IMF published its staff report and selected issues report under the 2018 Article IV consultation with Switzerland. Directors commended the authorities for progress in enhancing the resilience of the banking sector, including through the tightening of macro-prudential policies. They saw scope for targeting macro-prudential measures to contain risk-taking in the property market and removing tax incentives that encourage leveraged acquisition of real estate. They also encouraged reforming the pension system to ensure its long-term viability.
The staff report reveals that liquidity and capital of domestically focused banks exceed regulatory minima. Capital and liquidity buffers have increased across all categories of banks, including as a result of the countercyclical capital buffer on real estate exposure. A series of macro-prudential and regulatory measures was introduced in 2012–14, which were effective at containing property prices and moderating mortgage credit growth. Reinforcing the macro-prudential framework for real estate is needed. Measures requiring banks to hold additional capital if they choose to assume more risk will help to absorb future losses but may not curtail the buildup of risk when banks have ample capital buffers or if higher risk is priced into interest rates. Greater differentiation of risk-weights will be introduced between income-generating and owner-occupied mortgages, and among different loan-to-value buckets, consistent with the new Basel III guidelines. With changes in mandatory regulation requiring legal amendments, voluntary self-regulation by banks may be more timely and, moreover, any measures must be endorsed and supervised by FINMA. In addition, FINMA exercises close oversight of activities where regulation may not fully reflect prevailing risks.
The staff advises on several measures to limit future risk buildup and increase capacity to respond if risks materialize. Stricter regulatory limits on loan-to-value and debt-to-income ratios should be adopted, with only limited exemptions allowed. Mortgages on investment property should carry a surcharge on the applicable risk-weight in a manner consistent with Basel III requirements as published in December 2017. Intensified monitoring of individual banks that share similar business models, especially in regionally concentrated markets, is advised. To prevent regulatory arbitrage, nonbank mortgage lending should be subject to similar macro-prudential standards as for banks, where it is not already the case. The strengthened supervisory focus on cyber risk in the financial sector is also welcome. Furthermore, stress testing and building defenses against cybersecurity attacks, which could be highly disruptive and impose large costs, should be stepped up. Financial sector oversight should remain vigilant and independent.
The banking sector encompasses about 260 banks, with the two global systemically important banks (G-SIBs) and three other domestic systemic banks accounting for about 58% of system-wide assets. For the G-SIBs, too-big-to-fail regulations are appropriately calibrated to the relatively small size of the economy of the home country. Nonetheless, stress tests indicate that domestically oriented banks have sufficient capital to cope with a sharp increase in interest rates or correction in house prices, although a combined shock could have significant effects on some banks. The market share of G-SIBs in the Swiss mortgage market has decreased, although risks may rise under adverse global scenarios. Switzerland exceeds global minimum standards on regulation of systemic banks, reflecting the large size of the balance sheets of these banks relative to Swiss GDP. While delineating supervisory and regulatory authority is appropriate, preserving independent and robust supervision is critical. The selected issues report examines the response of the banking sector to the negative interest rate policy.
Keywords: Europe, Switzerland, Banking, Pensions, Stress Testing, Article IV, G-SIBs, IMF
Previous ArticleDanièle Nouy of ECB Speaks on the Work of ECB Banking Supervision
APRA has concluded its review of the comprehensive plans of authorized deposit-taking institutions for the assessment and management of loans with repayment deferrals.
ESAs (EBA, EIOPA, and ESMA) published the first joint report that assesses risks in the financial sector since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.
BoE and HM Treasury confirmed that the COVID Corporate Financing Facility (CCFF) will close for new purchases of commercial paper, with effect from March 23, 2021.
ECB published a decision allowing the euro area banks under its direct supervision to exclude certain central bank exposures from the leverage ratio.
ESAs launched a survey seeking feedback on the presentational aspects of product templates under the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR or Regulation 2019/2088).
ECB published input of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB) into the EBA feasibility report on reducing the reporting burden for banks in EU.
EC adopted a decision determining, for a limited period of time, that the regulatory framework applicable to central counterparties, or CCPs, in the UK and Northern Ireland is equivalent to the requirements laid down in the European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR or Regulation 648/2012).
EBA has decided to phase out the guidelines on legislative and non-legislative moratoria of loan repayments, in accordance with the earlier specified end of September deadline.
EBA published an Opinion addressed to EC to raise awareness about the opportunity to clarify certain issues related to the definition of credit institution in the upcoming review of the Capital Requirements Directive and Regulation (CRD and CRR).
ECB finalized the guide on assessment methodology for the internal model method for calculating exposure to counterparty credit risk (CCR) and the advanced method for own funds requirements for credit valuation adjustment (A-CVA) risk.