FDIC adopted the final rule to amend its company-run stress testing regulations applicable to state non-member banks and state savings associations, consistent with section 401 of the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection (EGRRCP) Act. The final rule revises the minimum threshold for applicability from USD 10 billion to USD 250 billion, revises the frequency of required stress tests by FDIC-supervised institutions, and reduces the number of required stress testing scenarios from three to two. The final rule also makes certain conforming and technical changes. The changes impact the FDIC form DFAST 14A (Summary and Scenario sections). The final rule is effective from November 25, 2019.
FDIC, on December 28, 2018, had issued a proposed rule to amend its stress testing requirements, consistent with section 401 of EGRRCP Act. FDIC has received six comments in response to the proposed rule. FDIC is adopting, without change, the proposed revisions to the stress testing rule. Section 401 of EGRRCP Act amended section 165 of the Dodd-Frank Act by raising the minimum asset threshold for banks required to conduct stress tests from USD 10 billion to USD 250 billion. The final rule implements this change by eliminating the two existing subcategories of covered bank—“USD 10 to USD 50 billion covered bank” and “over USD 50 billion covered bank”—and revising the term covered bank to mean a state non-member bank or state savings association with average total consolidated assets that are greater than USD 250 billion.
No FDIC-supervised institutions with total consolidated assets of USD 600 million or less are subject to 12 CFR part 325. Therefore, the final rule would not affect any small, FDIC-supervised institutions. The final rule provides that, in general, an FDIC-supervised institution that is a covered bank as of December 31, 2019, is required to conduct, report, and publish a stress test once every two years, beginning on January 01, 2020. The final rule also adds a new defined term, “reporting year,” to the definitions at 12 CFR 325.2. The reporting year for a covered bank is the year in which a covered bank must conduct, report, and publish its stress test. The “reporting year” for most covered banks would generally be every even-numbered year. The final rule also removes the “adverse” scenario in the FDIC stress testing rule and maintains the requirement to conduct stress tests under the “baseline” and “severely adverse” stress testing scenarios. The final rule amends the definition of “severely adverse scenario” so that the term is defined relative to the “baseline scenario,” rather than relative to the “adverse scenario.”
The final rule revises the transition period in 12 CFR 325.3 to conform to the other changes in this final rule. FDIC may require a covered bank with significant trading activities to include trading and counterparty components in its adverse and severely adverse scenarios. The trading data to be used in this component is as of a date between January 01 and March 01 of a calendar year. FED and OCC extended this range to run from October 01 of the calendar year preceding the year of the stress test to March 01 of the calendar year of the stress test. The final rule adopts the same change to the FDIC stress testing regulation, extending the range of as-of dates from October 01 of the preceding calendar year to March 01 of the calendar year of the stress test. Extending the as-of date range ensures consistency with FED and OCC rules and increases the FDIC flexibility to choose an appropriate as-of date.
Related Link: Federal Register Notice
Effective Date: November 25, 2019
Keywords: Americas, US, Banking, Stress Testing, Dodd-Frank Act, EGRRCP Act, DFAST, Reporting, DFAT 14A, FED, OCC
Previous ArticleUS Agencies Propose Reduced Reporting in the FFIEC 051 Call Report
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.
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.
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.
The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) and the European Banking Authority (EBA) have published results of the Basel III monitoring exercise.
The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) recently issued a few regulatory updates for banks, with the updated Basel implementation timelines being the key among them.
The U.S. Department of the Treasury has recently set out the principles for net-zero financing and investment.
The European Commission (EC) launched a stakeholder survey on the draft International Guiding Principles for organizations developing advanced artificial intelligence (AI) systems.
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.
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.
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.