KOMISSION TÄYTÄNTÖÖNPANOASETUS (EU) N:o 710/2014, annettu 23 päivänä kesäkuuta 2014, Euroopan parlamentin ja neuvoston direktiivin 2013/36/EU mukaista laitoskohtaisista vakavaraisuusvaatimuksista tehtävää yhteistä päätöstä koskevan menettelyn soveltamisedellytyksistä vahvistettavista teknisistä täytäntöönpanostandardeista (ETA:n kannalta merkityksellinen teksti)
KOMISSION TÄYTÄNTÖÖNPANOASETUS (EU) N:o 710/2014,
annettu 23 päivänä kesäkuuta 2014,
Euroopan parlamentin ja neuvoston direktiivin 2013/36/EU mukaista laitoskohtaisista vakavaraisuusvaatimuksista tehtävää yhteistä päätöstä koskevan menettelyn soveltamisedellytyksistä vahvistettavista teknisistä täytäntöönpanostandardeista
ottaa huomioon Euroopan unionin toiminnasta tehdyn sopimuksen,
ottaa huomioon oikeudesta harjoittaa luottolaitostoimintaa ja luottolaitosten ja sijoituspalveluyritysten vakavaraisuusvalvonnasta, direktiivin 2002/87/EY muuttamisesta sekä direktiivien 2006/48/EY ja 2006/49/EY kumoamisesta 26 päivänä kesäkuuta 2013 annetun Euroopan parlamentin ja neuvoston direktiivin 2013/36/EU (1) ja erityisesti sen 113 artiklan 5 kohdan kolmannen alakohdan,
sekä katsoo seuraavaa:
(1)
Jotta voitaisiin tehdä yhteinen päätös omien varojen riittävyydestä, maksuvalmiuden valvontaan liittyvistä valvontatoimenpiteistä sekä ryhmän kuhunkin laitokseen ja koko ryhmään sovellettavien maksuvalmius- ja pääomavaatimusten tasosta, on olennaista vaihtaa tehokkaasti asianmukaisia tietoja.
(2)
Sen varmistamiseksi, että yhteisen päätöksen tekomenettelyä sovelletaan yhdenmukaisesti, on tärkeää, että menettelyn jokainen vaihe määritellään selkeästi. Selkeä menettely helpottaa myös tietojenvaihtoa, edistää yhteisymmärrystä, kehittää valvontaviranomaisten välisiä suhteita ja tehostaa valvontaa.
(3)
Voidakseen suorittaa laitosryhmän riskinarvioinnin ja likviditeettiriskiprofiilin arvioinnin konsolidointiryhmän valvojalla olisi oltava kokonaiskäsitys ryhmän kaikkien laitosten, mukaan lukien unionin ulkopuolella toimivat laitokset, harjoittamasta toiminnasta. Sen vuoksi olisi edistettävä vuorovaikutusta unionin toimivaltaisten viranomaisten ja kolmansien maiden valvontaviranomaisten välillä, jotta unionin toimivaltaiset viranomaiset voisivat arvioida ryhmään kohdistuvia kokonaisriskejä.
(4)
On olennaista, että yhteisen päätöksen tekomenettelyn suunnittelu tapahtuu ajoissa ja realistisesti. Jokaisen toimivaltaisen viranomaisen olisi toimitettava asiaa koskevat tiedot ajoissa konsolidointiryhmän valvojalle. Jotta yksilölliset arvioinnit esitettäisiin ja tulkittaisiin johdonmukaisella ja yhtenäisellä tavalla, on tarpeen ottaa käyttöön yhteinen lomake laitoskohtaisten vakavaraisuuden arviointiprosessien tuloksia varten.
(5)
Yhtenäisten soveltamisedellytysten varmistamiseksi olisi määritettävä yhteisen riskinarvioinnin ja yhteisen päätöksen tekemisen vaiheet ottaen huomioon, että osa yhteiseen riskinarviointiin ja yhteisen päätöksen tekomenettelyyn liittyvistä tehtävistä voidaan hoitaa samanaikaisesti ja osa peräkkäin.
(6)
Jotta olisi helpompaa tehdä yhteisiä päätöksiä, on tärkeää, että päätöksentekomenettelyyn osallistuvat toimivaltaiset viranomaiset käyvät keskenään vuoropuhelua erityisesti ennen riskinarviointiraporttien ja yhteisten päätösten viimeistelyä.
(7)
Konsolidointiryhmän valvojan olisi toimitettava asianomaisille toimivaltaisille viranomaisille kaikki asiaa koskevat tiedot, joita ne tarvitsevat laatiakseen yksilöllisen riskinarviointinsa ja tehdäkseen yhteiset päätökset pääomasta ja likviditeetistä.
(8)
Ryhmän riskinarviointiraportti on keskeinen asiakirja, jonka avulla toimivaltaiset viranomaiset voivat saada käsityksen pankkiryhmän kokonaisriskiprofiilin arvioinnista ja kirjata kyseisen arvioinnin saadakseen aikaan yhteisen päätöksen omien varojen riittävyydestä ja ryhmän hallussa olevien omien varojen vaaditusta määrästä. Ryhmän likviditeettiriskiprofiilin arviointiraportti on tärkeä asiakirja, jonka avulla toimivaltaiset viranomaiset voivat saada käsityksen ryhmän yleisen likviditeettiprofiilin arvioinnista ja kirjata kyseisen arvioinnin. Jotta ryhmän kokonaisriskinarvioinnin ja likviditeettiriskinarvioinnin esitystapa olisi johdonmukainen, tukisi tarkoituksenmukaisia keskusteluita toimivaltaisten viranomaisten välillä ja mahdollistaisi luotettavien arviointien laatimisen valtioiden rajojen yli toimivien pankkiryhmien riskeistä, kyseisille raporteille olisi laadittava yhteiset lomakkeet.
(9)
Vaikka direktiivin 2013/36/EU 97 artiklan mukaisen vakavaraisuuden arviointiprosessin tulokset saatetaan dokumentoida eri jäsenvaltioissa eri tavoin riippuen siitä, kuinka kyseinen artikla on pantu täytäntöön kansallisessa lainsäädännössä, ja ottaen huomioon ohjeet, jotka Euroopan valvontaviranomainen (Euroopan pankkiviranomainen, jäljempänä ’EPV’) on antanut direktiivin 2013/36/EU 107 artiklan 2 kohdan mukaisesti, vakiolomakkeissa olisi oltava johdonmukaiset formaatit vakavaraisuuden arviointiprosessin havaintojen ja tulosten ilmoittamiseksi yhteisten päätösten tekemistä varten.
(10)
Ryhmän riskinarviointiraporttia ja ryhmän likviditeettiriskin arviointiraporttia ei pitäisi rajata toimivaltaisten viranomaisten yksittäisten osuuksien yhteenkokoamiseen. Molempia raportteja olisi käytettävä välineenä koko ryhmän yhteisessä riskinarvioinnissa ja ryhmän sisäisten erien vuorovaikutuksen analysoinnissa.
(11)
Vahvistamalla selkeät menettelyt yhteisen päätöksen sisältöä ja esittämistä varten olisi varmistettava, että yhteiset päätökset ovat kaikilta osin perusteltuja, sekä helpotettava kyseisten päätösten seurantaa ja niiden soveltamisen valvontaa.
(12)
Jotta voitaisiin selventää menettelyä, jota noudatetaan, kun yhteinen päätös on tehty, sekä tuoda avoimuutta päätöksen tulosten käsittelyyn ja helpottaa tarvittavia asianmukaisia jatkotoimia, olisi vahvistettava standardit perustellun yhteisen päätöksen tiedoksiantamista ja sen täytäntöönpanon valvontaa varten.
(13)
Olisi otettava käyttöön menettely, jota noudatetaan yhteisten päätösten ajantasaistuksissa, jotta voidaan varmistaa johdonmukaisen ja avoimen menettelytavan noudattaminen, toimivaltaisten viranomaisten riittävä osallistuminen ja tulosten tiedoksi antaminen.
(14)
Direktiivin 2013/36/EU 113 artiklan mukainen yhteistä päätöstä koskeva menettely sisältää menettelyn, jota noudatetaan, jos yhteistä päätöstä ei saada aikaan. Sen varmistamiseksi, että tämän menettelyyn sisältyvän osa-alueen soveltamisedellytykset ovat yhdenmukaiset, ja että päätökset ovat kaikilta osin perusteltuja ja vastaanottavan jäsenvaltion valvontaviranomaisten esittämät näkökannat ja varaumat käsitellään, olisi vahvistettava standardit päätösten tekemisessä noudatettavasta aikataulusta, jota noudatetaan tehtäessä päätöksiä, jos yhteistä päätöstä ei ole saatu aikaan, ja tällaisten päätösten yksityiskohtien tiedoksiantamisesta.
(15)
Tämä asetus perustuu teknisten täytäntöönpanostandardien luonnoksiin, jotka EPV on toimittanut komissiolle.
(16)
EPV on järjestänyt avoimen julkisen kuulemisen teknisten täytäntöönpanostandardien luonnoksista, joihin tämä asetus perustuu, analysoinut niihin mahdollisesti liittyviä kustannuksia ja hyötyjä sekä pyytänyt lausunnon Euroopan parlamentin ja neuvoston asetuksen (EU) N:o 1093/2010 (2) 37 artiklan mukaisesti perustetulta pankkialan osallisryhmältä,
ON HYVÄKSYNYT TÄMÄN ASETUKSEN:
Tämä asetus on kaikilta osiltaan velvoittava, ja sitä sovelletaan sellaisenaan kaikissa jäsenvaltioissa.
[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
