ECB published a paper that investigates whether window dressing behavior affects additional capital requirements imposed on global systemically important banks (G-SIBs) according to the post-crisis financial regulatory framework. The G-SIB assessment is conducted once a year, with the calculation of G-SIB scores relying on year-end data. Thus, banks involved in the exercise could have an incentive to reduce activities affecting the G-SIB score in the last quarter of the year, with the intention to reduce additional capital buffer requirements arising from the G-SIB framework.
The paper describes the data used and the current institutional setup to calculate the G-SIB risk score; introduces the methodology to investigate whether banks have been incentivized to window-dress, and the potential role played by capital market activities. The findings of the paper suggest that banks participating in the G-SIB exercise are more likely to reduce activities affecting the additional buffer requirements for G-SIBs at the end of the year, relative to the other banks in the sample. Furthermore, the effects are stronger for banks that are relatively close to a threshold between two buckets associated with different additional buffer requirements (which may have stronger incentives to window dress) and for banks with a larger amount of repo market activities that can be terminated relatively easily at reporting dates. The former result supports the view that it is indeed the G-SIB framework that is incentivizing the reduction in activities affecting the G-SIB score at year-end, rather than other factors such as contributions to the Single Resolution Fund or bank levies in a number of countries that are also based on year-end balance sheet data.
Overall, the study illustrates that G-SIB scores tended to decline over the sample period, in line with intention of the G-SIB framework to reduce the systemic footprint of banks. However, the regulatory context might have incentivized some banks to window-dress. This may imply a distortion in the relative ranking of the systemic importance of banks and may have adverse effects on the functioning of capital markets and on the provision of financial services, as banks reduce certain activities toward the end of the year. Against this background, further investigation could be warranted to understand whether an alternative metric for the risk score calculation might help to avoid the unintended consequences of the G-SIB framework while guaranteeing a smooth decreasing trend in the systemic importance of banks. Such alternative metrics are already being explored for the leverage ratio framework and could be extended further throughout the regulatory framework.
Related Link: Working Paper (PDF)
Keywords: International, Europe, Banking, Window Dressing Behavior, Systemic Risk, Single Resolution Fund, G-SIBs, G-SIB Framework, ECB
Previous ArticleECB Issues Legal Acts on Targeted Longer-Term Refinancing Operations
Next ArticleESRB Publishes Annual Report for 2018
PRA, via the consultation paper CP12/20, proposed changes to its rules, supervisory statements, and statements of policy to implement certain elements of the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD5).
EIOPA published the financial stability report that provides detailed quantitative and qualitative assessment of the key risks identified for the insurance and occupational pensions sectors in the European Economic Area.
EBA published its risk dashboard for the first quarter of 2020 together with the results of the risk assessment questionnaire.
EBA announced that the next stress testing exercise is expected to be launched at the end of January 2021 and its results are to be published at the end of July 2021.
PRA published the consultation paper CP11/20 that sets out its expectations and guidance related to auditors’ work on the matching adjustment under Solvency II.
MAS published a statement guidance on dividend distribution by banks.
APRA updated its capital management guidance for banks, particularly easing restrictions around paying dividends as institutions continue to manage the disruption caused by COVID-19 pandemic.
FSB published a report that reviews the progress on data collection for macro-prudential analysis and the availability and use of macro-prudential tools in Germany.
EBA issued a statement reminding financial institutions that the transition period between EU and UK will expire on December 31, 2020; this will end the possibility for the UK-based financial institutions to offer financial services to EU customers on a cross-border basis via passporting.
SRB published guidance on operational continuity in resolution and financial market infrastructure (FMI) contingency plans.