Fernando Restoy, the Chair of the Financial Stability Institute (FSI) of BIS, spoke at the FSI-IADI conference on crisis management, resolution, and deposit insurance. He highlighted that FSB reviews show an uneven and incomplete implementation of the FSB-issued Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes. In most FSB jurisdictions, resolution planning to date has largely concentrated on global and domestic systemic banks. However, the design of effective regimes for managing smaller bank failures is also important and gaining increasing attention. Such strengthening of the crisis management frameworks might also benefit the emerging market economies where the nature of the local financial system does not support the smooth application of international standards designed for large, complex institutions.
Mr. Restoy point out that it is unclear that bail-in is an appropriate tool for smaller banks with little experience of tapping capital markets in the way that would be necessary to issue sufficient amounts of bail-in-able liabilities. Such retail-focused banks are mainly funded by capital and deposits and may not easily satisfy, within their current business models, the loss-absorbing capacity requirements that would be required for resolution. Additionally, in many jurisdictions, smaller banks that do not meet thresholds for the use of special resolution powers are subject to an ordinary corporate insolvency regime. This may not provide suitable tools for dealing with the public interest considerations that may arise in the insolvency of any bank, irrespective of whether it is systemic.
He explained that deposit insurance is a fundamental element of an effective bank crisis management framework. In its most basic form, depositor protection contributes to financial stability by reducing the risk of depositor runs. However, where the mandate allows the funds to be used for purposes other than payout, this can support alternatives to liquidation for banks that do not meet the threshold conditions for the use of resolution powers. He highlighted the role of deposit insurance in bank failure management, as discussed in a recently published FSI Insights paper. The paper shows a wide range of approaches to the use of deposit insurance funds to support measures within resolution or insolvency that maintain access to insured deposits, or to prevent the failure of a member bank. The ability of deposit insurers to fund alternative measures can increase options for managing bank failures. This may be especially relevant for medium-size or non-systemic banks, in which deposits may be the main form of loss absorbency.
The FSI Chair added that these considerations are gaining prominence in the policy arena. In EU, a promising debate is gaining momentum on the eventual creation of an FDIC-like authority backed by a harmonized insolvency regime for banks that do not meet the thresholds for resolution. He concluded that improvements to bank insolvency regimes along the lines suggested may help strengthen crisis management frameworks in emerging market economies, where the nature of the local financial system does not support the smooth application of international standards designed for large, complex institutions.
Keywords: International, Banking, Deposit Insurance, G-SIBs, Small Banks, Resolution Planning, Crisis Management Framework, BIS, FSI
Previous ArticleFDIC Finalizes Rules on Community Bank Leverage Ratio Framework
BIS Innovation Hub published the work program for 2021, with focus on suptech and regtech, next-generation financial market infrastructure, central bank digital currencies, open finance, green finance, and cyber security.
In an article published by SRB, Mairead McGuinness, the European Commissioner for Financial Services, Financial Stability, and Capital Markets Union, discussed the progress and next steps toward completion of the Banking Union.
EBA finalized the two sets of draft regulatory technical standards on the identification of material risk-takers and on the classes of instruments used for remuneration under the Investment Firms Directive (IFD).
EC published, in the Official Journal of the European Union, a notification that the European Court of Auditors (ECA) has published a special report on resolution planning in the Single Resolution Mechanism.
BoE published a scenario against which it will be stress testing banks in 2021, in addition to setting out the key elements of the 2021 stress test, guidance on the 2021 stress test, and the variable paths for the 2021 stress test.
PRA published a consultation paper (CP3/21) proposes rules regarding the timing of identity verification required for eligibility of depositor protection under the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS).
FSB published the work program for 2021, which reflects a strategic shift in priorities in the COVID-19 environment.
FCA announced that 50% firms have started using the new data collection platform RegData, which is slated to replace the existing platform known Gabriel.
Bundesbank published Version 5.0 of the derivation rules for completeness check at the form level, with respect to the data quality of the European harmonized reporting system.
FED finalized a rule that updates capital planning requirements to reflect the new framework from 2019 that sorts large banks into categories, with requirements that are tailored to the risks of each category.