European Parliament published a briefing paper that gives an overview of the seven aspects of resolvability defined in 2019 by SRB. The seven aspects of resolvability are governance, loss absorption and recapitalization capacity, liquidity and funding in resolution, operational continuity and access to financial market infrastructures, information systems and data requirements, communication, and separability and restructuring. The briefing also assesses progress in two key areas—raising sufficient financial resources and changes in legal and operational structures of banks to facilitate resolution—based on evidence gathered from public disclosures of the 20 largest euro-area banks. The largest banks have made good progress in raising bail-in capital. However, changes to legal and operational structures of banks that will facilitate resolution will take more time.
This briefing reviews the two most important frameworks for resolvability assessments in Europe—that is, the frameworks in the UK (adopted in 2019) and in the euro area (in consultation stage). It then assesses progress in raising minimum required own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL) and the impediments that smaller banks are likely to confront in raising subordinated debt. Next, it assesses the transparency of the euro-area regime, before reviewing challenges in creating supportive governance arrangements and operational structures in the sample of 20 banks. This is examined in more detail in the following section of the paper for a subset of cross-border banks that have systematically important subsidiaries in a number of EU countries.
The briefing highlights that making banks in Europe resolvable will be a long process. So far, only the first steps have been taken. Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive (BRRD) 2 updated the earlier regime of 2014 and the draft resolvability assessment framework of SRB has clarified its expectation that banks will need to play a key role in this process. While smaller banks may be safely liquidated, numerous barriers still impede resolvability of the banks for which SRB intervention might be necessary. Several of the impediments in this process may reflect constraints in debt markets or unclear coordination between different resolution authorities. Additional loss-absorbing capital has been raised by the largest banks while mid-size banks are likely to face problems. Even where MREL targets are met, investors might question the utility of bail-in capital should significant parts need to be prepositioned in individual jurisdictions, or if there are refinancing risks. Unclear coordination between home and host countries might leave the final resolution strategy unclear for some time.
The work program of SRB to remove barriers to resolvability is likely to identify numerous bank-specific barriers in terms of inadequate governance and management information system, and legal and operational structures. Central European countries used to be dependent on cross-border parent and wholesale funding, but have now become much more reliant on local deposit funding, making them more amenable to multiple local resolution schemes and restructuring. However, the review of resolution-related disclosures by the 20 largest euro-area banks has offered very limited evidence that other operational and legal barriers to resolvability are being addressed. SRB should become more open about its own standards, the barriers it has identified, and how it goes about addressing these barriers. The U.S. experience has shown that banks can be asked to produce public versions of their crisis plans and that it might be in their interest to do so. Given the formalization of the expectations for banks and the future work program of SRB, addressing barriers to resolvability will become a central part of the agenda in EU.
Keywords: Europe, EU, Banking, BRRD2, MREL, Bail-in, Recapitalization, Resolution Framework, European Parliament
Previous ArticleESMA Publishes Market Share Figures for Credit Rating Agencies in EU
EBA published a report analyzing the impact of the unwind mechanism of the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR) for a sample of European banks over a three-year period, from the end of 2016 to the first quarter of 2020.
In response to questions from a member of the European Parliament, the ECB President Christine Lagarde issued a letter clarifying the possibility of amending the AnaCredit Regulation and making targeted longer-term refinancing operations (TLTROs) dependent on the climate-related impact of bank loans.
IASB started the post-implementation review of the classification and measurement requirements in IFRS 9 on financial instruments and added the review as a project to its work plan.
FSB published a report that examines progress in implementing policy measures to enhance the resolvability of systemically important financial institutions.
EBA published a report on the benchmarking of national loan enforcement frameworks across 27 EU member states, in response to the call for advice from EC.
FSB published a letter from its Chair Randal K. Quarles, along with two reports exploring various aspects of the market turmoil resulting from the COVID-19 event.
RBNZ launched a consultation on the details for implementing the final Capital Review decisions announced in December 2019.
The Trustees of the IFRS Foundation, which are responsible for the governance and oversight of IASB, have announced the appointment of Dr. Andreas Barckow as the IASB Chair, effective July 2021.
HKMA issued a letter to consult the banking industry on a full set of proposed draft amendments to the Banking (Capital) Rules for implementing the Basel standard on capital requirements for banks’ equity investments in funds in Hong Kong.
ESRB published an opinion assessing the decision of Swedish Financial Supervisory Authority (FSA) to extend the application period of a stricter measure for residential mortgage lending, in accordance with Article 458 of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR).