Search for Q&As Submit a question

List of Q&As

Reporting the whole outstanding amount in the maturity buckets

What amount has to be reported as the whole outstanding amount in the maturity buckets in template C30.00?

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (as amended)

ID: 2019_5026| Topic: Supervisory reporting| Date of submission: 05/12/2019

F22.02 row 120: Calculating amount of the assets involved

F22.02: How should the „amount of assets involved in payment services” be calculated for payment services listed in Annex I of the Directive (EU) 2015/2366?

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Draft ITS on Supervisory Reporting of Institutions

ID: 2019_5021| Topic: Supervisory reporting| Date of submission: 27/11/2019

Validation error

COREP OF contains one validation error. In C09.02 formula c105>=c110 is not correct because c105 can be bigger than c105.

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (as amended)

ID: 2019_5007| Topic: Supervisory reporting| Date of submission: 19/11/2019

What is to be reported as "Group or individual" on template C28 collumn 020

When you have an exposure only to cliente X, connected with the client Y (primary of the same group of connected clients) but without any exposure; do you have to report group of connected clients, or individual?

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (as amended)

ID: 2019_5004| Topic: Supervisory reporting| Date of submission: 15/11/2019

Validation rule 7301, 7304 and COREP template C32.04

Can guidance be provided on how to report short positions in column 0040 of template C32.04 without creating an error in the validation rules 7301 and 7304? When calculating and reporting concentration risk AVAs for individual positions, which may be both long and short, there will be occasions when the positions reported in column 0040 will be negative.

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (as amended)

ID: 2019_5003| Topic: Own funds| Date of submission: 15/11/2019

Validation Rule V6011_H, V6057_H and V5700_S

Were this validation rulesV6011_H, V6057_H and V5700_S correctly implemented in Taxonomy 2.8?

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (as amended)

ID: 2019_4999| Topic: Supervisory reporting| Date of submission: 12/11/2019

Should Maturity ladder report everything in the balance sheet?

Maturity ladder states in general instructions point 12.f that if no minimum contractual payment can be established, it shall be reported in column 220. But, in point 17, it says that past due items and non-performing loans should not be reported. Could point 17 be interpreted as "not be reported as a cash flow", and hence be reported in column 220 according to point 12.f?

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (as amended)

ID: 2019_4990| Topic: Liquidity risk| Date of submission: 11/11/2019

Classification of Personal Investment Companies (PICs) for the purposes of template C68 and C67.

Template C68 has 2 type of products, either retail or wholesale funding. However, PICs would not meet the criteria for classification as ‘retail’ or could not be viewed as 'wholesale' items. Notwithstanding that, as PICs are an important source of funding for our bank, and as part of the ALMM submission, should they be included in the ALMM template C68 and template C67 and be reported in the ‘wholesale’ section for consistency purposes ?

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (as amended)

ID: 2019_4980| Topic: Supervisory reporting| Date of submission: 01/11/2019

Validation error v6206_m for december 2018 submission of SBP report

Can you please overrule the validation error v6206_m?

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulatory Technical Standard on benchmarking portfolios

ID: 2019_5063| Topic: Supervisory reporting| Date of submission: 23/12/2019

Validation error v6207_m

Can the validation error v6207_m in the template c 103 for the reporting period December 2018, be overruled in Onegate

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulatory Technical Standard on benchmarking portfolios

ID: 2019_5062| Topic: Supervisory reporting| Date of submission: 23/12/2019

Errors v6205_m and v6183_m for C_102 template of SBP reporting

Is it possible to overrule the validation errors in the errors v6205_m and v6183_m on the Onegate?

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulatory Technical Standard on benchmarking portfolios

ID: 2019_5060| Topic: Supervisory reporting| Date of submission: 23/12/2019

Institution with country of residence in a “third country not EU equivalent”

The Institutions resident in a “third country not Equivalent” as for article 107 (3, 4) of CRR are classified as “Corporate” Exposure Classes for Regulatory and COREP purposes based on Art. 147 (7) of CRR. This type of counterparties mainly receive a “Banks” Internal authorized Rating system, having indeed the activity and related balance sheet typical of the related applicable segmentation, regardless of Regulatory Corep Asset Class in which they are reported. Therefore considering the aim of Supervisory Benchmarking Reporting, which focuses on drivers affecting the RWA volatility due to Internal Rating system among participants, jointly with the different information collected to build the portfolio clusters within Annex I in C.102/C.103 for Institution and Large Corporate/Corporate Portfolio (i.e , Sector of Counterparty, Counterparty, Type of exposure), UCG has considered as LDP “Institutions” this type of counterparts and not HDP/LDP Corporates, deeming more coherent the related portfolio required, in order to proper reflect the parameters and metrics time by time applied to this specific clients (i.e. PD, LGD, Rwa, ecc). We would like to have confirmation of the proposed approach

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Draft ITS on Supervisory Reporting for Institutions (for benchmarking the internal approaches)

ID: 2019_5017| Topic: Credit risk| Date of submission: 26/11/2019

The validation rules v6268_m, v6269_m, v6270_m, still have the reference to line 250 instead of 251.

The COREP_OF C 18.00 template, based on the new Table Layout for columns from 010 to 050, line 250 has been deleted and the 251 has been inserted. The validation rules v6268_m, v6269_m, v6270_m, still have the reference to line 250 instead of 251. Could you verify?

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (as amended)

ID: 2018_4418| Topic: Supervisory reporting| Date of submission: 12/12/2018

Validation rule 6358 and COREP template C32.02

Can guidance be provided on how to report operational risk AVA, which in accordance with the EBA RTS 2014/06 Article 17.3 have been calculated as 10% of the sum of the aggregated category level sums of MPUAVA and COCAVA and where these relates to contributions from unearned credit spread AVA and investing & funding cost AVA in accordance with the EBA RTS 2014/06 Articles 12.2 and 12.3?

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (as amended)

ID: 2019_4979| Topic: Supervisory reporting| Date of submission: 31/10/2019

Validation rule 6358 and COREP template C32.02

Can guidance be provided on how to fulfil the logic in validation rule 6342 and 6357 without creating an error in the validation rule 6358?

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (as amended)

ID: 2019_4978| Topic: Supervisory reporting| Date of submission: 31/10/2019

The EGDQ260 and EGDQ250 check wrongly compares risk weighted exposure amount pre SME-supporting factor and the original exposure pre conversion factors for the non-defaulted portfolio for the asset class “Corporates – other”.

The EGDQ260 and EGDQ250 check wrongly compares risk weighted exposure amount pre SME-supporting factor and the original exposure pre conversion factors for the non-defaulted portfolio for the asset class “Corporates – other”. When a comparison is made between the C08.02 and C09.02, there is a difference in calculation for the risk weighted exposure amount pre SME-supporting factor (DQ2016) and original exposure pre conversion factors (DQ250) in the COREP C08.02 and C09.02. In the EGDQ check R030 – R042 – R045 and R050 (Corporates ; Of Which: Specialised Lending - excl. SL subject to slotting criteria ; Of Which: Specialised Lending subject to slotting criteria and Of Which: SME) are taken into account for the COREP C09.02. As in COREP C08.02 only the sheets “Corporate – other” for both foundation and advanced are taken into account. Because the sheets for “SME” and “Specialized lending” in the COREP C08.02 are not included in the summation, there is a difference in calculation. Therefore the figures taken into account in the performed EGDQ check cannot be equal.

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (as amended)

ID: 2019_4973| Topic: Supervisory reporting| Date of submission: 30/10/2019

Validation rule v6522_a - Framework release 2.8

According to validation rule v6522_a, one of the allowable items to be reported in the sector of the counterparty in template C27.00 is "Financial corporations other than credit institutions and investment firms". However, this is not consistent with the allowable items in the instructions for reporting large exposures and concentration risk of the ITS on supervisory reporting. In reporting framework 2.8 the name of this category is "other financial corporations (excluding investment firms)".

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (as amended)

ID: 2019_4962| Topic: Supervisory reporting| Date of submission: 24/10/2019

Template C 70.00

Is it acceptable from the EBA point of view that in report 70 ALMM cash flows for significant currency in some time – bucket is higher than cash flows in the same time bucket at Total Template? Counterparty X has a maturing deposit of 100 EUR (~436 PLN equivalent) and same counterparty starts a deposit of 150 PLN. In this case on the Total template there would be no new funds coming in, only Matured 436 PLN and 150 PLN rolled over. On the PLN template there would be only 150 PLN new funds.

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (as amended)

ID: 2019_5030| Topic: Supervisory reporting| Date of submission: 22/10/2019

COREP C06.02 template - Consistency of the EBA Validation Rule v3696_s

Is the control v3696_s consistent with the COREP ITS when it comes to columns c300 to c340?

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (as amended)

ID: 2019_4947| Topic: Supervisory reporting| Date of submission: 16/10/2019

IFRS 9, validation rule v5662_s

Validation v5662 for IFRS 9 (taxonomy 2.8) should also accept positive values. v5662_s: [F 04.04.1 (All rows, c050;060;070;080;090)] {F 04.04.1} <= 0 How this should be treated in template F04.04.1 row 150 columns 050-070, where only negative values are expected (validation rule v5662_s)?

COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (as amended)

ID: 2019_4933| Topic: Supervisory reporting| Date of submission: 04/10/2019