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
MAS and Temasek jointly released a report to mark the successful conclusion of the fifth and final phase of Project Ubin, which focused on building a blockchain-based multi-currency payments network prototype.
EBA published phase 2 of the technical package on the reporting framework 2.10, providing the technical tools and specifications for implementation of EBA reporting requirements.
APRA updated the lists of the Direct to APRA (D2A) validation rules for authorized deposit-taking institutions, insurers, and superannuation entities.
PRA updated the statement that provides guidance to regulated firms on implementation of the EBA guidelines on reporting and disclosure of exposures subject to measures applied in response to the COVID-19 crisis.
EBA updated the 2019 list of closely correlated currencies that was originally published in December 2013.
FASB issued a proposed Accounting Standards Update that would grant insurance companies, adversely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, an additional year to implement the Accounting Standards Update No. 2018-12 on targeted improvements to accounting for long-duration insurance contracts, or LDTI (Topic 944).
APRA updated the regulatory approach for loans subject to repayment deferrals amid the COVID-19 crisis.
BCBS and FSB published a report on supervisory issues associated with benchmark transition.
IAIS published a report on supervisory issues associated with benchmark transition from an insurance perspective.
ESMA updated the reporting manual on the European Single Electronic Format (ESEF).