FSB published a summary of responses received to consultation on the solvent wind-down of the derivatives and trading book portfolio of a global systemically important bank (G-SIB). After carefully considering the comments and the fact that solvent wind-down of derivatives and trading portfolios capabilities differ across jurisdictions, FSB has decided not to develop further guidance on the solvent wind-down of derivatives and trading portfolios at this stage. FSB will continue to promote solvent wind-down of derivatives and trading portfolios planning as part of overall resolution planning.
The discussion paper sought comments on the possible future guidance, along with the rationale, for solvent wind-down of derivatives and trading portfolios planning. The discussion paper identified the capabilities of firms that are necessary to support solvent wind-down of derivatives and trading portfolios, including the ability to perform the analysis necessary to support the preparation of a wind-down plan along with timely assessment and analysis to be undertaken to support decision-making by management and authorities, as a firm prepares for execution and executes the plan. The consultation was launched in June 2019, with the comment period on the consultation ending on August 02, 2019. Six industry groups commented on the discussion paper, with some of the responses being consolidated efforts and resulting in FSB receiving three comment letters for the publication. Respondents generally opined that further guidance, if any, should be considered in a way that would limit or reduce regulatory divergence, acknowledge differing business models, and be principles-based and capabilities-focused.
Keywords: International, Banking, Resolution Planning, G-SIB, Solvent Wind-Down, Derivatives, Recovery and Resolution, Trading Book, Systemic Risk, Responses to Consultation, FSB
Previous ArticleFSB Not Planning Further Guidance on Resolution Planning Disclosures
EC published the Implementing Regulation 2021/763 that lays down implementing technical standards for supervisory reporting and public disclosure of the minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL).
EBA published a report that examines the convergence of prudential supervisory practices in 2020 and offers conclusions of the EBA college monitoring activity.
APRA announced the standardization of quarterly reporting due dates for authorized deposit-taking institutions.
The private sector working group of ECB on euro risk-free rates published the recommendations to address events that would trigger fallbacks in the Euro Interbank Offered Rate (EURIBOR)-related contracts, along with the €STR-based EURIBOR fallback rates (rates that could be used if a fallback is triggered).
Bundesbank published a list of "EntryPoints" that are accepted in its reporting system; the list provides taxonomy version and name of the module against each EntryPoint.
EBA published the phase 1 of its reporting framework 3.1, with the technical package covering the new reporting requirements for investment firms (under the implementing technical standards on investment firms reporting).
The Sustainable Finance Taskforce of IOSCO held two roundtables, with global stakeholders, on the IOSCO priorities to enhance the reliability, comparability, and consistency of sustainability-related disclosures and to collect views on the practical implementation of a global system architecture for these disclosures.
Asia Pacific Australia Banking APS 111 Capital Adequacy Regulatory Capital Basel RBNZ APRA
ESMA published the final guidelines on outsourcing to cloud service providers.
EBA published annual data for two key concepts and indicators in the Deposit Guarantee Schemes (DGS) Directive—available financial means and covered deposits.