APRA published information papers on the indicators that contributed to the countercyclical capital buffer (CCyB) decision and on the review of the prudential measures for residential mortgage lending risks. APRA also announced its decision to keep the CCyB for authorized deposit-taking institutions on hold at zero percent. APRA reviews the buffer quarterly and it has been set at zero percent of risk-weighted assets since it was introduced in 2016.
In the annual information paper on CCyB, APRA outlined the core economic indicators that contributed to the decision, including the following:
- Moderate growth in housing and business credit over 2018
- A decline in higher-risk categories of new housing lending, including interest-only loans, investor loans, and lending at high loan-to-value ratio (LVR) levels
- Continued strengthening in authorized deposit-taking institutions’ capital positions as they move to implement the requirements of “unquestionably strong” capital ratios
Also influencing APRA’s judgment that a zero percent CCyB setting remained appropriate has been the impact of measures that APRA has taken since 2014 to address systemic risks related to residential mortgage lending standards. In a separate but related information paper, APRA detailed the objectives for its interventions in the residential mortgage lending market in recent years, which were aimed at reinforcing sound mortgage lending standards and increasing the resilience of the banking sector in the face of heightened risks. The following are the key findings in the paper:
- Authorized deposit-taking institutions have lifted the quality of their lending standards, with improvements in policies and practices across the industry.
- During the period in which the adjustments were occurring (2015-2018), the growth in total credit for housing was stable.
- The composition of credit for housing, however, changed notably: the rate of growth of lending to investors fell considerably and the proportion of loans written on an interest only basis roughly halved (although, given the high starting point, one in five loans is still made on an interest-only basis).
- Although APRA did not introduce measures to specifically target lending with high LVR, there has been a moderation in high LVR lending in recent years.
- Initially, authorized deposit-taking institutions sought to adjust lending practices without resorting to interest rate increases. Ultimately, however, interest rates were used to help manage demand for credit. The pricing differential that has emerged between owner-occupied and investor loans, and between amortizing and interest-only loans, is often seen to be a product of the APRA benchmarks, but is also reflective of changes to capital requirements that will likely see differential pricing for higher risk lending continue into the future.
In conjunction with the other agencies on the Council of Financial Regulators, APRA will continue to closely monitor economic conditions and will adjust the CCyB if future circumstances warrant it. Separately, APRA is also considering setting the buffer at a non-zero default rate as part of its ongoing review of the authorized deposit-taking institutions capital framework.
Keywords: Asia Pacific, Australia, Banking, CCyB, Residential Mortgage Lending, Systemic Risk, LVR, APRA
Sam leads the quantitative research team within the CreditEdge™ research group. In this role, he develops novel risk and forecasting solutions for financial institutions while providing thought leadership on related trends in global financial markets.
Previous ArticleCPMI-IOSCO Conclude that Switzerland has Generally Implemented PFMI
EU published Directive 2021/338, which amends the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID) II and the Capital Requirements Directives (CRD 4 and 5) to facilitate recovery from the COVID-19 crisis.
The Standing Committee of the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) recommended that a systemic risk buffer level of 4.5% for domestic exposures can be considered appropriate for addressing the identified systemic risks to the stability of the financial system in Norway.
In a recent statement, PRA clarified its approach to the application of certain EU regulatory technical standards and EBA guidelines on standardized and internal ratings-based approaches to credit risk, following the end of the Brexit transition.
In a recently published letter addressed to the G20 finance ministers and central bank governors, the FSB Chair Randal K. Quarles has set out the key FSB priorities for 2021.
EU published, in the Official Journal of the European Union, a corrigendum to the revised Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR2 or Regulation 2019/876).
ESAs published a joint supervisory statement on the effective and consistent application and on national supervision of the regulation on sustainability-related disclosures in the financial services sector (SFDR).
EC published a public consultation on the review of crisis management and deposit insurance frameworks in EU.
HKMA announced that enhancements will be made to the Special 100% Loan Guarantee of the SME Financing Guarantee Scheme (SFGS) and the application period will be extended to December 31, 2021.
EBA launched consultations on the regulatory and implementing technical standards on cooperation and information exchange between competent authorities involved in prudential supervision of investment firms.
BoE issued a letter to the CEOs of eight major UK banks that are in scope of the first Resolvability Assessment Framework (RAF) reporting and disclosure cycle.