+Groups of connected clients based on control
---+Scenario C 1: Exceptional case (no single risk exists despite the existence of control)

Groups of connected clients based on control

Groups of connected clients based on control

1. Przegląd

,
Tytuł Regulacja
Scenario C 1: Exceptional case (no single risk exists despite the existence of control)

The reporting institution has exposures to all entities shown below (A, B, C and D). Entity A has control over entities B, C and D. The subsidiaries B, C and D are special purpose entities/ special purpose vehicles (SPEs/SPVs).

To assess if there is no single risk, despite the existence of a control relationship, the reporting institution should assess at least all of the following elements in relation to each of the SPEs/SPVs (entities B, C and D in this scenario):

  • i. The absence of economic interdependence or any other factors that could be indicative of a material positive correlation between the credit quality of the parent undertaking A and the credit quality of the SPE/SPV (B, C or D). Among other factors, potential reliance on parent undertaking A for funding sources and some of the criteria preventing the deconsolidation of the SPE/SPV or the derecognition of securitised assets under the applicable accounting rules have to be assessed as potential signs of material positive correlation.
  • ii. The specific nature of the SPE/SPV, especially its bankruptcy remoteness (based on Article 300(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013) – in the sense that effective arrangements exist that ensure that the assets of the SPE/SPV will not be available to the creditors of parent undertaking A in the event of its insolvency – and if the debt securities issued by the SPE/SPV normally reference assets that are third parties’ liabilities.
  • iii. The structural enhancement in a securitisation, and the delinkage of the obligations of the SPE/SPV from those of parent undertaking A, such as the existence of provisions, in the transactions documentation, ensuring servicing and operational continuity.
  • iv. The compliance with the provisions under Article 248 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 regarding arm’s length conditions.

Having assessed all of these elements, the reporting institution could conclude that, for example, subsidiaries B and C do not constitute a single risk with parent undertaking A. As a result, the reporting institution needs to consider a group of connected clients composed only of clients A and D. The institution should document these assessments and their findings in a comprehensive way.

1.1 Odwołania

1.2 Zidentyfikowane wymagania

1.3 Powiązane normy

2. Zidentyfikowane wymagania

Wymagania
Źródło Wymaganie

3. Powiązane normy

Normy
Źródło Wymaganie
  • EBA - Published by the European Banking Authority at https://www.eba.europa.eu/