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

Operational Risk - Refund of interest and fees

Do we have to report refunds to customers in combination with incorrectly overchared interest/fee in COREP 17.01? And if so, in which of the following situations:  1. refund by the bank within less than 5 days  2. refund by the bank within a quarter (before the quarterly financial statement is prepared)  3. refund by the bank within one year (before the annual balance sheet and income statement are prepared)  4. refund by the bank after several years  The timing of the outflow of the refund to the customer depends in each case on the time at which the error is identified.

  • 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

Allocating exposures into the correct vintage buckets of the „NPL-backstop“ acc. to Art. 47c CRR applying Art. 469a CRR

For exposures classified as non-performing prior to 26 April 2019 and not exempt from the deductions from CET1 items for non-performing exposures acc. to Art. 36 (1)(m) applying the second subparagraph of Art. 469a CRR, which date should be considered when allocating those exposures into the vintage buckets of the “NPL-backstop” in COREP template C 35.01 to C 35.03 in order to determine the applicable amount of insufficient coverage for non-performing exposures acc. Art. 36 (1)(m) in conjunction with Art. 47c CRR: Is it the date on which the exposures were originally classified as non- performing, as it is with purchased non-performing exposures (see EBA ITS regarding C 35.01 c0010 - c0100) – in the example above a date prior to 26 April 2019? Or is it the date on which the criteria of the second subparagraph Art. 469a CRR (terms and conditions of the exposure - originated prior to 26 April 2019 - were modified by the institution in a way that increases the institution’s exposure to the obligor) were fulfilled and therefore the exposure shall be considered as having been originated on the date when the modification applies?

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

The potential future exposure of a netting set with bilaterally exchanged collateral

The potential future exposure of a netting set with clients for which collateral is exchanged bilaterally may be decreased to 42%. Is it applicable only if the investment firm is the recepient of the collateral (initial and variation margin) or it can be also applied if the investment firm is the collateral provider.

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 2019/2033 (IFR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Draft ITS on reporting and disclosure requirements for investment firms

Concentration risk and own risk hedging

As per IFR article 36 paragraph 1 investment firm shall calculate exposure value with regard to a client or group of connected clients for the purposes of concentration risk as the exposure value of contracts and transactions referred to in Article 25(1) with the client in question, calculated in the manner laid down in Article 27. The question is whether the concentration risk should be also calculated for financial counterparties (e.g. members of QCCP) who investment firms hedge their own risk with (hedging of positions arising from derivatives with their clients).

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 2019/2033 (IFR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Draft ITS on reporting and disclosure requirements for investment firms

Treatment of intragroup liabilities when one of the institutions is established in a country being a member of EEA and EFTA (i.e. non-EU Member State but EEA Member State)

Should, according to Article 5(1)(a) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/63, intragroup liabilities be deducted from the contribution base when one side of the transaction is an institution established in a country being a member of the EEA and EFTA (e.g. Norway)? If so, from which date such deductions shall be applied?

  • 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

EMI's application of negative interest rates to its clients

Is an electronic money institution (EMI) allowed to apply negative interest rates to its clients (electronic money holders)?

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

Is the RWA capped at EAD amount for IRBA exposures as suggested by SBP validation check v6210

SBP validation check v6210 is set as an error which prevents the reporting of exposures with RWA higher than 12,5xEAD.  Verification is sought to the legal rationale behind setting such a maximum RWA limit.

  • 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)

Calculation of goodwill included in the valuation of significant investments in insurance undertakings

A. For the purposes of a deduction under Article 36(1)(b) CRR as per Article 37(b), should the goodwill (Article 4(1) no. 113 and 115 CRR) included in the valuation of significant investments calculated excluding goodwill booked under an insurance subsidiary given that this goodwill is not included in the valuation of a significant investment of the bank (i.e. goodwill not included in the prudential consolidation as per Articles 1, 11, 18 and 24 of CRR and EBA RTS on the methods of prudential consolidation)?  B. Can you confirm that the goodwill booked under an insurance subsidiary (which is excluded from the valuation of significant investments as per prudential consolidation) should be treated as part of the equity exposure of the bank to the insurance subsidiary and this be risk weighted as per Article 49(1) and Articles 133 or 155 (depending on Standardized or Advanced IRB method)?

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

Definition and scope of Asset Under Management

Are assets for which the investment firm provides account aggregation services (outside of the MiFID authorisation scope) to be included in the AUM calculation?  

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 2019/2033 (IFR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

C34.09 Credit Derivative Exposures – Signage of positive and negative fair values for credit derivatives

The instructions provided in Annex II Reporting on own funds and own funds requirements for template C34.09 requires the fair values broken down by product type as well as assets (positive fair values) and liabilities (negative fair values). According to validation rules v10325_s and v10481_s for C34.09, the fair values reported in columns 0030 and 0040 for rows 0010 to 0070 must be greater than or equal to zero. Can the EBA clarify if positive fair values should be reported with positive signage and negative fair values should be reported with negative signage in rows 0010 to 0050? Or if the validation rules are correct then is the requirement to report both positive and negative fair values with positive signage in these rows?  

  • 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

C34.01 Size of the Derivative Business – Application of validation rule v09805_m

The instructions provided in Annex II Reporting on own funds and own funds requirements for template C34.01 states the size of the derivative business must be the sum of the absolute value of long derivative positions and absolute value of short derivative positions.  According to validation rule v09805_m applicable to row {0050} in the C34.01 template, the percentage of the total assets to the size of the derivative business must be less than or equal to one.  Taking the sum of the absolute market value of long and short derivative positions would most likely trigger this warning validation. Can the EBA review the warning validation rule v09805_m for C34.01 and confirm if this needs amendment? 

  • 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

Upcoming deals in Liquiity risk reporting

Our institution currently reports the LCR including only deals wth value date prior or equal to the reporting date. We would like to include cashflows from contractual upcoming deals, from their trade date and before the actual value date. To raise funding, the bank issues debt securities and makes money market borrowing. As these deals are contractual, between the trade date and the value date we expect an inflow for the cash to be received as funding. Are we authorized to account these upcoming cashflows as inflows in the LCR? (between trade date and value date) And as soon as the value date occurs, the deal is booked as liabilities and it would become an outflow. The bank  makes money market lending. To be fair with the above approach, as these deals are contractual, between the trade date and the value date we expect an outflow for the cash to be delivered as a loan. Shall we  account these upcoming cashflows as outflows in the LCR? (between trade date and value date) And as soon as the value date occurs, the deal is booked as asset and it would become an inflow. If the above approach is approved by EBA, are we authorized to apply it only for Money market deals and issued securities? or shall we apply it for all deals? Our last concern is about the other reporting: If we apply this approach, shall we apply it as well to C66, NSFR? As it would make a deviation from the balance sheet in value date and especially the FINREP. Would it lead to EBA validation rules issues between the different reporting? Thank you,  

  • 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

Scope of Article 118 CRR - World Food Programme

Can the  Risk Weight of 0%  according to Article 118 CRR be applied on  the World Food Programme (“WFP”)?   According to Article 118(f) CRR exposures to an international financial institution established by two or more Member States which has the purpose to mobilise funding and provide financial assistance to the benefit of its members that are experiencing or threatened by severe financing problems, shall be assigned a risk weight of 0%. Can WFP be classified as an international financial institution in the meaning of Article 118 (f) CRR ? 

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

Article 28 Outflows from other liabilities

Credit institution is not traditional credit institution - institution offers only loans and deposits. Client's have under their name Current account, but client's cannot operate those accounts. Client's can make payments to those accounts from other credit institutions and those accounts are used to pay out loans to client's account in other credit institutions. Does such current accounts should be reported for LCR calculation?

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

F 31.01 in combination with Q&A 915

According to Q&A_915 and EBA-ITS v3.0, the EBA considers validation rule 1034_m still as accurate. We're seeking a clarification whether EBA also has taken into account IAS 24.26 when answering in 2014.

  • 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

Calculation of the amount of holdings of own Common Equity Tier 1 instruments on the basis of the net long position

How should the condition in  Article 42 a) i)  “(i) the long and short positions are in the same underlying exposure and the short positions involve no counterparty risk”  be applied when there are long and short positions on the same underlying reference with the same counterparty under the same master netting agreement ?   Are the single net amounts fixed by such contracts to be considered rather than the gross amounts?  Explanatory note: The master netting agreement we are considering complies with the conditions required under CRR (Article 206)    

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

Calculation of the amount of holdings of own Common Equity Tier 1 instruments on the basis of the net long position

Could it be assumed that short positions maintained with a Qualifying Central Counterparty do not involve counterparty risk according to Article 42 a) i) CRR and thus be netted for the purposes of the calculation of the amount of holdings of own Common Equity Tier I instruments to be deducted under point (f) of Article 36(1)?

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

Calculation of goodwill included in the valuation of significant investments in insurance undertakings

A. For the purposes of a deduction under Article 36(1)(b) CRR as per Article 37(b), should the goodwill (Article 4(1) no. 113 and 115 CRR) included in the valuation of significant investments calculated excluding goodwill booked under an insurance subsidiary given that this goodwill is not included in the valuation of a significant investment of the bank (i.e. goodwill not included in the prudential consolidation as per Articles 1, 11, 18 and 24 of CRR and EBA RTS on the methods of prudential consolidation)?  B. Can you confirm that the goodwill booked under an insurance subsidiary (which is excluded from the valuation of significant investments as per prudential consolidation) should be treated as part of the equity exposure of the bank to the insurance subsidiary and this be risk weighted as per Article 49(1) and Articles 133 or 155 (depending on Standardized or Advanced IRB method)?

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

Own credit risk

Should own credit risk be considered in the Alternative Standardised Approach of the FRTB?

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

C 33.00: Instructions concerning specific positions - c0020

Should column 0020 in C 33.00 be filled in as the sum of the columns 0030 to 0120 minus column 0130? Or should the net amount only be reported when the following condition is met: there’s a short position with the same immediate counterparty and residual maturity? If the current definition of column 0020 is considered correct, should validations v10651_m and v5853_h be changed?

  • 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