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.

List of Q&A's

Definition of domestic for reporting collateral by type

For the purposes of populating the C 34.08 of Annex 1 to the Regulation (EU) 2021/451 it asks for cash to be split by domestic currency and other currencies and sovereign debt to be split into domestic and other. In this context, how should domestic be interpreted? We can think of three possible options: 1) Domestic refers to the country of incorporation of the institution. 2) Domestic refers to the country of incorporation of the client against which the institution has the CCR exposures. 3) Domestic refers to the country of incorporation of the issuer of the debt with respect to the sovereign debt (although this would then seem to conflict with domestic for cash if it is a valid option).

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2021/451 – ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions

Identify when EMD2 needs to be applied to vouchers/gift cards issued by an electronic money institution.

Do vouchers/gift cards issued by an electronic money institution (EMI) to top-up an e-money account (managed by the EMI itself) in order to purchase on an e-commerce platform: i) goods and services sold directly by companies belonging to the same corporate group of the EMI (thus falling out of the scope of PSD2, encompassing the exemption provided for intra-group transactions in Article 3(1)(n) of the PSD2); ii) goods and services of third-party merchants,  have to be qualified as e-money at the time of issuing (i.e.sale) or - given the possible indefinite use of the funds - they acquire that status only at the moment they are used to purchase goods and services from third-party merchants on the e-commerce platform? 

  • Legal act: Directive 2009/110/EC (EMD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

Requirement for STS securitisations to involve a securitisation special purpose entity (SSPE) which acquires title to the underlying exposures by means of a true sale or assignment or transfer with the same legal effect

Can securitisations where the seller sells the underlying exposures directly to the funding party (typically a bank) rather than involving an SSPE also qualify as 'simple, transparent and standardised’ (STS) securitisations?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 2017/2402 (SecReg)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

Clarification on use of prearranged and highly reliable funding arrangements

If a CSD-banking service provider has routine credit at a central bank of issue in the EU, are the requirements in Article 11, paragraph 1, subparagraphs (b) and (d) simultaneously met?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 909/2014 (CSDR) - only RTS 2017/390
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2017/390 - RTS on prudential requirements of CSDs (CSDR-related)

Clarification on the need for a prearranged and highly reliable funding arrangement to liquidate collateral referred to in Article 11, paragraph 2

What type of arrangement is required under Article 11, paragraph 2, subparagraph (c), point (i)?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 909/2014 (CSDR) - only RTS 2017/390
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2017/390 - RTS on prudential requirements of CSDs (CSDR-related)

Perimeter of CSRBB

Should such investment products (such as bonds) accounted at amortised cost be included in the CSRBB perimeter when the management intention is to hold the asset until maturity?

  • Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: EBA/GL/2022/14 - Guidelines on interest rate risk arising from non-trading book activities

Net interest income measure plus market value changes

Should products accounted at fair value be included in the net interest income measure plus market value change when the fair value of the product is based on expert say and is therefore independent of the level of interest rates ?

  • Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: EBA/GL/2022/14 - Guidelines on interest rate risk arising from non-trading book activities

Net interest income measure plus market value changes

Should Mutual Funds which capitalise interests (no payment of interest and accounted at fair value) be taken into account for the net interest income measure plus market value changes ?

  • Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: EBA/GL/2022/14 - Guidelines on interest rate risk arising from non-trading book activities

Net interest income measure plus market value changes

Could you please confirm that fair value variations of financial products accounted at amortised cost (as the management intention is to hold them until maturity) are not to be accounted for the net interest income measure plus market value changes ?

  • Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: EBA/GL/2022/14 - Guidelines on interest rate risk arising from non-trading book activities

Inclusion of products accounted at fair value in the net interest income

Should products accounted at fair value be included in the net interest income measure plus market value change when the fair value of the product is based on expert say and is therefore independent of the level of interest rates ?

  • Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: EBA/GL/2022/14 - Guidelines on interest rate risk arising from non-trading book activities

Traetment of precious metals

Could precious metals, such as gold, silver etc., be considered as HLQA, i.e. be included in the LCR buffer? Otherwise, could be precious metas be considered in C66 Counterbalancing Capacity in the residual row "Other tradable assets"?

  • 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

Opinion to Question 2020_5551, whether an institution is allowed to apply the supporting factor for SMEs and the supporting factor for infrastructure projects simultaneously.

A pending Question 2020_5551 asks an opinion whether an institution is allowed to apply the supporting factor for SMEs (Art 501) and the supporting factor for infrastructure projects (Art 501a) simultaneously. I share here my opinion to help the answer, as it would be important to our institution, and I think the answer is simplier than thought suggested on that question. The pending question I am referring to is under the link https://www.eba.europa.eu/single-rule-book-qa/qna/view/publicId/2020_5551

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

EBA validation rules v3900_s and v5693_s

Should the severity of EBA validation rules v3900_s  and v5693_s be changed from ‘non-blocking’ to ‘warning’ to allow for the possibility of negative interest income values?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2021/451 – ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions

Extent of real time transaction monitoring expected when executing and processing payments.

Article 13(1)(d) of Directive (EU) 2015/849 sets out the on-going monitoring obligation of obliged entities.  This includes the 'scrutiny of transactions undertaken throughout the course of that relationship to ensure that the transactions being conducted are consistent with the obliged entity's knowledge of the customer, the business and risk profile, including where necessary the source of funds'.  However, the said Directive does not set out whether or the extent to which the scrutiny of transactions is to take place in real time or post the execution of transactions.  This is of particular relevance within the ambit of payment service providers given that these same service providers are also subject to timelines for the execution and processing of payment transactions.  To what extent, if at all, do Competent Authorities require payment service providers, including credit institutions that are providing payment services, to carry out real time transaction monitoring? If this is a requirement, do Competent Authorities also require real time transaction monitoring in case of transactions involving high amounts? If Competent Authorities do not require real time transaction monitoring, what is the justification for this position?

  • Legal act: Directive (EU) 2015/849 (AMLD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

Reserves held by the credit institution in a central bank

How to report a negative eligible withdrawable amount in LCR template 72 row 050 ID 1.1.1.2. Item Withdrawable central bank reserves Amount/Market value column 010. For example Central bank balance:                                1,659,504 Minimum reserve:                                      2,323,727 Total withdrawable central bank reserve:     - 664,224   There are two EBA validition rule which indicates that withdrawable central bank reserves Amount/Market value should be >= 0. EBA v7683_s. : [C 72.00.a (All rows, c0010)] {C 72.00.a} >= 0. EBA v7681_s: : [C 72.00. r0010;0020;0030;0040;0050;0060;0070;0080;0090;0100;0110;0120;0130;0140;0150;0160;0170;0180;0190;0200;0210;0220;0230;0240;0250;0260;0270;0280;0290;0300;0310;0320;0330;0340;0350;0360;0370;0380;0390;0400;0410;0420;0430;0440;0450;0460;0470, c0040)] {C 72.00.a} >= 0

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

COREP Large exposure, validation rule v_1678 related to POCI assets

In case of purchased or originated credit-impaired financial assets (POCI), it is possible that the value for positive 'value adjustments and provisions' exceeds the 'value of total original exposure' can be reported in COREP Large reports. However, DPM validation rule v_1678_m does not allow reporting of such cases.  Since it is possible to have positive impairments that exceed the total original exposure for the POCI assets, could the validation rule or its severity be modified in this respect?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2021/451 – ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions

FINREP template F44.03, F44.04

In template  44.3  Staff expenses by type of benefits  in row 0010 “Pension and similar expenses” are requested. In template 44.4 Staff expenses by category of remuneration and category of staff in row 0030 “Staff expenses other than remuneration” are requested.  For the whole template the following validation rules applies: v3988_s: {F 44.03} >= 0 (for all rows and with severity level error); v8364_s ({F 44.04} >= 0). This is suggesting Pension and similar expenses  and Staff expenses other than remuneration  can never be a negative amount, which we believe is not always the case (as a result of changes in the fair value of the liability recognised). Can you please amend the Validation rules by excluding row 0010 (44.3 Template), row 0020 ((44.4 Template) from those rules?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2021/451 – ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions

Reporting of Counterbalancing capacity (C66.01 of ALMM reporting)

After reporting template C66.01 we received an error related to validation rule: eba_v10660_m. We asume that the validation rule is inconsistent and want to explain. As a result of reporting C66.01b “Withdrawable central bank reserves” (r0740, c0010) you have to report this as a part of “Cummulated Counterbalancing Capacity”(r1080, c0010). You also have to fill C66.01a “Withdrawable central bank reserves” (r0740, c0020) with a negative indicator, but also at “Net change of Counterbalancing Capacity”(r1070, c0020) and  “Cumulated Counterbalancing Capacity” (r1080, c0020). When you report this as mentioned {C 66.01.a, r1080, c0020} is not equal to {C 66.01.b, r1080, c0010} + {C 66.01.a, r1070, c0020} as expected by validation rule v10660. Please can you explain how we have to solve this issue?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2021/451 – ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions

Whether values to be reported in template C 08.03 and C 34.07 should be based on original obligor or resultant obligor

Should the values reported in template C 08.03 be based on original obligor (immediate counterparty to whom the original exposure amount is assigned) or resultant obligor (counterparty guaranteeing the original exposure and whose PD or LGD is used for RWA calculation as result of PD/LGD substitution approach)? Consistently, as template C 34.07 has a similar structure as template C 08.03, can the logic applied for reporting values on original/resultant obligor basis in template C 08.03 also be applied to template C 34.07?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2021/451 – ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions

Finrep Templates 44.03 and 44.04

In template 44.3 Staff expenses by type of benefits , in row 0050 Severance payments are requested. For the whole template the following validation rule applies: v3988_s: {F 44.03} >= 0 (for all rows and with severity level error). This is suggesting severance payments can never be a negative amount, which we believe is not always the case (as a result of reviewing HR restructuring provisions as well as discounting effects of long term employee benefits. The same applies for template 44.04 other staff expense except remuneration (r0030 / c0010), where the amounts reported in 44.3 r0050/c0010 are reported, too. A positive amount reported in this item leads to the violation of the rules v8106_m and  v8364_s. Can you please amend the Validation rule by excluding the items 44.3 r0050/c0010 and 44.4 r0030/c0010 from these rules?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2021/451 – ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions