SRB published guidance on operational continuity in resolution and financial market infrastructure (FMI) contingency plans. This follows the publication of a document on SRB Expectations for Banks, which sets out the capabilities that SRB expects banks to demonstrate that they are resolvable, including the dimensions of operational continuity in resolution and access to FMIs. The Expectations for Banks will be subject to a gradual phase-in according to the general phase-in dates reported in Chapter 3 of the Expectations for Banks. This also applies to the expectations with regard to operational continuity in resolution and access to FMI services, which are expected to be met by the end of 2023. SRB acknowledges the challenges that banks face due to COVID-19 pandemic and is prepared to give banks the flexibility they may need to implement the Expectations for Banks, on an individual basis.
Operational Guidance on Operational Continuity in Resolution
As outlined in the Expectations for Banks, operational continuity in resolution refers to the ability to effectively implement, from an operational point of view, the resolution strategy and, consequently, to stabilize and restructure a bank. The guidance on operational continuity in resolution provides further clarifications to banks on how to implement the expectations on service identification and mapping, assessment of operational continuity risk, mitigating measures such as having adequately documented, resolution-resilient contracts, appropriate management information systems, and governance arrangements. Further guidance may be provided on other operational continuity in resolution topics in line with their phase-in.
Operational Guidance on FMI Contingency Plans
Banks are expected to prepare FMI contingency plans supporting continued access to critical and/or essential FMI services ahead of and during resolution. This document provides additional operational guidance for banks when preparing FMI contingency plans and clarifies the minimum standards against which internal resolution teams will assess FMI contingency plans submitted by banks. Such contingency plans enable internal resolution teams to evaluate whether the risk of losing access to a critical and/or essential FMI service provider may represent an impediment to resolvability. Indeed, when performing the resolvability assessment, SRB needs to consider the extent to which there are contingency plans and measures in place to ensure continuity in access to payment and settlement systems. The document sets out the SRB expectations with regard to the minimum content of FMI contingency plans prepared by banks. Each bank is expected to develop an FMI contingency plan in line with the July 2017 recommendations from FSB in the Guidance on Continuity of Access to FMIs for a Firm in Resolution.
Keywords: Europe, EU, Banking, Resolution Framework, Operational Continuity, Governance, Resolution Planning, SMI, Contingency Planning, SRB
Previous ArticleHKMA Announces Results of Survey on Credit Conditions of SMEs
APRA issued a letter on the loss-absorbing capacity (LAC) requirements for domestic systemically important banks (D-SIBs) and published a discussion paper, along with the proposed the prudential standards on financial contingency planning (CPS 190) and resolution planning (CPS 900).
The European Commission (EC) launched a call for evidence, until March 18, 2022, as part of a comprehensive review of the macro-prudential rules for the banking sector under the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR) and Directive (CRD IV).
The Financial Stability Board (FSB) published a report that sets out good practices for crisis management groups.
The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) found that Heritage Bank Limited had incorrectly reported capital because of weaknesses in operational risk and compliance frameworks, although the bank did not breach minimum prudential capital ratios at any point and remains well-capitalized.
The Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) released the annual report for 2020-2021.
Through a letter addressed to the banking sector entities, the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI) announced deferral of the domestic implementation of the final Basel III reforms from the first to the second quarter of 2023.
EIOPA recently published a letter in which EC is informing the European Parliament and Council that it could not adopt the set of draft regulatory technical standards for disclosures under the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) within the stipulated three-month period, given their length and technical detail.
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) published the third in a series of policy statements that set out rules to introduce the UK Investment Firm Prudential Regime (IFPR), which will take effect on January 01, 2022.
The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) published, along with a summary of its response to the consultation feedback, an information paper that summarizes the finalized capital framework that is in line with the internationally agreed Basel III requirements for banks.
The Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures (CPMI) and the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) issued a consultative report focusing on access to central counterparty (CCP) clearing and client-position portability.