Featured Product

    FSI Paper Examines Role of Deposit Insurance in Bank Resolution

    August 23, 2019

    The Financial Stability Institute, or FSI, of BIS published a paper that examines the role of deposit insurance schemes in the bank resolution framework. The paper takes stock of the types of alternative measures that the deposit insurance schemes may fund. These measures include purchase and assumption transactions; the transfer of deposits—and, possibly, other business—to a bridge bank; and the provision of capital and liquidity support, either to prevent the failure of a stressed bank or in the context of a resolution or insolvency procedure. The paper discusses how deposit insurance scheme support for such measures can complement bank insolvency and resolution frameworks and expand the toolbox for bank failure management.

    Deposit insurance schemes play an important role in the framework for managing bank failures. The core use of the deposit insurance scheme resources is the payout of insured deposits in the context of a bank closure and insolvency proceeding. The deposit insurance schemes may also fulfill their mandate by funding measures that, at a minimum, preserve access to insured deposits as an alternative to payout. The use of the deposit insurance scheme resources for purposes other than payout is reflected in international standards such as the International Association of Deposit Insurers (IADI) Core Principles for Effective Deposit Insurance Systems and the FSB Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes for Financial Institutions. On the basis of responses to a survey of 32 members of IADI, the paper takes stock of the types of alternative measures that deposit insurance schemes may fund.

    The survey reveals a wide range of approaches, based on variables that include the tools available under the applicable framework for bank failure management; the mandate of the deposit insurance schemes; the safeguards to protect deposit insurance scheme resources such as the operation of any financial cap on the amount that can be used for alternative measures for a single bank; and the availability of backup funding arrangements for the deposit insurance schemes. These differences in part reflect policy priorities and national institutional arrangements with the safety net. The ability to use deposit insurance scheme resources for alternative measures can complement bank insolvency and resolution frameworks and expand the options for bank failure management. However, a number of policy considerations frame choices about the use of deposit insurance scheme resources. Although these options can be helpful, they may require capacity on the part of the deposit insurance authority to assess and implement more sophisticated funding arrangements; the availability of appropriate backup funding arrangements if there is a risk that measures other than payout may involve material amounts that could exhaust the available resources of the scheme; and arrangements to deal with any moral hazard incentives for banks. Safeguards in the form of financial caps, including a “least cost” principle, and, where relevant, collateral requirements can help to counterbalance these issues at the cost of lower flexibility.

    The funding options for individual deposit insurance schemes will depend on the measures available under the legal framework for bank failure management and the role of the deposit insurance scheme in that framework. The availability of deposit insurance scheme resources to fund alternative measures is subject to conditions and safeguards. The amount the deposit insurance scheme may contribute to specific measures is generally also subject to constraints aimed at safeguarding its resources although backup funding arrangements may increase the capacity for deposit insurance scheme resources. Within these constraints, the availability of deposit insurance scheme resources to fund alternative measures can increase options for authorities in managing bank failures. This may be especially relevant when dealing with medium-size or non-systemic banks, in which deposits may be the main form of loss absorbency.

     

    Related Links

    Keywords: International, Banking, Deposit Guarantee Scheme, Deposit Insurance, Resolution Framework, Systemic Risk, BIS, FSI

    Related Articles
    News

    BoE Consults on Approach to Setting MREL, Publishes Bail-In Guidance

    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.

    July 22, 2021 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EBA Seeks Views on Proportionality Assessment Methodology

    The European Banking Authority (EBA) is seeking preliminary input on standardization of the proportionality assessment methodology for credit institutions and investment firms.

    July 22, 2021 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    US Agencies Propose Changes to Call Reports and Instructions

    Certain regulatory authorities in the US are extending period for completion of the review of certain residential mortgage provisions and for publication of notice disclosing the determination of this review until December 20, 2021.

    July 22, 2021 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    PRA Finalizes Rulebook Definition of Higher Paid Material Risk-Taker

    The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) published the policy statement PS18/21, which introduces an amendment in the definition of "higher paid material risk taker" in the Remuneration Part of the PRA Rulebook.

    July 21, 2021 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EBA Examines Asset Encumbrance in Banking Sector

    The European Banking Authority (EBA) published its annual report on asset encumbrance in banking sector.

    July 21, 2021 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EBA Publishes Methodological Guide to Mystery Shopping

    The European Banking Authority (EBA) published a methodological guide to mystery shopping.

    July 21, 2021 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    APRA Issues Update on Capital Reform Policy Settings for Banks

    The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) released a letter to authorized deposit-taking institutions to provide an update on key policy settings for the capital framework reforms, which will come into effect from January 01, 2023.

    July 21, 2021 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    CPMI-IOSCO Assess Continuity Planning of Market Infrastructures

    The Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures (CPMI) and the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) published a report that assesses the business continuity planning activities of financial market infrastructures or FMIs.

    July 21, 2021 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    BoE Announces Changes to Validation Rules for Form BTL

    The Bank of England (BoE) published questions and answers (Q&A) on OSCA to BEEDS migration for statistical reporting as well a presentation from the project overview session held with statistical reporters.

    July 20, 2021 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    BCBS Proposes Changes to Process for Reviewing G-SIB Methodology

    The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) is consulting on a technical amendment to the Basel Framework to reflect a new process reviewing the global systemically important bank (G-SIB) assessment methodology.

    July 20, 2021 WebPage Regulatory News
    RESULTS 1 - 10 OF 7281