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

Disclosure of transactions with zero exposure value

Under Article 274(5) and 273 there are circumstances where transactions may have a zero exposure value e.g. netting sets made up entirely of written options or certain CDS transactions. Should these be reported in the C34.02 with values in columns 0020-0140 and then have c0150 onwards set to 0 (or c0170 onwards?) or should they be disregarded from population of values in any columns as there is no requirement to calculate exposure for these transactions. Similarly should they be included in the same C34.03 columns?

  • 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

Categorisation of indirect exposures to collateral issuers

The guidance for c120 to c170 states "The institution shall report the original amount of the indirect exposures in the column that corresponds to the type of direct exposure guaranteed or secured by collateral such as, when the direct exposure guaranteed is a debt instrument, the amount of ‘Indirect exposure’ assigned to the guarantor shall be reported under the column ‘Debt instruments’" This example makes intuitive sense for guarantees as the nature of the indirect exposure is based upon the form of the exposure which has been guaranteed and through substitution effect transferred to the guarantor. However should the same logic also apply to exposures secured by collateral where the indirect exposure is based upon a reduction in exposure of the collateral received rather than through a substitution effect to the original type of exposure? For example, if i have a derivative exposure for which i have reduced the original exposure to the client through receipt of a debt instrument as collateral should the indirect exposure arising to the issuer of the collateral be reported in c120 for debt instrument or c140 for derivative?

  • 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 the derogation under Article 500a(2) CRR should also be recognised in Article 395(5) CRR.

Given there is in place the permission under Article 500a(2) CRR specifying higher limits for exposures to the central governments and central banks of Member States, where those exposures are denominated and funded in the domestic currency of another Member State, should there in the Article 395(5)(a) CRR be recognised this new value, or should there be used in Article 395(5)(a) CRR the value of the limit specified in Article 395(1) CRR anyway?

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

Definition of default for open-end investment funds

Should an open-end investment fund be considered an obligor under Art. 178 (1) CRR, irrespective of whether it has legal personality under a Member States’ regulations on investment funds?

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

Non-retail and term deposits where a flow is expected within 30 calendar days even if the maturity date is after 30 days

What is the treatment of non-retail deposits where the depositor is not allowed to withdraw the deposit or where there’s a significant penalty in case of withdrawal? What is the treatment of non-retail term deposits where an amortizing amount is due and authorized during the LCR period without a significant penalty ? What is the treatment of retail term deposits where an amortizing is due and authorized during the LCR period without a significant penalty ? What is the treatment of deposits on notice where the notice period is greater than 30 days ?

  • 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

Reporting of off-balance sheet exposures (any undrawn purchase commitment) from factoring contracts in F_09.01.1

In case of off-balance sheet exposures from factoring contracts (with or without recourse), who should be considered as the immediate counterparty when reporting these exposures in F 09.01.01?Should these off-balance sheet exposures be reported as loan commitments given or other commitments given?

  • 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

CVA hedges in the calculation of UCS

When calculating Unearned Credit Spread (UCS) is it allowed to include CVA hedges as well?

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

Applicability of the Guidelines of the Committee of European Banking Supervisors on the management of operational risks in market-related activities (12 October 2010)

Are the Guidelines of the Committee of European Banking Supervisors on the management of operational risks in market-related activities (12 October 2010) still in force and applicable? Is the same legal reasoning used under Question 2020_5340 applicable?

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

Definition of elligible capital

Can a parent company give a guarantee to investors of new shares in a bank and back it with their own assets? Or can a sister company invest in a bank? Can a bank lend to a company that already holds AT1 instruments of a bank? If so, is there a deduction? What if that company's investment in the bank is not a significant proportion of its portfolio and the bank's failure would not jeopardise the loan? What if the bank lends to a company that will use the loan to buy the bank's planned issue of AT1 instruments, but the loan is backed by high quality collateral?

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

Deductions from Common Equity Tier 1 items

1. Bank owns usd 20 million worth of 18% ordinary shares of a financial institution Alpha Bank. Alpha Bank has also invested usd 12 million to this bank's CET1 in order to artificially inflate the capital of both banks.  When calculating regulatory capital, USD 12 million reciprocal cross-holding was deducted from CET1. Now, when the bank calculates adjustments for investments in the capital of financial entities, should it count the investment in Alpha Bank as 8 million, and even if so, will it be considered a significant investment or an insignificant investment? 2.  Bank has a wholly owned subsidiary, Valeria Ltd, which is a non-financial entity. Valeria Ltd holds 100% of the shares of Karina Insurers, which is a financial institution. Should the bank now consider this as a significant investment (here indirect) in a financial institution and make deductions accordingly, or should the bank consider only Valeria Ltd in deductions (alternatively 1250% RW) as a qualifying non-financial holding? If the first option is the correct answer, should it ignore the investment in Valeria Ltd? 3.  A bank has 100 million CET1 and 10 million AT1 capital. The bank then invests 50 mln to buy 100% of an insurance company that holds the bank's 10 mln AT1. When recalculating the regulatory capital, the bank deducts 40 mln (50 - 100*10%) from CET1 as an investment in financial sector entities above the 10% threshold. Now, when calculating AT1, should the bank make an adjustment to 10 mln AT1 because it is considered an investment in own capital? If so, how much?

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

Interpretation of "exposures attributable to a central government" set forth in Article 400 (1)(d) of CRR

In the context of the application of Article 400 (1)(d) of CRR, which sets forth the types of exposures that shall be exempted from the application of Article 395 (1) of CRR, what exposures shall be considered to be attributable to the central government? May a financial institution exempt exposures to state-owned enterprises that i) provide public services, ii) the economic activities of which are subsidized by the state, iii) where the transfer of financial resources is based on legislative arrangements, provided that such exposures - if they were to exist to the central government, that is the entity to which the exposure is attributable, would be assigned a 0 % risk weight under Part Three, Title II, Chapter 2 of CRR? May the application of Article 400(1)(d) be triggered by demonstrating that there is a risk equivalence between exposures to such state-owned enterprises and exposures to central governments?

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

What to report in D 05.00.b - Banking book - Indicators of potential climate change physical risk?

Question 1: what are the data/NACE code in scope to be reported for template D 05.00.b - Banking book - Indicators of potential climate change physical risk? Question 2: what is the level of NACE code to disclose in template D 05.00.b - Banking book - Indicators of potential climate change physical risk?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2022/2453 - ITS on ESG disclosures

Reference of the cells and reports layouts to use for the public disclosures (NOT the XBRL reporting)

Question 1: What are the cells references that must be publicly disclosed into annual and semiannual public disclosures: the reference of the cells from the ITS or the references of the cells from the XBRL? Question 2: What are the reports layouts that must be publicly disclosed into annual and semiannual public disclosures: the layout from the ITS or the layout from the XBRL?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2022/2453 - ITS on ESG disclosures

Derivates splitting

In Part 5, No. 24 of the Annex 29 (REPORTING INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE PURPOSE OF INTEREST RATING RISK IN THE BANKING BOOK) is mentioned 'In the case of derivatives, institutions shall report the net amounts of repricing cashflows (i.e., not broken down by receiver/payer legs).' At the same time regarding the repricing cashflows, there is a link to the RTS SA which says in Article 10  'Derivative instruments not subject to optionality shall be separated into a paying and a receiving leg.' Can you please clarify if the Derivates should be shown as net position in J 05.00 or should they be split into their legs?

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

Weighted average repricing date

In the "ITS ON SUPERVISORY REPORTING FOR IRRBB" is mentioned that the institution has to report the "weighted average repricing date" in J 08.00 and J 09.00: Relevant parameters. Can you please clarify what kind of figure is expected? Does the institutuions has to fill in a date e.g. '30.09.2029' or a number e.g. '5' for five years?

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

Admissible values to {C34.06, c0040}

According to XBRL rule v10236_a: [C 34.06 (All rows)] {C 34.06, c0040} in {[eba_CT:x10], [eba_CT:x1], [eba_CT:x12], [eba_CT:x598], [eba_CT:x599], [eba_CT:x20]}. On the other hand, "DPM table layout and Datapoint categorization" file available at EBA website, the admissible values are: (CT:x10) Central banks; (CT:x1) General governments;  (CT:x12) Credit institutions;  (CT:x18) Financial corporations other than credit institutions; (CT:x598) Financial corporations other than credit institutions and investment firms; (CT:x599) Investment firms; (CT:x20) Non-financial corporations; (CT:x5) Households.  The EBA xbrl validation rule does not include (CT:x18) "Financial corporations other than credit institutions" nor (CT:x5) "Households". This mismatch has been caused validations warnings. Could you, please, clarify which admissible values should be considered for {C34.06,c0040} ?

  • 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

Risk retention

  Where an SSPE that directly purchases securitised exposures from the seller is fully consolidated for accounting purposes by an entity, with a view to exposing such entity to (i) the risks (first loss in an amount at least equal to the expected loss) and (ii) the benefit of the excess spread deriving from such exposures, based on the performance of the portfolio which depends on the management of the assets by such entity, can such entity be considered as the limb(b) originator and as such, be eligible to hold the risk retention piece under Article 6(3)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 2017/2402, even though such entity is not directly a party to the purchase arrangement?

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

Risk retention

In a situation where an entity: is not considering being itself at any time the legal owner of the securitised receivables, but has made its own decision to invest in the receivables by procuring the purchase thereof by an SSPE directly from the seller, based on its own audit of the portfolio, and has negotiated the terms and conditions of the sale and purchase independently and directly with the seller, is contractually and economically irrevocably committed to: procure the purchase of these receivables by an SSPE directly from the seller, not later than an agreed closing date, under a sale and purchase agreement entered into between such entity and the seller, failing which it would be liable for contractual damages to the seller, in an amount significant enough to evidence that it is in its economic interest to avoid such liability by performing its obligation, arrange and appoint any service providers, for the purposes of the structuring and syndication of a financing of the purchase price in the form of a securitisation of these receivables not later than the closing date, where: it would have a right of active control over the servicing, either by itself or by an appointed third-party servicer, of the securitised assets, that would be determinant for the performance of the portfolio, it would bear at least the first loss risk of the securitised portfolio, in an amount that exceeds the expected loss of the portfolio, by subscribing the first losses tranche, it would expect to receive a remuneration that would be directly dependent on the performance of the portfolio, it would be committed to fund 100% of defaulting or ineligible receivables, can this entity be considered as limb(b) originator under Regulation (EU) No 2017/2402 and as such, act as risk retention holder under Article 6(3)(d)? Would the same analysis apply with respect to future receivables that the same entity would contractually irrevocably commit, pursuant to the same sale and purchase agreement, to purchase after the closing date under the same terms and conditions, during a certain period of time, provided that they comply with the same eligibility criteria (both individually and on an aggregate basis) and up to an agreed aggregate amount, by having them assigned by the seller to the same SSPE?

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

Interpretation of payment instrument

What devices or procedures can be considered as payment instrument as per Art. 4(14) of PSD2?

  • Legal act: Directive 2015/2366/EU (PSD2)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

Adjustment of risk-weighted non-defaulted SME exposures

Should the RWEA to which the adjustment shall be made under CRR Article 501 constitute the total RWEA for credit risk determined in accordance with Part Three, Title II, Chapter 2 or 3 that relates to non-defaulted credit exposures defined in 501 p 2 - regardless if the RWEA stems from the standardized approach, the IRB approach or any national measures impacting the credit risk RWEA?

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