APRA Issues Guidance on Indemnities in Divestment Transactions
In a letter to the authorized deposit-taking institutions, APRA issued guidance on the management of risks associated with indemnities in divestment transactions. The principles in the guidance on prudent management and oversight apply equally to all other APRA-regulated industries, where similar risks are faced. APRA expects the Board to review and approve, as part of the oversight of significant transactions, indemnities that give rise to a material contingent liability for an institution. The guidance specifies that an appropriate level of capital should be held for such risk exposures.
In recent months, APRA has been in discussion with several deposit-taking institutions on indemnities provided to acquiring entities as part of divestment transactions. While indemnities are not a new feature of merger and acquisition activity, their scope and nature appears to be shifting in focus, particularly as entities manage matters of conduct and customer redress. Without appropriate controls, these indemnities can expose institutions to potentially significant liabilities. Thus, APRA expects the following from the authorized deposit-taking institutions:
- Indemnities are capped and timebound, as uncapped indemnities are inconsistent with the prudential requirements for authorized deposit-taking institutions that prohibit unlimited exposures.
- Indemnity types are clearly distinguished, to reflect the difference in risk profile of the underlying exposures. This is important for identifying, recording, and monitoring the risk, capital treatment, and management approach.
- Governance arrangements and accountabilities are clearly defined and implemented to ensure appropriate oversight and controls around indemnities, both in setting them and monitoring and influencing the underlying risks post-transaction.
- Institutions should assess the need to provision for each material indemnity, both at inception and during the life of the indemnity, having regard to the likelihood that the indemnity will be called upon.
- Institutions must hold an appropriate and commensurate level of operational risk capital for the financial risks associated with indemnities. They should also engage APRA to demonstrate the appropriateness of intended operational risk capital treatment for current or prospective material indemnities. Where this does not appropriately reflect the level of risk, APRA will consider an adjustment to operational risk capital requirements
- Institutions should consider gaining independent assessment and validation of provisioning and capital for material indemnities.
Related Links
Keywords: Asia Pacific, Australia, Banking, Divestment Transactions, Governance, Operational Risk, Basel, Capital Requirements, APRA
Featured Experts
María Cañamero
Skilled market researcher; growth strategist; successful go-to-market campaign developer
Nicolas Degruson
Works with financial institutions, regulatory experts, business analysts, product managers, and software engineers to drive regulatory solutions across the globe.
Patrycja Oleksza
Applies proficiency and knowledge to regulatory capital and reporting analysis and coordinates business and product strategies in the banking technology area
Previous Article
FED Committees to Address Micro- and Macro-Prudential Climate RisksRelated Articles
APRA Sets LAC for D-SIBs, Proposes to Enhance Crisis Preparedness
APRA issued a letter on the loss-absorbing capacity (LAC) requirements for domestic systemically important banks (D-SIBs) and published a discussion paper, along with the proposed the prudential standards on financial contingency planning (CPS 190) and resolution planning (CPS 900).
EC to Review Macro-Prudential Rules while ESRB Assesses Policy Stance
The European Commission (EC) launched a call for evidence, until March 18, 2022, as part of a comprehensive review of the macro-prudential rules for the banking sector under the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR) and Directive (CRD IV).
FSB Sets Out Good Practices for Crisis Management Groups
The Financial Stability Board (FSB) published a report that sets out good practices for crisis management groups.
APRA Penalizes Heritage Bank for Incorrect Reporting of Capital
The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) found that Heritage Bank Limited had incorrectly reported capital because of weaknesses in operational risk and compliance frameworks, although the bank did not breach minimum prudential capital ratios at any point and remains well-capitalized.
OSFI Releases Annual Report 2021-2022
The Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) released the annual report for 2020-2021.
OSFI Updates Timeline for Implementation of Certain Basel Rules
Through a letter addressed to the banking sector entities, the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) announced deferral of the domestic implementation of the final Basel III reforms from the first to the second quarter of 2023.
EC Defers Adoption of Regulatory Standards for Disclosures Under SFDR
EIOPA recently published a letter in which EC is informing the European Parliament and Council that it could not adopt the set of draft regulatory technical standards for disclosures under the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) within the stipulated three-month period, given their length and technical detail.
FCA Releases MIFIDPRU Application Forms and Third Set of Rules on IFPR
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) published the third in a series of policy statements that set out rules to introduce the UK Investment Firm Prudential Regime (IFPR), which will take effect on January 01, 2022.
APRA Finalizes Capital Adequacy Standards for Banks
The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) published, along with a summary of its response to the consultation feedback, an information paper that summarizes the finalized capital framework that is in line with the internationally agreed Basel III requirements for banks.
CPMI-IOSCO Seek Comments on Access to Central Clearing and Portability
The Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures (CPMI) and the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) issued a consultative report focusing on access to central counterparty (CCP) clearing and client-position portability.
