance with the formula laid down in Article 279c. |
Article 279a
Supervisory delta
Institutions shall calculate the supervisory delta as follows:
for call and put options that entitle the option buyer to purchase or sell an underlying instrument at a positive price on a single or multiple dates in the future, except where those options are mapped to the interest rate risk category, institutions shall use the following formula:
where:
δ |
= |
the supervisory delta; |
sign |
= |
– 1 where the transaction is a sold call option or a bought put option; |
sign |
= |
+ 1 where the transaction is a bought call option or sold put option; |
type |
= |
– 1 where the transaction is a put option; |
type |
= |
+ 1 where the transaction is a call option; |
N(x) |
= |
the cumulative distribution function for a standard normal random variable meaning the probability that a normal random variable with mean zero and variance of one is less than or equal to x; |
P |
= |
the spot or forward price of the underlying instrument of the option; for options the cash flows of which depend on an average value of the price of the underlying instrument, P shall be equal to the average value at the calculation date; |
K |
= |
the strike price of the option; |
T |
= |
the period between the expiry date of the option (Texp) and the reporting date; for options which can be exercised at one future date only, Texp is equal to that date; for options which can be exercised at multiple future dates, Texp is equal to the latest of those dates; T shall be expressed in years using the relevant business day convention; and |
σ |
= |
the supervisory volatility of the option determined in accordance with Table 1 on the basis of the risk category of the transaction and the nature of the underlying instrument of the option. |
Table 1
Risk category |
Underlying instrument |
Supervisory volatility |
Foreign exchange |
All |
15 % |
Credit |
Single-name instrument |
100 % |
Multiple-names instrument |
80 % |
|
Equity |
Single-name instrument |
120 % |
Multiple-names instrument |
75 % |
|
Commodity |
Electricity |
150 % |
Other commodities (excluding electricity) |
70 % |
|
Others |
All |
150 % |
Institutions using the forward price of the underlying instrument of an option shall ensure that:
the forward price is consistent with the characteristics of the option;
the forward price is calculated using a relevant interest rate prevailing at the reporting date;
the forward price integrates the expected cash flows of the underlying instrument before the expiry of the option;
for tranches of a synthetic securitisation and a nth-to-default credit derivative, institutions shall use the following formula:
where:
sign = |
|
+ 1 where credit protection has been obtained through the transaction |
|
– 1 where credit protection has been provided through the transaction |
A |
= |
the attachment point of the tranche; for a nth-to-default credit derivative transaction based on reference entities k, A = (n – 1)/k; and |
D |
= |
the detachment point of the tranche; for a nth-to-default credit derivative transaction based on reference entities k, D = n/k; |
for transactions not referred to in point (a) or (b), institutions shall use the following supervisory delta:
δ = |
|
+ 1 if the transaction is a long position in the primary risk driver or in the most material risk driver in the given risk category |
|
– 1 if the transaction is a short position in the primary risk driver or in the most material risk driver in the given risk category |
EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify:
in accordance with international regulatory developments, the formula that institutions shall use to calculate the supervisory delta of call and put options mapped to the interest rate risk category compatible with market conditions in which interest rates may be negative as well as the supervisory volatility that is suitable for that formula;
the method for determining whether a transaction is a long or short position in the primary risk driver or in the most material risk driver in the given risk category for transactions referred to in Article 277(3).
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 10 July 2025.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 279b
Adjusted notional amount
Institutions shall calculate the adjusted notional amount as follows:
for transactions mapped to the interest rate risk category or the credit risk category, institutions shall calculate the adjusted notional amount as the product of the notional amount of the derivative contract and the supervisory duration factor, which shall be calculated as follows:
where:
R |
= |
the supervisory discount rate; R = 5 %; |
S |
= |
the period between the start date of a transaction and the reporting date, which shall be expressed in years using the relevant business day convention; |
E |
= |
the period between the end date of a transaction and the reporting date, which shall be expressed in years using the relevant business day convention; and OneBusinessYear = one year expressed in business days using the relevant business day convention. |
The start date of a transaction is the earliest date at which at least a contractual payment under the transaction, to or from the institution, is either fixed or exchanged, other than payments related to the exchange of collateral in a margin agreement. Where the transaction has already been fixing or making payments at the reporting date, the start date of a transaction shall be equal to 0.
Where a transaction involves one or more contractual future dates on which the institution or the counterparty may decide to terminate the transaction prior to its contractual maturity, the start date of a transaction shall be equal to the earliest of the following:
the date or the earliest of the multiple future dates at which the institution or the counterparty may decide to terminate the transaction earlier than its contractual maturity;
the date at which a transaction starts fixing or making payments, other than payments related to the exchange of collateral in a margin agreement.
Where a transaction has a financial instrument as the underlying instrument that may give rise to contractual obligations additional to those of the transaction, the start date of a transaction shall be determined on the basis of the earliest date at which the underlying instrument starts fixing or making payments.
The end date of a transaction is the latest date at which a contractual payment under the transaction, to or from the institution, is or may be exchanged.
Where a transaction has a financial instrument as an underlying instrument that may give rise to contractual obligations additional to those of the transaction, the end date of a transaction shall be determined on the basis of the last contractual payment of the underlying instrument of the transaction.
Where a transaction is structured to settle an outstanding exposure following specified payment dates and where the terms are reset so that the market value of the transaction is zero on those specified dates, the settlement of the outstanding exposure at those specified dates is considered a contractual payment under the same transaction;
for transactions mapped to the foreign exchange risk category, institutions shall calculate the adjusted notional amount as follows:
where the transaction consists of one payment leg, the adjusted notional amount shall be the notional amount of the derivative contract;
where the transaction consists of two payment legs and the notional amount of one payment leg is denominated in the institution's reporting currency, the adjusted notional amount shall be the notional amount of the other payment leg;
where the transaction consists of two payment legs and the notional amount of each payment leg is denominated in a currency other than the institution's reporting currency, the adjusted notional amount shall be the largest of the notional amounts of the two payment legs after those amounts have been converted into the institution's reporting currency at the prevailing spot exchange rate;
for transactions mapped to the equity risk category or commodity risk category, institutions shall calculate the adjusted notional amount as the product of the market price of one unit of the underlying instrument of the transaction and the number of units in the underlying instrument referenced by the transaction;
where a transaction mapped to the equity risk category or commodity risk category is contractually expressed as a notional amount, institutions shall use the notional amount of the transaction rather than the number of units in the underlying instrument as the adjusted notional amount;
for transactions mapped to the other risks category, institutions shall calculate the adjusted notional amount on the basis of the most appropriate method among the methods set out in points (a), (b) and (c), depending on the nature and characteristics of the underlying instrument of the transaction.
Institutions shall determine the notional amount or number of units of the underlying instrument for the purpose of calculating the adjusted notional amount of a transaction referred to in paragraph 1 as follows:
where the notional amount or the number of units of the underlying instrument of a transaction is not fixed until its contractual maturity:
for deterministic notional amounts and numbers of units of the underlying instrument, the notional amount shall be the weighted average of all the deterministic values of notional amounts or number of units of the underlying instrument, as applicable, until the contractual maturity of the transaction, where the weights are the proportion of the time period during which each value of notional amount applies;
for stochastic notional amounts and numbers of units of the underlying instrument, the notional amount shall be the amount determined by fixing current market values within the formula for calculating the future market values;
for contracts with multiple exchanges of the notional amount, the notional amount shall be multiplied by the number of remaining payments still to be made in accordance with the contracts;
for contracts that provide for a multiplication of the cash-flow payments or a multiplication of the underlying of the derivative contract, the notional amount shall be adjusted by an institution to take into account the effects of the multiplication on the risk structure of those contracts.
Article 279c
Maturity Factor
Institutions shall calculate the maturity factor as follows:
for transactions included in the netting sets referred to in Article 275(1), institutions shall use the following formula:
where:
MF |
= |
the maturity factor; |
M |
= |
the remaining maturity of the transaction which is equal to the period of time needed for the termination of all contractual obligations of the transaction; for that purpose, any optionality of a derivative contract shall be considered to be a contractual obligation; the remaining maturity shall be expressed in years using the relevant business day convention; where a transaction has another derivative contract as underlying instrument that may give rise to additional contractual obligations beyond the contractual obligations of the transaction, the remaining maturity of the transaction shall be equal to the period of time needed for the termination of all contractual obligations of the underlying instrument; where a transaction is structured to settle outstanding exposure following specified payment dates and where the terms are reset so that the market value of the transaction is zero on those specified dates, the remaining maturity of the transaction shall be equal to the time until the next reset date; and |
OneBusinessYear |
= |
one year expressed in business days using the relevant business day convention; |
for transactions included in the netting sets referred to in Article 275(2) and (3), the maturity factor is defined as:
where:
MF |
= |
the maturity factor; |
MPOR |
= |
the margin period of risk of the netting set determined in accordance with Article 285(2) to (5); and |
OneBusinessYear |
= |
one year expressed in business days using the relevant business day convention. |
When determining the margin period of risk for transactions between a client and a clearing member, an institution acting either as the client or as the clearing member shall replace the minimum period set out in point (b) of Article 285(2) with five business days.
Article 280
Hedging set supervisory factor coefficient
For the purpose of calculating the add-on of a hedging set as referred to in Articles 280a to 280f, the hedging set supervisory factor coefficient ‘є’ shall be the following:
є = |
|
1 for the hedging sets established in accordance with Article 277a(1) |
|
5 for the hedging sets established in accordance with point (a) of Article 277a(2) |
|||
0,5 for the hedging sets established in accordance with point (b) of Article 277a(2) |
Article 280a
Interest rate risk category add-on
For the purposes of Article 278, institutions shall calculate the interest rate risk category add-on for a given netting set as follows:
where:
AddOnIR |
= |
the interest rate risk category add-on; |
j |
= |
the index that denotes all the interest rate risk hedging sets established in accordance with point (a) of Article 277a(1) and with Article 277a(2) for the netting set; and |
|
= |
the interest rate risk category add-on for hedging set j calculated in accordance with paragraph 2. |
Institutions shall calculate the interest rate risk category add-on for hedging set j as follows:
where:
єj |
= |
the hedging set supervisory factor coefficient of hedging set j determined in accordance with the applicable value specified in Article 280; |
SFIR |
= |
the supervisory factor for the interest rate risk category with a value equal to 0,5 %; and |
|
= |
the effective notional amount of hedging set j calculated in accordance with paragraph 3. |
For the purpose of calculating the effective notional amount of hedging set j, institutions shall first map each transaction of the hedging set to the appropriate bucket in Table 2. They shall do so on the basis of the end date of each transaction as determined under point (a) of Article 279b(1):
Table 2
Bucket |
End date (in years) |
1 |
> 0 and <= 1 |
2 |
> 1 and <= 5 |
3 |
> 5 |
Institutions shall then calculate the effective notional amount of hedging set j in accordance with the following formula:
where:
|
= |
the effective notional amount of hedging set j; and |
Dj,k |
= |
the effective notional amount of bucket k of hedging set j calculated as follows:
|
where:
l |
= |
the index that denotes the risk position. |
Article 280b
Foreign exchange risk category add-on
For the purposes of Article 278, institutions shall calculate the foreign exchange risk category add-on for a given netting set as follows:
where:
AddOnFX |
= |
the foreign exchange risk category add on; |
j |
= |
the index that denotes the foreign exchange risk hedging sets established in accordance with point (b) of Article 277a(1) and with Article 277a(2) for the netting set; and |
|
= |
the foreign exchange risk category add-on for hedging set j calculated in accordance with paragraph 2. |
Institutions shall calculate the foreign exchange risk category add-on for hedging set j as follows:
where:
єj |
= |
the hedging set supervisory factor coefficient of hedging set j determined in accordance with Article 280; |
SFFX |
= |
the supervisory factor for the foreign exchange risk category with a value equal to 4 %; |
|
= |
the effective notional amount of hedging set j calculated as follows: |
where:
l |
= |
the index that denotes the risk position. |
Article 280c
Credit risk category add-on
For the purposes of paragraph 2, institutions shall establish the relevant credit reference entities of the netting set in accordance with the following:
there shall be one credit reference entity for each issuer of a reference debt instrument that underlies a single-name transaction allocated to the credit risk category; single-name transactions shall be assigned to the same credit reference entity only where the underlying reference debt instrument of those transactions is issued by the same issuer;
there shall be one credit reference entity for each group of reference debt instruments or single-name credit derivatives that underlie a multi-name transaction allocated to the credit risk category; multi-names transactions shall be assigned to the same credit reference entity only where the group of underlying reference debt instruments or single-name credit derivatives of those transactions have the same constituents.
For the purposes of Article 278, institution shall calculate the credit risk category add-on for a given netting set as follows:
where:
AddOnCredit |
= |
credit risk category add-on; |
j |
= |
the index that denotes all the credit risk hedging sets established in accordance with point (c) of Article 277a(1) and with Article 277a(2) for the netting set; and |
|
= |
the credit risk category add-on for hedging set j calculated in accordance with paragraph 3. |
Institutions shall calculate the credit risk category add-on for hedging set j as follows:
where:
|
= |
the credit risk category add-on for hedging set j; |
єj |
= |
the hedging set supervisory factor coefficient of hedging set j determined in accordance with Article 280; |
k |
= |
the index that denotes the credit reference entities of the netting set established in accordance with paragraph 1; |
|
= |
the correlation factor of the credit reference entity k; where the credit reference entity k has been established in accordance with point (a) of paragraph 1,
|
AddOn(Entityk) |
= |
the add-on for the credit reference entity k determined in accordance with paragraph 4. |
Institutions shall calculate the add-on for the credit reference entity k as follows:
where:
|
= |
the effective notional amount of the credit reference entity k calculated as follows:
where:
|
Institutions shall calculate the supervisory factor applicable to the credit reference entity k as follows:
an institution using the approach referred to in Chapter 3 shall map the internal rating of the individual issuer to one of the external credit assessments;
for the credit reference entity k established in accordance with point (b) of paragraph 1:
Table 3
Credit quality step |
Supervisory factor for single-name transactions |
1 |
0,38 % |
2 |
0,42 % |
3 |
0,54 % |
4 |
1,06 % |
5 |
1,6 % |
6 |
6,0 % |
Table 4
Dominant credit quality |
Supervisory factor for quoted indices |
Investment grade |
0,38 % |
Non-investment grade |
1,06 % |
Article 280d
Equity risk category add-on
For the purposes of paragraph 2, institutions shall establish the relevant equity reference entities of the netting set in accordance with the following:
there shall be one equity reference entity for each issuer of a reference equity instrument that underlies a single-name transaction allocated to the equity risk category; single-name transactions shall be assigned to the same equity reference entity only where the underlying reference equity instrument of those transactions is issued by the same issuer;
there shall be one equity reference entity for each group of reference equity instruments or single-name equity derivatives that underlie a multi-name transaction allocated to the equity risk category; multi-names transactions shall be assigned to the same equity reference entity only where the group of underlying reference equity instruments or single-name equity derivatives of those transactions, as applicable, has the same constituents.
For the purposes of Article 278, institutions shall calculate the equity risk category add-on for a given netting set as follows:
where:
AddOnEquity |
= |
the equity risk category add-on; |
j |
= |
the index that denotes all the equity risk hedging sets established in accordance with point (d) of Article 277a(1) and Article 277a(2) for the netting set; and |
|
= |
the equity risk category add-on for hedging set j calculated in accordance with paragraph 3. |
Institutions shall calculate the equity risk category add-on for hedging set j as follows:
where:
|
= |
the equity risk category add-on for hedging set j; |
єj |
= |
the hedging set supervisory factor coefficient of hedging set j determined in accordance with Article 280; |
k |
= |
the index that denotes the equity reference entities of the netting set established in accordance with paragraph 1; |
|
= |
the correlation factor of the equity reference entity k; where the equity reference entity k has been established in accordance with point (a) of paragraph 1,
|
AddOn(Entityk) |
= |
the add-on for the equity reference entity k determined in accordance with paragraph 4. |
Institutions shall calculate the add-on for the equity reference entity k as follows:
where:
AddOn(Entityk) |
= |
the add-on for the equity reference entity k; |
|
= |
the supervisory factor applicable to the equity reference entity k; where the equity reference entity k has been established in accordance with point (a) of paragraph 1,
|
|
= |
the effective notional amount of the equity reference entity k calculated as follows:
where:
|
Article 280e
Commodity risk category add-on
For the purposes of Article 278, institutions shall calculate the commodity risk category add-on for a given netting set as follows:
where:
AddOnCom |
= |
the commodity risk category add-on; |
j |
= |
the index that denotes the commodity hedging sets established in accordance with point (e) of Article 277a(1) and with Article 277a(2) for the netting set; and |
|
= |
the commodity risk category add-on for hedging set j calculated in accordance with paragraph 4. |
Institutions shall calculate the commodity risk category add-on for hedging set j as follows:
where:
|
= |
the commodity risk category add-on for hedging set j; |
єj |
= |
the hedging set supervisory factor coefficient of hedging set j determined in accordance with Article 280; |
ρCom |
= |
the correlation factor of the commodity risk category with a value equal to 40 %; |
k |
= |
the index that denotes the commodity reference types of the netting set established in accordance with paragraph 2; and |
|
= |
the add-on for the commodity reference type k calculated in accordance with paragraph 5. |
Institutions shall calculate the add-on for the commodity reference type k as follows:
where:
|
= |
the add-on for the commodity reference type k; |
|
= |
the supervisory factor applicable to the commodity reference type k; where the commodity reference type k corresponds to transactions allocated to the hedging set referred to in point (e) of Article 277a(1), excluding transactions concerning electricity, |
|
= |
the effective notional amount of the commodity reference type k calculated as follows:
where:
|
Article 280f
Other risks category add-on
For the purposes of Article 278, institutions shall calculate the other risks category add-on for a given netting set as follows:
where:
AddOnOther |
= |
the other risks category add-on; |
єj |
= |
the index that denotes the other risk hedging sets established in accordance with point (f) of Article 277a(1) and Article 277a(2) for the netting set; and |
|
= |
the other risks category add-on for hedging set j calculated in accordance with paragraph 2. |
Institutions shall calculate the other risks category add-on for hedging set j as follows:
where:
|
= |
the other risks category add-on for hedging set j; |
єj |
= |
the hedging set supervisory factor coefficient of hedging set j determined in accordance with Article 280; and |
SFOther |
= |
the supervisory factor for the other risk category with a value equal to 8 %; |
|
= |
the effective notional amount of hedging set j calculated as follows:
where:
|
Article 281
Calculation of the exposure value
The exposure value of a netting set shall be calculated in accordance with the following requirements:
institutions shall not apply the treatment referred to in Article 274(6);
by way of derogation from Article 275(1), for netting sets that are not referred to in Article 275(2), institutions shall calculate the replacement cost in accordance with the following formula:
RC = max{CMV, 0}
where:
RC |
= |
the replacement cost; and |
CMV |
= |
the current market value. |
by way of derogation from Article 275(2) of this Regulation, for netting sets of transactions: that are traded on a recognised exchange; that are centrally cleared by a central counterparty authorised in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 or recognised in accordance with Article 25 of that Regulation; or for which collateral is exchanged bilaterally with the counterparty in accordance with Article 11 of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012, institutions shall calculate the replacement cost in accordance with the following formula:
RC = TH + MTA
where:
RC |
= |
the replacement cost; |
TH |
= |
the margin threshold applicable to the netting set under the margin agreement below which the institution cannot call for collateral; and |
MTA |
= |
the minimum transfer amount applicable to the netting set under the margin agreement; |
by way of derogation from Article 275(3), for multiple netting sets that are subject to a margin agreement, institutions shall calculate the replacement cost as the sum of the replacement cost of each individual netting set, calculated in accordance with paragraph 1 as if they were not margined;
all hedging sets shall be established in accordance with Article 277a(1);
institutions shall set to 1 the multiplier in the formula that is used to calculate the potential future exposure in Article 278(1), as follows:
where:
PFE |
= |
the potential future exposure; and |
AddOn(a) |
= |
the add-on for risk category a; |
by way of derogation from Article 279a(1), for all transactions, institutions shall calculate the supervisory delta as follows:
δ = |
|
+ 1 where the transaction is a long position in the primary risk driver |
|
– 1 where the transaction is a short position in the primary risk driver |
where:
δ |
= |
the supervisory delta; |
the formula referred to in point (a) of Article 279b(1) that is used to compute the supervisory duration factor shall read as follows:
supervisory duration factor = E – S
where:
E |
= |
the period between the end date of a transaction and the reporting date; and |
S |
= |
the period between the start date of a transaction and the reporting date; |
the maturity factor referred to in Article 279c(1) shall be calculated as follows:
for transactions included in netting sets referred to in Article 275(1), MF = 1;
for transactions included in netting sets referred to in Article 275(2) and (3), MF = 0,42;
the formula referred to in Article 280a(3) that is used to calculate the effective notional amount of hedging set j shall read as follows:
where:
|
= |
the effective notional amount of hedging set j; and |
Dj,k |
= |
the effective notional amount of bucket k of hedging set j; |
the formula referred to in Article 280c(3) that is used to calculate the credit risk category add-on for hedging set j shall read as follows:
where:
|
= |
the credit risk category add-on for hedging set j; and |
AddOn(Entityk) |
= |
the add-on for the credit reference entity k; |
the formula referred to in Article 280d(3) that is used to calculate the equity risk category add-on for hedging set j shall read as follows:
where:
|
= |
the equity risk category add-on for hedging set j; and |
AddOn(Entityk) |
= |
the add-on for the credit reference entity k; |
the formula referred to in Article 280e(4) that is used to calculate the commodity risk category add-on for hedging set j shall read as follows:
where:
|
= |
the commodity risk category add-on for hedging set j; and |
|
= |
the add-on for the commodity reference type k. |
Article 282
Calculation of the exposure value
The current replacement cost referred to in paragraph 2 shall be calculated as follows:
for netting sets of transactions: that are traded on a recognised exchange; centrally cleared by a central counterparty authorised in accordance with Article 14 of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 or recognised in accordance with Article 25 of that Regulation; or for which collateral is exchanged bilaterally with the counterparty in accordance with Article 11 of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012, institutions shall use the following formula:
RC = TH + MTA
where:
RC |
= |
the replacement cost; |
TH |
= |
the margin threshold applicable to the netting set under the margin agreement below which the institution cannot call for collateral; and |
MTA |
= |
the minimum transfer amount applicable to the netting set under the margin agreement; |
for all other netting sets or individual transactions, institutions shall use the following formula:
RC = max{CMV, 0}
where:
RC |
= |
the replacement cost; and |
CMV |
= |
the current market value. |
In order to calculate the current replacement cost, institutions shall update current market values at least monthly.
Institutions shall calculate the potential future exposure referred to in paragraph 2 as follows:
the potential future exposure of a netting set is the sum of the potential future exposure of all the transactions included in the netting set, calculated in accordance with point (b);
the potential future exposure of a single transaction is its notional amount multiplied by:
the product of 0,5 % and the residual maturity of the transaction expressed in years for interest-rate derivative contracts;
the product of 6 % and the residual maturity of the transaction expressed in years for credit derivative contracts;
4 % for foreign-exchange derivatives;
18 % for gold and commodity derivatives other than electricity derivatives;
40 % for electricity derivatives;
32 % for equity derivatives;
the notional amount referred to in point (b) of this paragraph shall be determined in accordance with Article 279b(2) and (3) for all derivatives listed in that point; in addition, the notional amount of the derivatives referred to in points (b)(iii) to (b)(vi) of this paragraph shall be determined in accordance with points (b) and (c) of Article 279b(1);
the potential future exposure of netting sets referred to in point (a) of paragraph 3 shall be multiplied by 0,42.
For calculating the potential exposure of interest-rate derivatives and credit derivatives in accordance with points b(i) and (b)(ii), an institution may choose to use the original maturity instead of the residual maturity of the contracts.
Section 6
Internal Model Method
Article 283
Permission to use the Internal Model Method
Provided that the competent authorities are satisfied that the requirement in paragraph 2 have been met by an institution, they shall permit that institution to use the Internal Model Method (IMM) to calculate the exposure value for any of the following transactions:
transactions in Article 273(2)(a);
transactions in Article 273(2)(b), (c) and (d);
transactions in Article 273(2)(a) to (d),
Where an institution is permitted to use the IMM to calculate exposure value for any of the transactions mentioned in points (a) to (c) of the first subparagraph, it may also use the IMM for the transactions in Article 273(2)(e).
Notwithstanding the third subparagraph of Article 273(1), an institution may choose not to apply this method to exposures that are immaterial in size and risk. In such case, an institution shall apply one of the methods set out in Sections 3 to 5 to these exposures where the relevant requirements for each approach are met.
If an institution ceases to comply with the requirements laid down in this Section, it shall notify the competent authority and do one of the following:
present to the competent authority a plan for a timely return to compliance;
demonstrate to the satisfaction of the competent authority that the effect of non-compliance is immaterial.
Article 284
Exposure value
The model used by the institution for that purpose shall:
specify the forecasting distribution for changes in the market value of the netting set attributable to joint changes in relevant market variables, such as interest rates, foreign exchange rates;
calculate the exposure value for the netting set at each of the future dates on the basis of the joint changes in the market variables.
The own funds requirement for counterparty credit risk with respect to the CCR exposures to which an institution applies the IMM, shall be the higher of the following:
the own funds requirement for those exposures calculated on the basis of Effective EPE using current market data;
the own funds requirement for those exposures calculated on the basis of Effective EPE using a single consistent stress calibration for all CCR exposures to which they apply the IMM.
Except for counterparties identified as having Specific Wrong-Way risk that fall within the scope of Article 291(4) and (5), institutions shall calculate the exposure value as the product of alpha (α) times Effective EPE, as follows:
Exposure value = α · Effective EPE
where:
α |
= |
1.4, unless competent authorities require a higher α or permit institutions to use their own estimates in accordance with paragraph 9; |
Effective EPE shall be calculated by estimating expected exposure (EEt) as the average exposure at future date t, where the average is taken across possible future values of relevant market risk factors.
The model shall estimate EE at a series of future dates t1, t2, t3, etc.
Effective EE shall be calculated recursively as:
where:
Effective EPE is the average Effective EE during the first year of future exposure. If all contracts in the netting set mature within less than one year, EPE shall be the average of EE until all contracts in the netting set mature. Effective EPE shall be calculated as a weighted average of Effective EE:
Notwithstanding paragraph 4, competent authorities may permit institutions to use their own estimates of alpha, where:
alpha shall equal the ratio of internal capital from a full simulation of CCR exposure across counterparties (numerator) and internal capital based on EPE (denominator);
in the denominator, EPE shall be used as if it were a fixed outstanding amount.
When estimated in accordance with this paragraph, alpha shall be no lower than 1,2.
Article 285
Exposure value for netting sets subject to a margin agreement
If the netting set is subject to a margin agreement and daily mark-to-market valuation, the institution shall calculate Effective EPE as set out in this paragraph. If the model captures the effects of margining when estimating EE, the institution may, subject to the permission of the competent authority, use the model's EE measure directly in the equation in Article 284(5). Competent authorities shall grant such permission only if they verify that the model properly captures the effects of margining when estimating EE. An institution that has not received such permission shall use one of the following Effective EPE measures:
Effective EPE, calculated without taking into account any collateral held or posted by way of margin plus any collateral that has been posted to the counterparty independent of the daily valuation and margining process or current exposure;
Effective EPE, calculated as the potential increase in exposure over the margin period of risk, plus the larger of:
the current exposure including all collateral currently held or posted, other than collateral called or in dispute;
the largest net exposure, including collateral under the margin agreement, that would not trigger a collateral call. This amount shall reflect all applicable thresholds, minimum transfer amounts, independent amounts and initial margins under the margin agreement.
For the purposes of point (b), institutions shall calculate the add-on as the expected positive change of the mark-to-market value of the transactions during the margin period of risk. Changes in the value of collateral shall be reflected using the Supervisory Volatility Adjustments Approach in accordance with Section 4 of Chapter 4 or the own estimates of volatility adjustments of the Financial Collateral Comprehensive Method, but no collateral payments shall be assumed during the margin period of risk. The margin period of risk is subject to the minimum periods set out in paragraphs 2 to 5.
For transactions subject to daily re-margining and mark-to-market valuation, the margin period of risk used for the purpose of modelling the exposure value with margin agreements shall not be less than:
5 business days for netting sets consisting only of repurchase transactions, securities or commodities lending or borrowing transactions and margin lending transactions;
10 business days for all other netting sets.
Points (a) and (b) of paragraph 2 shall be subject to the following exceptions:
for all netting sets where the number of trades exceeds 5 000 at any point during a quarter, the margin period of risk for the following quarter shall not be less than 20 business days. This exception shall not apply to institutions' trade exposures;
for netting sets containing one or more trades involving either illiquid collateral, or an OTC derivative that cannot be easily replaced, the margin period of risk shall not be less than 20 business days.
An institution shall determine whether collateral is illiquid or whether OTC derivatives cannot be easily replaced in the context of stressed market conditions, characterised by the absence of continuously active markets where a counterparty would, within two days or fewer, obtain multiple price quotations that would not move the market or represent a price reflecting a market discount (in the case of collateral) or premium (in the case of an OTC derivative).
An institution shall consider whether trades or securities it holds as collateral are concentrated in a particular counterparty and if that counterparty exited the market precipitously whether the institution would be able to replace those trades or securities.
For re-margining with a periodicity of N days, the margin period of risk shall be at least equal to the period specified in paragraphs 2 and 3, F, plus N days minus one day. That is:
Margin Period of Risk = F + N – 1
Article 286
Management of CCR — Policies, processes and systems
An institution shall establish and maintain a CCR management framework, consisting of:
policies, processes and systems to ensure the identification, measurement, management, approval and internal reporting of CCR;
procedures for ensuring that those policies, processes and systems are complied with.
Those policies, processes and systems shall be conceptually sound, implemented with integrity and documented. The documentation shall include an explanation of the empirical techniques used to measure CCR.
The CCR management framework required by paragraph 1 shall take account of market, liquidity, and legal and operational risks that are associated with CCR. In particular, the framework shall ensure that the institution complies with the following principles:
it does not undertake business with a counterparty without assessing its creditworthiness;
it takes due account of settlement and pre-settlement credit risk;
it manages such risks as comprehensively as practicable at the counterparty level by aggregating CCR exposures with other credit exposures and at the firm-wide level.
An institution using the IMM shall ensure that its CCR management framework accounts to the satisfaction of the competent authority for the liquidity risks of all of the following:
potential incoming margin calls in the context of exchanges of variation margin or other margin types, such as initial or independent margin, under adverse market shocks;
potential incoming calls for the return of excess collateral posted by counterparties;
calls resulting from a potential downgrade of its own external credit quality assessment.
An institution shall ensure that the nature and horizon of collateral re-use is consistent with its liquidity needs and does not jeopardise its ability to post or return collateral in a timely manner.
Article 287
Organisation structures for CCR management
An institution using the IMM shall establish and maintain:
a risk control unit that complies with paragraph 2;
a collateral management unit that complies with paragraph 3.
The risk control unit shall be responsible for the design and implementation of its CCR management, including the initial and on-going validation of the model, and shall carry out the following functions and meet the following requirements:
it shall be responsible for the design and implementation of the CCR management system of the institution;
it shall produce daily reports on and analyse the output of the institution's risk measurement model. That analysis shall include an evaluation of the relationship between measures of CCR exposure values and trading limits;
it shall control input data integrity and produce and analyse reports on the output of the institution's risk measurement model, including an evaluation of the relationship between measures of risk exposure and credit and trading limits;
it shall be independent from units responsible for originating, renewing or trading exposures and free from undue influence;
it shall be adequately staffed;
it shall report directly to the senior management of the institution;
its work shall be closely integrated into the day-to-day credit risk management process of the institution;
its output shall be an integral part of the process of planning, monitoring and controlling the institution's credit and overall risk profile.
The collateral management unit shall carry out the following tasks and functions:
calculating and making margin calls, managing margin call disputes and reporting levels of independent amounts, initial margins and variation margins accurately on a daily basis;
controlling the integrity of the data used to make margin calls, and ensuring that it is consistent and reconciled regularly with all relevant sources of data within the institution;
tracking the extent of re-use of collateral and any amendment of the rights of the institution to or in connection with the collateral that it posts;
reporting to the appropriate level of management the types of collateral assets that are reused, and the terms of such reuse including instrument, credit quality and maturity;
tracking concentration to individual types of collateral assets accepted by the institution;
reporting collateral management information on a regular basis, but at least quarterly, to senior management, including information on the type of collateral received and posted, the size, aging and cause for margin call disputes. That internal reporting shall also reflect trends in these figures.
Article 288
Review of CCR management system
An institution shall regularly conduct an independent review of its CCR management system through its internal auditing process. That review shall include both the activities of the control and collateral management units required by Article 287 and shall specifically address, as a minimum:
the adequacy of the documentation of the CCR management system and process required by Article 286;
the organisation of the CCR control unit required by Article 287(1)(a);
the organisation of the collateral management unit required by Article 287(1)(b);
the integration of CCR measures into daily risk management;
the approval process for risk pricing models and valuation systems used by front and back-office personnel;
the validation of any significant change in the CCR measurement process;
the scope of CCR captured by the risk measurement model;
the integrity of the management information system;
the accuracy and completeness of CCR data;
the accurate reflection of legal terms in collateral and netting agreements into exposure value measurements;
the verification of the consistency, timeliness and reliability of data sources used to run models, including the independence of such data sources;
the accuracy and appropriateness of volatility and correlation assumptions;
the accuracy of valuation and risk transformation calculations;
the verification of the model's accuracy through frequent back-testing as set out in points (b) to (e) of Article 293(1);
the compliance of the CCR control unit and collateral management unit with the relevant regulatory requirements.
Article 289
Use test
Article 290
Stress testing
It shall apply at least quarterly multifactor stress testing scenarios and assess material non-directional risks including yield curve exposure and basis risks. Multiple-factor stress tests shall, at a minimum, address the following scenarios in which the following occurs:
severe economic or market events have occurred;
broad market liquidity has decreased significantly;
a large financial intermediary is liquidating positions.
Article 291
Wrong-Way Risk
For the purposes of this Article:
‘General Wrong-Way risk’ arises when the likelihood of default by counterparties is positively correlated with general market risk factors;
‘Specific Wrong-Way risk’ arises when future exposure to a specific counterparty is positively correlated with the counterparty's PD due to the nature of the transactions with the counterparty. An institution shall be considered to be exposed to Specific Wrong-Way risk if the future exposure to a specific counterparty is expected to be high when the counterparty's probability of a default is also high.
Institutions shall calculate the own funds requirements for CCR in relation to transactions where Specific Wrong-Way risk has been identified and where there exists a legal connection between the counterparty and the issuer of the underlying of the OTC derivative or the underlying of the transactions referred to in points (b), (c) and (d) of Article 273(2)), in accordance with the following principles:
the instruments where Specific Wrong-Way risk exists shall not be included in the same netting set as other transactions with the counterparty, and shall each be treated as a separate netting set;
within any such separate netting set, for single-name credit default swaps the exposure value equals the full expected loss in the value of the remaining fair value of the underlying instruments based on the assumption that the underlying issuer is in liquidation;
LGD for an institution using the approach set out in Chapter 3 shall be 100 % for such swap transactions;
for an institution using the approach set out in Chapter 2, the applicable risk weight shall be that of an unsecured transaction;
for all other transactions referencing a single name in any such separate netting set, the calculation of the exposure value shall be consistent with the assumption of a jump-to-default of those underlying obligations where the issuer is legally connected with the counterparty. For transactions referencing a basket of names or index, the jump-to-default of the respective underlying obligations where the issuer is legally connected with the counterparty, shall be applied, if material;
to the extent that this uses existing market risk calculations for own funds requirements for incremental default and migration risk as set out in Title IV, Chapter 5, Section 4 that already contain an LGD assumption, the LGD in the formula used shall be 100 %.
Article 292
Integrity of the modelling process
An institution shall ensure the integrity of modelling process as set out in Article 284 by adopting at least the following measures:
the model shall reflect transaction terms and specifications in a timely, complete, and conservative fashion;
those terms shall include at least contract notional amounts, maturity, reference assets, margining arrangements and netting arrangements;
those terms and specifications shall be maintained in a database that is subject to formal and periodic audit;
a process for recognising netting arrangements that requires legal staff to verify that netting under those arrangements is legally enforceable;
the verification required under point (d) shall be entered into the database mentioned in point (c) by an independent unit;
the transmission of transaction terms and specification data to the EPE model shall be subject to internal audit;
there shall be processes for formal reconciliation between the model and source data systems to verify on an ongoing basis that transaction terms and specifications are being reflected in EPE correctly or at least conservatively.
To calculate the Effective EPE using a stress calibration, an institution shall calibrate Effective EPE using either three years of data that includes a period of stress to the credit default spreads of its counterparties or market implied data from such a period of stress.
The requirements in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 shall be applied by the institution for that purpose.
The competent authorities shall require an institution to adjust the stress calibration if the exposures of those benchmark portfolios deviate substantially from each other.
An institution shall subject the model to a validation process that is clearly articulated in the institutions' policies and procedures. That validation process shall:
specify the kind of testing needed to ensure model integrity and identify conditions under which the assumptions underlying the model are inappropriate and may therefore result in an understatement of EPE;
include a review of the comprehensiveness of the model.
An institution shall monitor the relevant risks and have processes in place to adjust its estimation of Effective EPE when those risks become significant. In complying with this paragraph, the institution shall:
identify and manage its exposures to Specific Wrong-Way risk arising as specified in Article 291(1)(b) and exposures to General Wrong-Way risk arising as specified in Article 291(1)(a);
for exposures with a rising risk profile after one year, compare on a regular basis the estimate of a relevant measure of exposure over one year with the same exposure measure over the life of the exposure;
for exposures with a residual maturity below one year, compare on a regular basis the replacement cost (current exposure) and the realised exposure profile, and store data that would allow such a comparison.
Article 293
Requirements for the risk management system
An institution shall comply with the following requirements:
it shall meet the qualitative requirements set out in Part Three, Title IV, Chapter 5;
it shall conduct a regular programme of back-testing, comparing the risk measures generated by the model with realised risk measures, and hypothetical changes based on static positions with realised measures;
it shall carry out an initial validation and an on-going periodic review of its CCR exposure model and the risk measures generated by it. The validation and review shall be independent of the model development;
the management body and senior management shall be involved in the risk control process and shall ensure that adequate resources are devoted to credit and counterparty credit risk control. In this regard, the daily reports prepared by the independent risk control unit established in accordance Article 287(1)(a) shall be reviewed by a level of management with sufficient seniority and authority to enforce both reductions of positions taken by individual traders and reductions in the overall risk exposure of the institution;
the internal risk measurement exposure model shall be integrated into the day-to-day risk management process of the institution;
the risk measurement system shall be used in conjunction with internal trading and exposure limits. In this regard, exposure limits shall be related to the institution's risk measurement model in a manner that is consistent over time and that is well understood by traders, the credit function and senior management;
an institution shall ensure that its risk management system is well documented. In particular, it shall maintain a documented set of internal policies, controls and procedures concerning the operation of the risk measurement system, and arrangements to ensure that those policies are complied with;
an independent review of the risk measurement system shall be carried out regularly in the institution's own internal auditing process. This review shall include both the activities of the business trading units and of the independent risk control unit. A review of the overall risk management process shall take place at regular intervals (and no less than once a year) and shall specifically address, as a minimum, all items referred to in Article 288;
the on-going validation of counterparty credit risk models, including back-testing, shall be reviewed periodically by a level of management with sufficient authority to decide the action that will be taken to address weaknesses in the models.
Article 294
Validation requirements
As part of the initial and on-going validation of its CCR exposure model and its risk measures, an institution shall ensure that the following requirements are met:
the institution shall carry out back-testing using historical data on movements in market risk factors prior to the permission by the competent authorities in accordance with Article 283(1). That back-testing shall consider a number of distinct prediction time horizons out to at least one year, over a range of various initialisation dates and covering a wide range of market conditions;
the institution using the approach set out in Article 285(1)(b) shall regularly validate its model to test whether realised current exposures are consistent with prediction over all margin periods within one year. If some of the trades in the netting set have a maturity of less than one year, and the netting set has higher risk factor sensitivities without these trades, the validation shall take this into account;
it shall back-test the performance of its CCR exposure model and the model's relevant risk measures as well as the market risk factor predictions. For collateralised trades, the prediction time horizons considered shall include those reflecting typical margin periods of risk applied in collateralised or margined trading;
if the model validation indicates that Effective EPE is underestimated, the institution shall take the action necessary to address the inaccuracy of the model;
it shall test the pricing models used to calculate CCR exposure for a given scenario of future shocks to market risk factors as part of the initial and on-going model validation process. Pricing models for options shall account for the nonlinearity of option value with respect to market risk factors;
the CCR exposure model shall capture the transaction-specific information necessary to be able to aggregate exposures at the level of the netting set. An institution shall verify that transactions are assigned to the appropriate netting set within the model;
the CCR exposure model shall include transaction-specific information to capture the effects of margining. It shall take into account both the current amount of margin and margin that would be passed between counterparties in the future. Such a model shall account for the nature of margin agreements that are unilateral or bilateral, the frequency of margin calls, the margin period of risk, the minimum threshold of un-margined exposure the institution is willing to accept, and the minimum transfer amount. Such a model shall either estimate the mark-to-market change in the value of collateral posted or apply the rules set out in Chapter 4;
the model validation process shall include static, historical back-testing on representative counterparty portfolios. An institution shall conduct such back-testing on a number of representative counterparty portfolios that are actual or hypothetical at regular intervals. Those representative portfolios shall be chosen on the basis of their sensitivity to the material risk factors and combinations of risk factors to which the institution is exposed;
an institution shall conduct back-testing that is designed to test the key assumptions of the CCR exposure model and the relevant risk measures, including the modelled relationship between tenors of the same risk factor, and the modelled relationships between risk factors;
the performance of CCR exposure models and its risk measures shall be subject to appropriate back-testing practice. The back testing programme shall be capable of identifying poor performance in an EPE model's risk measures;
an institution shall validate its CCR exposure models and all risk measures out to time horizons commensurate with the maturity of trades for which exposure is calculated using IMM in accordance to the Article 283;
an institution shall regularly test the pricing models used to calculate counterparty exposure against appropriate independent benchmarks as part of the on-going model validation process;
the on-going validation of an institution's CCR exposure model and the relevant risk measures shall include an assessment of the adequacy of the recent performance;
the frequency with which the parameters of an CCR exposure model are updated shall be assessed by an institution as part of the initial and on-going validation process;
the initial and on-going validation of CCR exposure models shall assess whether or not the counterparty level and netting set exposure calculations of exposure are appropriate.
Section 7
Contractual netting
Article 295
Recognition of contractual netting as risk-reducing
Institutions may treat as risk reducing in accordance with Article 298 only the following types of contractual netting agreements where the netting agreement has been recognised by competent authorities in accordance with Article 296 and where the institution meets the requirements set out in Article 297:
bilateral contracts for novation between an institution and its counterparty under which mutual claims and obligations are automatically amalgamated in such a way that the novation fixes one single net amount each time it applies so as to create a single new contract that replaces all former contracts and all obligations between parties pursuant to those contracts and is binding on the parties;
other bilateral agreements between an institution and its counterparty;
contractual cross-product netting agreements for institutions that have received the approval to use the method set out in Section 6 for transactions falling under the scope of that method. Competent authorities shall report to EBA a list of the contractual cross-product netting agreements approved.
Netting across transactions entered into by different legal entities of a group shall not be recognised for the purposes of calculating the own funds requirements.
Article 296
Recognition of contractual netting agreements
The following conditions shall be fulfilled by all contractual netting agreements used by an institution for the purposes of determining exposure value in this Part:
the institution has concluded a contractual netting agreement with its counterparty which creates a single legal obligation, covering all included transactions, such that, in the event of default by the counterparty it would be entitled to receive or obliged to pay only the net sum of the positive and negative mark-to-market values of included individual transactions;
the institution has made available to the competent authorities written and reasoned legal opinions to the effect that, in the event of a legal challenge of the netting agreement, the institution's claims and obligations would not exceed those referred to in point (a). The legal opinion shall refer to the applicable law:
the jurisdiction in which the counterparty is incorporated;
if a branch of an undertaking is involved, which is located in a country other than that where the undertaking is incorporated, the jurisdiction in which the branch is located;
the jurisdiction whose law governs the individual transactions included in the netting agreement;
the jurisdiction whose law governs any contract or agreement necessary to effect the contractual netting;
credit risk to each counterparty is aggregated to arrive at a single legal exposure across transactions with each counterparty. This aggregation shall be factored into credit limit purposes and internal capital purposes;
the contract shall not contain any clause which, in the event of default of a counterparty, permits a non-defaulting counterparty to make limited payments only, or no payments at all, to the estate of the defaulting party, even if the defaulting party is a net creditor (i.e. walk-away clause).
If any of the competent authorities are not satisfied that the contractual netting is legally valid and enforceable under the law of each of the jurisdictions referred to in point (b) the contractual netting agreement shall not be recognised as risk-reducing for either of the counterparties. Competent authorities shall inform each other accordingly.
The legal opinions referred to in point (b) may be drawn up by reference to types of contractual netting. The following additional conditions shall be fulfilled by contractual cross-product netting agreements:
the net sum referred to in point (a) of paragraph 2 is the net sum of the positive and negative close out values of any included individual bilateral master agreement and of the positive and negative mark-to-market value of the individual transactions (the ‘cross-product net amount’);
the legal opinions referred to in point (b) of paragraph 2 shall address the validity and enforceability of the entire contractual cross-product netting agreement under its terms and the impact of the netting arrangement on the material provisions of any included individual bilateral master agreement.
Article 297
Obligations of institutions
Taking into account the contractual cross-product netting agreement, the institution shall continue to comply with the requirements for the recognition of bilateral netting and the requirements of Chapter 4 for the recognition of credit risk mitigation, as applicable, with respect to each included individual bilateral master agreement and transaction.
Article 298
Effects of recognition of netting as risk-reducing
Netting for the purposes of Sections 3 to 6 shall be recognised as set out in those Sections.
Section 8
Items in the trading book
Article 299
Items in the trading book
When calculating risk-weighted exposure amounts for counterparty risk of items in the trading book, institutions shall comply with the following principles:
▼M8 —————
institutions shall not use the Financial Collateral Simple Method set out in Article 222 for the recognition of the effects of financial collateral;
in the case of repurchase transactions and securities or commodities lending or borrowing transactions booked in the trading book, institutions may recognise as eligible collateral all financial instruments and commodities that are eligible to be included in the trading book;
for exposures arising from OTC derivative instruments booked in the trading book, institutions may recognise commodities that are eligible to be included in the trading book as eligible collateral;
for the purposes of calculating volatility adjustments where such financial instruments or commodities which are not eligible under Chapter 4 are lent, sold or provided, or borrowed, purchased or received by way of collateral or otherwise under such a transaction, and an institution is using the Supervisory Volatility Adjustments Approach under Section 3 of Chapter 4, institutions shall treat such instruments and commodities in the same way as non-main index equities listed on a recognised exchange;
where an institution is using the Own Estimates of Volatility adjustments Approach under Section 3 of Chapter 4 in respect of financial instruments or commodities which are not eligible under Chapter 4, it shall calculate volatility adjustments for each individual item. Where an institution has obtained the approval to use the internal models approach defined in Chapter 4, it may also apply that approach in the trading book;
in relation to the recognition of master netting agreements covering repurchase transactions, securities or commodities lending or borrowing transactions, or other capital market-driven transactions, institutions shall only recognise netting across positions in the trading book and the non-trading book when the netted transactions fulfil the following conditions:
all transactions are marked to market daily;
any items borrowed, purchased or received under the transactions may be recognised as eligible financial collateral under Chapter 4 without the application of points (c) to (f) of this paragraph;
where a credit derivative included in the trading book forms part of an internal hedge and the credit protection is recognised under this Regulation in accordance with Article 204, institutions shall apply one of the following approaches:
treat it as if there were no counterparty risk arising from the position in that credit derivative;
consistently include for the purpose of calculating the own funds requirements for counterparty credit risk all credit derivatives in the trading book forming part of internal hedges or purchased as protection against a CCR exposure where the credit protection is recognised as eligible under Chapter 4.
Section 9
Own funds requirements for exposures to a central counterparty
Article 300
Definitions
For the purposes of this Section and of Part Seven, the following definitions apply:
‘bankruptcy remote’, in relation to client assets, means that effective arrangements exist which ensure that those assets will not be available to the creditors of a CCP or of a clearing member in the event of the insolvency of that CCP or clearing member respectively, or that the assets will not be available to the clearing member to cover losses it incurred following the default of a client or clients other than those that provided those assets;
‘CCP-related transaction’ means a contract or a transaction listed in Article 301(1) between a client and a clearing member that is directly related to a contract or a transaction listed in that paragraph between that clearing member and a CCP;
‘clearing member’ means a clearing member as defined in point (14) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012;
‘client’ means a client as defined in point (15) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 or an undertaking that has established indirect clearing arrangements with a clearing member in accordance with Article 4(3) of that Regulation;
‘cash transaction’ means a transaction in cash, debt instruments or equities, a spot foreign exchange transaction or a spot commodities transaction; however, repurchase transactions, securities or commodities lending transactions, and securities or commodities borrowing transactions, are not cash transactions;
‘indirect clearing arrangement’ means an arrangement that meets the conditions set out in the second subparagraph of Article 4(3) of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012;
‘higher-level client’ means an entity providing clearing services to a lower-level client;
‘lower-level client’ means an entity accessing the services of a CCP through a higher-level client;
‘multi-level client structure’ means an indirect clearing arrangement under which clearing services are provided to an institution by an entity which is not a clearing member, but is itself a client of a clearing member or of a higher-level client;
‘unfunded contribution to a default fund’ means a contribution that an institution that acts as a clearing member has contractually committed to provide to a CCP after the CCP has depleted its default fund to cover the losses it incurred following the default of one or more of its clearing members;
‘fully guaranteed deposit lending or borrowing transaction’ means a fully collateralised money market transaction in which two counterparties exchange deposits and a CCP interposes itself between them to ensure the performance of those counterparties' payment obligations.
Article 301
Material scope
This Section applies to the following contracts and transactions, for as long as they are outstanding with a CCP:
the derivative contracts listed in Annex II and credit derivatives;
securities financing transactions and fully guaranteed deposit lending or borrowing transactions; and
long settlement transactions.
This Section does not apply to exposures arising from the settlement of cash transactions. Institutions shall apply the treatment laid down in Title V to trade exposures arising from those transactions and a 0 % risk weight to default fund contributions covering only those transactions. Institutions shall apply the treatment set out in Article 307 to default fund contributions that cover any of the contracts listed in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in addition to cash transactions.
For the purposes of this Section, the following requirements shall apply:
the initial margin shall not include contributions to a CCP for mutualised loss sharing arrangements;
the initial margin shall include collateral deposited by an institution acting as a clearing member or by a client in excess of the minimum amount required respectively by the CCP or by the institution acting as a clearing member, provided the CCP or the institution acting as a clearing member may, in appropriate cases, prevent the institution acting as a clearing member or the client from withdrawing such excess collateral;
where a CCP uses the initial margin to mutualise losses among its clearing members, institutions that act as clearing members shall treat that initial margin as a default fund contribution.
Article 302
Monitoring of exposures to CCPs
Article 303
Treatment of clearing members' exposures to CCPs
An institution that acts as a clearing member, either for its own purposes or as a financial intermediary between a client and a CCP, shall calculate the own funds requirements for its exposures to a CCP as follows:
it shall apply the treatment set out in Article 306 to its trade exposures with the CCP;
it shall apply the treatment set out in Article 307 to its default fund contributions to the CCP.
Article 304
Treatment of clearing members' exposures to clients
Where an institution that acts as a clearing member uses the methods set out in Section 3 or 6 of this Chapter to calculate the own funds requirement for its exposures, the following provisions shall apply:
by way of derogation from Article 285(2), the institution may use a margin period of risk of at least five business days for its exposures to a client;
the institution shall apply a margin period of risk of at least 10 business days for its exposures to a CCP;
by way of derogation from Article 285(3), where a netting set included in the calculation meets the condition set out in point (a) of that paragraph, the institution may disregard the limit set out in that point, provided that the netting set does not meet the condition set out in point (b) of that paragraph and does not contain disputed trades or exotic options;
where a CCP retains variation margin against a transaction, and the institution's collateral is not protected against the insolvency of the CCP, the institution shall apply a margin period of risk that is the lower of one year and the remaining maturity of the transaction, with a floor of 10 business days.
In the case of a multi-level client structure, the treatment set out in the first subparagraph may be applied at each level of that structure.
Article 305
Treatment of clients' exposures
Without prejudice to the approach specified in paragraph 1, where an institution is a client, it may calculate the own funds requirements for its trade exposures for CCP-related transactions with its clearing member in accordance with Article 306 provided that all the following conditions are met:
the positions and assets of that institution related to those transactions are distinguished and segregated, at the level of both the clearing member and the CCP, from the positions and assets of both the clearing member and the other clients of that clearing member and as a result of that distinction and segregation those positions and assets are bankruptcy remote in the event of the default or insolvency of the clearing member or one or more of its other clients;
laws, regulations, rules and contractual arrangements applicable to or binding that institution or the CCP facilitate the transfer of the client's positions relating to those contracts and transactions and of the corresponding collateral to another clearing member within the applicable margin period of risk in the event of default or insolvency of the original clearing member. In such circumstance, the client's positions and the collateral shall be transferred at market value unless the client requests to close out the position at market value;
the client has conducted a sufficiently thorough legal review, which it has kept up to date, that substantiates that the arrangements that ensure that the condition set out in point (b) is met are legal, valid, binding and enforceable under the relevant laws of the relevant jurisdiction or jurisdictions;
the CCP is a QCCP.
When assessing its compliance with the condition set out in point (b) of the first subparagraph, an institution may take into account any clear precedents of transfers of client positions and of corresponding collateral at a CCP, and any industry intent to continue with that practice.
Article 306
Own funds requirements for trade exposures
An institution shall apply the following treatment to its trade exposures with CCPs:
it shall apply a risk weight of 2 % to the exposure values of all its trade exposures with QCCPs;
it shall apply the risk weight used for the Standardised Approach to credit risk as set out in Article 107(2)(b) to all its trade exposures with non-qualifying CCPs;
where an institution acts as a financial intermediary between a client and a CCP, and the terms of the CCP-related transaction stipulate that the institution is not required to reimburse the client for any losses suffered due to changes in the value of that transaction in the event that the CCP defaults, that institution may set the exposure value of the trade exposure with the CCP that corresponds to that CCP-related transaction to zero;
where an institution acts as a financial intermediary between a client and a CCP, and the terms of the CCP-related transaction stipulate that the institution is required to reimburse the client for any losses suffered due to changes in the value of that transaction in the event that the CCP defaults, that institution shall apply the treatment in point (a) or (b), as applicable, to the trade exposure with the CCP that corresponds to that CCP-related transaction.
Article 307
Own funds requirements for contributions to the default fund of a CCP
An institution that acts as a clearing member shall apply the following treatment to its exposures arising from its contributions to the default fund of a CCP:
it shall calculate the own funds requirement for its pre-funded contributions to the default fund of a QCCP in accordance with the approach set out in Article 308;
it shall calculate the own funds requirement for its pre-funded and unfunded contributions to the default fund of a non-qualifying CCP in accordance with the approach set out in Article 309;
it shall calculate the own funds requirement for its unfunded contributions to the default fund of a QCCP in accordance with the treatment set out in Article 310.
Article 308
Own funds requirements for pre-funded contributions to the default fund of a QCCP
An institution shall calculate the own funds requirement to cover the exposure arising from its pre-funded contribution as follows:
where:
Ki |
= |
the own funds requirement; |
i |
= |
the index denoting the clearing member; |
KCCP |
= |
the hypothetical capital of the QCCP communicated to the institution by the QCCP in accordance with Article 50c of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012; |
DFi |
= |
the pre-funded contribution; |
DFCCP |
= |
the pre-funded financial resources of the CCP communicated to the institution by the CCP in accordance with Article 50c of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012; and |
DFCM |
= |
the sum of pre-funded contributions of all clearing members of the QCCP communicated to the institution by the QCCP in accordance with Article 50c of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012. |
▼M8 —————
Article 309
Own funds requirements for pre-funded contributions to the default fund of a non-qualifying CCP and for unfunded contributions to a non-qualifying CCP
An institution shall apply the following formula to calculate the own funds requirement for the exposures arising from its pre-funded contributions to the default fund of a non-qualifying CCP and from unfunded contributions to such CCP:
K |
= |
the own funds requirement; |
DF |
= |
the pre-funded contributions to the default fund of a non-qualifying CCP; and |
UC |
= |
the unfunded contributions to the default fund of a non-qualifying CCP. |
Article 310
Own funds requirements for unfunded contributions to the default fund of a QCCP
An institution shall apply a 0 % risk weight to its unfunded contributions to the default fund of a QCCP.
Article 311
Own funds requirements for exposures to CCPs that cease to meet certain conditions
Where the condition set out in paragraph 1 is met, institutions shall, within three months of becoming aware of the circumstance referred to therein, or at an earlier time if the competent authorities of those institutions so require, do the following with respect to their exposures to that CCP:
apply the treatment set out in point (b) of Article 306(1) to their trade exposures to that CCP;
apply the treatment set out in Article 309 to their pre-funded contributions to the default fund of that CCP and to its unfunded contributions to that CCP;
treat their exposures to that CCP, other than the exposures listed in points (a) and (b) of this paragraph, as exposures to a corporate in accordance with the Standardised Approach for credit risk set out in Chapter 2.
TITLE III
OWN FUNDS REQUIREMENTS FOR OPERATIONAL RISK
CHAPTER 1
General principles governing the use of the different approaches
Article 312
Permission and notification
Competent authorities shall permit institutions to use an alternative relevant indicator for the business lines of retail banking and commercial banking where the conditions set out in Articles 319(2) and 320 are met.
Institutions shall also apply for permission from their competent authorities where they want to implement material extensions and changes to those Advanced Measurement Approaches. Competent authorities shall grant the permission only where institutions would continue to meet the standards specified in the first subparagraph following those material extensions and changes.
EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify the following:
the assessment methodology under which the competent authorities permit institutions to use Advanced Measurement Approaches;
the conditions for assessing the materiality of extensions and changes to the Advanced Measurement Approaches;
the modalities of the notification required in paragraph 3.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 31 December 2014.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 313
Reverting to the use of less sophisticated approaches
An institution may only revert to the use of a less sophisticated approach for operational risk where both the following conditions are met:
the institution has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the competent authority that the use of a less sophisticated approach is not proposed in order to reduce the operational risk related own funds requirements of the institution, is necessary on the basis of nature and complexity of the institution and would not have a material adverse impact on the solvency of the institution or its ability to manage operational risk effectively;
the institution has received the prior permission of the competent authority.
Article 314
Combined use of different approaches
An institution may use an Advanced Measurement Approach in combination with either the Basic Indicator Approach or the Standardised Approach, where both of the following conditions are met:
the combination of Approaches used by the institution captures all its operational risks and competent authorities are satisfied with the methodology used by the institution to cover different activities, geographical locations, legal structures or other relevant divisions determined on an internal basis;
the criteria set out in Article 320 and the standards set out in Articles 321 and 322 are fulfilled for the part of activities covered by the Standardised Approach and the Advanced Measurement Approaches respectively.
For institutions that want to use an Advanced Measurement Approach in combination with either the Basic Indicator Approach or the Standardised Approach competent authorities shall impose the following additional conditions for granting permission:
on the date of implementation of an Advanced Measurement Approach, a significant part of the institution's operational risks are captured by that Approach;
the institution takes a commitment to apply the Advanced Measurement Approach across a material part of its operations within a time schedule that was submitted to and approved by its competent authorities.
A competent authority shall grant such permission only where the institution has committed to apply the Standardised Approach within a time schedule that was submitted to and approved by the competent authority.
EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify the following:
the conditions that competent authorities shall use when assessing the methodology referred to in point (a) of paragraph 2;
the conditions that the competent authorities shall use when deciding whether to impose the additional conditions referred to in paragraph 3.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 31 December 2016.
Power is delegated to the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify the following:
the components of the business indicator, and their use, by developing lists of typical sub-items, taking into account international regulatory standards and, where appropriate, the prudential boundary defined in Part Three, Title I, Chapter 3;
the elements listed in paragraph 7 of this Article.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 10 January 2026.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
EBA shall submit those draft implementing technical standards to the Commission by 10 January 2026.
Power is conferred on the Commission to adopt the implementing technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Article 15 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
CHAPTER 2
Basic Indicator Approach
Article 315
Own funds requirement
Institutions shall calculate the average over three years of the relevant indicator on the basis of the last three twelve-monthly observations at the end of the financial year. When audited figures are not available, institutions may use business estimates.
EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards to specify the following:
how institutions are to determine the adjustments to the business indicator referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2;
the conditions under which competent authorities are able to grant the permission referred to in paragraph 2;
the timing for the adjustments referred to in paragraph 2.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 10 January 2026.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 316
Relevant indicator
For institutions applying accounting standards established by Directive 86/635/EEC, based on the accounting categories for the profit and loss account of institutions under Article 27 of that Directive, the relevant indicator is the sum of the elements listed in Table 1 of this paragraph. Institutions shall include each element in the sum with its positive or negative sign.
Table 1
1 Interest receivable and similar income
2 Interest payable and similar charges
3 Income from shares and other variable/fixed-yield securities
4 Commissions/fees receivable
5 Commissions/fees payable
6 Net profit or net loss on financial operations
7 Other operating income
Institutions shall adjust these elements to reflect the following qualifications:
institutions shall calculate the relevant indicator before the deduction of any provisions and operating expenses. Institutions shall include in operating expenses fees paid for outsourcing services rendered by third parties which are not a parent or subsidiary of the institution or a subsidiary of a parent which is also the parent of the institution. Institutions may use expenditure on the outsourcing of services rendered by third parties to reduce the relevant indicator where the expenditure is incurred from an undertaking subject to rules under, or equivalent to, this Regulation;
institutions shall not use the following elements in the calculation of the relevant indicator:
realised profits/losses from the sale of non-trading book items;
income from extraordinary or irregular items;
income derived from insurance.
when revaluation of trading items is part of the profit and loss statement, institutions may include revaluation. When institutions apply Article 36(2) of Directive 86/635/EEC, they shall include revaluation booked in the profit and loss account.
By way of derogation from the first subparagraph of this paragraph, institutions may choose not to apply the accounting categories for the profit and loss account under Article 27 of Directive 86/635/EEC to financial and operating leases for the purpose of calculating the relevant indicator, and may instead:
include interest income from financial and operating leases and profits from leased assets in the category referred to in point 1 of Table 1;
include interest expense from financial and operating leases, losses, depreciation and impairment of operating leased assets in the category referred to in point 2 of Table 1.
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 10 January 2026.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
CHAPTER 3
Standardised Approach
Article 317
Own funds requirement
Where an institution can prove to its competent authority that, due to a merger, an acquisition or a disposal of entities or activities, using a three year average to calculate the relevant indicator would lead to a biased estimation for the own funds requirement for operational risk, the competent authority may permit institutions to amend the calculation in a way that would take into account such events and shall duly inform EBA thereof. In such circumstances, the competent authority may, on its own initiative, also require an institution to amend the calculation.
Where an institution has been in operation for less than three years it may use forward-looking business estimates in calculating the relevant indicator, provided that it starts using historical data as soon as it is available.
Table 2
Business line |
List of activities |
Percentage (beta factor) |
Corporate finance |
Underwriting of financial instruments or placing of financial instruments on a firm commitment basis Services related to underwriting Investment advice Advice to undertakings on capital structure, industrial strategy and related matters and advice and services relating to the mergers and the purchase of undertakings Investment research and financial analysis and other forms of general recommendation relating to transactions in financial instruments |
18 % |
Trading and sales |
Dealing on own account Money broking Reception and transmission of orders in relation to one or more financial instruments Execution of orders on behalf of clients Placing of financial instruments without a firm commitment basis Operation of Multilateral Trading Facilities |
18 % |
Retail brokerage (Activities with natural persons or with SMEs meeting the criteria set out in Article 123 for the retail exposure class) |
Reception and transmission of orders in relation to one or more financial instruments Execution of orders on behalf of clients Placing of financial instruments without a firm commitment basis |
12 % |
Commercial banking |
Acceptance of deposits and other repayable funds Lending Financial leasing Guarantees and commitments |
15 % |
Retail banking (Activities with natural persons or with SMEs meeting the criteria set out in Article 123 for the retail exposure class) |
Acceptance of deposits and other repayable funds Lending Financial leasing Guarantees and commitments |
12 % |
Payment and settlement |
Money transmission services, Issuing and administering means of payment |
18 % |
Agency services |
Safekeeping and administration of financial instruments for the account of clients, including custodianship and related services such as cash/collateral management |
15 % |
Asset management |
Portfolio management Managing of UCITS Other forms of asset management |
12 % |
EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by 10 January 2026.
Power is delegated to the Commission to supplement this Regulation by adopting the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph of this paragraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010.
Article 318
Principles for business line mapping
Institutions shall apply the following principles for business line mapping:
institutions shall map all activities into the business lines in a mutually exclusive and jointly exhaustive manner;
institutions shall allocate any activity which cannot be readily mapped into the business line framework, but which represents an ancillary activity to an activity included in the framework, to the business line it supports. Where more than one business line is supported through the ancillary activity, institutions shall use an objective-mapping criterion;
where an activity cannot be mapped into a particular business line then institutions shall use the business line yielding the highest percentage. The same business line equally applies to any ancillary activity associated with that activity;
institutions may use internal pricing methods to allocate the relevant indicator between business lines. Costs generated in one business line which are imputable to a different business line may be reallocated to the business line to which they pertain;
the mapping of activities into business lines for operational risk capital purposes shall be consistent with the categories institutions use for credit and market risks;