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

Applicability of the EUR 500 million-limit when calculating the required stable funding associated with CIUs in NSFR

Does the EUR 500 million-limit for the integration of CIUs in the liquidity buffer composition requirement indicated in article 15.1 of the LCR delegated act 2015/61 also apply to the CIU RSF in NSFR?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2024_7039
  • Topic: Liquidity risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 23/05/2024

Val rules_v12727_m_for template 7 GAR amount is not aligned with ITS

We believe the ITS instructions 2022/2453  are incorrect for Row 32 into ITS (EU) 2022/2453. NB =  equivalent row into DPM is 0320.

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2022/2453 - ITS on ESG disclosures
  • ID: 2024_7038
  • Topic: Transparency and Pillar 3
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 09/04/2024

Management of the Trading Book - Active Anti-Fraud Procedures and Controls

Under Article 103(2), point (b)(vi), CRR, there is a requirement that institutions shall have active anti-fraud procedures and controls. Could you please provide clarification on the specific types of fraud that should be considered with respect to the trading book? Can this be considered to effectively cross-refer to the requirements of Regulation (EU) No 596/2014 on market abuse or are there other areas which need to also be considered?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2024_7037
  • Topic: Market risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 04/04/2024

Permission to reduce AT1, Tier 2 or eligible liabilities instruments and deduction rules in the context of a liability management exercise without replacement.

When should deductions from own funds and eligible liabilities be applied in the context of a liability management exercise without replacement (i.e. a tender offer)? When can the unredeemed part of own funds or eligible liabilities be included in own funds or eligible liabilities again?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 241/2014 - RTS for Own Funds requirements for institutions
  • ID: 2024_7036
  • Topic: Own funds
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 05/04/2024

Modelling the risk of migration from NMDs to term deposits in the context of the constant balance sheet assumption in the NII SOT.

Is it modelling the risk of migration from NMDs to term deposits consistent with the constant balance sheet assumption in the NII SOT?

  • 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
  • ID: 2024_7035
  • Topic: Interest Rate Risk for Banking Book (IRRBB)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 31/05/2024

What amount to be reported for repos and reverse repos in NSFR?

What’s the appropriate definition of 'accounting value' of repos and reverse repos in UK, for NSFR reporting purposes?  We have identified several potential interpretations, which include: 1) The cash nominal at the value date of the transaction (referred to as 'outstanding').2) The cash nominal at the value date, plus the accrued interests.3) The outstanding value (as defined in point 1), plus all interests flows (both accrued and non-accrued).4) The outstanding value (as defined in point 1) multiplied by a discount factor, plus the interests flows multiplied by a discount factor. This could be considered a form of cash fair value. When netting repos and reverse repos of the same counterparty together under the appropriate conditions, for NSFR purpose, should we use the same 'accounting value' to determine if the net position falls under a repo or a reverse?  Any guidance you can provide on this matter would be greatly appreciated.

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Draft ITS on Supervisory Reporting of Institutions
  • ID: 2024_7034
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Liquidity (LCR, NSFR, AMM)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 30/08/2024

Annex XI, INSTRUCTIONS FOR REPORTING ON LEVERAGE, C43 template {0040;0020} & {0050;0020}

Where should the cash collateral receivables on derivative transactions be disclosed in template C43

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: EBA/GL/2016/11 - Guidelines on disclosure requirements under Part Eight of CRR
  • ID: 2024_7033
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Leverage ratio
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 30/08/2024

Disclosure of exposures arising from Article 390 (5)

How the exposures as per Article 390 (5) be reported in Corep templates C28 & C29 - direct vs indirect?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2024_7031
  • Topic: Large exposures
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 15/03/2024

Credit derivatives on CLO in SA-CCR

Should a credit derivative with underlying a CLO (Credit Loan Obligation) be treated as multi-name under Article 280c(1) because the underlying is a pool of loans or single name because the issuer is unique, SPV, or can the tranche be viewed as a whole?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2024_7030
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 04/04/2024

recognision of own funds

Can the Common Equity Tier 1 items, namely „capital instruments, provided that the conditions laid down in Article 28 or, where applicable, Article 29 are met“(CRR Art 26 (1) (a)) and „other reserves“ (CRR Art 26 (1) (e)) be recognised as CET1 capital if there are features preventing its funds from use?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2024_7029
  • Topic: Own funds
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 15/03/2024

Non-applicability of the CRR (Capital Requirements Regulation) regarding OCCPs

According to Article 111 CRR, OCCPs must be included in the calculation of the Total Capital Ratio (TCR) under Pillar I, even though their economic risk is fully mitigated by the DvP mechanism. Eurex Clearing AG only includes OCCPs in their balance sheet, as per accounting standards. While the risk of OCCPs is covered in the CCP risk management framework through margins and other lines of defense, they cannot be mitigated through collateralization or netting under the CRR framework.    Regarding the information in section 1 and 2, ECAG would like to inquire whether the OCCPs can be exempted from the application of Article 111 CRR.

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2024_7028
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 01/05/2024

Can a CASP receive / transmit / execute orders for non-EUR denominated EMTs, whose issuers are not authorised as a credit institution or as an electronic money institution?

Article 48 of MiCA states that: “A person shall not make an offer to the public or seek the admission to trading of an e-money token, within the Union, unless that person is the issuer of such e-money token and: (a) is authorised as a credit institution or as an electronic money institution...”.  The cited part of first paragraph of Art 48 of MiCA allows an interpretation in accordance with which a MiCA registered CASP can still either receive and transmit (to a non EU entity) or execute an order (on a non EU trading platform) to buy or sell a non-EUR denominated EMT whose issuer is not MiCA compliant. Namely, it seems that the provision of either of the two mentioned crypto asset services does not fall either under offer to the public nor under admission to trading.  It is quite clear that the provision of the two described crypto asset services does not fall under “seek the admission to trading.”  Nevertheless, an argument can be made that the provision of the two described crypto asset services  does not fall under “offer to public” as well. Namely, MiCA defines offer to the public “a communication (...) in any form presenting (...) sufficient information on the terms of the offer. When a CASP receives and transmits an order or when a CASP executes it, a CASP usually only receives order instructions and does not provide any information on the asset that will be bought. Consequently, it can be argued, that when acting as described, a CASP does not offer an EMT to public. This interpretation is further supported by the Recital 28. This one states that “The mere admission to trading or the publication of bid and offer prices should not, in and of itself, be regarded as an offer to the public of crypto-assets.”. Therefore, one could argue that a CASP can execute orders for non-EUR denominated EMTs, whose issuers are not authorised as a credit institution or as an electronic money institution.

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 2023/1114 (MiCAR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2024_7027
  • Topic: Scope and definitions (MiCAR)
  • Date of submission:

Reporting of the collateral and guarantees by loans and advances

Article 174 from Annex V mentions that where the ‘Maximum collateral/guarantee that can be considered’ exceeds the value of immovable property collateral, its remaining value shall be allocated to other collateral types and guarantees according to its quality, starting from the one with best quality. There are no details regarding the expectation of reporting for different types of collaterals used at the same time to cover different types of loan and advances if the amount of the collaterals is smaller than the total exposure covered (n:m relationships). It is not clear how the collateral should be split between the loans (if a particular order should be followed or an optimization model should be used) and if for immovable properties the prior liens are deducted from the property value before the maximum amount is calculated.  Example for F 13.01: Residential immovable property = 100.000 Prior lien on the property = 20.000 Financial guarantee received = 10.000 Loan 1 to a non-financial corporation = 70.000 Loan 2 to other financial corporation = 60.000 Both loans are covered by the immovable property and the financial guarantee. Position 0010/0010 F 13.01: 100.000 or 80.000 (after the prior lien is deducted) Position 0010/0050 F 13.01: 10.000 Which amounts are expected in rows 0010, 0020 and 0030, columns 0010/0050 from F 13.01?

  • 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
  • ID: 2024_7026
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - FINREP (incl. FB&NPE)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 15/04/2024

Calculation of the LTV ratio in FinRep

Article 239x from Annex V mentions that the LTV ratio should be calculated in accordance with the method for the calculation of the ‘current loan-to-value ratio’ (LTV-C) laid down in section 2, chapter 1, paragraph 1 of the ESRB Recommendation on closing real estate data gaps. According to Annex IV, Art 2.3 (b) of the ESRB Recommendation, VC is adjusted for changes in the prior liens on the property. The version from 2016 of the Recommendation also contained an additional passage which was deleted in the 2019 update: (d) Is adjusted by the total amount of the outstanding RRE loan, disbursed or not, that is secured through ‘prior’ liens on the property. In the case of more senior liens on the property, the full amount of the debt secured by these more senior liens needs to be deducted. In the case of ‘equal ranking liens’, an appropriate proportional adjustment should be made. In the current version of the Recommendation or in Annex V it is not clear how VC is adjusted regarding the prior liens on the property (e.g. they are deducted from the full value of the property, proportional adjustments are performed).

  • 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
  • ID: 2024_7024
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - FINREP (incl. FB&NPE)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 08/05/2024

Treatment of repos and reverse repos with the same counterparty

How the unidentifiable collateral received and provided should be reported at LCR C74 and LCR C73 respectively? 

  • 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
  • ID: 2024_7023
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Liquidity (LCR, NSFR, AMM)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 12/09/2024

Excess of cash as part of reverse repo transaction

How should excess of cash as part of reverse repo transaction be reported in LCR C74 template?

  • 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
  • ID: 2024_7022
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Liquidity (LCR, NSFR, AMM)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 12/09/2024

Regulatory Reporting treatment in COREP of credit risk exposures linked to participated loans

Should exposures linked to loans participated in by other parties and de-recognised under IFRS 9 3.2.5 be reported as ORIGINAL EXPOSURE PRE CONVERSION FACTORS and mitigated by the amount received as the price paid for the participation or shall de-recognition allow the institutions to report ORIGINAL EXPOSURE PRE CONVERSION FACTORS equal to zero. 

  • 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
  • ID: 2024_7019
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 16/10/2024

Taxonomy 3.2: Is the validation rules v4745_s consistent for fair-value in short position disclosed in the cell C09.04, row 0040, columns 0010 ?

For information this request replace 2024_7015 In Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2021/451, chapter 3.4.3 referring to template C 09.04, the row of the line 0040  contains “Value of trading book exposures under internal models”. By this way, how to disclose the fair-value of a non-deritivative in a short position, in which the value is negative, whereas the CFV v4745_s expects only positive value used for long position ? Should this validation rule should exclude line 0040 ?

  • 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
  • ID: 2024_7018
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - COREP (incl. IP Losses)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 16/10/2024

Legal requirement for ASPSPs to provide for cancellation of future dated pay-ments through its dedicated payment initiation services interface

Is there a legal requirement for ASPSPs to allow its PSU to cancel/revoke future dated payments via a payment initiation service provider, using the ASPSPs dedicated payment initiation services interface?

  • Legal act: Directive 2015/2366/EU (PSD2)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2018/389 - RTS on strong customer authentication and secure communication
  • ID: 2024_7017
  • Topic: Strong customer authentication and common and secure communication (incl. access)
  • Date of submission: