ESMA published the responses received to its consultation on draft guidelines on “as stringent as” notion in the CRA Regulation. The consultation was issued on March 27, 2018 and comment period ended on May 25, 2018. ESMA published responses from four institutions, three of which are credit rating agencies—namely, Rating-Agentur Expert RA GmbH, A.M. Best Europe-Rating Services Limited, and Moody's Investors Service Ltd. U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Center for Capital Markets Competitiveness, was the other respondent.
This consultation followed on from the updated Guidelines on endorsement (November 2017) and was in response to requests from the industry. The aim of the proposed supplementary guidance is two-fold:
- To provide clarity regarding the general principle, ESMA relies on when assessing whether an alternative requirement can be considered as stringent as a requirement set out in the CRA Regulation
- ESMA’s concrete assessment of a number of alternative internal requirements, which are in place in a third-country credit rating agency (CRA)
In the updated guidelines on endorsement, ESMA had clarified that compliance with the third-country legal framework will no longer be considered proof that a third-country CRA fulfills requirements that are at least as stringent as those set out in the CRA Regulation. Instead, an endorsing CRA has two options to demonstrate to ESMA that the "as stringent as" condition is met: either stating that the third-country CRA complies with the relevant provisions of CRA Regulation or stating that the third-country CRA has established and fulfills alternative internal requirements, which are at least as stringent as the relevant endorsement provisions of CRA Regualtion.
Related Link: Consultation and Responses
Keywords: Europe, EU, Securities, CRA Regulation, Endorsement Regime, Responses to Consultation, ESMA
Previous ArticleValdis Dombrovskis of EC Speaks on Reviews of Solvency II
BCBS is consulting on the principles for operational resilience and the revisions to the principles for sound management of operational risk for banks.
The Financial Stability Institute (FSI) of BIS published a brief note that examines the supervisory challenges associated with certain temporary regulatory relief measures introduced by BCBS and prudential authorities in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
HKMA, together with the Banking Sector Small and Medium-Size Enterprise (SME) Lending Coordination Mechanism, announced a ninety-day repayment deferment for trade facilities under the Pre-approved Principal Payment Holiday Scheme.
The Advisory Scientific Committee of ESRB published a response, in the form of an Insights Paper, to the EBA proposals for reforms to the stress testing framework in EU.
MAS announced several initiatives to support adoption of the Singapore Overnight Rate Average (SORA), which is administered by MAS.
BoE updated the reporting template for Form ER as well as the Form ER definitions, which contain guidance on the methodology to be used in calculating annualized interest rates.
PRA published the policy statement PS19/20 on the final policy for extending coverage under the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) for Temporary High Balance.
EBA published the final draft implementing technical standards for disclosures and reporting on the minimum requirements for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL) and the total loss-absorbing capacity (TLAC) requirements in EU.
EBA published an erratum for the phase 2 of technical package on the reporting framework 2.10.
EC published the Implementing Regulation 2020/1145, which lays down technical information for calculation of technical provisions and basic own funds.