REGULAMENTUL DE PUNERE ÎN APLICARE (UE) NR. 710/2014 AL COMISIEI din 23 iunie 2014 de stabilire a unor standarde tehnice de punere în aplicare în ceea ce privește condițiile de aplicare a procesului de adoptare a deciziei comune privind cerințele prudențiale specifice unei instituții, în conformitate cu Directiva 2013/36/UE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului (Text cu relevanță pentru SEE)
REGULAMENTUL DE PUNERE ÎN APLICARE (UE) NR. 710/2014 AL COMISIEI
din 23 iunie 2014
de stabilire a unor standarde tehnice de punere în aplicare în ceea ce privește condițiile de aplicare a procesului de adoptare a deciziei comune privind cerințele prudențiale specifice unei instituții, în conformitate cu Directiva 2013/36/UE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului
având în vedere Tratatul privind funcționarea Uniunii Europene,
având în vedere Directiva 2013/36/UE a Parlamentului European și a Consiliului din 26 iunie 2013 cu privire la accesul la activitatea instituțiilor de credit și supravegherea prudențială a instituțiilor de credit și a firmelor de investiții, de modificare a Directivei 2002/87/CE și de abrogare a Directivelor 2006/48/CE și 2006/49/CE (1), în special articolul 113 alineatul (5) al treilea paragraf,
întrucât:
(1)
Schimbul eficient de informații adecvate este esențial pentru a se ajunge la o decizie comună cu privire la adecvarea fondurilor proprii, măsurile de supraveghere referitoare la supravegherea lichidității, nivelul de lichiditate și cerințele de capital aplicate unui grup și fiecărei instituții care face parte din acesta.
(2)
Pentru a se asigura o aplicare consecventă a procesului prin care se ajunge la o decizie comună, este important ca fiecare etapă să fie bine definită. Un proces clar facilitează, de asemenea, schimbul de informații, favorizează înțelegerea reciprocă, dezvoltă relațiile dintre autoritățile de supraveghere și promovează supravegherea eficace.
(3)
Pentru a efectua evaluarea riscurilor și evaluarea profilului de risc de lichiditate pentru un grup de instituții, autoritatea responsabilă cu supravegherea consolidată ar trebui să aibă o imagine de ansamblu asupra activităților desfășurate de toate instituțiile care fac parte din grup, inclusiv de instituțiile care operează în afara Uniunii. Prin urmare, ar trebui promovată interacțiunea dintre autoritățile competente din Uniune și autoritățile de supraveghere din țările terțe, astfel încât primele să poată evalua riscurile globale cu care se confruntă grupul.
(4)
Planificarea realistă și în timp util a procesului de adoptare a deciziei comune este esențială. Fiecare autoritate competentă implicată ar trebui să furnizeze în timp util informațiile relevante autorității responsabile cu supravegherea consolidată. Pentru ca evaluările individuale să fie prezentate și interpretate în mod coerent și uniform, este necesar să se introducă un formular comun de prezentare a rezultatelor proceselor de supraveghere și evaluare specifice fiecărei instituții.
(5)
În vederea asigurării unor condiții uniforme de aplicare, ar trebui stabilite etapele de urmat pentru a efectua evaluarea comună a riscurilor și a ajunge la decizia comună, recunoscându-se că unele sarcini aferente evaluării comune a riscurilor și procesului de adoptare a deciziei comune pot fi efectuate în paralel, iar altele succesiv.
(6)
Pentru a se facilita adoptarea deciziilor comune, este important ca autoritățile competente implicate în procesul decizional să inițieze un dialog, în special înainte de finalizarea rapoartelor privind evaluarea riscurilor și a deciziilor comune.
(7)
Autoritatea responsabilă cu supravegherea consolidată ar trebui să furnizeze autorităților competente implicate toate informațiile relevante care sunt necesare pentru întocmirea evaluărilor riscurilor individuale și pentru a ajunge la deciziile comune privind capitalul și lichiditatea.
(8)
Raportul care conține evaluarea de risc a grupului este un document esențial, care permite autorităților competente să înțeleagă și să înregistreze evaluarea profilului general de risc al grupului bancar, cu scopul de a ajunge la o decizie comună cu privire la adecvarea fondurilor proprii și la nivelul de fonduri proprii pe care grupul trebuie să le dețină. Raportul care conține evaluarea profilului de risc de lichiditate al grupului este un document important care permite autorităților competente să înțeleagă și să înregistreze evaluarea profilului general de lichiditate al grupului. Pentru o prezentare coerentă a evaluării riscului global și a evaluării riscului de lichiditate al grupului, pentru a facilita desfășurarea unor discuții constructive între autoritățile competente și a permite o evaluare aprofundată a riscurilor aferente grupurilor bancare transfrontaliere, ar trebui stabilite formulare comune pentru aceste rapoarte.
(9)
Deși este recunoscut faptul că rezultatele procesului de supraveghere și evaluare prevăzut la articolul 97 din Directiva 2013/36/UE pot fi documentate în mod diferit în statele membre, în funcție de modul de transpunere a articolului respectiv în legislația națională, ținând seama și de orientările emise de autoritatea europeană de supraveghere (Autoritatea Bancară Europeană, ABE) în temeiul articolului 107 alineatul (2) din Directiva 2013/36/UE, formularele standard ar trebui să asigure formate uniforme pentru comunicarea constatărilor și a rezultatelor procesului de supraveghere, cu scopul de a se ajunge la decizii comune.
(10)
Nici raportul privind evaluarea de risc a grupului și nici raportul care conține evaluarea riscului de lichiditate al grupului nu ar trebui limitate la o agregare a evaluărilor individuale efectuate de autoritățile competente. Ambele rapoarte ar trebui utilizate ca un instrument pentru efectuarea evaluării comune de risc a întregului grup și pentru analizarea interacțiunii dintre elementele din cadrul grupului.
(11)
Prin stabilirea de proceduri clare pentru conținutul și articularea deciziei comune ar trebui să se asigure că deciziile comune sunt pe deplin motivate și să se faciliteze monitorizarea deciziilor comune și punerea lor în aplicare.
(12)
Pentru clarificarea procesului care trebuie urmat după ce se ajunge la o decizie comună, pentru asigurarea transparenței în tratarea consecințelor deciziei și pentru facilitarea desfășurării de acțiuni subsecvente adecvate, dacă este necesar, ar trebui stabilite norme privind comunicarea deciziei comune deplin motivate și privind monitorizarea punerii sale în aplicare.
(13)
Este necesar să se stabilească procesul care trebuie urmat pentru actualizarea deciziilor comune, pentru a se asigura o abordare consecventă și transparentă, precum și implicarea adecvată a autorităților competente și comunicarea rezultatelor.
(14)
Procesul de adoptare a deciziei comune prevăzut la articolul 113 din Directiva 2013/36/UE include procesul care trebuie urmat dacă nu se ajunge la o decizie comună. Pentru a se asigura condiții uniforme de aplicare a acestui aspect al procesului, ar trebui să se stabilească articularea deciziilor deplin motivate și tratamentul aplicat opiniilor și rezervelor exprimate de autoritățile de supraveghere din statul membru gazdă, normele referitoare la calendarul pentru luarea deciziilor în absența unei decizii comune și comunicarea detaliilor unor astfel de decizii.
(15)
Prezentul regulament se bazează pe proiectele de standarde tehnice de punere în aplicare transmise Comisiei de către ABE;
(16)
ABE a organizat consultări publice deschise cu privire la proiectele de standarde tehnice de punere în aplicare pe care se bazează prezentul regulament, a analizat potențialele costuri și beneficii aferente și a solicitat avizul Grupului părților interesate din domeniul bancar, instituit în conformitate cu articolul 37 din Regulamentul (UE) nr. 1093/2010 al Parlamentului european și al Consiliului (2),
ADOPTĂ PREZENTUL REGULAMENT:
Prezentul regulament este obligatoriu în toate elementele sale și se aplică direct în toate statele membre.
[based on national classification until common categorisation approach is in place as per EBA Guidelines for common SREP methodologies and procedures; the category to which the institution is assigned shall reflect also its systemic importance]
Reference date:
Total assets (million EUR) at reference date:
Competent authority:
Overall SREP assessment
Overall SREP score (following the capital and liquidity adequacy assessment):
This section should contain a summary of the assessments made in the sections below.
Capital adequacy assessment
Within this section please provide: (1) a summary of the assessment of the capital adequacy; (2) the preliminary proposal for the joint decision, including a statement on the adequacy of own funds at the respective entity level and any required level of own funds in excess of the requirements set out in Chapter Four of Title VII of Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD) and in Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR); (3) the outlook for next assessment period; and, (4) a description of any other capital-related supervisory measures (1).
Within this section please also describe how SREP capital estimates have been derived and how ICAAP capital estimates have been taken into account, if assessed as reliable.
Liquidity Adequacy Assessment
Within this section please provide: (1) a summary of the assessment of the liquidity adequacy; (2) the proposal for the joint decision, including a statement on the adequacy of liquidity at the respective entity level and any required supervisory measures, where applicable; (3) the outlook for the next assessment period; and, (4) a description of any other supervisory measures to address the deficiencies identified, where applicable.
Depending on the timing of the joint decision on liquidity, this assessment should either mirror the findings summarised in the Liquidity SREP report (see template in Annex 5), or provide an updated assessment.
A. Business model analysis (viability and sustainability)
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of the business model, strategy and financial position within the observed period; (2) the supervisory assessment of the viability of the current business model and sustainability of the strategy; and, (3) any relevant supervisory measures, including capital and non-capital supervisory measures.
B. Internal governance arrangements
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of the internal governance framework within the observed period; (2) deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to internal governance requirements; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) actions to be taken by the institution, and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures, including capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
C. Risks to solvency
C.1 Credit and counterparty risk
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of the risk in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures including, capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
C.2 Settlement/delivery risk
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of the risk in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures including, capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
C.3 Inter-concentration risk
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of the risk in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures including, capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of the risk in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures including, capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
C.5 IRRBB
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of the risk in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures including, capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
C.6 Operational risk
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of the risk in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures including, capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
C.7 Risk of excessive leverage
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of the risk in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures including, capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
C.8 Other risks material to the institution, as applicable (please specify)
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of other identified risks to solvency in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures including, capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of liquidity and funding risks in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures including, capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
Depending on the timing of the joint decision on liquidity, this assessment should either mirror the findings summarised in the Liquidity SREP report (see template in Annex 5), or provide an updated assessment.
Should the assessment of liquidity and funding risks highlight significant issues in relation to funding risk requiring the allocation of capital to mitigate impacts from an increased cost of funding, please describe how it is reflected in the additional own funds requirements, if relevant.
E. Systemic risk
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of the risk in the observed period; (2) the outlook for the next assessment period; and, (3) any supervisory measures, including capital and non-capital supervisory measures.
F. ICAAP review
Within this section please provide: (1) a summary of the findings of the assessment of the reliability of the ICAAP framework and institution’s own quantification of risks and the consequent allocation of appropriate internal capital; (2) a description of the evolution of ICAAP framework in the observed period; (3) deficiencies identified; (4) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to the ICAAP; (5) mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and (6) any relevant supervisory measures, including capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
The section should also have a statement on whether ICAAP estimates are considered reliable and could serve as an input into the assessment of capital adequacy.
G. Inter-risk diversification effects
Taking into account the outcome of the ICAAP assessments and internal capital estimates, and only in case diversification effects are recognised, please provide within this section a description of the impact of diversification effects and define the extent to which benefits from the diversification effects can be taken into account in the determination of capital adequacy.
Within this section please summarise the results and their impact on capital adequacy of institutions own stress tests and their reconciliation with supervisory stress tests, including the explanation of how the stress testing buffer was derived, where applicable.
Other relevant information
Within this section please provide other information deemed relevant by the competent authority for the purposes of the group risk assessment and not provided above.
Quantitative Indicators agreed by the consolidating supervisor and the host EEA competent authorities (pursuant to RTS/ITS on colleges of supervisors)
Please list any quantitative indicators agreed to be shared while developing the joint risk assessment report for the purposes of reaching a joint decision.
[based on national classification until common categorisation approach is in place as per EBA Guidelines for common SREP methodologies and procedures; the category to which the institution is assigned shall reflect also its systemic importance]
Reference date:
Total assets (mln EUR) at reference date:
Competent authority:
SREP elements
Score
A.
Business Model (viability and sustainability)
B.
Internal governance arrangements
C.
Risks to solvency
C.1
Credit and counterparty risk
C.2
Settlement / Delivery risk
C.3
Inter-concentration risk
C.4
Market risk
C.5
IRRBB
C.6
Operational risk
C.7
Risk of excessive leverage
C.8
Other risks material to the institution, as applicable (please specify)
C.9
Other risks material to the institution, as applicable (please specify)
D.
Risks to liquidity
[as per the outcome of the Liquidity SREP report]
These scores should be consistent with the respective assessments under the liquidity joint decision. Depending on the timing of the joint decision on liquidity, this assessment should either mirror the findings summarised in the liquidity SREP report, or provide updated assessment.
E.
Systemic risk (risk that institution poses to financial system)
[based on national classification until common categorisation approach is in place as per EBA Guidelines for common SREP methodologies and procedures; the category to which the institution is assigned shall reflect also its systemic importance]
Reference date:
Total assets (mln EUR) at reference date:
Competent authority:
SREP elements
Memoranda items
Overall SREP capital requirement/estimate (including supervisory proxy, where applicable) (in mln EUR)
Pillar 1 capital requirements, where applicable (in mln EUR)
ICAAP estimate (in mln EUR)
A.
Business Model (viability and sustainability)
B.
Internal governance arrangements
C.
Risks to solvency (risks and controls)
C.1
Credit and counterparty risk
C.2
Settlement / Delivery risk
C.3
Inter-concentration risk
C.4
Market risk
C.5
IRRBB
C.6
Operational risk
C.7
Risk of excessive leverage
C.8
Other risks material to the institution, as applicable (please specify)
C.9
Other risks material to the institution, as applicable (please specify)
D.
Risks to liquidity — Funding risk (cost of funding perspective)
E.
Systemic risk (risk that institution poses to financial system)
F.
Inter-risk diversification effects
G.
Capital planning / stress test buffer (where applicable)
Capital planning / Stress testing buffer based on the outcomes of ICAAP stress tests, where applicable
Reconciliation of ICAAP stress tests with supervisory stress tests and resulting capital planning / stress testing buffer, where applicable
SREP capital outcome (preliminary proposal for joint decision discussion)
Overall capital requirement/estimate
Total Pillar 1 capital requirement
Total ICAAP capital estimate
Total SREP capital estimate
Capital adequacy assessment (capital is assessed as adequate/inadequate)
Adequate/Inadequate
Additional own funds requirement
Sum of components or holistic approach (formulated as an amount or ratio, or combination of both)
Memoranda items (values at reference date)
Total own funds (mln EUR) at reference date
Tier 1 own funds (mln EUR) at reference date
Common Equity Tier 1 own funds (mln EUR) at reference date
Total risk weighted assets (mln EUR) at reference date
The own funds requirements applicable in the home Member State in accordance with Article 92 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, taking into account any measures adopted or recognised in accordance with Article 458 of that Regulation and the transitional arrangements laid down in Part X of that Regulation
The level of the capital conservation buffer that the institution is required to maintain in accordance with Article 129 of Directive 2013/36/EU
The level of the institution-specific countercyclical capital buffer to be maintained by the institution in accordance with Article 130 of Directive 2013/36/EU
The level of any systemic risk buffer that the institution is required to maintain in accordance with Article 133 of Directive 2013/36/EU
The level of any G-SII buffer or O-SII buffer that the institution is required to maintain in accordance with Article 128(3) and (4) of Directive 2013/36/EU
Any other prudential requirements applicable to the institution, including under Article 103 of Directive 2013/36/EU, macro-prudential measures and recommendations of EBA and ESRB
The Group risk assessment report shall include as annexes all SREP reports submitted by the relevant competent authorities. The group risk assessment report shall be supplemented with summaries of scores (Table 1) and the capital adequacy assessment (Table 2).
[based on national classification until common categorisation approach is in place as per EBA Guidelines for common SREP methodologies and procedures; the category to which the institution is assigned shall reflect also its systemic importance]
Reference date:
Total assets (million EUR) at reference date:
Overall SREP assessment of the Group
Overall SREP score (following the capital and liquidity adequacy assessment):
This section should contain a summary of the assessments made in the sections below,
Capital adequacy assessment
Within this section please provide: (1) a summary of the assessment of the capital adequacy; (2) the proposal for the joint decision, including a statement on the adequacy of own funds at the group level and any required level of own funds in excess of the requirements set out in Chapter Four of Title VII of Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD) and in Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR); (3) the outlook for the next assessment period; and, (3) a description of any other capital-related supervisory measures (1).
Within this section please also describe how SREP capital estimates have been derived and how ICAAP capital estimates have been taken into account, if assessed as reliable.
Liquidity Adequacy Assessment
Within this section please provide: (1) a summary of the assessment of the liquidity adequacy; (2) the proposal for the joint decision, including a statement on the adequacy of liquidity at the group level and any required supervisory measures, where applicable; (3) the outlook for the next assessment period; and, (4) a description of any other supervisory measures to address the deficiencies identified, where applicable.
Depending on the timing of the joint decision on liquidity, this assessment should either mirror the findings summarised in the Group liquidity risk assessment report (see template in Annex 7), or provide an updated assessment.
A. Business model analysis (viability and sustainability)
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of the business model, strategy and financial position within the observed period; (2) the supervisory assessment of the viability of the current business model and sustainability of the strategy; and, (3) any relevant supervisory measures, including capital and non-capital supervisory measures.
B. Internal governance arrangements
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of the internal governance framework within the observed period; (2) deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to internal governance requirements; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) actions to be taken by the institution, and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures, including capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
C. Risks to solvency
C.1 Credit and counterparty risk
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of the risk in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures including, capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
C.2 Settlement/delivery risk
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of the risk in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures including, capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
C.3 Inter-concentration risk
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of the risk in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures including, capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of the risk in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures including, capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
C.5 IRRBB
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of the risk in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures including, capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
C.6 Operational risk
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of the risk in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures including, capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
C.7 Risk of excessive leverage
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of the risk in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures including, capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
C.8 Other risks material to the institution, as applicable (please specify)
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of other identified risks to solvency in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures including, capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of liquidity and funding risks in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures including, capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
Depending on the timing of the joint decision on liquidity, this assessment should either mirror the findings summarised in the Group liquidity risk assessment report (see template in Annex 7), or provide an updated assessment.
Should the assessment of liquidity and funding risks highlight significant issues in relation to funding risk requiring the allocation of capital to mitigate impacts from an increased cost of funding, please describe how it is reflected in the additional own funds requirements, if relevant.
E. Systemic risk
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of the risk in the observed period; (2) the outlook for the next assessment period; and, (3) any supervisory measures, including capital and non-capital supervisory measures.
F. ICAAP review
Within this section please provide: (1) a summary of the findings of the assessment of the reliability of the ICAAP framework and institution’s own quantification of risks and the consequent allocation of appropriate internal capital; (2) a description of the evolution of ICAAP framework in the observed period; (3) deficiencies identified; (4) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to the ICAAP; (5) mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and (6) any relevant supervisory measures, including capital and non-capital supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
The section should also have a statement on whether ICAAP estimates are considered reliable and could serve as an input into the assessment of capital adequacy.
G. Inter-risk diversification effects
Taking into account the outcome of the ICAAP assessments and internal capital estimates, and only in case diversification effects are recognised, please provide within this section a description of the impact of diversification effects and define the extent to which benefits from the diversification effects can be taken into account in the determination of capital adequacy.
Within this section please summarise the results and their impact on capital adequacy of institutions own stress tests and their reconciliation with supervisory stress tests, including the explanation of how the stress testing buffer was derived, where applicable.
Other relevant information
Within this section please provide other information deemed relevant by the competent authorities for the purposes of the group risk assessment and not provided above (e.g. information needed to meet requirements of Article 6(5) of this Implementing Regulation.
Quantitative Indicators agreed by the consolidating supervisor and the host EEA competent authorities (pursuant to RTS/ITS on colleges of supervisors)
Please list any quantitative indicators agreed to be shared while developing the joint risk assessment report for the purposes of reaching a joint decision.
SREP capital outcome (preliminary proposal for joint decision discussion)
Overall capital requirement/estimate
Total Pillar 1 capital requirement
Total ICAAP capital estimate
Total SREP capital estimate
Total Pillar 1 capital requirement
Total ICAAP capital estimate
Total SREP capital estimate
Total Pillar 1 capital requirement
Total ICAAP capital estimate
Total SREP capital estimate
Capital adequacy assessment (capital is assessed as adequate/inadequate)
Adequate/Inadequate
Adequate/Inadequate
Adequate/Inadequate
Additional own funds requirement
Sum of components or holistic approach (formulated as an amount or ratio, or combination of both)
Sum of components or holistic approach (formulated as an amount or ratio, or combination of both)
Sum of components or holistic approach (formulated as an amount or ratio, or combination of both)
I.
Diversification effects, including intra-group (-)
Intra-group concentration (+)
Intra-group support arrangements (-)
Other intra-group items (+/-)
J.
Joint decision outcome (based on preliminary proposal (H), reflecting impact of intra-group items, and results of the dialogue between competent authorities)
Overall capital requirement/estimate
Total SREP capital estimate
Total SREP capital estimate
Total SREP capital estimate
Capital adequacy assessment (capital is assessed as adequate/inadequate)
Adequate/Inadequate
Adequate/Inadequate
Adequate/Inadequate
Additional own funds requirement
Sum of components or holistic approach (formulated as an amount or ratio, or combination of both)
Sum of components or holistic approach (formulated as an amount or ratio, or combination of both)
Sum of components or holistic approach (formulated as an amount or ratio, or combination of both)
Common Equity Tier 1 own funds (mln EUR) at reference date
Total risk weighted assets (mln EUR) at reference date
The own funds requirements applicable in the home Member State in accordance with Article 92 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 taking into account any measures adopted or recognised under Article 458 of that Regulation and the transitional arrangements under Part X of that Regulation
The level of the capital conservation buffer required to be maintained by the institution in accordance with Article 129 of Directive 2013/36/EU
The level of the institution-specific countercyclical capital buffer to be maintained by the institution in accordance with Article 130 of Directive 2013/36/EU
The level of the systemic risk buffer to be maintained by the institution, if applicable, in accordance with Article 133 of Directive 2013/36/EU
The level of the any G-SII buffer or O-SII buffer, as defined in paragraphs (3) and (4) respectively of Article 128 of Directive 2013/36/EU, to be held by the institution
Any other prudential requirements applicable to the institution, including under Article 103 of Directive 2013/36/EU, macro-prudential measures and recommendations of EBA and ESRB
[based on national classification until common categorisation approach is in place as per EBA Guidelines for common SREP methodologies and procedures; the category to which the institution is assigned shall reflect also its systemic importance]
Reference date:
Total assets (million EUR) at reference date:
Competent authority:
Overall Assessment of Liquidity Risk in SREP
Overall liquidity risk Score :
This section should contain a summary of the individual assessments below.
Liquidity Adequacy Assessment
Within this section please provide: (1) a summary of the assessment of the liquidity adequacy; (2) the proposal for the joint decision, including a statement on the adequacy of liquidity at the respective entity level and any supervisory measures, where applicable, to address significant matters and material findings; and, (3) the outlook for the next assessment period.
A. Assessment of liquidity risk
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of liquidity risk in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
B. Assessment of funding risk
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of funding risk in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
C. Assessment of liquidity and funding risk management
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of liquidity and funding risk management in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
Other relevant information
Within this section please provide other information deemed relevant by the competent authority for the purposes of the group risk assessment and not provided above.
[based on national classification until common categorisation approach is in place as per EBA Guidelines for common SREP methodologies and procedures; the category to which the institution is assigned shall reflect also its systemic importance]
[based on national classification until common categorisation approach is in place as per EBA Guidelines for common SREP methodologies and procedures; the category to which the institution is assigned shall reflect also its systemic importance]
Reference date:
Total assets (mln EUR) at reference date:
Competent authority:
Liquidity elements in SREP
Outcome of liquidity risk assessment
(in mln euros or ratio or narrative information on measures)
A.
Liquidity adequacy assessment
Adequate/Inadequate
B.
Proposal for joint decision - Quantitative measures (Articles 104 and 105)
Specific liquidity buffer requirements [To be specified in terms of LCR eligible assets post-introduction of LCR as a standard (optional before)]
Specific stable funding requirements [To be specified on NSFR definition post-NSFR introduced as a standard (optional before)]
Other quantitative restrictions/requirements
D
Proposal for joint decision — Qualitative measures (Articles 104 and 105)
Memoranda items (values at reference date)
Actual LCR ratio or any other equivalent domestic ratio (until LCR implementation in CRR)
Actual NSFR ratio or any other equivalent domestic ratio (until NSFR implementation in CRR)
LCR buffer requirement, if any ('Pillar 1')
NSFR stable funding requirement, if any ('Pillar 1')
Any other prudential requirements applicable to the institution, including under Article 103 of Directive 2013/36/EU, macro-prudential measures and recommendations of EBA and ESRB
The Group liquidity risk assessment report includes as annexes all liquidity risk assessment reports submitted by the relevant competent authorities. The group risk assessment report is supplemented with summaries of scores (Table 1) and liquidity adequacy assessment (Table 2).
[based on national classification until common categorisation approach is in place as per EBA Guidelines for common SREP methodologies and procedures; the category to which the institution is assigned shall reflect also its systemic importance]
Reference date:
Total assets (million EUR) at reference date:
Overall Assessment of Liquidity Risk in SREP
Overall liquidity risk Score :
This section should contain a summary of the individual assessments below.
Liquidity Adequacy Assessment
Within this section please provide: (1) a summary of the assessment of the liquidity adequacy; (2) the proposal for the joint decision, including a statement on the adequacy of liquidity at the group level and any supervisory measures, where applicable, to address significant matters and material findings; and, (3) the outlook for the next assessment period.
A. Assessment of liquidity risk
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of liquidity risk in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
B. Assessment of funding risk
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of funding risk in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
C. Assessment of liquidity and funding risk management
Score:
Within this section please provide: (1) a description of the evolution of liquidity and funding risk management in the observed period; (2) control deficiencies identified; (3) issues of non-compliance with the CRR and the CRD in relation to risk; (4) the outlook for the next assessment period; (5) risk mitigating actions to be taken by the institution; and, (6) any relevant supervisory measures to address the deficiencies and non-compliance issues.
Other relevant information
Within this section please provide other information deemed relevant by the competent authorities for the purposes of the group risk assessment and not provided above (e.g. information needed to meet requirements of Article 6(5) of this Implementing Regulation
[based on national classification until common categorisation approach is in place as per EBA Guidelines for common SREP methodologies and procedures; the category to which the institution is assigned shall reflect also its systemic importance]
[based on national classification until common categorisation approach is in place as per EBA Guidelines for common SREP methodologies and procedures; the category to which the institution is assigned shall reflect also its systemic importance]
[based on national classification until common categorisation approach is in place as per EBA Guidelines for common SREP methodologies and procedures; the category to which the institution is assigned shall reflect also its systemic importance]
[based on national classification until common categorisation approach is in place as per EBA Guidelines for common SREP methodologies and procedures; the category to which the institution is assigned shall reflect also its systemic importance]
[based on national classification until common categorisation approach is in place as per EBA Guidelines for common SREP methodologies and procedures; the category to which the institution is assigned shall reflect also its systemic importance]
[based on national classification until common categorisation approach is in place as per EBA Guidelines for common SREP methodologies and procedures; the category to which the institution is assigned shall reflect also its systemic importance]
Reference date:
Total assets (mln EUR) at reference date:
Competent authority:
Liquidity elements in SREP
Outcome of liquidity risk assessment
Outcome of liquidity risk assessment
Outcome of liquidity risk assessment
(in mln Euros or ratio or narrative information on measures]
(in mln Euros or ratio or narrative information on measures]
(in mln Euros or ratio or narrative information on measures]
A.
Liquidity adequacy assessment
Adequate/Inadequate
Adequate/Inadequate
Adequate/Inadequate
B.
Proposal for joint decision - Quantitative measures (Articles 104 and 105)
Specific liquidity buffer requirements [To be specified in terms of LCR eligible assets post-introduction of LCR as a standard (optional before)]
Specific stable funding requirements [To be specified on NSFR definition post-NSFR introduced as a standard (optional before)]
Other quantitative restrictions/requirements
D
Proposal for joint decision — Qualitative measures (Articles 104 and 105)
Actual LCR ratio or any other equivalent domestic ratio (until LCR implementation in CRR)
Actual NSFR ratio or any other equivalent domestic ratio (until NSFR implementation in CRR)
LCR buffer requirement, if any ('Pillar 1')
NSFR stable funding requirement, if any ('Pillar 1')
Any other prudential requirements applicable to the institution, including under Article 103 of Directive 2013/36/EU, macro-prudential measures and recommendations of EBA and ESRB
