FSB launched the third thematic peer review on resolution regimes for banks. The review aims to evaluate implementation, by FSB jurisdictions, of the resolution planning standard set out in the FSB Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes for Financial Institutions and in associated guidance in relation to banks. The Key Attributes are the international standard on resolution regimes and form a key component of the FSB policy framework to address the risks associated with institutions that are too-big-to-fail. As part of this review, FSB is seeking feedback from stakeholders by July 04, 2018.
The Summary Terms of Reference on the peer review provide more details on the objectives, scope, and process for this review. The aim of the peer review is to:
- Evaluate progress in the adoption of requirements for bank resolution planning and resolvability assessments since the second (March 2016) resolution peer review
- Take stock of resolution planning practices in FSB jurisdictions for domestically incorporated banks that could be systemically significant or critical if they fail, focusing in particular on banks other than G-SIBs
- Highlight the range of practices and lessons of experience on bank resolution planning, including any challenges arising from implementation
- Identify jurisdictions’ approaches to resolution planning for banks that could be systemic in failure, including how proportionality considerations are reflected in resolution planning for those banks
- Identify material inconsistencies or gaps that are common across jurisdictions and make recommendations to address them to promote effective implementation
The peer review report, which is expected to be published in the first half of 2019, will describe the resolution planning frameworks and practices in FSB jurisdictions, including the progress since the second resolution peer review. It will describe the steps that those jurisdictions have taken as part of resolution planning to develop resolution strategies, implement resolution plans, and address barriers to resolvability, also highlighting differences in approaches across jurisdictions and by types of banks that could be systemic in failure. Progress in implementation of resolution planning requirements and the development of resolution plans will be illustrated with examples of different practices and the identification of areas where more work may be needed.
Comment Due Date: July 04, 2018
Keywords: International, Banking, Resolution Planning, Thematic Review, Peer Review, Systemic Risk, FSB
Sam leads the quantitative research team within the CreditEdge™ research group. In this role, he develops novel risk and forecasting solutions for financial institutions while providing thought leadership on related trends in global financial markets.
Previous ArticleFSB Article on Achieving G20 Goal of Resilient Market-Based Finance
EIOPA submitted—to the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union, and EC—its 2020, fifth, and last annual report on long-term guarantee measures and measures on equity risk.
The BIS Innovation Hub Swiss Centre, SNB, and the financial infrastructure operator SIX announced the successful completion of a joint proof-of-concept (PoC) experiment as part of the Project Helvetia.
EBA published the final draft regulatory technical standards for calculation of own funds requirements for market risk, under the standardized and internal model approaches of the Fundamental Review of the Trading Book (FRTB) framework.
EIOPA published discussion paper on a methodology for the potential inclusion of climate change in the Solvency II (sometimes also written as SII) standard formula when calculating natural catastrophe underwriting risk.
EU published, in the Official Journal of the European Union, corrigenda to the Directive and the Regulation on the prudential requirements and supervision of investment firms.
MAS proposed amendments to certain regulations, notices, and guidelines arising from the Banking (Amendment) Act 2020.
PRA published a statement that explains when to expect further information on the PRA approach to transposing the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD5), including its approach to revisions to the definition of capital for Pillar 2A.
RBNZ launched consultations on the scope of the Insurance Prudential Supervision Act (IPSA) 2010 and on the associated Insurance Solvency Standards.
SRB published the work program for 2021-2023, setting out a roadmap to further operationalize the Single Resolution Fund and to achieve robust resolvability of banks under its remit over the next three years.
EIOPA is consulting on the relevant ratios to be mandatorily disclosed by insurers and reinsurers falling within the scope of the Non-Financial Reporting Directive as well as on the methodologies to build these ratios.