BIS published a short note or bulletin that explores the conditions under which the release of prudential buffers might help address the shock caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The note first assesses the impact of the economic fallout from the crisis and the related policy measures on banks. It then reviews the design and usability of prudential buffers, before moving on to discuss how the relaxation of such buffers can support bank credit. Thus far, the prudential authorities have sought to support the flow of credit to firms, households, and governments, most notably by relaxing banks’ constraints on the use of liquidity and capital buffers.
The note further highlights that for banks to continue playing a positive role in the supply of funding during the recovery, they should maintain usable buffers for a long period, as losses from a severe recession will take time to materialize. Bank counterparties, market participants, and the public need to remain convinced that buffers in the banking systems will help them weather economic stress. If past experience is any guide, buffers will be needed for quite some time. However, no matter how aggressive, the release of available buffers is unlikely to suffice on its own to compensate fully for the recession-induced erosion of capital.
For example, the CCyB put in place by BCBS jurisdictions before the COVID-19 crisis was set no higher than 2.5% of risk-weighted assets, with the CCyB of most jurisdictions being well below that level. Even tripling this amount by tapping into other buffers—while keeping some resources unused—would be only just enough to absorb the losses estimated in central bank stress tests. In recent versions of those exercises, recession-induced capital erosion was calculated to rise to 4.0% to 7.5% of risk-weighted assets (US, UK, and EU). Given that the impending global recession is likely to match or exceed the most adverse scenarios embedded in these past exercises, capital erosion may be much larger, even if governments intervene to support banks (for example, with guarantees).
A buffer release will be most effective if included within a general strategy for managing the evolution of the pandemic’s economic impact with a portfolio of tools. Lessons from the past indicate that this strategy should have a medium-term horizon and combine transparency, effective market discipline, and preservation of intermediation capacity. It should help to avoid a financial crisis that will worsen the macroeconomic problem. Reading through this lens the messages from successful resolution of past banking crises, the restoration of credit flows to the real economy will be short-lived if banks become weighed down with bad assets and no buffers. Furthermore, government guarantee schemes should require banks to keep “skin in the game,” thus both protecting the solvency of the public sector and leveraging the ability of lenders to discriminate between good and bad credit. Preserving monetary and fiscal space is key, as the resilience of banks is likely to depend for a long time on a combination of buffers and non-prudential policies.
Related Link: Bulletin
Keywords: International, Banking, COVID-19, Bulletin, Macro-Prudential Policy, Capital Buffers, LCR, CCyB, Procyclicality, Regulatory Capital, Liquidity Risk, BIS
Previous ArticleUS Agencies Extend Comment Period for Guidance on Resolution Plans
The European Banking Authority (EBA) published the final guidelines on the monitoring of the threshold and other procedural aspects on the establishment of intermediate parent undertakings in European Union (EU), as laid down in the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD).
In a recent Market Notice, the Bank of England (BoE) confirmed that green gilts will have equivalent eligibility to existing gilts in its market operations.
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) published the policy statement PS21/9 on implementation of the Investment Firms Prudential Regime.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) proposed regulatory technical standards that set out criteria for identifying shadow banking entities for the purpose of reporting large exposures.
The Board of the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) proposed a set of recommendations on the environmental, social, and governance (ESG) ratings and data providers.
The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) published recommendations from the Working Group on Euro Risk-Free Rates (RFR) on the switch to risk-free rates in the interdealer market.
The European Commission (EC) announced plans to defer the application of 13 regulatory technical standards under the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (2019/2088) by six months, from January 01, 2022 to July 01, 2022.
The European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) proposed to amend the supervisory statement on supervision of run-off undertakings that are subject to Solvency II regulation.
The Bank of England (BoE) published a consultation paper on approach to setting minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL), an operational guide on executing bail-in, and a statement from the Deputy Governor Dave Ramsden.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) is seeking preliminary input on standardization of the proportionality assessment methodology for credit institutions and investment firms.