BCBS published the latest progress report on implementation of the BCBS 239 principles, also known as the Principles for effective risk data aggregation and reporting, by banks. The report reviews progress of 34 global systemically important banks (G-SIBs) in implementing the principles as of the end of 2018, with the assessment having been completed before onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. The assessment concludes that none of the banks are fully compliant with the principles in terms of building up the necessary data architecture and, for many, IT infrastructure remains difficult. However, banks' efforts to implement the principles have resulted in tangible progress in several key areas, including governance, risk data aggregation capabilities, and reporting practices.
Despite the improved overall performance, no bank has been assessed as fully compliant with all the principles in this assessment. This contrasts with the 2017 assessment exercise, in which three banks had qualified for the rating of “4” (the highest rating) for all principles. Increased awareness among banks has resulted in better in-depth analysis and this, together with the expanded scope of projects aimed at implementing the principles, partially explains the ratings downgrades. Many banks have expanded their implementation scope beyond risk data management to incorporate strategic initiatives—including regulatory reporting, financial reporting, and recovery and resolution planning—into their BCBS 239 implementation programs. Supervisors observed notable improvements in banks’ overarching governance, risk data aggregation capabilities, and reporting practices. In particular, banks have:
- Established enterprise data strategies and data management frameworks and appointed relevant governance committees and managers for key roles in data management (such as data-owners and -stewards) to improve data oversight
- Improved data dictionaries, which is a key aspect of Principle 3, enterprise data quality metrics, and data lineage
- Enhanced quality assurance, allowing identification and correction of data quality issues
- Initiated automated reporting platforms, which strengthen ad hoc reporting capabilities
- Established group-level reporting policies, which set out the periodicity and dissemination of reports
As per the progress report, the reasons why banks have been unable to effectively implement the Principle 2 on data architecture and IT infrastructure have not changed drastically over the years. Banks have unaligned IT solutions and legacy systems, which hamper reconciliations of risk data. This hinders banks from producing accurate reports with sufficient granularity to meet ad hoc data requests. This also explains the challenges faced by banks in implementing Principles 3 (accuracy and integrity), 5 (timeliness), 6 (adaptability), and 7 (accuracy). Appendix 2 to the report provides more detailed examples of effective and ineffective practices among banks for implementing the Principles. BCBS will continue to monitor the progress of G-SIBs in adopting the principles. Nevertheless, to promote full adoption of the Principles, the Committee has made the following recommendations:
- Banks should continue to closely monitor their implementation of the principles, adapting them as necessary to take into account any changes in the financial sector. Banks that have struggled to implement the principles should address weaknesses promptly, which may include committing the resources needed to complete data architecture and IT infrastructure improvement projects.
- Supervisors should continue to monitor the progress made by banks in implementing the principles. Supervisors should also take appropriate measures to address delays and ineffective implementation
Keywords: International, Banking, Reporting, Data Aggregation, BCBS 239, Progress Report, G-SIBs, Statistical Reporting, BCBS
EBA published a report analyzing the impact of the unwind mechanism of the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR) for a sample of European banks over a three-year period, from the end of 2016 to the first quarter of 2020.
In response to questions from a member of the European Parliament, the ECB President Christine Lagarde issued a letter clarifying the possibility of amending the AnaCredit Regulation and making targeted longer-term refinancing operations (TLTROs) dependent on the climate-related impact of bank loans.
IASB started the post-implementation review of the classification and measurement requirements in IFRS 9 on financial instruments and added the review as a project to its work plan.
FSB published a report that examines progress in implementing policy measures to enhance the resolvability of systemically important financial institutions.
EBA published a report on the benchmarking of national loan enforcement frameworks across 27 EU member states, in response to the call for advice from EC.
FSB published a letter from its Chair Randal K. Quarles, along with two reports exploring various aspects of the market turmoil resulting from the COVID-19 event.
RBNZ launched a consultation on the details for implementing the final Capital Review decisions announced in December 2019.
The Trustees of the IFRS Foundation, which are responsible for the governance and oversight of IASB, have announced the appointment of Dr. Andreas Barckow as the IASB Chair, effective July 2021.
HKMA issued a letter to consult the banking industry on a full set of proposed draft amendments to the Banking (Capital) Rules for implementing the Basel standard on capital requirements for banks’ equity investments in funds in Hong Kong.
ESRB published an opinion assessing the decision of Swedish Financial Supervisory Authority (FSA) to extend the application period of a stricter measure for residential mortgage lending, in accordance with Article 458 of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR).