Search

The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) today publishes a report on the materiality of custodian banks’ engagement in settlement internalisation and Central Counterparty-like activities. This forms part of its follow-up work in response to the ECOFIN’s request on 3 June 2008 for a review of ‘the coverage of risks borne by custodians (…) so as to ensure a level playing field while avoiding inconsistencies in the treatment of custodians and double regulation’.

The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) has published today two reports setting out the outcome of efforts made in assessing banks’ disclosures i) in their 2008 audited annual reports on activities and exposures affected by the financial crisis and ii) under Pillar 3.

The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) has published today a Position Paper on a countercyclical capital buffer. The objective of this paper is to outline possible practical tools for supervisors to assess banks’ capital buffers under Pillar 2.

The three Level 3 Committees (the Committee of European Securities Regulators (CESR), the Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) and the Committee of European Insurance and Occupational Pension Supervisors (CEIOPS) – through its 3L3 Anti Money Laundering Task Force (AMLTF) – publish today their compendium paper on the supervisory implementation practices amongst EU Member States of the Third Money Laundering Directive (2005/60/EC).

The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) and the Committee of European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Supervisors (CEIOPS) - through the Joint Committee on Financial Conglomerates (JCFC) - today publish their advice to the European Commission on the review of the Financial Conglomerates Directive (FCD).

The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) today publishes its advice on the effectiveness of a minimum retention requirement for securitisations.

The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) today publishes its implementation guidelines on hybrid capital instruments.

The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) together with the Committee of European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Supervisors (CEIOPS) and the Committee of European Securities Regulators (CESR) are publishing today the revised Impact Assessment Guidelines and a Feedback Statement as a practical tool to help ensure the effective use of Impact Assessment (IA) within the three Lamfalussy Level 3 Committees. They are consistent with the European Commission's approach to Better Regulation and, specifically, with the EC's own IA Guidelines, though adapted to reflect the more specialised nature of financial services policy and the specific circumstances in which it is developed within the EU.The scope of the Committees' IA work will take account of IA work to be conducted by the Commission or others. This is so as to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort and to ensure that the exercise adds value.

The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) today publishes its guidelines in relation to two specific aspects of the revised large exposures regime that has been included in the amended Capital Requirements Directive (CRD). The amendments will have to be transposed into Member States’ national law by 31 October 2010 and will be applied from 31 December 2010.

The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) today publishes its consultation paper (CP35) on its draft guidelines on the management of operational risk in market-related activities. The consultation is open to all interested parties, including supervised institutions and other market participants.

The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) together with the Committee of European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Supervisors (CEIOPS) are publishing today recommendations to address the consequences of the differences in sectoral rules on the calculation of own funds of financial conglomerates. These recommendations have been produced by the Interim Working Committee on Financial Conglomerates (IWCFC) at the request of the European Financial Conglomerates Committee. Today, this advice has been sent to the European Commission.

The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) today publishes its Advice on the review of the large exposures regime

The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) today publishes its guidelines on operational risk mitigation techniques following a three-month public consultation period and a public hearing. These guidelines, which build on the provisions of the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD) and CEBS’s Guidelines on the Implementation, Validation and Assessment of AMA and IRB Approaches (Implementation Guidelines – GL10) provide supervisory expectations and clarification on the recognition of risk transfer instruments within the AMA.

The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) together with the Committee of European Insurance and Occupational Pensions (CEIOPS) are publishing today the joint response of CEBS and the Interim Working Committee on Financial Conglomerates (IWCFC ), to the two parallel requests from June 2007, for technical advice from the European Commission (EC) on its recommendations on whether the supervisory arrangements of the US and Swiss supervisory authorities would achieve the objectives of consolidated and supplementary supervision.

In December 2007 the European Commission issued a joint Call for Technical Advice related to the review under Articles 65(3)(a), (b) and (d) of MiFID and Article 48(2) of the CRD. CESR and CEBS are requested to deliver its technical advice by end-July 2008. In order to prepare this advice, CESR and CEBS are inviting all interested parties to submit their views regarding the Call for Advice from the Commission and especially in relation to the questions contained in its annex.

The European Central Bank (ECB) and the Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) have today published a new classification system aimed at reducing over time the reporting burden placed on entities that are required to deliver data to the Eurosystem as well as to supervisory authorities.

The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) and the Committee of European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Supervisors (CEIOPS) are publishing today a report on the possible impact of the differences in the definition of capital instruments provided for by the European banking, insurance and securities regulation, for the supervision of a conglomerate. This assessment has been produced by the Interim Working Committee on Financial Conglomerates (IWCFC) in response to the Commission’s call for advice on sectoral rules on eligible capital and analysis of the consequences for supervision of financial conglomerates.

CEBS has made a review of the progress made on the basis of the measures taken with respect to the issues raised in its June 2008 Report on issues relating to the valuation of complex and illiquid financial instruments and concludes that there are still more improvements to be made.

The Commission has asked the Interim Working Committee on Financial Conglomerates (IWCFC) - the joint working committee of the Committee of European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Supervisors (CEIOPS) and the Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) - to provide technical advice with regard to the sectoral rules on eligible capital and the analysis of the consequences for supervision of financial conglomerates.

The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) and the Committee of European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Supervisors (CEIOPS) are publishing today a comparison of the capital instruments that are eligible for prudential purposes in the application of the European banking, insurance and securities regulation. This cross-sectoral comparison has been produced by the Interim Working Committee on Financial Conglomerates (IWCFC) at the request of the European Financial Conglomerates Committee. This report was sent to the Commission on 3 January 2007.The recommendations in this advice focus on the four main differences that were gathered during the analysis: the treatment of hybrids, revaluation reserves/latent gains, deduction of holdings and the differences in consolidation approaches and methods foreseen by the Financial Conglomerates Directive.