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

Reporting Requirements per type of institution

Are small and non-complex/other institutions required to use the simplified set of templates, or can they use the Large format if they already have to produce it, for example, for their holding/parent company?

  • 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_7072
  • Topic: Interest Rate Risk for Banking Book (IRRBB)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 28/05/2024

Trading desk requirements for Standardized approach perimeter

Could you please confirm whether all desks in the prudential perimeter, independently from the internal model or standardized approach, should respect the requirements for trading desks reported in Article 104b and other provisions for trading desks?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2024_7076
  • Topic: Market risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 28/05/2024

Trading and Banking book positions within a Trading desk

Could an A-IMA eligible Trading desk have trading and banking book positions segregated in different portfolios within the same desk, given that non-trading book positions are carve-out from A-IMA calculations?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2024_7075
  • Topic: Market risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 28/05/2024

Classification of Repo Transaction

How can internal repo transactions be managed in the calculation of the regulatory capital requirement in the A-IMA trading desk? Can these transactions be carved out from the scope of regulatory capital requirement of the A-IMA trading desk? Does the regulation prescribe that the funding in repos should be allocated to the trading/banking book accordingly to the funding strategy purpose? (if the funding is for banking book positions, the repos are non-trading instruments, if the funding is for trading book strategy the repos are trading book instruments). Is it possible to have different prudential classification of internal repos and external repo transactions on the market?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2024_7074
  • Topic: Market risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 28/05/2024

Prudential Classification of Repo Transaction

What treatment for market risk capital requirement should be adopted for repos included in an A-IMA trading desk where those repos are used for funding of trading positions and valued at accrual and thus excluded from the regulatory trading book, following Basel Committee’s provision?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2024_7071
  • Topic: Market risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 28/05/2024

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

Calculation of RWA for assets that are deducted from own funds

As a follow-up question to Q&A 6106, what would be the appropriate risk weight to be used for the purposes of col 0030 'RWEAs: SA exposures' in the case of assets that are deducted from own funds?

  • 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: 2022_6477
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Leverage ratio
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 03/05/2024

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

Regular Way Purchase or Sales Awaiting settlement: distinction between trading date and settlement date according to whether the institution has an agent activity or for its own account

How  Regular Way Purchases or Sales Awaiting should be properly allocated in Pillar III  EU-LR2 template?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2023_6907
  • Topic: Leverage ratio
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 01/05/2024

Data collection regarding high earners that are staff in investment firms subject to Article 25 and 34 of Directive (EU) 2019/2034 when the investment firms are part of a group subject to prudential consolidation.

Point 18 of EBA/GL/2022/08 states: “High-earners data should be submitted (…) by: a. institutions referred to in Subsection 1.1, using the template for the data collection specified under: i. Annex I for high earners that are staff of institutions and other entities in the scope of consolidation; ii. Annex II for high earners that are staff in investment firms subject to Article 25 and 34 of Directive (EU) 2019/2034;” We have found that there are several common data points defined between R 04.00 and R.04.01 (in particular columns 0010, 0020 and 0070 of R 04.01) in XBRL taxonomy version 3.2. which technically prevents the possibility to report according to point 18 of EBA/GL/2022/08. For example, supposing an institution has one member of the MB Supervisory function (column 0010) reported in “Number of other staff” (row 0030) in an investment firm (point ii) and four members of the MB Supervisory function (column 0010) reported in “Number of other staff” (row 0030) in the parent institution (point i), it cannot report one person in R 04.01 and four people in R 04.00 due to the common data points between them.

  • Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: EBA/GL/2022/08 – Guidelines on the data collection exercises regarding high earners
  • ID: 2023_6872
  • Topic: Remuneration
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 01/05/2024

Validation rules and warnings

Due to the increase of interest rates, the 'fair value changes of the hedged items in portfolio hedge of interest rate risk' is a negative number on the asset side of the balance sheet. In the NSFR this amount is reported under 'other assets' (C80.00 R1030). However, we obtain multiple warnings eba_v11531_s, eba_v11537_s, eba_v11546_s, eba_v11552_s, eba_v11565_s, eba_v11582_s. Is it possible to report a negative number under other assets, and if not where should we report the negative amount of 'fair value changes of the hedged items in portfolio hedge of interest rate risk'

  • 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: 2023_6853
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - Liquidity (LCR, NSFR, AMM)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 01/05/2024

Definition of Financial Institution / Third Country Undertakings

Should the definition of "Financial Institution" as used in IFR be interpreted as excluding firms established in third countries unless otherwise expressly stated?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 2019/2033 (IFR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2024_7045
  • Topic: Prudential consolidation
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 26/04/2024

Calculation of K-COH

Should the transactions relating to managing the delegated investment funds’ portfolios be included into COH of the investment firms?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 2019/2033 (IFR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2024_6999
  • Topic: K-factor requirements
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 26/04/2024

Meaning of “without automatic rollover” in the definition of trade finance

The definition of trade finance refers to “financial products of fixed short-term maturity, generally of less than one year, without automatic rollover”. Does a financial product meet the aforementioned maturity condition that has a maturity not exceeding one year (i.e. typically less than one year or a maximum of one year) and that is repeatedly extended by another 365 days but where the bank has the contractual right to unilaterally terminate the product prior to any extension? 

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2024_7012
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 15/04/2024

Fulfilment of “fixed short-term maturity, […], without automatic rollover” for trade finance product bank guarantees (“Guarantee”) in case of a contractually agreed clause between the issuing bank and its client instructing the issuing bank to issue the Guarantee (“Instructing Party”) that allows the issuing bank to effectively exit the risk position within a contractually agreed fixed timeframe

  The definition of trade finance refers to “financial products of fixed short-term maturity, generally of less than one year, without automatic rollover”. We would like to confirm that an open-ended Guarantee, i.e. a guarantee that does not provide for a fixed maturity date, meets the aforementioned definition of trade finance, in case the issuing bank and the Instructing Party agree on contractual provisions that allow the issuing bank to effectively exit the risk position incurred via the Guarantee. In this specific case the issuing bank conducts a regular bank internal review regarding the Guarantee and may – in case it deems this appropriate on the basis of its review – on the basis of a contractual arrangement between the bank and the Instructing Party, at its full discretion, require the Instructing Party to provide the issuing bank within a contractually agreed fixed time period with either a counter-guarantee from another bank in favour of the issuing bank, cash cover collateral or a substitution of the Guarantee by ensuring that another bank issues a Guarantee replacing the issuing bank’s Guarantee. 

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2024_7011
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 15/04/2024

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

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
  • ID: 2023_6916
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - IRRBB
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 15/04/2024

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
  • ID: 2023_6921
  • Topic: Operational risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 10/04/2024

ESG P3 - Template 5 validation rule v12726_m

Is the validation rules v12726_m correctly defined?

  • 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_7041
  • Topic: Transparency and Pillar 3
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 09/04/2024

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