EBA submits its Opinion to the European Commission on proposed amendments to Regulatory Technical Standards (RTS) under CRR Article 124(14), addressing equivalent legal mechanisms for residential property completion, including prudential safeguards like risk weight thresholds and legal enforceability requirements.
European Commission letter to EBA outlining intended amendments to draft regulatory technical standards (RTS) under CRR on equivalent legal mechanisms for completing residential properties, addressing prudential conditions, market stability, and legal clarity before adoption.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) today published its Opinion in response to the European Commission’s amendments to the draft Regulatory Technical Standards (RTS) specifying what constitutes an equivalent legal mechanism to ensure the completion of a residential property under construction within a reasonable timeframe, as laid down in the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR).
The European Banking Authority (EBA) has decided to conclude its dedicated work on the monitoring of legacy instruments, in line with its long-standing expectation that such instruments should be eliminated over time. The phasing out of legacy instruments is essential to maintain a clear subordination ranking within institutions’ capital structures and to avoid unnecessary complexity in the prudential framework.
European Banking Authority (EBA) outlines its data processing activities for recruiting Temporary Agents, Contract Agents, and Seconded National Experts under EUDPR, detailing personal data handling, legal bases, external processors, and candidate selection procedures.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) and the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) today launched a consultation on the revised joint Guidelines on the assessment of the suitability of members of the management body and key function holders. In parallel, the EBA is consulting on draft Regulatory Technical Standards (RTS) specifying the documentation and information that large institutions must submit to competent authorities. Together, these elements form the Suitability Package, which aims to harmonise suitability assessments and promote supervisory convergence across the EU.
EBA and ESMA consult on joint guidelines for assessing suitability of management body members and key function holders under CRD IV and MiFID II, covering proportionality, diversity, reputation, skills, training, and ongoing monitoring requirements.
EBA consults on draft Regulatory Technical Standards outlining minimum requirements for suitability questionnaires, CVs, and internal assessments under Directive 2013/36/EU for bank management evaluations, with feedback due by May 2026.
EBA decision establishing mandatory annual data collection from EU credit institutions to monitor Basel III standards, assess regulatory mandates, and support impact analysis—covering capital, liquidity, leverage, and funding ratios for systemic and large banks.
European Banking Authority follow-up report assessing progress on ICT risk evaluation under the Supervisory Review and Evaluation Process (SREP), including recommendations for competent authorities, benchmarking, and alignment with DORA and CRD/CRR frameworks.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) today published the follow-up to its 2022 peer review report on ICT risk assessment under the supervisory review and evaluation process (SREP). The follow-up Report shows that competent authorities have made notable progress in strengthening ICT risk assessment, driven largely by the implementation of the Digital Operational Resilience Act. At the same time, further work and continued investment remain necessary to ensure consistent and effective ICT risk supervision across the European Union (EU).
Can persons who are authorized in writing by the issuer to offer crypto-assets to the public conduct this activity on a commercial basis, continuously, repeatedly, and possibly for different issuers (whether concurrently or consecutively) without having a MiCA CASP license for the crypto-asset service 'placing of crypto-assets'?
In Article 67, Paragraph 1, crypto asset providers shall at all time have prudential safeguards as the highest of the following;
- the amount of permanent minimum capital requirements indicated in Annex IV
- one quarter of the fixed overheads of the preceding year, reviewed annually
In Paragraph 3, the method to calculate the prudential requirement of one quarter of the fixed overheads of the preceding year, reviewed annually is stated as;
"Crypto-asset service providers shall calculate their fixed overheads for the preceding year, using figures resulting from the applicable accounting framework, by subtracting the following items from the total expenses after distribution of profits to shareholders or members."
When defining "total expenses" in the quoted sentence from Paragraph 3, does it in fact mean the total costs (fixed and variable overheads) after distribution of profits in the income statement for the preceding year, or is it meant to be the total fixed overheads after distribution of profits?
Article 5(2) of MiCA states that “when a crypto-asset is admitted to trading on the initiative of a trading platform and a crypto-asset white paper has not been published in accordance with Article 9 in the cases required by this Regulation [emphasis added], the operator of that trading platform for crypto-assets shall comply with the requirements set out in paragraph 1 of this Article”.
In turn, Article 9 requires offerors and persons seeking admission to trading of crypto-assets other than ARTs or EMTs to publish their crypto-asset white papers and any marketing materials.
However, recital 22 of MiCA states that “Where crypto-assets have no identifiable issuer, they should not fall within the scope of Title II, III or IV of this Regulation”.
Does the expression “in the cases required by this Regulation” mean that Article 5(2) exempts operators of trading platforms from the requirements of Article 5 for crypto-assets without an identifiable issuer?