EBA Consults on Estimation of Pillar 2 and Combined Buffers for MREL
EBA proposed regulatory technical standards that specify the methodology to be used by resolution authorities to estimate the Pillar 2 and combined buffer requirements at resolution group level for setting the minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities requirement (MREL) under the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive (BRRD). The estimation of Pillar 2 and combined buffer requirements is necessary for setting MREL when the resolution group perimeter differs significantly from the prudential perimeter, at the level of which own fund requirements have been set by the competent authority. The consultation runs until October 24, 2020, with the final standards and the communication to EC being planned for December 2020.
EBA proposes a pragmatic approach aiming to create a framework to improve accuracy in setting the MREL requirement, without requiring sub-consolidation at resolution level and without blurring the lines of responsibilities between competent and resolution authorities in the capital setting process. The proposed approach aims to focus on resolution groups that are significantly different from the prudential group on which capital requirements have been set. To ensure that this methodology only captures resolution groups for which an estimation of Pillar 2 and combined buffer requirements is effectively needed, it was decided to introduce a materiality threshold of 5%. The threshold is meant to express the difference between the total risk exposure measure of the resolution group and the banking group or entity closest in size for which own fund requirements have been effectively set by the competent authority.
If a resolution group is more than 5% different in terms of total risk exposure amount from either the overall banking group or from the main entity for which an additional own fund requirement has been set, then two ways of estimating the resolution group capital requirements have been proposed for setting MREL—a top-down approach and bottom-up approach. With regard to the estimation of the combined buffer requirement, the proposed approach is equally straightforward and proportionate. Under the proposed methodology, the following would apply:
- For the global systemically important institution (G-SII) buffer, the proposal is to keep the G-SII buffer as an input to computing MREL.
- For other systemically important institution (O-SII) buffer and Systemic Risk buffer, the proposal is to use, as an input to calibrate MREL, the buffer of either the banking group or largest entity constituting the resolution group—whichever is the closest in size. The level of the O-SII buffer and the Systemic Risk buffer can be adjusted up or down by the resolution authority as per Article 45c(7), paragraph 6 of the BRRD.
- No estimation methodology has been proposed for both the capital conservation buffer and the countercyclical buffer. This is because the former is not bank-specific and would be simply set at the consolidated resolution group level and the latter is not included in the MREL calibration.
Related Links
Comment Due Date: October 24, 2020
Keywords: Europe, EU, Banking, MREL, Pillar2, BRRD, Resolution Framework, Basel, Regulatory Technical Standards, Proportionality, Systemic Risk, Capital Buffers, EBA
Featured Experts

María Cañamero
Skilled market researcher; growth strategist; successful go-to-market campaign developer

Pierre-Etienne Chabanel
Brings expertise in technology and software solutions around banking regulation, whether deployed on-premises or in the cloud.

Nicolas Degruson
Works with financial institutions, regulatory experts, business analysts, product managers, and software engineers to drive regulatory solutions across the globe.
Previous Article
Bundesbank Issues Circular on Adjustments to AnaCredit ReportingRelated Articles
EC Adopts Financial Reporting Changes Arising from Benchmark Reforms
EC published Regulation 2021/25 that addresses amendments related to the financial reporting consequences of replacement of the existing interest rate benchmarks with alternative reference rates.
BIS Bulletin Examines Key Elements of Policy Response to Cyber Risk
BIS published a bulletin, or a note, that examines the cyber threat landscape in the context of the pandemic and discusses policies to reduce risks to financial stability.
HMT Updates List of Post-Brexit Equivalence Decisions in UK
HM Treasury, also known as HMT, has updated the table containing the list of the equivalence decisions that came into effect in UK at the end of the transition period of its withdrawal from EU.
EBA Issues Erratum for Technical Package on Reporting Framework 3.0
EBA published an erratum for technical package on phase 1 of the reporting framework 3.0.
APRA Publishes FAQ on Measurement of Credit Risk Weighted Assets
APRA updated a frequently asked question (FAQ), for authorized deposit-taking institutions, on the measurement of credit risk weighted assets.
EBA Publishes Risk Dashboard for Third Quarter of 2020
EBA published the quarterly risk dashboard, along with the results of the Risk Assessment Questionnaire survey among 60 banks and 15 market analysts.
ECB Analysis Shows Privacy as Biggest Concern in Use of Digital Euro
ECB concluded the public consultation on the introduction of a digital euro in EU.
ECB Finalizes Guide on Supervisory Approach to Bank Consolidation
ECB published a guide that sets out the supervisory approach to consolidation in the banking sector.
SRB Chair Outlines Work Priorities for 2021
The SRB Chair Elke König published an article setting out work priorities for 2021.
FDIC Selects Companies to Compete in Final Phase of Tech Sprint
FDIC has selected 11 technology companies—including BearingPoint, Fed Reporter, Inc, and S&P Global Market Intelligence, LLC—for inclusion in the third and final phase of the rapid prototyping competition.