Featured Product

    FSI Assesses Basel Framework Implementation in Non-BCBS Jurisdictions

    November 23, 2018

    FSI published a paper that explores the state of implementation of the key Basel standards, while outlining the associated proportionality practices, in 100 jurisdictions that are not members of BCBS. The prudential requirements covered in this study include risk-based capital (RBC) rules, leverage requirements, two quantitative liquidity standards, and the large exposures standard, which are collectively referred to as Pillar 1 requirements. The paper also catalogs a range of proportionality practices applied in non-BCBS jurisdictions, providing a reference for authorities that seek to tailor the Basel framework to fit their country-specific circumstances.

    The findings state that all jurisdictions have adopted some version of the Basel RBC regime, while most have implemented, in some manner, quantitative liquidity standards and the large exposures rule. Of the Pillar 1 requirements, most of the surveyed jurisdictions have adopted the RBC regime in various forms, the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR), and some version of the large exposures standard. All 100 jurisdictions have adopted some iteration of the RBC regime (Basel I, II, or III), while 81 countries reported the adoption of either the LCR (54 jurisdictions) or domestic liquidity rules (27). Similarly, 91 jurisdictions have adopted the large exposures rule, based on either the 2014 large exposures standard (14), some variation of the 1991 standard (38), or their own domestic large exposure rule (39). Despite its relative simplicity, the leverage ratio has been adopted by only 16 surveyed jurisdictions, with another four countries applying a domestic leverage rule. Similarly, the NSFR has been adopted by 15 jurisdictions. 

    The lack of global prudential standards for non-internationally active banks has led national authorities to implement a range of proportionality approaches. In their implementation of Basel standards, nearly all jurisdictions apply proportionality, simplifying standards in some cases and applying more stringent requirements in others. As countries shift to the Basel III RBC regime, more extensive proportionality strategies are applied. In practice, jurisdictions follow one or a combination of three proportionality strategies with respect to the Basel III RBC regime. Within the RBC regime, the market risk capital requirement is most often subject to a proportionate approach. The perceived complexity of the market risk framework has led many countries to either exempt all banks from the market risk capital requirements (Basel I countries) or to exempt banks with small trading books from the market risk capital charge (Basel III countries).

     

    Related Links

    Keywords: International, Banking, Basel III, Basel Framework, Proportionality, RBC Regime, BCBS

    Featured Experts
    Related Articles
    News

    FSB Examines Financial Stability Aspects of Bigtech and Cloud Services

    FSB published two reports that consider the financial stability implications from the offering of financial services by bigtech firms and the adoption of cloud computing and data services across a range of functions at financial institutions.

    December 09, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    APRA Specifies Capital Treatment of Equity Investments in ABGF

    APRA published a letter to the authorized deposit-taking institutions outlining the regulatory capital treatment of their equity investments in the Australian Business Growth Fund (ABGF).

    December 09, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EBA Publishes Action Plan on Sustainable Finance

    EBA published the Action Plan on sustainable finance for banks.

    December 06, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EBA Single Rulebook Q&A: Second Update for December 2019

    EBA updated the Single Rulebook question and answer (Q&A) tool with answers to three questions under the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR) and the second Payment Services Directive (PSD 2).

    December 06, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    APRA Publishes Proposal to Increase Transparency of Banking Data

    APRA proposed to substantially increase the volume and breadth of data it makes publicly available on authorized deposit-taking institutions, including banks, credit unions, and building societies.

    December 05, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    ESMA Consults on Guide to Internal Controls for Credit Rating Agencies

    ESMA launched a consultation on the guidelines on internal controls for credit rating agencies (CRAs).

    December 05, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EU Finalizes Directive and Prudential Rules for Investment Firms

    EU published, in the Official Journal of the European Union, the Directive (2019/2034) and Regulation (2019/2033) on the prudential requirements and supervision of investment firms.

    December 05, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    OSFI Revises Guideline on Principles for Management of Liquidity Risk

    OSFI finalized Guideline B-6 on the principles for the management of liquidity risk.

    December 05, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    ESAs Publish Draft Amendments to Bilateral Margin Requirements

    ESAs published joint draft regulatory technical standards to amend the Delegated Regulation on the risk mitigation techniques for non-cleared over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives as well as a joint statement on the introduction of fallbacks in OTC derivative contracts and the requirement to exchange collateral.

    December 05, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    RBNZ Releases Final Decisions Related to Capital Review for Banks

    RBNZ released a paper that sets out its final decisions following the comprehensive review of its capital framework for banks, known as the Capital Review.

    December 05, 2019 WebPage Regulatory News
    RESULTS 1 - 10 OF 4279