APRA published a frequently asked question (FAQ) for authorized deposit-taking institutions on the regulatory capital treatment of loans issued under the federal government’s Family Home Guarantee (FHG) and First Home Loan Deposit Scheme (FHLDS) programs. The clarifications provided in the FAQ are relevant mainly for the authorized deposit-taking institutions that use the standardized approach to credit risk. The FAQ also clarifies the correct reporting approach for entities that use the standardized approach to credit risk under the reporting standard ARS 112.1 on on-balance sheet assets under the standardized credit risk approach the reporting standard ARS 223.0 on residential mortgage lending.
Under the standardized approach to credit risk, loans subject to the FHG and FHLDS may be treated in a comparable manner to the residential mortgage loans with a loan-to-valuation ratio of 80% and accordingly risk-weighted at 35%. This risk-weight must be applied to the total amount lent to the borrower. This risk-weight reflects the government guarantee and terms of the program. Once the government guarantee ceases to apply, authorized deposit-taking institutions must revert to calculating the regulatory capital requirement in line with the existing requirements of the prudential standard APS 112 on standardized approach to credit risk. For authorized deposit-taking institutions that use the internal ratings-based approach to credit risk, there are no adjustments to the capital treatment of loans subject to the FHG or FHLDS.
Keywords: Asia Pacific, Australia, Banking, Credit Risk, Residential Mortgage, FHG, FHLDS, Regulatory Capital, Standardized Approach, Internal Ratings Based Approach, APS 112, APS 223.0, APRA
Previous ArticlePRA and FPC Propose Changes to Leverage Ratio Framework in UK
The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (FED) adopted the final rule on Adjustable Interest Rate (LIBOR) Act.
The European Central Bank (ECB) published an updated list of supervised entities, a report on the supervision of less significant institutions (LSIs), a statement on macro-prudential policy.
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) published a circular on the prudential treatment of crypto-asset exposures, an update on the status of transition to new interest rate benchmarks.
The European Commission (EC) adopted the standards addressing supervisory reporting of risk concentrations and intra-group transactions, benchmarking of internal approaches, and authorization of credit institutions.
The China Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission (CBIRC) issued rules to manage the risk of off-balance sheet business of commercial banks and rules on corporate governance of financial institutions.
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) made announcements to address sustainability issues in the financial sector.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) published regulatory standards on identification of a group of connected clients (GCC) as well as updated the lists of identified financial conglomerates.
The General Board of the European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB), at its December meeting, issued an updated risk assessment via the quarterly risk dashboard and held discussions on key policy priorities to address the systemic risks in the European Union.
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) is seeking comments, until December 21, 2022, on the draft guidance for firms to support existing mortgage borrowers.
The Financial Stability Board (FSB) published a report that assesses progress on the transition from the Interbank Offered Rates, or IBORs, to overnight risk-free rates as well as a report that assesses global trends in the non-bank financial intermediation (NBFI) sector.