OSFI published a discussion paper seeks input on possible tailoring of the capital and liquidity requirements for small and medium-size deposit-taking institutions. The discussion paper outlines proposals for the segmentation of small and medium-size banks and the application of more tailored capital and liquidity requirements. Comment period on the consultation ends on September 27, 2019. In this phase, which is phase 1, focus is on the Pillar 1 minimum requirements. Subsequent phases of this exercise will focus on the Pillar 2 (prudential and risk management expectations) and Pillar 3 (public disclosure) requirements, which will be the subject of future consultations.
The discussion paper provides a summary of the four categories of small and medium-size deposit-taking institutions, including the criteria for segmentation and characteristics of institutions that will fall into each category. Pillar 1 requirements, which the consultation addresses, include the Capital Adequacy Requirements Guideline, the Leverage Requirements Guideline, and the Liquidity Adequacy Requirements Guideline. These guidelines are more rules-based in nature, which allows comparability and ensures consistent application across deposit-taking institutions. However, given the varying nature and complexity of deposit-taking institutions, the ratios produced by these requirements (for example, risk-based capital ratios, leverage ratio, liquidity coverage ratio) may not be the best measure of the risks faced by all small and medium-size institutions. To address this concern, OSFI is assessing how the existing capital and liquidity requirements can be modified for some small and medium-size institutions and is exploring alternative measures to assess the adequacy of capital and liquidity.
The current frameworks already incorporate some simpler options for smaller, less complex institutions (for example, flat risk-weights that can be applied to determine the credit risk capital held against certain assets). However, there may be a need to develop additional, simpler approaches for use by smaller or less risky institutions. In addition, the standardized approaches may not be sufficiently risk-sensitive to capture the risks associated with exposures in certain asset classes (for example, real estate). In these instances, OSFI will look to develop more risk-sensitive approaches that can be used to better capture the risk to which the small and medium-size institutions are exposed. Part of the work to assess the Pillar 1 requirements for small and medium-size deposit-taking institutions will involve the assessment of the current regulatory reporting regime, including the content and frequency of regulatory reporting.
This initiative, which is one of the key priorities identified in the Strategic Plan 2019–2022 of OSFI, will explore revisions to the capital and liquidity frameworks to better reflect the size, nature, complexity, and business activities of small and medium-size deposit-taking institutions. As new capital and liquidity standards are developed internationally and implemented domestically, OSFI is focused on ensuring that its capital and liquidity regime remains appropriate for these smaller, less complex organizations.
Comment Due Date: September 27, 2019
Keywords: Americas, Canada, Banking, Basel III, Proportionality, Reporting, Pillar 1, Regulatory Capital, LCR, Leverage Ratio, OSFI
Previous ArticleIMF Report on 2019 Article IV Consultation on Euro Area Policies
PRA published a set of questions and answers (Q&A) covering common queries regarding residential and commercial property valuations, for the purpose of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR), during the period of disruption caused by COVID-19 pandemic.
IOSCO proposed updates to its principles for regulated entities that outsource tasks to service providers.
MAS announced that the first phase of the Veritas initiative will commence with the development of fairness metrics in credit risk scoring and customer marketing.
BoE published the Statistical Notice 2020/4 to update the buy-to-let (BTL) Phase 2 and Phase 3 definitions for the Interest Rate Type data item.
FSI published a brief note that examines challenges facing the banking sector as a result of the payment deferral programs put in place to support borrowers affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.
PRA published the policy statement PS14/20, which contains the supervisory statement SS1/20 and the feedback to responses to the consultation paper CP22/19 on expectations for investment by firms in accordance with the Prudent Person Principle, or PPP, as set out in the Investments Part of the PRA Rulebook.
EBA published an opinion following the notification by the French macro-prudential authority, the Haut Conseil de Stabilité Financière (HCSF), of its intention to extend a measure introduced in 2018 on the use of Article 458(9) of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR).
As part of a Research Bulletin on the recent policy-relevant work, ECB published an article that examines the lessons learned from past crises for nonperforming loan resolution in the post COVID-19 period.
RBNZ published the financial stability report for May 2020. This review of the financial system in the country highlights that the economic disruption associated with COVID-19 will present challenges to the financial system.
ECB updated the guidance notes for reporting related to the statistics on holdings of securities by reporting banking groups (SHSG).