FSB published a discussion paper on the regulatory and supervisory issues related to outsourcing and third-party relationships. The discussion paper presents an overview of the evolving regulatory and supervisory landscape for outsourcing and third-party risk management in FSB member jurisdictions. It briefly describes the existing regulatory and supervisory approaches and outlines the common regulatory and supervisory challenges associated with outsourcing and third-party risk management, also identifying key issues for further exploration. FSB is seeking comments, by January 08, 2021, on the questions set out in the discussion paper.
In January-March 2020, the FSB Standing Committee on Supervisory and Regulatory Cooperation (SRC) conducted a survey among member jurisdictions on the existing regulatory and supervisory landscape for outsourcing and third-party risk management, including cross-border supervisory challenges and potential financial stability issues. The discussion paper provides a high-level overview of the existing landscape based on the survey findings as well as the preliminary observations from authorities’ and financial institutions’ recent responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. The paper intends to facilitate and inform discussions among authorities, financial institutions, and third parties on how to address the issues identified in the SRC survey and the 2019 FSB report on third-party dependencies in cloud services. The discussion has highlighted the following key challenges faced by supervisory authorities:
- Practical limitations on the ability to ensure that financial institutions appropriately manage the risks in their outsourcing and third-party agreements (including risks in the third party’s wider supply chain)
- Limitations on their ability to effectively oversee supervised financial institutions’ outsourcing and third-party arrangements in a cross-border context
- Challenges in identifying, monitoring, and managing potential systemic risks related to financial institutions’ use of outsourcing and third-party arrangements, particularly, due to concentration in the provision of third-party services and lack of relevant information
The high pace of evolution of third-party relationships, including where and how financial institutions use third-party providers, can make understanding and managing these risks more complex. In the paper, FSB highlights that additional analysis may be considered to better understand the risks posed by the changing landscape of outsourcing and third-party relationships. The additional analysis may also be considered to better understand whether the existing approaches allow financial institutions to capture the benefits of outsourcing and third-party relationships while sufficiently addressing the risks that these relationships may pose to financial institutions. The discussion paper emphasizes that effective cross-border cooperation and dialog among supervisory authorities as well as the effective application of existing standards and other emerging practices are important to address these challenges and risks.
Comment Due Date: January 08, 2021
Keywords: International, Banking, Insurance, Securities, COVID-19, Third-Party Risk, Systemic Risk, Outsourcing Risk, Cloud Computing, FSB
Leading economist; commercial real estate; performance forecasting, econometric infrastructure; data modeling; credit risk modeling; portfolio assessment; custom commercial real estate analysis; thought leader.
Across 35 years in banking, Blake has gained deep insights into the inner working of this sector. Over the last two decades, Blake has been an Operating Committee member, leading teams and executing strategies in Credit and Enterprise Risk as well as Line of Business. His focus over this time has been primarily Commercial/Corporate with particular emphasis on CRE. Blake has spent most of his career with large and mid-size banks. Blake joined Moody’s Analytics in 2021 after leading the transformation of the credit approval and reporting process at a $25 billion bank.
Previous ArticleEBA Reminds Firms to Execute Contingency Plans for Brexit Transition
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.