BCBS Reviews Impact of Stronger Capital and Liquidity Requirements
BCBS published a working paper that assesses the costs and benefits of stronger capital and liquidity requirements. The paper finds that the net macroeconomic benefits of capital requirements are positive over a wide range of capital levels. The paper also suggests a set of issues that warrant further monitoring and research. These issues include the link between capital and the cost and probability of crises, accounting for the effects of liquidity regulations, resolution regimes and countercyclical capital buffers, and the impact of regulation on loan quantities.
The range of estimates for the theoretically optimal level of capital requirements—where marginal benefits equal marginal costs—is likely either similar or higher than was originally estimated by the Basel Committee. This conclusion is, however, subject to a number of important considerations:
- First, estimates of optimal capital are sensitive to a number of assumptions and design choices. For example, the literature differs in judgments made about the permanence of crisis effects as well as assumptions about the efficacy of post crisis reforms, such as liquidity regulations and bank resolution regimes, in reducing the probability and costs of future banking crisis. In some cases, these judgments can offset the upward tendency in the range of optimal capital.
- Second, differences in (net) benefit estimates can reflect different conditioning assumptions such as starting levels of capital or default thresholds (the capital ratio at which firms are assumed to fail) when estimating the impact of capital in reducing crisis probabilities.
- Finally, the estimates are based on capital ratios that are measured in different units. For example, some studies provide optimal capital estimates in risk-weighted ratios, others in leverage ratios. Additionally, across the risk-weighted ratio estimates, the definition of capital and risk-weighted assets (RWAs) can also differ (for example, tangible common equity or tier 1 or common equity tier 1 capital; Basel II RWAs vs. Basel III measures of RWAs).
Related Links
Keywords: International, Banking, Regulatory Capital, Liquidity Requirements, Liquidity Risk, CET 1, Basel III, BCBS
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
Charlotte Gerken of PRA Outlines Risk Management Work in InsuranceRelated Articles
EBA Clarifies Use of COVID-19-Impacted Data for IRB Credit Risk Models
The European Banking Authority (EBA) published four draft principles to support supervisory efforts in assessing the representativeness of COVID-19-impacted data for banks using the internal ratings based (IRB) credit risk models.
EP Reaches Agreement on Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive
The European Council and the European Parliament (EP) reached a provisional political agreement on the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD).
PRA Consults on Model Risk Management Principles for Banks
The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) launched a consultation (CP6/22) that sets out proposal for a new Supervisory Statement on expectations for management of model risk by banks.
EC Regulation Amends Standards for Calculating Credit Risk Adjustments
The European Commission (EC) published the Delegated Regulation 2022/954, which amends regulatory technical standards on specification of the calculation of specific and general credit risk adjustments.
BIS Hub Updates Work Program for 2022, Announces New Projects
The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) Innovation Hub updated its work program, announcing a set of projects across various centers.
EIOPA Issues Cyber Underwriting Proposal, Statement on Open Insurance
The European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) published two consultation papers—one on the supervisory statement on exclusions related to systemic events and the other on the supervisory statement on the management of non-affirmative cyber exposures.
US Senate Members Seek Details on SEC Proposed Climate Disclosure Rule
Certain members of the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs issued a letter to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
EIOPA Consults on Review of Securitization Framework in Solvency II
The European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) published a consultation paper on the advice on the review of the securitization prudential framework in Solvency II.
UK Authorities Issue Regulatory and Reporting Updates for Banks
The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) issued a statement on PRA buffer adjustment while the Bank of England (BoE) published a notice on the statistical reporting requirements for banks.
BCBS Issues Climate Risk Principles while HKMA Expresses Its Support
The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) issued principles for the effective management and supervision of climate-related financial risks.
