BIS Paper Explores Enhanced G-SIB Capital Surcharge Framework
A recently published BIS paper explores an alternative, enhanced implementation of the expected impact framework for global systemically important bank (G-SIB) capital surcharges. As developed by the BCBS, the expected impact framework is the theoretical foundation for calibrating the capital surcharge applied to G-SIBs. The alternative framework has the potential to improve the empirical basis of these surcharges and eliminate uneven incentives for G-SIB growth. The paper concludes with some thoughts about the use of these two capital surcharge functions for monitoring the capital adequacy of G-SIBs.
This paper describes four improvements to the current implementation of the BCBS expected impact framework. In this paper, the authors introduce a theoretically sound and an empirically grounded approach to estimating a probability of default (PD) function and apply density-based cluster analysis to identify the reference bank for each G-SIB indicator. They also recalibrate the systemic loss-given-default (LGD) function that determines G-SIB scores, using both the current system based on supervisory judgment and using an alternative system based on CoVaR, to finally derive a continuous capital surcharge function to determine G-SIB capital surcharges.
The authors find that these empirically-based alternative implementations of the expected impact framework would result in minor declines in G-SIB surcharges in the aggregate, but would result in the removal of some of the smaller G-SIBs from the list of G-SIBs. Adopting the "supervisory" surcharge function, which is calibrated to maintain the general level of capital surcharges based on the current supervisory consensus, would result in changes of less than 30 bps in individual G-SIB scores, and in moderate changes in G-SIB surcharges. Adopting a surcharge function that uses CoVaR as a measure of LGD would result in both more significant increases in capital and more significant declines in G-SIB scores and surcharges. These findings suggest that these functions could be used to monitor current G-SIB surcharges, particularly by highlighting gains from the cap on the substitutability score and from cliff effects.
The approach presented in this paper would strengthen the empirical and theoretical foundation of the G-SIB surcharge framework. Moreover, the continuous surcharge function would reduce banks' incentive to manage their balance sheets to reduce systemic capital surcharges, mitigate cliff effects, allow for the lifting of the cap on the substitutability score and penalize growth in the category for all G-SIBs. In addition, the two capital surcharge functions might be used to monitor G-SIBs' capital adequacy and distortions induced by G-SIB surcharges.
Related Links
Keywords: International, Banking, G-SIBs, Systemic Risk, G-SIB Surcharge, Loss Given Default, Regulatory Capital, Basel, BIS
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
BCBS Issues Principles for Operational Resilience and RiskRelated Articles
EBA Finalizes Templates for One-Off Climate Risk Scenario Analysis
The European Banking Authority (EBA) has published the final templates, and the associated guidance, for collecting climate-related data for the one-off Fit-for-55 climate risk scenario analysis.
EBA Mulls Inclusion of Environmental & Social Risks to Pillar 1 Rules
The European Banking Authority (EBA) recently published a report that recommends enhancements to the Pillar 1 framework, under the prudential rules, to capture environmental and social risks.
BCBS Consults on Disclosure of Crypto-Asset Exposures of Banks
As a follow on from its prudential standard on the treatment of crypto-asset exposures, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) proposed disclosure requirements for crypto-asset exposures of banks.
BCBS and EBA Publish Results of Basel III Monitoring Exercise
The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) and the European Banking Authority (EBA) have published results of the Basel III monitoring exercise.
PRA Updates Timeline for Final Basel III Rules, Issues Other Updates
The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) recently issued a few regulatory updates for banks, with the updated Basel implementation timelines being the key among them.
US Treasury Sets Out Principles for Net-Zero Financing
The U.S. Department of the Treasury has recently set out the principles for net-zero financing and investment.
EC Launches Survey on G7 Principles on Generative AI
The European Commission (EC) launched a stakeholder survey on the draft International Guiding Principles for organizations developing advanced artificial intelligence (AI) systems.
ISSB Sustainability Standards Expected to Become Global Baseline
The finalization of the two sustainability disclosure standards—IFRS S1 and IFRS S2—is expected to be a significant step forward in the harmonization of sustainability disclosures worldwide.
IOSCO, BIS, and FSB to Intensify Focus on Decentralized Finance
Decentralized finance (DeFi) is expected to increase in prominence, finding traction in use cases such as lending, trading, and investing, without the intermediation of traditional financial institutions.
BCBS Assesses NSFR and Large Exposures Rules in US
The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) published reports that assessed the overall implementation of the net stable funding ratio (NSFR) and the large exposures rules in the U.S.
