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

SME supporting factor

Can you please confirm whether the SME supporting factor can be applied to derivative exposure and Repo exposure?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2014_1050
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 02/10/2015

The mortgage lending value of the German property

The part of an exposure treated as fully secured by a German property shall be the lower amount of the market value or the mortgage lending value of the property. Does it mean that the mortgage lending value of the German property must be determined so that the property can be treated as collateral? How shall we treat the German property, in which only the market value exists, but not the mortgage lending value?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2014_1023
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Risk Weights for International Organisations

Could you please advise what risk weight/treatments should be applied to International Organisations that are not included in Article 118 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: 2014_968
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 10/10/2014

Inclusion of additional value adjustments in the IRB treatment of expected loss

In CRR article 159 we read the following: "Institutions shall subtract the expected loss amounts calculated in accordance with Article 158 (5), (6) and (10) from the general and specific credit risk adjustments and additional value adjustments in accordance with Articles 34 and 110 and other own funds reductions related to these exposures." Due to the wording and the grammatical structure of the above sentence we are having doubts as to which amounts should actually be used in the IRB treatment of expected losses.

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2014_950
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 11/07/2014

Reglamento 575/2013 exposiciones garantizadas hipotecas sobre bienes inmuebles/ Exposures secured by mortgages on immovable property

La parte de la exposición que supere el valor hipotecario dice que le será asignada la ponderación de riesgo aplicable a las exposiciones no garantizadas de la contraparte implicada. Si la contraparte es minorista, cómo puede ser que la parte de la exposición que supere el valor hipotecario vaya ponderada al 75% y la parte que va entre el 80% y el 100% del valor hipotecario vaya ponderada al 100%? ENGLISH TRANSLATION: In Article 124 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR) it says that the part of the exposure which exceeds the mortgage value shall be assigned the risk weight applicable to the unsecured exposures of the counterparty involved. If the counterparty is retail, can you explain how the part of the exposure which exceeds the mortgage value shall have a weight of 75% and the part which goes from 80% through 100% of the mortgage value shall have a weight of 100%?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2014_936
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 12/12/2014

Residual maturity of exposures with an undefined maturity

Do exposures with an undefined maturity, such as deposits or time deposits which can be called by the depositor and must then be reimbursed with a delay shorter than three months, quality as such?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2014_883
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 04/07/2014

Non Credit Obligation Assets

Paragraph 5 of article 148 of CRR, states "An institution that is permitted to use the IRB Approach for any exposure class shall use the IRB Approach for the equity exposure class laid down in point (e) of Article 147(2), except where that institution is permitted to apply the Standardised Approach for equity exposures pursuant to Article 150 and for the other non credit-obligation assets exposure class laid down in point (g) of Article 147(2)." It is not clear whether an institution with an IRB Approach permission should treat "non customer assets" e.g. fixed assets, cash etc under the IRB approach (reported as Non Credit Obligation) or under the standardised approach (reported as Other Assets)

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2014_810
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 12/09/2014

Effect on the capital requirement of a guarantee where the right to call is linked to default versus another where it is linked to realised loss

Let’s take a portfolio level guarantee that is callable once losses from the exposures covered have been realised (and NOT when exposures DEFAULT); realised losses decrease the notional of the guarantee. As it can take years till losses get realised after the default event, while losses are still unrealised (but defaults have happened) the full notional is used to cover the whole portfolio. Our question is whether such a guarantee is eligible to be taken into account as unfunded credit protection and thus decrease the capital requirement of the sub-portfolio it cover?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2014_803
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 04/07/2014

Maturity used in IRB RWA calculations

Is there an error in this paragraph? It currently says "....shall calculate M for each of these exposures as set out in points (a) to (e)....."; should this read "as set out in points (a) to (f)" in order to be consistent with the previous version of the legislation. Based on the current wording the effect of this is to exclude the possibility of banks using a residual maturity ".....M shall be the maximum remaining time (in years) that the obligor is permitted to take to fully discharge its contractual obligations,......"

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2014_762
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 23/10/2015

Application of the Basel I floor (Article 500) and the SME factor (Article 501) // Aplicación del límite mínimo de Basilea I (art. 500) y del factor reductor de PyME (art. 501)

When the Basel I requirements are compared to the requirements of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, should the application of the SME factor specified in Article 501 be considered? Or, pursuant to Article 500(4), should only Part Three, Title II, Chapter 3 be considered and, therefore, not the application of Article 501? ¿Cuando se comparan los requerimientos de Basilea I con los requerimientos según el Reglamento (UE) No 575/2013 se debe considerar la aplicación del factor reductor de PyME especificado en el artículo 501? ¿O por el contrario y según el párrafo 4 del artículo 501 sólo se debe contemplar el capítulo 3 del título II de la parte tercera y por tanto no se contempla la aplicación del artículo 501?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2014_744
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:

Calculation of retail exposures under Article 123(c) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)

Does expression from point (c) of the first subparagraph of Article 123 of Regulation (EU) 575/2013 (CRR) “the total amount owed to the institution and parent undertakings and its subsidiaries” refer to exposure value as of Article 111 1. net exposure value (after deduction specific credit risk adjustments and additional adjustments) of an asset and of an off-balance sheet? Should the exposure value (the sum of current replacement cost and potential future credit exposure) of derivative instruments be included in calculation of total amount owed to the institution, laid down in point (c) of Article 123? Should the total amount owed to the institution and parent undertakings and its subsidiaries as of Article 123 (c) include: - An off-balance sheet item = 50 000 EUR? - Credit risk adjustments = -10 000 EUR? - Value of derivative instrument? If so, should both current replacement cost and potential future credit exposure be included?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2014_707
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 27/06/2014

Retail exposure class and risk weight for exposure value of derivative instruments

Should the credit risk exposures and counterparty credit risk exposures for the same customer be classified as retail exposures if the criteria from Article 123 points (a) to (c) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR) are met and they are classified neither as exposures in default nor as exposures secured by mortgages on immovable property? Are there any restrictions in assigning derivative instrument to the retail exposures class and to use one of the preferential risk weights of 75% except criteria from Article 123?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2014_704
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 27/06/2014

Maturity under Article 162 of Regularion (EU) No 575/2013

Under the provisions of Article 162(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR), how should an instrument with a scheduled cash flow, where the institution may opt for prolonging the contract for another period, be treated?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_687
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 21/11/2014

Maturity (M) for short-term credit line contracts which are continuously rolled over.

This query regards the setting of the maturity parameter (M) for corporate exposures when applying the IRB approach. In this respect, we are referring to facilities subject to Article 162(2)(f) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR): “(f) for any other instrument than those mentioned in this paragraph or when an institution is not in a position to calculate M as set out in (a), M shall be the maximum remaining time (in years) that the obligor is permitted to take to fully discharge its contractual obligations, where M shall be at least 1 year;” Consider exposures where the credit contract stipulates a short-term contractual maturity (say 1 year). If an institution typically rolls over such facilities, possibly after rigorous, annual credit processes so that the de-facto maturity is greater than the contractual, should the institution then be allowed to apply the contract length as maturity?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_686
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 21/11/2014

Treatment of recognised exchanges (non-third country vs. third country)

Are exchanges, explicitly exchanges according to Article 4(1)(72) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR), also treated like institutions?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_677
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 03/10/2014

Application of Article 199(6)(c) and (d) in the event that the credit institution has not liquidated any such collateral in the past

In the event that a credit institution has not liquidated the collateral referred to in Article 199(6) in the past, is it sufficient to demonstrate the availability of processes and data collection/analyses tool which enables the institution to show that the realised proceeds from the collateral are not below 70% of the collateral value in more than 10% of all liquidations for a given type of collateral in case collateral is liquidated?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_669
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 11/04/2014

Relevance of Issuers Rating for Article 120 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)

Does Article 120 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR) refer to claims only, where there is an issue-related rating existing, or does it also cover claims, where no rating exists for the issue, but for the issuer?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_652
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 03/10/2014