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 ArticleEIOPA Publishes Annual Report for 2018
Next ArticleEBA Single Rulebook Q&A: Second Update for June 2019
PRA published the policy statement PS8/21, which contains the final supervisory statement SS3/21 on the PRA approach to supervision of the new and growing non-systemic banks in UK.
EBA published a report that sets out the final draft regulatory technical standards specifying the conditions according to which consolidation shall be carried out in line with Article 18 of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR).
EBA updated the list of other systemically important institutions (O-SIIs) in EU.
BCBS published two reports that discuss transmission channels of climate-related risks to the banking system and the measurement methodologies of climate-related financial risks.
UK Authorities (FCA and PRA) welcomed the findings of FSB peer review on the implementation of financial sector remuneration reforms in the UK.
PRA and FCA jointly issued a letter that highlights risks associated with the increasing volumes of deposits that are placed with banks and building societies via deposit aggregators and how to mitigate these risks.
MFSA announced that amendments to the Banking Act, Subsidiary Legislation, and Banking Rules will be issued in the coming months, to transpose the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD5) into the national regulatory framework.
EC finalized the Delegated Regulation 2021/598 that supplements the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR or 575/2013) and lays out the regulatory technical standards for assigning risk-weights to specialized lending exposures.
OSFI launched a consultation to explore ways to enhance the OSFI assurance over capital, leverage, and liquidity returns for banks and insurers, given the increasing complexity arising from the evolving regulatory reporting framework due to IFRS 17 (Insurance Contracts) standard and Basel III reforms.
ECB published results of the benchmarking analysis of the recovery plan cycle for 2019.