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
HM Treasury announced that the new Financial Services Bill has been introduced in the Parliament.
PRA published the consultation paper CP17/20 to propose changes to certain rules, supervisory statements, and statements of policy to implement elements of the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD5).
US Agencies adopted a final rule that applies to advanced approaches banking organizations and aims to reduce interconnectedness in the financial system as well as to reduce contagion risks associated with the failure of a global systemically important bank (G-SIB).
US Agencies (FDIC, FED, and OCC) adopted a final rule that implements the net stable funding ratio (NSFR) for certain large banking organizations.
FSB finalized the toolkit of effective practices to assist financial institutions in their cyber incident response and recovery activities.
ECB published eleventh issue of the Macroprudential Bulletin, which provides insight into the ongoing work of ECB in the field of macro-prudential policy.
HM Treasury issued a call for evidence seeking views to reform the prudential regulatory regime—also known as Solvency II—of the insurance sector in UK.
ESRB responded to the EC consultation on review of Solvency II regime.
HM Treasury launched a consultation on Phase II of the Future Regulatory Framework Review, with the comment period ending on January 19, 2021.
EC adopted the work program for 2021.