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
Previous ArticleOCC Releases Bank Supervision Operating Plan for Fiscal Year 2020
BCBS is consulting on the principles for operational resilience and the revisions to the principles for sound management of operational risk for banks.
The Financial Stability Institute (FSI) of BIS published a brief note that examines the supervisory challenges associated with certain temporary regulatory relief measures introduced by BCBS and prudential authorities in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.
HKMA, together with the Banking Sector Small and Medium-Size Enterprise (SME) Lending Coordination Mechanism, announced a ninety-day repayment deferment for trade facilities under the Pre-approved Principal Payment Holiday Scheme.
The Advisory Scientific Committee of ESRB published a response, in the form of an Insights Paper, to the EBA proposals for reforms to the stress testing framework in EU.
MAS announced several initiatives to support adoption of the Singapore Overnight Rate Average (SORA), which is administered by MAS.
BoE updated the reporting template for Form ER as well as the Form ER definitions, which contain guidance on the methodology to be used in calculating annualized interest rates.
PRA published the policy statement PS19/20 on the final policy for extending coverage under the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS) for Temporary High Balance.
EBA published the final draft implementing technical standards for disclosures and reporting on the minimum requirements for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL) and the total loss-absorbing capacity (TLAC) requirements in EU.
EBA published an erratum for the phase 2 of technical package on the reporting framework 2.10.
EC published the Implementing Regulation 2020/1145, which lays down technical information for calculation of technical provisions and basic own funds.