FED published a paper that examines whether governance structures for macro-prudential policies affect decisions to implement Basel III macro-prudential capital buffers. The paper presents empirical evidence that stronger governance for macro-prudential policies significantly increases the probability of using the countercyclical capital buffer (CCyB). The analysis also shows that stronger governance increases the sensitivity of this probability to credit growth, consistent with taking actions to mitigate financial stability risks.
The study finds that the probabilities of using CCyB are higher in countries that have financial stability committees with stronger governance mechanisms and fewer agencies, which reduces coordination problems. The probability of the use of CCyB by a country is even higher when financial stability committees or ministry of finance have direct authority to set the CCyB; this might be because setting the CCyB involves establishing a new macro-financial analytical process to regularly assess systemic risks and allows these new entities to influence the traditional process of writing rules. The study finds that only some of the new multi-agency committees—specifically, those with tools or those with fewer member agencies—are consistent with a functional delegation motive. While countries may prefer to create these committees mainly for improved communication, large committees or those with weak governance mechanisms may actually hinder effective decision-making.
The study also shows that the institutional arrangements and establishing clear responsibilities for new tools have a measurable effect on decisions. New authorities with tools and accountability can have a significant effect on using the CCyB. The study does not find that central banks with direct powers are more likely than independent bank regulators to use the CCyB or increase the minimum systemically important bank surcharge, although central banks are involved in multiple ways in these decisions. For the CCyB, they are the direct authority in 34 countries (wherever they are also the prudential regulator) and they make formal recommendations in five more countries. However, the study does not find a distinct effect for the central bank from the prudential regulator for any of the macro-prudential capital buffer decisions.
Related Link: Paper
Keywords: Americas, US, Banking, CCyB, Basel III, Systemic Risk, Macro-Prudential Policy, Financial Stability, FED
Previous ArticleECB on Simulating Fire Sales in a System of Banks and Asset Managers
PRA published the policy statement PS8/21, which contains the final supervisory statement SS3/21 on the PRA approach to supervision of the new and growing non-systemic banks in UK.
EBA published a report that sets out the final draft regulatory technical standards specifying the conditions according to which consolidation shall be carried out in line with Article 18 of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR).
EBA updated the list of other systemically important institutions (O-SIIs) in EU.
BCBS published two reports that discuss transmission channels of climate-related risks to the banking system and the measurement methodologies of climate-related financial risks.
UK Authorities (FCA and PRA) welcomed the findings of FSB peer review on the implementation of financial sector remuneration reforms in the UK.
PRA and FCA jointly issued a letter that highlights risks associated with the increasing volumes of deposits that are placed with banks and building societies via deposit aggregators and how to mitigate these risks.
MFSA announced that amendments to the Banking Act, Subsidiary Legislation, and Banking Rules will be issued in the coming months, to transpose the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD5) into the national regulatory framework.
EC finalized the Delegated Regulation 2021/598 that supplements the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR or 575/2013) and lays out the regulatory technical standards for assigning risk-weights to specialized lending exposures.
OSFI launched a consultation to explore ways to enhance the OSFI assurance over capital, leverage, and liquidity returns for banks and insurers, given the increasing complexity arising from the evolving regulatory reporting framework due to IFRS 17 (Insurance Contracts) standard and Basel III reforms.
ECB published results of the benchmarking analysis of the recovery plan cycle for 2019.