Post the latest consultation paper on the review of capital requirements, RBNZ released the feedback received, along with a summary of the submissions. The Capital Review proposes several measures to ensure a safer banking system in New Zealand. This summary collates the common themes and views on the key points raised during the consultation process and does not include the RBNZ response to the submissions. The RBNZ response is expected to be published along with the final decisions in November 2019. Implementation of any new rules will start from April next year, with the transition period of a number of years before banks are required to meet the new requirements.
As part of the Capital Review, which began more than two years ago, RBNZ has 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. There was significant and wide-ranging media and public interest in the fourth consultation, with written feedback from 161 respondents. Feedback has also been received from analysts and other interested parties who did not make a formal submission.
In general, respondents support the RBNZ objective to ensure that the financial system in New Zealand is safe, acknowledging the economic and well-being impact of banking crises. Many respondents, particularly from the general public, support the proposed higher capital requirements for banks. A number of respondents observe that higher capital requirements could lead to higher borrowing costs for New Zealanders. Yet some other respondents, in particular banks and business groups, question whether the proposed increases are too large and too costly.
Central to the measures proposed in the consultation paper are increases in regulatory capital buffers for locally incorporated banks. The changes include requiring bank shareholders to increase their stake so that they absorb a greater share of losses in case their bank fails, thus improving the quality of capital and ensuring that banks more accurately measure their risk. Increasing the amount and quality of capital can be reasonably expected to mean that banks can survive all but the most exceptional shocks. RBNZ is also consulting on changes to the quality of capital, constraints on modeling capital requirements, and the implementation timeline. RBNZ has also engaged three external experts for an independent review of its proposals.
Additionally, the RBNZ Deputy Governor Geoff Bascand welcomed reports by two key international financial institutions and a major rating agency last week that support the proposals to increase bank capital ratios. The IMF also released a Statement, post its recent mission, that highlights the need for strengthening bank capital levels and that the proposals appear commensurate with the systemic financial risks facing New Zealand. The latest Economic Survey of New Zealand by OECD also expects that increases in capital will likely have net benefits for New Zealand. Furthermore, Standard and Poor’s says that the proposals should not have material impact on overall credit availability.
- News Release
- Summary of Submissions (PDF)
- Individual Submissions
- Consultation Paper 1 (PDF)
- Consultation Paper 2 (PDF)
- Consultation Paper 3 (PDF)
- Consultation Paper 4 (PDF)
Keywords: Asia Pacific, New Zealand, Banking, Basel III, Capital Adequacy Framework, Capital Requirements, Capital Review, Responses to Consultation, RBNZ
Previous ArticleIFSB Council Adopts IFSB-20, IFSB-21, and IFSB-22
A Consultative Group on Risk Management (CGRM) at the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) published a report that examines incorporation of climate risks into the international reserve management framework.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) published the final guidelines on liquidity requirements exemption for investment firms, updated version of its 5.2 filing rules document for supervisory reporting, and Single Rulebook Question and Answer (Q&A) updates in July 2022.
The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) is seeking comments, until October 21, 2022, on the introduction of CPS 230, which is the new cross-industry prudential standard on operational risk management.
The European Commission published a Delegated Regulation 2022/1301 on the information to be provided in accordance with the simple, transparent, and standardized (STS) notification requirements for on-balance-sheet synthetic securitizations.
The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) is announced revisions to the capital framework for authorized deposit-taking institutions to implement the "unquestionably strong" capital ratios and the Basel III reforms.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) published a report that examines the use of certain exemptions included in the large exposures regime under the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR).
The Bank of England (BoE), the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA), and the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) published a joint discussion paper that sets out potential measures to oversee and strengthen the resilience of services provided by critical third parties to the financial sector in UK.
The Bank of England (BoE) issued a communication to firms to provide an update on the progress of the joint data transformation program—which is being led by BoE, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), and the industry—for the financial sector in UK.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) published the draft methodology, templates, and template guidance for the European Union-wide stress test in 2023.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) and the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) jointly published the final guidelines on common procedures and methodologies for the supervisory review and evaluation process (SREP) for investment firms.