FSB Examines Implementation of Resolution Regimes in Financial Sector
FSB published a report that examines progress in implementing policy measures to enhance the resolvability of systemically important financial institutions and sets out plans for further work. The report also presents the status of implementation of aspects of bank resolution regimes by FSB jurisdictions, along with the planned actions and timelines going forward. The report reveals that significant progress has been achieved; however, progress is uneven across reform areas and sectors and there is need to be mindful of remaining gaps. The report concludes that authorities and firms need to be mindful of the remaining gaps as they work toward making resolution strategies and plans operational in all sectors.
This report, which has been prepared by the FSB Resolution Steering Group or ReSG, is the eighth report on the implementation of resolution reforms. It takes stock of progress made by FSB members in implementing reforms and summarizes findings from the monitoring of resolvability across the banking, insurance, and financial market infrastructure sectors. It discusses progress in implementing the resolution policies of FSB for banks, insurers, and central counterparties or CCPs. It also examines the initiatives in monitoring implementation and evaluating the effects of resolution reforms and presents actions and timelines going forward. Annex 1 to the report presents the status of implementation of aspects of bank resolution regimes by FSB jurisdictions, as of September 2019. The status is based on self-reporting by national authorities. The availability of legal frameworks and regimes in jurisdictions does not mean that resolution will necessarily be effective, nor does the absence of such powers necessarily mean that a jurisdiction will not be able to achieve an effective resolution.
With respect to the banking sector, the report highlights that global systemically important banks have been made more resolvable through the build-up of total loss-absorbing capacity, or TLAC, and other measures. Notwithstanding this progress, challenges remain. Authorities need to determine the appropriate balance between group-internal distribution of Total loss-absorbing capacity and non-pre-positioned resources. Furthermore, access to temporary liquidity in relevant currencies and in adequate amounts when and where needed is critical for firms going through resolution and requires ex ante preparation by firms and authorities.
In the insurance sector, over the past year, two jurisdictions (Netherlands and Singapore) have introduced or strengthened powers to resolve insurers. Resolvability monitoring highlighted the challenges stemming from group-internal interconnectedness. Ongoing work on resolution planning focuses on intragroup funding, intragroup reinsurance, centralized cash pooling, intragroup guarantees, and operational interconnections. Additionally, work on resolution funding encompasses temporary sources of funding and interactions with any existing policyholder protection schemes, information-sharing, and communication.
A policy priority for the FSB is the further strengthening of the resilience and resolvability of central counterparties. The continuing work on financial resources and tools to support orderly resolution will lead to further guidance, on which the FSB will publicly consult during the second quarter of 2020. FSB is developing this guidance in consultation with CPMI and IOSCO. This work draws on the experience of authorities and Crisis Management Groups in assessing the quality and quantity of resources for resolution and on the comments received from stakeholders in response to the public consultation. The future guidance should help authorities and Crisis Management Groups in adopting a structured process for evaluating the adequacy of resources to support resolution on a CCP-specific basis and, if necessary, addressing the need for any additional resources considering a reasonable range of scenarios. It should also assist authorities and Crisis Management Groups in their analysis of the treatment of central counterparty equity.
Related Links
Keywords: International, Banking, Insurance, Securities, FMI, CCPs, Resolution Regime, Resolution Framework, Crisis Management, Systemic Risk, SIFI, FSB
Featured Experts
Blake Coules
Across 35 years in banking, Blake has gained deep insights into the inner working of this sector. Over the last two decades, Blake has been an Operating Committee member, leading teams and executing strategies in Credit and Enterprise Risk as well as Line of Business. His focus over this time has been primarily Commercial/Corporate with particular emphasis on CRE. Blake has spent most of his career with large and mid-size banks. Blake joined Moody’s Analytics in 2021 after leading the transformation of the credit approval and reporting process at a $25 billion bank.
Previous Article
Randal Quarles of FED on Regulatory Regime for Foreign Banks in USRelated Articles
BIS and Central Banks Experiment with GenAI to Assess Climate Risks
A recent report from the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) Innovation Hub details Project Gaia, a collaboration between the BIS Innovation Hub Eurosystem Center and certain central banks in Europe
Nearly 25% G-SIBs Commit to Adopting TNFD Nature-Related Disclosures
Nature-related risks are increasing in severity and frequency, affecting businesses, capital providers, financial systems, and economies.
Singapore to Mandate Climate Disclosures from FY2025
Singapore recently took a significant step toward turning climate ambition into action, with the introduction of mandatory climate-related disclosures for listed and large non-listed companies
SEC Finalizes Climate-Related Disclosures Rule
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has finalized the long-awaited rule that mandates climate-related disclosures for domestic and foreign publicly listed companies in the U.S.
EBA Proposes Standards Related to Standardized Credit Risk Approach
The European Banking Authority (EBA) has been taking significant steps toward implementing the Basel III framework and strengthening the regulatory framework for credit institutions in the EU
US Regulators Release Stress Test Scenarios for Banks
The U.S. regulators recently released baseline and severely adverse scenarios, along with other details, for stress testing the banks in 2024. The relevant U.S. banking regulators are the Federal Reserve Bank (FED), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC).
Asian Governments Aim for Interoperability in AI Governance Frameworks
The regulatory landscape for artificial intelligence (AI), including the generative kind, is evolving rapidly, with governments and regulators aiming to address the challenges and opportunities presented by this transformative technology.
EBA Proposes Operational Risk Standards Under Final Basel III Package
The European Union (EU) has been working on the final elements of Basel III standards, with endorsement of the Banking Package and the publication of the European Banking Authority (EBA) roadmap on Basel III implementation in December 2023.
EFRAG Proposes XBRL Taxonomy and Standard for Listed SMEs Under ESRS
The European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG), which plays a crucial role in shaping corporate reporting standards in European Union (EU), is seeking comments, until May 21, 2024, on the Exposure Draft ESRS for listed SMEs.
ECB to Expand Climate Change Work in 2024-2025
Banking regulators worldwide are increasingly focusing on addressing, monitoring, and supervising the institutions' exposure to climate and environmental risks.
