FSB is seeking feedback as part of its evaluation of the effects of the too-big-to-fail reforms for banks. To this end, FSB published a reference document, known as summary terms of reference, which details the objectives, scope, and process of the evaluation of too-big-to-fail reforms. Feedback, including evidence in support of the responses, should be submitted by June 21, 2019. FSB will consider the feedback it receives while preparing its draft report, which will be issued for public consultation in June 2020. The evaluation will be completed once final report is published by the end of 2020.
The evaluation, which is being conducted by a working group chaired by Claudia Buch (Vice-President of Deutsche Bundesbank), will assess whether the implemented reforms are reducing the systemic and moral hazard risks associated with the systemically important banks. It will also examine the broader effects of the reforms to address too-big-to-fail (for systemically important banks) on the overall functioning of the financial system. FSB is inviting feedback from banks, other financial institutions, academics, think tanks, industry, and consumer associations on the following issues:
- To what extent are too-big-to-fail reforms achieving their objectives, as described in the terms of reference? Are they reducing the systemic and moral hazard risks associated with systemically important banks?
- Which types of too-big-to-fail policies (for example: higher loss absorbency, total loss-absorbing capacity, more intensive supervision, resolution and resolvability) have had an impact on systemically important banks and how?
- Is there any evidence that the effects of these reforms differ by type of bank (for example: global vs. domestic systemically important banks)?
- What have been the broader effects of these reforms on financial system resilience and structure, the functioning of financial markets, the global financial integration, or the cost and availability of financing?
- Have there been any material unintended consequences from the implementation of these reforms to date?
- Any other issues related to the effects of too-big-to-fail reforms that have not been covered in the questions above.
Comment Due Date: June 21, 2019
Keywords: International, Banking, Too-Big-To-Fail, Systemic Risk, TLAC, Resolution, Crisis Management, FSB
Previous ArticleSARB Issues Directive on Pillar 3 Disclosure Requirements Framework
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.
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.
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).
APRA is consulting on updates to ARS 210.0, the reporting standard that sets out requirements for provision of information on liquidity and funding of an authorized deposit-taking institution.
FED released hypothetical scenarios for a second round of stress tests for banks.
FED is proposing to temporarily revise the capital assessments and stress testing reports (FR Y-14A/Q/M) to implement the changes necessary to conduct stressed analysis in connection with the re-submission of capital plans, using data as of June 30, 2020.
FED adopted a proposal to extend for three years, with revision, the information collection under the market risk capital rule (FR 4201; OMB No. 7100-0314).
EBA published a voluntary online survey seeking input from credit institutions on their practices and future plans for Pillar 3 disclosures on the environmental, social, and governance (ESG) risks.