FED published a note that examines whether and how U.S. global systemically important banks, or G-SIBs, adjust the systemic importance indicators to lower their capital surcharges. Evidence shows that the U.S. G-SIBs mainly reduce one indicator of systemic importance—the notional amount of over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives. G-SIBs lower these amounts in the fourth quarter of each year, the quarter that FED uses to determine G-SIB surcharges.
Overall, the assessment studied estimates of changes in 13 systemic importance indicators of G-SIBs in the fourth quarter. The estimate of this effect was only statistically significant for the notional amount of OTC derivatives and implies that OTC derivatives held by G-SIBs drop 13.4% relative to non-G-SIBs at year-end, representing a large effect. The note highlights that this seasonal adjustment is stronger at G-SIBs than at other banks and that it became more pronounced after the G-SIB surcharge was introduced. These findings are consistent with the reports that U.S. bank managers have lowered surcharges to a large extent by compressing OTC derivatives—terminating offsetting contracts and replacing them with another contract with the same market risk but a lower notional amount than the terminated contracts.
The assessment used bank-level data, with the systemic importance indicators coming from the FR Y-15 report and the quarterly data on bank characteristics collected from the FR Y-9C report. Interest rate OTC derivatives are by far the largest category of OTC derivatives at U.S. banks. In the U.S., the G-SIB surcharge was introduced on January 01, 2016, was fully phased in on January 01, 2019, and is applied to the capital conservation buffer of the bank holding company. G-SIB surcharges incentivize banks to lower their indicators, which may decrease the risks that G-SIBs impose on financial stability, but may also adversely affect the economy, for example, if banks restrict the supply of certain services to reduce these indicators.
Related Link: Note
Keywords: Americas, US, Banking, Capital Surcharge, G-SIBs, OTC Derivatives, Systemic Risk, Regulatory Capital, FED
Previous ArticleECB Updates Q&A on AnaCredit Regulation in January 2020
EBA finalized the two sets of draft regulatory technical standards on the identification of material risk-takers and on the classes of instruments used for remuneration under the Investment Firms Directive (IFD).
EC published, in the Official Journal of the European Union, a notification that the European Court of Auditors (ECA) has published a special report on resolution planning in the Single Resolution Mechanism.
BoE published a scenario against which it will be stress testing banks in 2021, in addition to setting out the key elements of the 2021 stress test, guidance on the 2021 stress test, and the variable paths for the 2021 stress test.
PRA published a consultation paper (CP3/21) proposes rules regarding the timing of identity verification required for eligibility of depositor protection under the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS).
FSB published the work program for 2021, which reflects a strategic shift in priorities in the COVID-19 environment.
FCA announced that 50% firms have started using the new data collection platform RegData, which is slated to replace the existing platform known Gabriel.
Bundesbank published Version 5.0 of the derivation rules for completeness check at the form level, with respect to the data quality of the European harmonized reporting system.
FED finalized a rule that updates capital planning requirements to reflect the new framework from 2019 that sorts large banks into categories, with requirements that are tailored to the risks of each category.
ECB published results of the quarterly lending survey conducted on 143 banks in the euro area.
ESAs published the final draft implementing technical standards on reporting of intra-group transactions and risk concentration of financial conglomerates subject to the supplementary supervision in EU.