15.12.2012   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 388/60

1.

The European Banking Authority (hereinafter "the Authority"), which is located in London, was established by Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council (1). The Authority’s task is to contribute to the establishment of high-quality common regulatory and supervisory standards and practices, to contribute to the consistent application of legally binding Union acts, to stimulate and facilitate the delegation of tasks and responsibilities among competent authorities, to monitor and assess market developments in the area of its competence and to foster depositor and investor protection (2). The Authority was set up on 1 January 2011.

2.

The audit approach taken by the Court comprises analytical audit procedures, direct testing of transactions and an assessment of key controls of the Authority’s supervisory and control systems. This is supplemented by evidence provided by the work of other auditors (where relevant) and an analysis of management representations.

3.

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 287 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the Court has audited the annual accounts (3) of the Authority, which comprise the “financial statements” (4) and the “reports on the implementation of the budget” (5) for the financial year ended 31 December 2011, and the legality and regularity of the transactions underlying those accounts.

4.

As authorising officer, the Director implements the revenue and expenditure of the budget in accordance with the financial rules of the Authority, under his own responsibility and within the limits of the authorised appropriations (6). The Director is responsible for putting in place (7) the organisational structure and the internal management and control systems and procedures relevant for drawing up final accounts (8) that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and for ensuring that the transactions underlying those accounts are legal and regular.

5.

The Court’s responsibility is to provide, on the basis of its audit, the European Parliament and the Council (9) with a statement of assurance as to the reliability of the annual accounts of the Authority and the legality and regularity of the transactions underlying them.

6.

The Court conducted its audit in accordance with the IFAC International Standards on Auditing and Codes of Ethics and the INTOSAI International Standards of Supreme Audit Institutions. These standards require that the Court plans and performs the audit to obtain reasonable assurance as to whether the annual accounts of the Authority are free of material misstatement and the transactions underlying them are legal and regular.

7.

An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the accounts and the legality and regularity of the transactions underlying them. The procedures are selected based on the auditor’s judgment, including an assessment of the risks of material misstatement of the accounts and of material non-compliance of the underlying transactions with the requirement of the legal framework of the European Union, whether due to fraud or error. In assessing those risks, the auditor considers internal controls relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of the accounts and supervisory and control systems implemented to ensure legality and regularity of underlying transactions, in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances. An audit also includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and reasonableness of accounting estimates made, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the accounts.

8.

The Court considers that the audit evidence obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for the opinions set out below.

9.

In the Court’s opinion, the Authority’s Annual Accounts (10) present fairly, in all material respects, its financial position as of 31 December 2011 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the year then ended, in accordance with the provisions of its Financial Regulation and the accounting rules adopted by the Commission’s accounting officer (11).

10.

In the Court’s opinion, the transactions underlying the annual accounts of the Authority for the financial year ended 31 December 2011 are legal and regular in all material respects.

11.

The comments which follow do not call the Court’s opinions into question. They should be considered in the context of the Authority’s transition from the predecessor Committee of European Banking Supervisors.

12.

The Authority’s commitments amounted to 9 054 030 euro, or 71 % of the 2011 budget. The commitment rates were low especially for Title II "Administrative expenditure" (57 %) and Title III "Operational expenditure"’ (46 %). This impacted on the Authority’s IT objectives, which were not entirely achieved. The low budget execution rates show difficulties in budget planning and implementation.

13.

The Authority’s budget for the financial year 2011 was 12,7 million euro. In accordance with its Founding Regulation (12), 60 % of the 2011 budget was financed from Member States’ and EFTA countries’ contributions and 40 % from the Union budget. At the end of 2011, the Authority recorded a positive budget outturn of 3,6 million euro. In compliance with Articles 15(4) and 16(1) of its Financial Regulation the full amount was then recorded in the accounts as a liability towards the European Commission.

14.

Weaknesses were noted as regards three legal commitments made in advance of budget commitments (742 000 euro).

15.

The Authority’s accounting system has still to be validated by the Accounting Officer, as required by the Financial Regulation.

16.

Not all the audited procurement procedures were fully consistent with the provisions of the general Financial Regulation. Contracts worth 299 182 euro had been launched under national rules, leading to payments in 2011 of 248 775 euro. The Authority should ensure that all new contracts are awarded in full compliance with the EU procurement rules.

17.

The Authority needs to improve the transparency of recruitment procedures: weightings for selection criteria and threshold scores for being invited to interviews or for inclusion in the list of suitable candidates were not set before the examination of applications. In one selection procedure, the allocation of the grade was not in line with the vacancy notice.