EBA published the initial observations on the post-implementation impact of IFRS 9 on banks in EU. This exercise, which builds on the two pre-implementation impact assessments published in November 2016 and July 2017, is mainly based on data extracted from supervisory reporting by institutions. The initial observations from this exercise are consistent with the forecasts of the second EBA impact assessment report.
The report on IFRS 9 implementation is intended to provide preliminary observations on the first stages of implementation of IFRS 9 while a deeper analysis is still ongoing. Based on the data collected for the sample of banks, the actual negative day-one impact on common equity tier 1, or CET 1, capital (51 bps on simple average compared to 42 bps in the second impact assessment report from July 2017) and increase in provisions (9% on simple average compared to 13% in the second assessment report from July 2017) broadly confirm the previous estimations from the banks. In relation to the use of transitional arrangements mitigating the impact of IFRS 9 on CET 1 capital, the average CET 1 impact resulting from the add-back of provisions for all the banks in the sample applying these transitional arrangements corresponds to 118 bps. The main observations from the report highlight some areas where the EBA thinks further scrutiny is necessary. These include better understanding the drivers for the observed impact on CET 1, the quantitative and qualitative criteria used for transfers between stages, and the use of IFRS 9 transitional arrangements.
EBA notes that the post-implementation review of IFRS 9 is just starting and the effective impact of the standard, closely linked to the current and expected macroeconomic circumstances, as well as its implementation, will need to be reviewed through time. Therefore, EBA has developed a set of indicators using the supervisory reporting data that it intends to monitor on an ongoing basis. EBA will carry out further work on IFRS 9 modeling aspects to better understand the practices followed by banks and to assess which aspects might merit further investigation. Greater attention may be given to banks under the standardized approach, given their lack of modeling experience. As a medium/long-term action, EBA will consider the possibility of conducting a benchmarking exercise, whose objective would be to understand to what extent the use of different methodologies, models, inputs, and scenarios could lead to material inconsistencies in the expected credit loss outcomes between banks. In addition, EBA will continue to closely monitor and follow up on the ongoing work, at the level of BCBS, on the interaction between accounting expected credit loss models and regulatory provisions.
Keywords: Europe, EU, Accounting, Banking, IFRS 9, Expected Credit Loss, CET 1, Credit Risk, EBA
Previous ArticleRBNZ Amends Insurance Solvency Standards for New Zealand
BIS published a paper that provides an overview on the use of big data and machine learning in the central bank community.
APRA finalized the reporting standard ARS 115.0 on capital adequacy with respect to the standardized measurement approach to operational risk for authorized deposit-taking institutions in Australia.
ECB published a guide that outlines the principles and methods for calculating the penalties for regulatory breaches of prudential requirements by banks.
MAS and The Association of Banks in Singapore (ABS) jointly issued a paper that sets out good practices for the management of operational and other risks stemming from new work arrangements adopted by financial institutions amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
ACPR announced that a new data collection application, called DLPP (Datalake for Prudential), for collecting banking and insurance prudential data will go into production on April 12, 2021.
BCB announced that the Financial Stability Committee decided to maintain the countercyclical capital buffer (CCyB) for Brazil at 0%, at least until the end of 2021.
EIOPA has launched a European-wide comparative study on non-life underwriting risk in internal models, also kicking-off of the data collection phase.
SRB published an overview of the resolution tools available in the Banking Union and their impact on a bank’s ability to maintain continuity of access to financial market infrastructure services in resolution.
EBA is consulting on the implementing technical standards for Pillar 3 disclosures on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) risks, as set out in requirements under Article 449a of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR).
ESAs Issue Advice on KPIs on Sustainability for Nonfinancial Reporting