EBA published its first peer review report on the stress tests and the resilience of Deposit Guarantee Schemes. The review, which is mandated under the Deposit Guarantee Schemes Directive or DGSD, was based on the results of the Deposit Guarantee Scheme stress tests and intended to identify good practices and areas for improvement. The report presents the results of an assessment of 135 Deposit Guarantee Scheme stress tests performed by 32 Deposit Guarantee Schemes from 27 member states in EU. In the report, EBA highlighted certain shortcomings and provided early indications on how to improve and enhance the framework.
The DGSD requires member states to ensure that Deposit Guarantee Schemes perform stress tests of their systems. In 2016, EBA issued guidelines on stress tests of Deposit Guarantee Schemes that set out the scope, principle-based requirements, and a list of four "priority tests" that Deposit Guarantee Schemes are required to perform. The DGSD, in turn, requires EBA to use these reports to conduct a peer review of all Deposit Guarantee Schemes across EU, at least every five years. In this exercise, the priority tests covered operational and funding capabilities of Deposit Guarantee Schemes, credit institutions’ single customer view (SCV) files containing depositor information to prepare for a Deposit Guarantee Scheme payout, and cross-border cooperation between Deposit Guarantee Schemes in case of cross-border branches. EBA concluded that such tests have become an established tool to prepare for Deposit Guarantee Scheme interventions.
EBA is of the view that, using the grading system outlined in the guidelines on stress tests of Deposit Guarantee Schemes, the overall resilience of Deposit Guarantee Schemes across the EU is "fair," which is the second best result, after "optimal." This means that the identified shortcomings are isolated and/or can easily be addressed by the Deposit Guarantee Schemes at the point of failure and are unlikely to affect the ability of Deposit Guarantee Schemes to perform their tasks in line with the DGSD. The report also identified good practices that were deployed by a number of Deposit Guarantee Schemes and that can be considered by the other Deposit Guarantee Schemes. EBA also highlighted certain shortcomings and provided early indications on how to improve and enhance the framework. In particular, EBA found that the divergence in the type of exercises performed and in the way outcomes were reported made it difficult for EBA to compare the tests between Deposit Guarantee Schemes, thus hampering the desired consistency. EBA, therefore, provided early indications on how to enhance the comparability for future peer reviews. These early indications will also serve as input for any potential future revision of the EBA guidelines on stress tests of Deposit Guarantee Schemes.
While the peer review performed by EBA is a regular exercise required by the DGSD, it also includes provisions stemming from the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. The report outlines lessons learned from a real-life payout case in one EU member state that coincided with the pandemic. In relation to the COVID‐19 pandemic, the report includes an early indication of how to improve the framework by exploring how to incentivize Deposit Guarantee Schemes to perform special tests that allow them to assess scenarios resulting in severe business continuity problems, such as a pandemic, power outages, or significant operational disruptions.
Keywords: Europe, EU, Banking, DGS, DGSD, Deposit Guarantee Schemes, Peer Review, Resolution Framework, COVID-19, EBA
Leading economist; commercial real estate; performance forecasting, econometric infrastructure; data modeling; credit risk modeling; portfolio assessment; custom commercial real estate analysis; thought leader.
Previous ArticleBCBS Met, Discussed COVID Impact and Finalized CVA Risk Framework
EBA published a report analyzing the impact of the unwind mechanism of the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR) for a sample of European banks over a three-year period, from the end of 2016 to the first quarter of 2020.
In response to questions from a member of the European Parliament, the ECB President Christine Lagarde issued a letter clarifying the possibility of amending the AnaCredit Regulation and making targeted longer-term refinancing operations (TLTROs) dependent on the climate-related impact of bank loans.
IASB started the post-implementation review of the classification and measurement requirements in IFRS 9 on financial instruments and added the review as a project to its work plan.
FSB published a report that examines progress in implementing policy measures to enhance the resolvability of systemically important financial institutions.
EBA published a report on the benchmarking of national loan enforcement frameworks across 27 EU member states, in response to the call for advice from EC.
FSB published a letter from its Chair Randal K. Quarles, along with two reports exploring various aspects of the market turmoil resulting from the COVID-19 event.
RBNZ launched a consultation on the details for implementing the final Capital Review decisions announced in December 2019.
The Trustees of the IFRS Foundation, which are responsible for the governance and oversight of IASB, have announced the appointment of Dr. Andreas Barckow as the IASB Chair, effective July 2021.
HKMA issued a letter to consult the banking industry on a full set of proposed draft amendments to the Banking (Capital) Rules for implementing the Basel standard on capital requirements for banks’ equity investments in funds in Hong Kong.
ESRB published an opinion assessing the decision of Swedish Financial Supervisory Authority (FSA) to extend the application period of a stricter measure for residential mortgage lending, in accordance with Article 458 of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR).