FSB Sets Out Preliminary Lessons for Financial Stability from Pandemic
The Financial Stability Board (FSB) published an interim report that identifies the lessons learned from a financial stability perspective during the COVID-19 pandemic. The report, which has been prepared in collaboration with certain standard-setting bodies, identifies aspects of the functioning of the G20 financial reforms that may warrant attention at the international level. It notes that the functioning of capital and liquidity buffers may warrant further consideration, while concerns about excessive financial system procyclicality remain. The final report, which is to be delivered to the G20 Summit in October 2021, will also set out next steps to address the identified issues.
The interim report notes that parts of the global financial system, where implementation of post-crisis reforms is most advanced, displayed resilience. The COVID-19 experience reinforces the importance of completing the remaining elements of the G20 reform agenda. Overall, the report discusses the following key issues:
- Need to strengthen resilience in the non-bank financial intermediation sector. FSB has developed a comprehensive work program to enhance resilience of the non-bank financial intermediation sector and emphasizes the importance of continuing international cooperation and coordination of policy responses to prevent regulatory arbitrage and market fragmentation
- Functioning of capital and liquidity buffers may warrant further consideration. Authorities released countercyclical capital buffers quickly and, while banks did not face large liquidity pressures overall, some banks took defensive actions to maintain their liquidity levels well above the regulatory minima.
- Concerns about excessive financial system procyclicality remain. The pandemic has highlighted issues relating to margin calls; the behavior of certain market participants; specific aspects of the use of external credit ratings; and the interaction between the new expected credit loss (ECL) accounting and regulatory frameworks. However, it may be too early to draw conclusions about the procyclicality of financial system and some of these issues need further examination as the support measures may have dampened or delayed their impact.
- Authorities should continue to take steps to further enhance crisis management preparedness. Authorities should continue exploring opportunities to enhance information-sharing and to continue to adapt supervisory and regulatory policies to the changing underlying circumstances, including by addressing identified data gaps and enhancing analytical tools. Efforts should continue to ensure credible liquidity and systemic crisis arrangements for times of stress and resolution.
- Identifying systemic vulnerabilities early on remains a priority. The current low level of corporate insolvencies seems predicated on continued policy support. Banks and non-bank lenders could still face additional losses as these measures are unwound. Recent bank stress tests suggest that the largest banks are well-capitalized and will remain resilient under a range of recovery scenarios. Yet there may be questions about how banks would maintain real economy financing in an environment of deteriorating non-financial sector credit quality, which makes it harder to discriminate viable projects. Asynchronous economic cycles and widening interest rate differentials could induce disorderly capital outflows from emerging markets as dollar denominated investments are suddenly reallocated across jurisdictions.
- Build-up of leverage and debt overhang in the non-financial sector. Addressing debt overhang, including by facilitating the market exit of unviable companies and by promoting the efficient reallocation of resources to viable firms,, may be a key task for policymakers going forward.
- Need to promote resilience amid rapid technological change in the economy and the global financial system. The boost that COVID-19 seems to have given to digital financial services, in particular various forms of digital payments, reinforces the need to ensure that regulatory frameworks and approaches provide a solid basis for harnessing the benefits of such innovation while containing their risks.
Related Links
Keywords: International, Banking, Insurance, Securities, COVID-19, Systemic Risk, Credit Risk, NBFI, Financial Stability, Basel, Regulatory Capital, CCyB, Liquidity Risk, ECL, Loan-Loss Provisioning, FSB
Featured Experts
María Cañamero
Skilled market researcher; growth strategist; successful go-to-market campaign developer
Nicolas Degruson
Works with financial institutions, regulatory experts, business analysts, product managers, and software engineers to drive regulatory solutions across the globe.
Patrycja Oleksza
Applies proficiency and knowledge to regulatory capital and reporting analysis and coordinates business and product strategies in the banking technology area
Previous Article
EBA Issues Guidelines Related to Internal Model Market Risk ApproachRelated Articles
BIS and Central Banks Experiment with GenAI to Assess Climate Risks
A recent report from the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) Innovation Hub details Project Gaia, a collaboration between the BIS Innovation Hub Eurosystem Center and certain central banks in Europe
Nearly 25% G-SIBs Commit to Adopting TNFD Nature-Related Disclosures
Nature-related risks are increasing in severity and frequency, affecting businesses, capital providers, financial systems, and economies.
Singapore to Mandate Climate Disclosures from FY2025
Singapore recently took a significant step toward turning climate ambition into action, with the introduction of mandatory climate-related disclosures for listed and large non-listed companies
SEC Finalizes Climate-Related Disclosures Rule
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has finalized the long-awaited rule that mandates climate-related disclosures for domestic and foreign publicly listed companies in the U.S.
EBA Proposes Standards Related to Standardized Credit Risk Approach
The European Banking Authority (EBA) has been taking significant steps toward implementing the Basel III framework and strengthening the regulatory framework for credit institutions in the EU
US Regulators Release Stress Test Scenarios for Banks
The U.S. regulators recently released baseline and severely adverse scenarios, along with other details, for stress testing the banks in 2024. The relevant U.S. banking regulators are the Federal Reserve Bank (FED), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC).
Asian Governments Aim for Interoperability in AI Governance Frameworks
The regulatory landscape for artificial intelligence (AI), including the generative kind, is evolving rapidly, with governments and regulators aiming to address the challenges and opportunities presented by this transformative technology.
EBA Proposes Operational Risk Standards Under Final Basel III Package
The European Union (EU) has been working on the final elements of Basel III standards, with endorsement of the Banking Package and the publication of the European Banking Authority (EBA) roadmap on Basel III implementation in December 2023.
EFRAG Proposes XBRL Taxonomy and Standard for Listed SMEs Under ESRS
The European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG), which plays a crucial role in shaping corporate reporting standards in European Union (EU), is seeking comments, until May 21, 2024, on the Exposure Draft ESRS for listed SMEs.
ECB to Expand Climate Change Work in 2024-2025
Banking regulators worldwide are increasingly focusing on addressing, monitoring, and supervising the institutions' exposure to climate and environmental risks.