The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) published further information related to its 2021 assessment of global systemically important banks (G-SIBs), with additional details to help understand the scoring methodology. Meanwhile, the Financial Stability Board (FSB) published the 2021 list of G-SIBs using end-2020 data and an assessment methodology designed by BCBS. This year's list features the same 30 banks that were on the 2020 list; however, three banks have moved to a higher bucket: JP Morgan Chase has moved from bucket 3 to bucket 4, BNP Paribas has moved from bucket 2 to bucket 3, and Goldman Sachs has moved from bucket 1 to bucket 2.
The assignment of G-SIBs to the buckets in this list determines the higher capital buffer requirements that will apply to each G-SIB from January 01, 2023. FSB member authorities apply the following requirements to G-SIBs:
Higher capital buffer: The G-SIBs are allocated to buckets corresponding to higher capital buffers that they are required to hold by national authorities in accordance with international standards.
Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity (TLAC): G-SIBs are required to meet the TLAC standard, alongside the regulatory capital requirements set out in the Basel III framework. The TLAC standard began being phased in from January 01, 2019 for G-SIBs identified in the 2015 list that continued to be designated as G-SIBs.
Resolvability: These include group-wide resolution planning and regular resolvability assessments. The resolvability of each G-SIB is also reviewed in a high-level FSB Resolvability Assessment Process by senior regulators within the firms’ Crisis Management Groups.
Higher supervisory expectations: These include supervisory expectations for risk management functions, risk data aggregation capabilities, risk governance, and internal controls.
BCBS published the updated denominators used to calculate banks’ scores, the thresholds used to allocate the banks to buckets, and the values of the twelve high-level indicators of all banks in the main sample used in the G-SIB scoring exercise. BCBS also provides the links to the public disclosures of all banks in the full sample of banks assessed. Earlier this month, BCBS approved a technical amendment to the G-SIB assessment methodology review process, which replaces the previous three-year review cycle with a process of ongoing monitoring and review. In the near term, BCBS will review the implications of developments related to the European Banking Union for the G-SIB methodology. In particular, this will include a targeted review of the treatment of cross-border exposures within the Banking Union on the G-SIB methodology. A new list of G-SIBs will next be published in November 2022.
Keywords: International, Banking, G-SIBs, Systemic Risk, Regulatory Capital, Basel, TLAC, G-SIB Assessment, Cross-Border Exposures, BCBS, FSB
Previous ArticleFASB Proposes Improvements to Credit Losses Standard
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.