Search for Q&As

Enquirers can use various factors to search for a Q&A:

  • These include searching by the Q&A ID; legal reference, date submitted, technical standard / guideline, or by keyword if known.
  • Searches can be extended to more than one legal act, topic, technical standard or guidelines by making multiple selections (i.e. pressing 'Ctrl' on your keyboard, and selecting the relevant ones from the drop-down lists by left mouse-click).

Disclaimer:

Q&As refer to the provisions in force on the day of their publication. The EBA does not systematically review published Q&As following the amendment of legislative acts. Users of the Q&A tool should therefore check the date of publication of the Q&A and whether the provisions referred to in the answer remain the same.

Please note that the Q&As related to the supervisory benchmarking exercises have been moved to the dedicated handbook page. You can submit Q&As on this topic here.

Final Q&As Q&As under review Rejected Q&As Archived Q&As All Q&As

List of Q&A's

Treatment of derivative liabilities in the denominator of MREL

What does Article 45 (1) of Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD) mean by including derivative liabilities in the total liabilities on the basis that full recognition is given to counterparty netting rights?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2266
  • Topic: MREL
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Differentiation between specialised lending and sme exposures within exposure class corporates

The exposure class 'corporates' is splitted into sme, specialised lending and other corporates. Where must an institution report specialised lending exposures, that are at the same time exposures to sme? The implemented sme definition only the annualised returns (< 50 mln. EUR). Specialised lending exposures are identified through the rating methodologies, that have been applied to determine a credit quality.

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (repealed)
  • ID: 2015_2259
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - COREP (incl. IP Losses)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 03/02/2017

Calculation of Default rate past 5 years and Loss rate past 5 years

If bank applies AIRB models to RWA calculation (according with the decision of the competent authority) for a period shorter than 5 years, what time series should be used for calculation of 5-year average values when calculating default rates and loss rates ?

  • Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Draft ITS on Supervisory Reporting of Institutions (for benchmarking the internal approaches)
  • ID: 2015_2257
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Supervisory Benchmarking
  • Date of submission:

Reporting of different AIRB models in the same benchmarking class (portfolio) - credit risk

If one of the credit risk portfolios defined in the benchmarking exercise covers two different AIRB models, how it should be presented in the benchmarking templates?

  • Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Draft ITS on Supervisory Reporting of Institutions (for benchmarking the internal approaches)
  • ID: 2015_2256
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Supervisory Benchmarking
  • Date of submission:

Break clauses in capital requirements and Residual maturity

In a swap contract with break clauses, basically with an enforceable option of early termination by one of the counterparties, which is the residual maturity to be considered for the application of the CVA capital charge in article 384 of CRR? The residual maturity of the original contract or the residual maturity for the break clause date?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2252
  • Topic: Market risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 09/12/2016

Cap on inflows

Does a credit institution benefit from a cap on inflows of 90% when the sum of its activities as referred to in Article 33(3) and its activities as referred to in Article 33(4) exceeds 80% of the total balance sheet?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/61 - DR with regard to liquidity coverage requirement
  • ID: 2015_2236
  • Topic: Liquidity risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 27/05/2016

Leverage ratio - Add-on calculation for SFT transactions in Financial collateral simple method

In the example below, under Financial Collateral Simple Method would the add-on be the same as under Article 429e(2) of the CRR, that is 25, or should it be based on (1025 * 0.20) = 205 – 200 (1000 * 0.20), that is 5?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2234
  • Topic: Leverage ratio
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 17/02/2017

LRCalc – Reporting of SFT Exposures according to Article 429 (5) (d), 429 (8) and 429b (1) CRR

Please clarify regarding securities included in Repo transactions. As per the guidelines for Row010 in LRCALC table, ‘cash received or security that is provided to a counterparty via the aforesaid mentioned transactions and is retained on the balance sheet...’ are to be reported in other assets in Row190.From the above, as cash received or security provided on balance are to be reported in Row190, these are not reported in Row 010.[1] However, for purpose of cash receivable and cash payable netting, cash received which is reported in Row190 is included for the purpose of netting which is reported in Row 010. Is there no contradiction in guidelines?As an example if an institution has done a repo transaction of own security (on balance sheet) of value 1025 and receives a cash of 1000, in Row190, 2025 is to be reported.In Row010, for purpose of cash receivable and payable netting, cash received 1000 is included in netting.Is this not double reporting?[2] In Row 020, ADD-ON for SFT transactions is to be reported as per Article 429b (1).As securities which are included in repo transactions and which are on balance sheet, full value of security is reported in Row190 as other asset, whether ADD-ON is to be calculated and reported for such securities?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (repealed)
  • ID: 2015_2233
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Leverage ratio
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 24/11/2017

Defining a concession

Our questions refers to the border case, where a bank modifies terms and conditions in favour of a debtor who is in financial difficulties, but where - at the same time - the new terms and conditions are still less favourable or equal to the standard terms and conditions of the bank for comparable debtors. The matter might become clearer through a specific example: A debtor of a performing loan is in financial difficulties (let's say 25 days past due). Due to the existing financial problems the bank reduces the interest rate to a rate which is still above the standard interest rate for debtors with a similar risk profile of the bank. The bank has no doubt about the debtor being able to pay it's debt. Is this measure to be considered a forborne measurement? Paragraph 163 lays down, that forbearance measures consist of concessions towards a debtor that is experiencing or about to experience difficulties in meeting its financial commitments (“financial difficulties”), i.e. it states two conditions for a forbearance: a) a concession has taken place b) the concession refers to a debtor in financial difficulties There is no doubt, that the debtor in the above mentioned example is in financial difficulties, but is the above stated measure also a concession? paragraph 165 says: 165. Evidence of a concession includes the following: (a) a difference in favour of the debtor between the modified terms of the contract and the previous terms of the contract; (b) inclusion in a modified contract of more favourable terms than other debtors with a similar risk profile could have obtained from the same institution at that time. Our example meets only condition a) not condition b). This may lead to the conclusion that it is not a concession and therefore the above stated case does not refer to a forbearance measure. Paragraph 164 on the other hand lays down "...that would not have been granted had the debtor not been experiencing financial difficulties". If we view this statement individually, we may come to the conclusion that a concession has taken place; on the other hand it is somewhat contradictory to 163 and 165, from where one may deduct that a concession is a separately defined component of a forbearance measure. If we interpret this statement in the light of paragraph 165 b), i.e. that terms and conditions should not be more favourable than those applied to other comparable debtors the measure may not be a forbearance measure.

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (repealed)
  • ID: 2015_2231
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - FINREP (incl. FB&NPE)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 04/10/2019

Can the activity consisting in granting credits on own account without collecting deposits or other repayable funds from the public be subject to the requirements of the CRD IV regarding the freedom to provide services and freedom of establishment?

According to Article 4.1 (1) of the CRR, credit institution means an undertaking the business of which is to take deposits or other repayable funds from the public and to grant credits for its own account. The regulations of the CRR and CRDIV are applicable only to the institutions that fulfill both criteria, i.e. the business of which consist of both activities – taking deposits or other repayable funds from the public and granting credits for own account. Only such types of institutions are obliged to be subject to prudential supervision and only to such types of institutions the requirements of authorization and passporting in case of starting cross-border activity are applicable. In some jurisdictions, however, national legislation requires to obtain authorization and to be under prudential supervision from entities which do not accept deposits or other repayable funds but provide some kind of financial activity, in particular, grant different types of credits. This is for example a case of factoring or leasing firms. In these jurisdictions competent authorities require such firms to use passport notification procedure from the CRD IV to notify the intention to start cross-border activity in other Member State. Moreover, these authorities require relevant firms (i.e. leasing or factoring firms) from other Member State to notify the intention to start cross-border activity in jurisdiction of these authorities, using the procedure from the CRD IV. Notwithstanding of the lack of the EU legal basis for such requirements, it must be also noticed that in jurisdictions where such firms are not subject to authorization and prudential supervision, competent authorities have no mandate either to send or accept any notifications regarding the cross-border activity of such firms.

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2230
  • Topic: Other topics
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Classification of Churches and Religious Communities

Will the exposures of churches and religious communities that do not fall under Articles 115 (3), 127, and 128 be classified as Corporates (Article 122) or Retail (Article 123)? Additionally, can these be classified as SMEs?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2015_2227
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 11/03/2016

Extending the range of application system.

What is practically meant by 'additional exposures related to the lending decision of a third party to the group'?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 529/2014 - RTS on materiality of extensions and changes in the advanced approaches (IRB and AMA)
  • ID: 2015_2224
  • Topic: Model validation
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 23/09/2016

Promotional banks

Is there a list of all EU institutions qualifying for the notion of "promotional bank"?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/63 - DR on ex ante contributions to resolution financing arrangements
  • ID: 2015_2223
  • Topic: Resolution financing arrangements
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 01/07/2016

Liquidity – treatment of payment commitments according to Article 2 (13) DGSD

How should payment commitments pursuant to Article 2(13) DGSD (Directive 2014/49/EU) be treated in the outflow-section of LCR?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/61 - DR with regard to liquidity coverage requirement
  • ID: 2015_2222
  • Topic: Liquidity risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 27/05/2016

FINREP, F 31.02 vs F 02.00 – dividend income from joint ventures and associates

Could you clarify the inconsistency between the references of template F 31.02 (IAS24) and the instructions and deactivate the validation rule v1374_m, or if not, clarify the reasons of this one?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (repealed)
  • ID: 2015_2218
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - FINREP (incl. FB&NPE)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 04/08/2017

Mortgages as the real estate collateral received to be included in template AE-COL

Following the answer provided on Q&A 2013_675 we would like to clarify if mortgages as the real estate collateral received should be included in template AE-COL. If so, in which column / row should it be reported.

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (repealed)
  • ID: 2015_2217
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Asset Encumbrance
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 13/12/2019

Consistency between validation rule V3933 and paragraph IAS39 - 89A

Could you explicit the reasons of the validation rule V3933, taking account of paragraph IAS39 - 89A, mentioned in the template?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (repealed)
  • ID: 2015_2215
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - FINREP (incl. FB&NPE)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 13/12/2019

Prices for various lengths of funding - Transactions volume

Should transactions volume in Prices for Various Lenghts of Funding be reported as average transactions volume, calculated as total volume divided by number of transactions?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Draft ITS on Supervisory Reporting of Institutions
  • ID: 2015_2208
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Liquidity (LCR, NSFR, AMM)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 18/12/2015

Reporting of prices for various lengths of funding

Should Reporting of Prices for Various Lenghts of Funding include only those transactions originally in Euro currency, excluding all other different currencies?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Draft ITS on Supervisory Reporting of Institutions
  • ID: 2015_2204
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Liquidity (LCR, NSFR, AMM)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 18/12/2015

Treatment of securities received in reverse repo and sold (short position) in F32.04 and F08.01

Our question is about the link between F32.04 and F08.01 for reverse repo, notably if the securities received is sold (short position). Our position is: - Securities in reverse repo don’t have to be reported in F 8.1 (only repo have to be reported) but should be mentioned in cell 160_030 in F32.04, - Securities received and sold have to be reported in F 8.1, cell 040_010, - The sum of row 10 to 110 (column 010) of F32.04 have to be matched with liabilities reported in F08.01. Do you agree with this treatment? If not, could you precise your recommendations?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (repealed)
  • ID: 2015_2202
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - FINREP (incl. FB&NPE)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 10/09/2021