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

Correct consideration of the saving accounts in the LCR calculation of outflows following Article 421 (5) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)

Is it correct that German “Savings Accounts” are to be considered in the LCR calculation only up to the threshold of EUR 2000,- penalty-free withdrawals per account?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_193
  • Topic: Liquidity risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 04/04/2014

Definition of the words "on group basis"

What is the definition of the words “on a group basis” in Article 411 (2) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_192
  • Topic: Liquidity risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 26/09/2014

Consideration from residual values in the LCR calculation

As significant inflows from residual values of large portfolios of leased cars are not regulated within Part 6 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR) how may institutions who professionally manage such portfolios take those values into account?

  • 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: 2013_191
  • Topic: Liquidity risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 27/03/2015

Notifications of agents and subagents of credit institutions in the European Economic Area (EEA)

1) Is it allowed for a credit institution to provide money remittance services via agent cross-border in the EEA? 2) Do agents have to be notified to the home-/host authority and if so under which directive? 3) Do agents have to be notified by way of freedom of establishment or by way of freedom to provide services? 4) Are agents to be treated as branches? 5) Is it allowed for an agent of a credit institution which provides money remittance services cross-border in the EEA to use subagents? If yes: a) Does a sub-agent have to be notified? b) On which legal basis? c) To which Authority? d) Does the credit institution or the agent provide notification and, if so, freedom of establishment or by way of freedom to provide services?

  • Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_190
  • Topic: Other issues
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 08/11/2013

Outflows associated with shorts - net or gross

Can you clarify whether Article 423(4) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR) requires firms to: 1) assess long and short positions gross per ISIN and to treat shorts gross by ISIN, reporting an outflow under Article 423(4) corresponding to the sum of all the gross short positions per ISIN (not covered >30 days); or 2) assess shorts net of any longs currently used to cover shorts via stock collateralised stock borrow e.g. a long in one ISIN (not qualifying as liquid assets per Article 416) that is currently used as collateral to cover a short in another ISIN (stock collateralised stock borrowing) and maturing inside 30 days, can continue to be eligible as collateral to cover shorts thus reducing the outflow reported under Article 423 (4).

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_189
  • Topic: Liquidity risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 31/01/2014

Leverage Ratio: C45.00 (LRCalc) r010: SFTs exposure according to CRR 220

The exposure for repurchase transactions, securities or commodities lending or borrowing transactions, long settlement transactions and margin lending transactions should be calculated in accordance with Article 220 (1) to (3). Should the volatility adjustments be taken into account for the determination of the leverage ratio exposure value of exposures subject to Article 220?

  • 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: 2013_188
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Leverage ratio
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 14/02/2014

Firm shorts covered by client longs

We assume that an outflow should be reflected under Article 423 (4) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR) for any firm short currently covered using a client long position, unless the residual term of the borrowing of the client stock used to cover the short is contractually committed beyond 30 days.

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_185
  • Topic: Liquidity risk
  • Date of submission:

FINREP: Counterparty breakdown - hospitals, schools, social secretaries

As what counterparty shall hospitals, schools and social secretaries be reported? Are there any thresholds (e.g. turnover) which when exceeded then the entity shall be reported as different counterparty (e.g. in current FINREP hospitals are treated households, when turnover exceed the limit then the hospital is reported as corporate)?

  • 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: 2013_184
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - FINREP (incl. FB&NPE)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 14/02/2014

NSFR: Calculation of liablities and receivables from derivatives if there is no netting agreement

NSFR: How should the amount of liablities and receivables from derivatives be calculated if there is no netting agreement with the counterparty?

  • 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: 2013_183
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Liquidity (LCR, NSFR, AMM)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 14/02/2014

Own funds deduction (granted subordinated loan)

According to Directive 2006/48/EC regarding own funds deduction, a subordinated loan granted by institution ‘A’ to institution ‘B’ in which institution ‘A’ has a significant investments has to be deducted from institution ‘A’s own funds (in 50% from Tier1 and in 50% from Tier2). Simultaneously a received subordinated loan is treated as component of Tier2 of institution ‘B’. In Regulation (EU) No. 575/2013 (CRR) there is no clear information regarding deducting such an instrument from own funds. In the light of the above, should a granted subordinated loan be treated as Tier2 deduction - according to the Article 66 of CRR? If not, how should such an instrument be treated?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_182
  • Topic: Own funds
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 26/09/2014

FINREP: F1.1. row 040 "other demand deposits"

On the basis of the validation rules of template F1.1, row 040 is part of the sum of row 010 'cash and cash balances at central banks'. So one can assume that row 040 'other demand deposits' are deposits with central banks. However, the guidance in annex V part 2.3 (1.1 assets - § 3) stipulates that 'other demand deposits' includes balances receivable on demand with credit institutions. This seems contradictory to us. Please can you confirm whether row 040 of template F1.1, comprises 'other demand deposits' with central banks or with credit institutions.

  • 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: 2013_180
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - FINREP (incl. FB&NPE)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 14/02/2014

FINREP: Gains or (-) losses on derecognition of investments in subsidiaries, joint ventures and associates, net

During the last update on the ITS Annex III in July 2013 the FINREP P&L template was modified by removing the line item for "Gains or (-) losses on derecognition of investments in subsidiaries, joint ventures and associates, net" (table 2 row 320 ITSoR March 2013) without any explanation. But in comparison with the published DPM in July 2013 which still contains the line item there is an inconsistency. In our opinion the line item is required to reach a consistent and meaningful P&L Statement, so that we assume that removing the line item is a mistake in the templates. If it is not an error it is necessary to give guidance on the disclosure of gains or losses on derecognition of investments in subsidiaries, joint ventures and associates.

  • 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: 2013_178
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - FINREP (incl. FB&NPE)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 14/02/2014

Interaction between Qualified CCPs and Reporting

Institutions must meet higher capital requirements as long as CCPs are not qualified. Most of the Clearing organisations are working for many years on the derivative market. Will EBA (or national competent authorities) create an interim agreement for that special issue? CCPs are already supervised by their national financial authorities.

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_177
  • Topic: Market infrastructures
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 26/09/2014

Possibility to increase the frequency of reporting with regard to information covered by Draft ITS on Supervisory Reporting.

Article 104(1)(j) of Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD) provides for competent authorities to have inter alia the power to impose additional or more frequent reporting requirements, including reporting on capital and liquidity positions. The draft Implementing Technical Standard on reporting (ITS on reporting) submitted by EBA to the European Commission on 26 July 2013 includes strict provisions regarding format and frequency of reporting. In light of this does the competent authority have the power to impose more frequent reporting requirements relating to information that to some extent is covered by parts of Draft ITS on reporting (for instance the tables CA1, CA2) .

  • Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (repealed)
  • ID: 2013_175
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Other
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 20/12/2013

Eligibility of Tier 2 after contractual change if already in amortisation phase

This is a follow up question to 2013_16, where it is stated that "A material change in the terms and conditions of a pre-existing instrument shall be considered in the same way as the issuance of a new instrument, meaning that the changes shall aim at ensuring a full eligibility...". Does this principle apply only to changes that would lead to inclusion in grandfathering or also to instruments which after a contractual change (removal of call rights) would be fully eligible but already are within the last 5 years of their maturity and therefore recognized according to amortization rules?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_174
  • Topic: Own funds
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 24/01/2014

Capital buffers

According to Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD), Title VII, Chapter 4, institutions shall hold capital to cover combined buffer requirement (CombB, in % of a given institution’s total risk exposure). The CombB (as in Art 128 para 6 CRD) will consist of conservation buffer (CB), possibly extended by countercyclical capital buffer (CCB), SII buffer and systemic risk buffer (SRB) applicable to institutions on consolidated, subconsolidated or individual level as set by competent or designated authorities. The CRD also sets some rules and conditions on combinations of the individual types of capital buffers (additivity versus higher of) and rules for combinations arising from application of capital buffers on different levels (parent versus subsidiary), especially in Articles 131 and 133 CRD IV. However, given this variety of potential application of capital buffers, many capital buffer combinations may emerge where the rules for setting the resulting CombB of an institution may not be 100% clear as the CRD wording can give different interpretations. The rule in Art 131 (16, 17) can a) either mean that the decision of the home regulator as regards CombB of the group effectively introduces a floor of CombB in subsidiaries, or b) just emphasize that buffers imposed on the group should not be taken as a reason for reducing buffers imposed individually on the group’s subsidiaries and sub-groups. Which interpretation of capital buffer combinations on different levels is correct?

  • Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_173
  • Topic: Other issues
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 06/06/2014

COREP C25.00 (CVA): rows 030 and 040 for column 110 shouldn't be reported

in CVA report, the column 110 is requested for all methods but when we check the definition of this column "number of counterparties where the credit spread was determined using a proxy instead of directly observed market data". This definition suits more for CVA advanced method but no for standard method nor for based OEM, our question is the proxy used to determine credit spread is it really requested for standard method or OEM?

  • 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: 2013_171
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - COREP (incl. IP Losses)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 14/02/2014

Netting within cash pooling agreement used as part of cash management products

Where customers have both assets and liability balances within a cash pooling agreement (supported by a credit netting agreement) can the balance within the cash pooling agreement be treated as either a single net asset (Article 425) or a net liability (Article 420) i.e. not treated gross?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_170
  • Topic: Liquidity risk
  • Date of submission:

FINREP validation rules - references to missing rows

In the Validation Formulae (Appendix XV), there are many rows referred to that do not exist in the template (Appendix III). For example, in table 1.1 it is referred to rows 091, 092, 093, 094, 095, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236 and 237, which do not exist in the template. There are many other similar examples. How should we interpret/handle these validation rules?

  • 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: 2013_165
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - FINREP (incl. FB&NPE)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 14/02/2014