OSFI published a summary of the findings of the 2018-19 online financial institutions survey of all OSFI-supervised active deposit-taking institutions and insurance companies. The objective of the survey was to provide a high-level assessment of the performance of OSFI as a prudential regulator and supervisor and to compare the 2018 results from a previous study that was conducted in 2016. OSFI had, in the Fall of 2018, commissioned Phoenix Strategic Perspectives, an independent research firm, to conduct this confidential survey with executives of the financial institutions that OSFI regulates.
The results show that overall satisfaction of OSFI as a regulator and supervisor remains strong. The highest positive ratings in the 2018 survey pertain to satisfaction with the effectiveness of OSFI in supervising financial institutions, consistent with previous results. In addition, there has also been a notable improvement in the scaling in guidance and supervisory activities, which was identified as an area for improvement in the 2016 survey. Areas of improvement identified in 2018 relate to the response time of OSFI to market developments or industry suggestions that guidance needs updating and the development of guidance that balances prudential considerations and the need for institutions to compete. However, IT security, including cyber risk, continues to be an area that the institutions would like to see OSFI focus on in the coming years. Additionally, the deposit-taking institutions pointed to a variety of other risks while insurance companies focused on environmental risks, regulatory burden, and issues related to IFRS 17 on insurance contracts.
Keywords: Americas, Canada, Banking, Insurance, Financial Institution Survey, Research, IFRS 17, Cyber Risk, OSFI
Previous ArticleCBIRC Notice on Use of Credit Risk Mitigation Tools in Insurance
CBUAE has issued a regulation that introduces the licensing and supervision framework for low-risk, specialized banks.
APRA is consulting on CPG 511—the draft Prudential Practice Guide on remuneration for banks, insurers, and superannuation licensees—with the comment period ending on July 23, 2021.
MAS announced a new RegTech grant scheme and an enhancement of the Digital Acceleration Grant (DAG) scheme to accelerate technology adoption in the financial sector.
PRA published a letter that sets out findings from the 2020 Internal Audit Review of the Collections function of a sample of non-systemic banks and building societies.
EIOPA launched a consultation on the Interbank Offered Rate (IBOR) transitions, in context of the EU Benchmarks Regulation.
EIOPA published a discussion paper on uses cases of, and the European approach to, blockchain and smart contracts in the insurance sector.
HKMA granted a banking license to NongHyup Bank (also NH Bank), which is incorporated in the Republic of Korea.
PRA published a discussion paper that explores options for developing a simpler but resilient prudential framework for banks and building societies that are neither systemically important nor internationally active.
ECB published an opinion on the proposal for a regulation on the pilot regime for market infrastructures based on distributed ledger technology.
EBA proposed regulatory technical standards that specify how to identify the appropriate risk-weights and conditions when assessing minimum loss given default (LGD) values for exposures secured by immovable property.