RBNZ released assessment reports, of the three independent international experts, on its Capital Review for banks. Post the fourth consultation on Capital Review, which was published in December 2018, RBNZ commissioned external experts to independently review its analysis and advice underpinning the Capital Review proposals. The reports by these experts will be part of the collection of information considered in the final decision-making process of the Capital Review. The implementation of new capital rules is proposed to start from April 2020, with a transition period of a number of years before banks would need to meet the new requirements.
The experts were asked to take into account the objectives of the Capital Review as well as the domestic context, the available literature, the international debate, and global policy developments relating to the role of bank capital. Dr. James Cummings, Professor Ross Levine, and Professor David Miles, who provided the independent assessments, offered certain suggestions and concluded that the RBNZ review was balanced, sound, unbiased, and well-reasoned in general. Dr. Cummings suggested that RBNZ should investigate the extent to which the Internal Ratings-Based (IRB) models provide a more accurate prediction of unexpected losses than the standardized models. If the IRB models do not outperform, then the role of IRB should be reconsidered. Additionally, Professor Levine is skeptical about the ability of RBNZ to accurately assess when to turn the countercyclical capital buffer (CCyB) on and off while Professor Miles suggests that RBNZ should consider making the CCyB a part of the rest of the prudential buffer, to remove direct allocation of part of the buffer to the CCyB.
In response to the assessments, RBNZ will consider all the comments and suggestions of the external experts. The issues raised by the experts will also be addressed in the regulatory impact analysis, including the cost-benefit assessment. RBNZ has a number of processes underway to address the points raised by the external experts as well as points made in submissions on the Capital Review. This includes refining estimates of the costs and benefits of the proposals, considering a range of perspectives about possible interest rate impact, assessing the impact of incentives on the various groups that make up the financial ecosystem, and additional analysis of the definition of capital and processes for determining the level of risk-weighted assets.
The RBNZ Capital Review is intended to identify the most appropriate framework for setting capital requirements for banks in New Zealand. The review is also considering the way the current framework operates and the international developments in the capital requirements of banks. As part of the Capital Review, which began more than two years ago, RBNZ has, so far, published four consultation papers. The first consultation was an issues paper that discussed, at a high level, the scope and key issues that should be covered by the Review. The second consultation discussed the definition of regulatory capital instruments while the third one addressed questions related to the measurement of risk for bank exposures. The fourth and last consultation so far is titled "How much capital is enough?" and it seeks views on the proposed capital requirements for banks and on the other proposals in the Capital Review to date.
- Press Release
- Expert Review: James Cummings (PDF)
- Expert Review: Ross Levine (PDF)
- Expert Review: David Miles (PDF)
- Summary of Expert Reviews (PDF)
- Q&A on Expert Reviews
Keywords: Asia Pacific, New Zealand, Basel, Banking, Capital Review, External Expert Assessment, Capital Requirements, Regulatory Capital, RBNZ
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.
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) published the policy statement PS21/9 on implementation of the Investment Firms Prudential Regime.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) is seeking preliminary input on standardization of the proportionality assessment methodology for credit institutions and investment firms.
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.
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.