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

Instructions and COREP validation rules

C 12.00 Credit Risk: Securitisation - Standardised Approach Instruction for Column 190 Exposure Value: Securitisation positions according to Article 246 of CRR. This piece of information is related to column 200 of the CR SA Total template. Question 1. Column 200 of CRSA is a calculated column. Does it mean the same calculation applies to CRSEC SA? Question 2. If both the columns (C190 of SECSA and C200 of CRSA) are same, then there is no supporting validation for C190 for Securitisation- SA

  • 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Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (repealed)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_647
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - COREP (incl. IP Losses)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 30/04/2014

Definition of Accumulated Writte-Offs to be reported in column 110 of Table 7

The ITS 2.49 defines accumulated write-offs as follows: The column “Accumulated write-offs” includes the cumulative amount of principal and past due interest of any debt instrument that the institution is no longer recognizing because they are considered uncollectible, independently of the portfolio in which they were included. These amounts shall be reported until the total extinguishment of all the institution’s rights (by expiry of the statute-of–limitations period, forgiveness or other causes) or until recovery. Does this amount refer to the write-offs from the initiation of the exposure, or only cumulatively, as it relates to the current reporting period (please specify if year or quarter)?

  • 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_643
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - FINREP (incl. FB&NPE)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 22/08/2014

Base for calculating Add-ons for Derivatives

For the calculation of potential future credit exposure, when should the notional amount be used and when the underlying value? Which notional amount should be used: Notional of the derivative contract or notional of the underlying?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_641
  • Topic: Market risk
  • Date of submission:

Exposure for Large Exposure Reporting - Accrued interests

Article 389 of the CRR states that for Large Exposure Reporting, the exposure should be identical to those in the standardised approach (Part II, Title 2, Chapter II) just without applying risk weights. According to Standard Approach for assets the risk position is defined by the balance sheet value including accrued interest and impairments being deducted. Can you confirm that this is also the definition for Large Exposures?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_638
  • Topic: Large exposures
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 11/04/2014

CVA for Exposures in structures with underlying assets

In case the bank invests in a structure with underlying assets (e.g. UCITS) that consist also of derivatives. Should the CVA also be calculated for these exposures?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_637
  • Topic: Market risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 13/05/2016

Reconciliation between accounting and CRR scope of consolidation when no accounting scope exists

In case a bank has to provide financial information according to FINREP on a subconsolidated level, but the institution has no accounting obligation on a subconsolidated level, what should be filled in Template 17 of the FINREP-Reporting?

  • 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_636
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - FINREP (incl. FB&NPE)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 30/04/2014

Look through approach to be applied for calculation of Leverage Ratio

Article 429b(1)(a) states that risk positions for the calculation of the Leverage Ratio should be calculated according to paragraph 111 (1) sent. 1 of the CRR, meaning, they are identical to risk positions in the Standard Approach.Does this mean that for transactions with underlying assets, e.g. UCITS a look through approach should also be used for the calculation of the Leverage Ratio?Does this apply to template C45.00 columns 010, 020 and 030 as well as to template C40.00 column 010?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_635
  • Topic: Leverage ratio
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 08/05/2014

Table F 02.00 and Table F 43.00 - cross validation of Provisions charge

FINREP Table F 02.00 subtotal row 430 (Provisions or Reversals of Provisions) is identified on the template as cross referencing to Table F 43.00 (Provisions). The cross validations do not however identify what data should agree. Please confirm which columns (and for which rows ) on Table F 43.00 should agree back to Table F 02.00.

  • 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_634
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - FINREP (incl. FB&NPE)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 30/04/2014

Total inflows excluded due do cap

Instructions concerning reporting on inflows, specify that total monies due which are excluded due to an inflow cap which is set at 75% of liquidity outflows shall be reported in row 990 of C 53.00. This will require to be checked by reference to total outflows as calculated from the outflow template. How is this supposed to be done, when the outflow template C 52.00 contains no row for total outflows (no reference to total outflows) and inflow template C 53.00 contains no row for total inflows before cap (no reference to total inflows before cap)?

  • 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_631
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Liquidity (LCR, NSFR, AMM)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 07/11/2014

Holding in an undertaking that is neither a financial sector entity nor outside the financial sector

According to Article 89 (1) of the CRR, a holding in an undertaking that is not a financial sector entity, carrying on certain ancillary activities (for which guidelines are pending to be issued by the EBA), shall not be treated as a qualifying holding outside the financial sector. In addition, the aforementioned holding does not seem to be captured neither by the deductions from eligible capital items (Articles 36, 56, 66) since relevant deductions relate only to holdings in financial sector entities. Therefore, shall a holding in an undertaking that is not a financial sector entity, carrying on certain ancillary activities, be treated as a holding in a financial sector entity or as an exposure which should be risk weighted?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_630
  • Topic: Own funds
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 22/08/2014

Supervisory reporting of bonds issued by promotional banks

In its instructions on the EBA LCR Monitoring Exercise for the end-June 2013 and end-September 2013 data collection the EBA gives examples of promotional banks whose bonds can be reported in row 10 of the ‘LCR EU Only’ tab, if they are not already reported in section A of that exercise. In this context we would like to raise two questions: 1. Is the list of promotional banks given in the instructions exhaustive and also applicable for the reporting of these assets in Row 180 of the Liquid Assets template of COREP (C 51.00)? 2. Do bonds issued by promotional banks always have to be reported in row 180 of the respective template?

  • 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_628
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Liquidity (LCR, NSFR, AMM)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 04/07/2014

EBA Q&A 2013_160

This is a follow up question to Q&A 2013_160.A matched (hedged) FX position will result in four cash flows; an inflow in currency 1 and an outflow in currency 2 with counterpart A and an opposite outflow in currency 1 and an inflow in currency 2 with counterpart B.At an all currency LCR level the inflow and outflow with counterpart A can be netted in line with 422(6) and the inflow and outflow of counterpart B can be netted in line with 422(6), giving rise to a net position with each couterpart which will be a very small FX translation difference; one will be a small inflow with one counterpart and one a small outflow with the other counterpart.However at a single currency level the off-setting cashflows are in the same currency, but are not with the same counterpart, and so strictly under LCR rulles they can not be netted. They will therefore be reported gross as an inflow with one counterpart and outflow with the other counterpart, but the inflows will be subject to the 75% cap of outflows in each currency LCR if the 75% cap on inflows apply to both the all currency and the single currency.This will give rise to the sum of the individual currency LCRs showing a worse position than the all currency combined and we question if this is the intended outcome.

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_625
  • Topic: Liquidity risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Inclusion of indirect holdings in the large exposures regime

Do indirect holdings have to be included in the large exposure regime based on Article 389 of Regulation (EU) No. 575/2013 (CRR) if they are held against a financial sector entity (that is fulfil the definition in Article 36 (1)(h) or (i) of the CRR), but are not deducted from own funds and instead risk weighted according to Articles 48(4), 46(4) or 49(4) of the CRR? If the answer is yes, can the financial sector entity being regarded as the relevant client for large exposure purposes?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_624
  • Topic: Large exposures
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 11/04/2014

Credit valuation adjustment, standardized method to calculate own funds requirement

"Maturity" definition referred to Art 384 para. 1 for the CVA standardized method calculate for non-IMM banks only refers to Art. 162(2)(b), i.e., derivatives covered by the master netting agreement. However, if derivatives are not included in a netting set and no collateral has been taken into account, how is maturity for the purpose of CVA standardized approach calculation determined?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_622
  • Topic: Other topics
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 11/02/2022

Additional Tier 1 and Tier 2

Should the Additional Tier 1, Tier 1 ,Tier 2 and own funds stemming from undertakings of third countries outside Europe and subject to local requirements equivalent to those requirements under Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR) and Directive (EU) 2013/36 (CRD), be included in the consolidated own funds?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_620
  • Topic: Own funds
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 31/10/2014

FINREP Reporting - Cumulative from ARD or period-on-period

Can the EBA please confirm whether data in the FINREP templates should be reported on a cumulative basis (from the start of the accounting reference date), or period-on-period?

  • 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_619
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - FINREP (incl. FB&NPE)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 30/04/2014

Assessment criteria of the conditions of forbone exposures that are performing

Performing exposures with forbearance measures are distinguished into these that were considered as performing from the date when forbearance measures were extended (see paragraph 178) and these that were previously non-performing and have been reclassified from the non-performing category. Is there a distinction regarding the assessment criteria for these two types of exposures or have all performing exposures with forbearance measures to be assessed on a quarterly basis (see paragraph 177), although the class of formerly non-performing exposures is exposed to a higher risk to become non-performing again as compared to these that have always been performing since forbearance measures were extended?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Draft ITS on Supervisory Reporting of Institutions
  • ID: 2013_618
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - FINREP (incl. FB&NPE)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 22/08/2014

Calculation of EADi(total) for CVA purposes under the standardised method

How should an institution using Mark-to-market Method for calculating the exposure value for CCR purposes calculate an EADi(total) when calculating the own funds requirements for CVA risk under standardised method? How should collateral be taken into account?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_616
  • Topic: Market risk
  • Date of submission:

Validation Rules FINREP - COREP

CRR states that certain balance sheet items shall be used for COREP reporting only, if they have been reviewed by an auditor. The last reviewed or audited values have to be used for COREP purposes until auditor’s review or audit of the current values have been carried out (so called "static principle"). For example some interim financial statements are not published and/or not reviewed by auditors (e.g. as of March 31st). In this case the last audited deferred tax assets or liabilities - i.e. as of December 31st of the preceding year- have to be used for all COREP reporting (e.g. March 31st, June, 30th, etc) until the next financial statement is reviewed or audited by the auditor. For FINREP reporting the most recent accounting values would be used for preparation of the quarterly reporting- e.g. even if no auditor’s review is conducted as of March 31st, 2014 current accounting values would be submitted for FINREP reporting. Because of this static principle for COREP reporting, COREP values may not equal FINREP accounting values for specific positions and specific reporting dates. However, according to EBA validation rules specific balance sheet positions (e.g. deferred tax assets or liabilities) shall equal in the FINREP and COREP templates. These validations do not appear to be valid because of the difference in principles in preparing COREP and FINREP numbers. For example validation rule v1780_h states that {F 01.01 , r330} = +{F 01.01 , r340} +{C 04.00 , r010}). COREP- FINREP validation rules are applicable for share premium and accumluated other comprehsensvie income too. These validations do not appear to be valid for all reporting dates. Which numbers are required for deferred tax assets and liability reporting in the COREP and FINREP tables respectively?

  • 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_612
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - COREP (incl. IP Losses)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 30/04/2014

Calculation of exposure value for counterparty credit risk under Mark-to-market Method

Is there any exemption for the calculation of "add ons" when using Mark-to-market method for determining the exposure value for Regulation (EU) No. 575/2013 (CRR)? What is the right treatment of a single transaction that is not subject to legally enforceable netting agreement, if the contract has a negative value?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2013_611
  • Topic: Market risk
  • Date of submission: