EBA published the first quantitative report taking stock of the increased capacity of minimum requirements for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL) in EU. The report shows that authorities have made strong progress in agreeing to resolution strategies and setting the related MREL requirements. However, the report also notes that banks need to issue MREL-eligible debt to meet the shortfalls in MREL. The focus of this report is on external as opposed to internal MREL—that is, MREL expected to be issued to investors in the market and not to a parent company. Additionally, EBA published a factsheet on its work on MREL and resolution planning. EBA will soon publish a report on the quality of MREL instruments also.
EBA received a total of 266 decisions relating to banks where resolution, by either a bail-in or a transfer, would be favored rather than liquidation. Out of those decisions, 22 have been left out of the shortfall analysis for lack of actual MREL decisions and 22 were left out because of data quality issues. Of the remaining ones, approximately 80% of EU domestic assets are now covered by a bail-in strategy and 5% by a transfer strategy. Fifteen percent of assets are now either earmarked for liquidation or still awaiting a resolution strategy. Also, for most banks the distribution of this MREL within the group is yet to be determined. On a weighted average basis, MREL requirements in the EU range between 26.5% of risk-weighted assets for global systemically important institutions (G-SIIs) and 19% of risk-weighted assets for the banks with total assets below EUR 1 billion that are neither G-SIIs nor other systemically important institutions (O-SIIs).
Out of the 222 resolution groups that have been considered in the shortfall analysis, 105 banks already meet their requirement while the remaining 117 reported an estimated MREL shortfall of EUR 178 billion. The shortfalls in MREL vary, depending on the type and size of the bank and its resolution group. Other marketable securities tends to benefit larger banks and to dry out as institutions decrease in size. Total shortfall for 7 out of 16 G-SIIs resolution groups reaches EUR 51 billion, to be considered in the light of EUR 29 billion in other marketable securities. Funding needs for 49 out of 79 O-SIIs reach EUR 101 billion, to be considered in the light of EUR 33 billion of other marketable securities for 39 O-SIIs. Finally, funding needs for 61 out of 127 smaller banks reach EUR 23 billion in the light of a limited EUR 4.4 billion of other marketable securities for 21 resolution groups. While this is significant, it is worth noting that 65 of the banks with shortfalls also report instruments totaling EUR 67 billion that are close in nature to MREL but not eligible. This shows that some banks already have a sophisticated investor base, likely to invest in long-term unsecured debt such as MREL-eligible instruments.
In the light of these shortfalls, EBA encourages European resolution groups to take advantage of the current positive market conditions to issue and build-up resources. As pointed out in the recent EBA risk assessment report, despite continued volatility, spreads for all market instruments have been on a downward trend for most of 2019, with spreads between secured and unsecured as well as between senior and subordinated instruments narrowing.
This report is based on data provided by resolution authorities and covers the actual population of banks covered by an MREL decision, the actual level of this requirement, and the level of resources effectively eligible in the relevant jurisdictions. It is the first report by EBA under a revised methodology and will be updated annually as required by the recently agreed banking package. This means that the report considers formally adopted MREL decisions that were reported to EBA and MREL decisions that were communicated to institutions by way of indicative quotas by the middle of 2019, but have not been formally adopted (both by the end of June 2019). Going forward, EBA plans to also consider the impact of MREL on bank profitability in more detail in the impact assessment that it is expected to deliver to EC by December 2022.
Keywords: Europe, EU, Banking, Resolution Planning, MREL, MREL Eligible Debt, G-SII, O-SII, Risk-Weighted Assets, BRRD, EBA
Previous ArticleEU-US Insurance Forum in March to Focus on Cyber Risk and Insurtech
The European Banking Authority (EBA) published the final draft regulatory technical standards on disclosure of investment policy by investment firms, under the Investment Firms Regulation (IFR).
The European Banking Authority (EBA) published version 5.1 of the filing rules for supervisory reporting.
The European Central Bank (ECB) Guideline 2021/1829 on the procedures for the collection of granular credit and credit risk data has been published in the Official Journal of European Union.
The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) published the prudential practice guide CPG 511 to assist banks, insurers, and superannuation licensees in meeting requirements of CPS 511, the new prudential standard on remuneration.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) published a bulletin that provides an updated self-assessment tool for banks to evaluate their preparedness for cessation of the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR).
The Financial Stability Board (FSB) published a report that examines the progress made toward disclosures aligned with recommendations of the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD).
The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) published the progress report on adoption of the Basel III regulatory framework in member jurisdictions.
The French Prudential Supervisory Authority (ACPR) has implemented, in its information system, updates linked to the Data Point Model (DPM) version 3.1.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) published a thematic note that aims to identify and raise awareness of the transition risks of benchmark rates, as the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) and the Euro Overnight Index Average (EONIA) are close to being phased out.
In a letter to the federally regulated financial institutions and pension plans, the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) published a summary of the feedback received to the January 2021 discussion paper on ways to address climate risks.