CBIRC Revises Guidance on Capital Instrument Innovation of Banks
CBIRC revised guidance on the "Capital Instrument Innovation" of commercial banks, with immediate effect. The revised guidance covers the basic principles for commercial banks to issue capital instruments, the criteria for determining qualified capital instruments, and the working mechanism for commercial banks to issue capital instruments. One of the revisions concerns further clarification regarding the sequence of loss absorption of various capital instruments. The amendments are in line with Basel III and the international practices.
The former China Banking Regulatory Commission (CBRC) issued, in 2012, the "Measures for the Capital Management of Commercial Banks (for Trial Implementation)" and the "Guiding Opinions on the Innovation of Capital Tools of Commercial Banks" (the former "Guiding Opinions" ) to issue capital for commercial banks in China. Since then, commercial banks have successively introduced new capital instruments such as secondary capital bonds, preferred stocks, and non-fixed-term capital bonds (that is, perpetual bonds). With the increasing variety of capital instruments, the identification criteria for qualified capital instruments specified in the original Guiding Opinions need to be adjusted and refined. Earlier this year, the Ministry of Finance issued supporting rules such as the “Provisions on Perpetual Debt-related Accounting Treatment,” which also laid an important policy foundation for this revision. CBIRC has revised this guidance in response to these changes and also published the questions and answers (Q&A) to help understand the revisions.
The amendments to the guidance are to:
- Adjust capital instruments trigger event name to more accurately reflect the meaning of the triggering event
- Adjust the other tier 1 capital trigger conditions and set a different trigger events to other tier 1 capital in accordance with the accounting classification
- Specify the order of loss absorption of capital instruments (All capital instruments of the same level should absorb losses at the same time and capital instruments of different levels should absorb losses in sequence.)
- Specify that write-downs should be permanent write-downs
- Clarify the relevant requirements for the issuance of capital instruments by commercial banks, including attracting diversified market participants to participate in investment through market-based pricing and ensuring the orderly connection of issuance and redemption of capital instruments
Related Links
- Notification
- Guidance (in Chinese)
- Q&A (in Chinese)
Keywords: Asia Pacific, China, Banking, Regulatory Capital, Tier 1 Capital, Loss Absorbing Capacity, Basel III, CBIRC
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
EBA Report Examines Progress in Addressing Nonperforming Loans in EURelated Articles
PRA Finalizes Approach to Supervision of International Banks
In a recent Market Notice, the Bank of England (BoE) confirmed that green gilts will have equivalent eligibility to existing gilts in its market operations.
FCA Issues PS21/9 on Implementation of Investment Firms Regime
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) published the policy statement PS21/9 on implementation of the Investment Firms Prudential Regime.
EBA Proposes Regulatory Standards to Identify Shadow Banking Entities
The European Banking Authority (EBA) proposed regulatory technical standards that set out criteria for identifying shadow banking entities for the purpose of reporting large exposures.
IOSCO Proposes Recommendations on ESG Ratings and Data Providers
The Board of the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) proposed a set of recommendations on the environmental, social, and governance (ESG) ratings and data providers.
EC to Defer Application of SFDR Standards Till July 2022
The European Commission (EC) announced plans to defer the application of 13 regulatory technical standards under the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (2019/2088) by six months, from January 01, 2022 to July 01, 2022.
EIOPA Consults on Reporting and Disclosures Under Solvency II
The European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) proposed to amend the supervisory statement on supervision of run-off undertakings that are subject to Solvency II regulation.
BoE Consults on Approach to Setting MREL, Publishes Bail-In Guidance
The Bank of England (BoE) published a consultation paper on approach to setting minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL), an operational guide on executing bail-in, and a statement from the Deputy Governor Dave Ramsden.
EBA Seeks Views on Proportionality Assessment Methodology
The European Banking Authority (EBA) is seeking preliminary input on standardization of the proportionality assessment methodology for credit institutions and investment firms.
US Agencies Propose Changes to Call Reports and Instructions
Certain regulatory authorities in the US are extending period for completion of the review of certain residential mortgage provisions and for publication of notice disclosing the determination of this review until December 20, 2021.
PRA Finalizes Rulebook Definition of Higher Paid Material Risk-Taker
The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) published the policy statement PS18/21, which introduces an amendment in the definition of "higher paid material risk taker" in the Remuneration Part of the PRA Rulebook.
