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

EBA validations APPEAR to be relevant to IFRS and GAAP though they only include a GAAP template (F 04.06)

Can you confirm that these validations are out of scope for IFRS and, if so, why in the EBA validations list their severity is marked as "Blocking for IFRS"?

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or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (repealed)

Template C 07.00, column 230: of which: with a credit assessment by a nominated ECAI

We would like to know that whether ECAI rated CRM will be considered to report this column.Case: Unrated Corporate customer pledges ECAI rated debt instruments. Will this exposure be reported in column 230?

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or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (repealed)

Validation rule v3950_s for nGAAP

For some Institution, which don't follow the IFRS recommendations respective interest income on liabilities and interest expense on assets it might happen,,that they show negative interest income. Because according to Austrian GAAP it it is allowed, that negative interest rates reduce interest income and might turn negative. So v3950_s can not be fulfilled in some cases and therefore v3950_s should be "non-blocking" for nGAAP reporters.

  • 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)

Partial and Total-Write-Offs in FINREP IFRS 9 templates F 04.03.1 and F 04.03.2

FINREP Forms F.04.03.1 and F.04.03.2 require the disclosure of partial and total-write offs in columns 080 and 090. Reference is made to IFRS 9.5.4.4 and B5.4.9 and Annex V.Part 2.72-74.Both references are however silent, as to how long the disclosure about in particular total write-offs is required. Is the disclosure of total write-offs only required in the year, when the total-write off has occurred? (Rationale: A (total) write-off constitutes a derecognition event - a disclosure for instruments no longer recognised does not make sense in the following year).Alternative view: Guidance in Part 2.72 is equally valid for partial and total write-offs. This means, the amounts in columns 080 and 090 ‘shall be reported until the total extinguishment of all the reporting institution’s rights by expiry of the statute-of-limitations period, forgiveness or other causes, or until recovery’, i.e. as long as ‘they are subject to enforcement activities’. This would mean, that partial write-offs would NOT be required to be reported, if a certain amount (e.g. 50%) was forgiven and therefore written off and is therefore also no longer enforced. Simultaneously, even total-write-offs would have to be reported, as long as enforcement activities are undertaken, also in later years. This view however seems to be somewhat in contradiction with IFRS 9.B.5.4.9, which stipulates that write-offs should only occur, ‘if the entity has no reasonable prospects of recovering any further cash flows from the financial asset’. Thus, the column would have to be filled in only in the very rare cases, where ‘the entity has no reasonable prospect of recovering any further cash flows from the financial assets’, but still undertakes enforcement activities.Is this interpretation correct?

  • 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)

Reconciliation of FINREP and COREP with regard to goodwill

May the amounts of goodwill reported in FINREP and COREP differ due to differences in treatment between the accounting framework and the CRR?

  • 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)

Asset encumbrance Reporting vs. Finrep Reporting – Definition of equity instruments not aligned

The following validation rule is not correct:v2816_m: sum({F 32.01, r030, (c010, c060)}) = sum({F 01.01, c010, (r070, r093, r110, r150, r172, r176, r235)})’.This validation rule excludes row 260 of F 01.01. An entity has to disclose ‘Investments in subsidiaries, joint ventures and associates’ in this row.By definition, row 260 of F 01.01 includes equity shares that are representing the ownership in subsidiary, joint ventures or associates.

  • 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)

Reporting of outflows and Inflows arising from secured lending transaction where collateral is not Level 1, Level 2A and Level 2B asset on DA LCR templates C 73.00 and C 74.00

On which rows of the liquidity coverage templates C 73.00  - Outflows and C 74.00 - Inflows should firms report flows arising from secured lending transaction where collateral is not Level 1, Level 2A and Level 2B asset and therefore non-liquid asset. ANNEX XXV – REPORTING ON LIQUIDITY (PART 2 OUTFLOWS) and ANNEX XXV – REPORTING ON LIQUIDITY (PART 3: INFLOWS) state that ‘Credit institutions shall only report the Level 1, Level 2A and Level 2B assets that qualify as liquid assets in accordance with Title II of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/61. Where collateral is Level 1, Level 2A or Level 2B but does not qualify as liquid asset in accordance with Title II of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/61 it shall be reported as non-liquid.’Therefore are firms not required to report flows arising from secured lending transaction where collateral is non Level 1, Level 2A and Level 2B asset in section ID 1.2 of the C 73.00  and C 74.00 on the rows for collateral that does not qualify as a liquid asset? The specific remark regarding secured lending and capital market-driven transactions on ANNEX XXV – REPORTING ON LIQUIDITY (PART 3 INFLOWS) 1.2 (3) is ambiguous when viewed in conjunction with the decision tree guidance for reporting assets and liabilities from secured lending which states ‘Allocate into one relevant item of ID 1.2’.If firms are not required to report flows arising from secured lending transaction where collateral is non Level 1, Level 2A and Level 2B asset in section ID 1.2 of the C 73.00  and C 74.00 where should they be reported? We assume they must be reported somewhere as they contribute to the firms’ net liquidity outflow, but to report these flows in section 1.2 can distort the numerator calculation on row 090 of C 76.00.

  • 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)

Reporting of individual exposures relating to a group of connected institutions for which there is a cash pooling agreement, where some creditor nostri accounts are offsetting debtor nostri balances

Our institution has a cash pooling agreement relating to three bank accounts opened in different banks belonging to the same Group, so that cash transfers are processed automatically overnight to one centralizing bank account.Up to now, in the LE2 template, we have been reporting the resulting net exposure on this group of connected counterparties and in the LE3 template, the detail for each of the three counterparties, but we have been encountering the following validation rule blocking errors: v0648_m, v0649_m,  v3799_s and v3802_s. These errors are due to the input of a negative outstanding for one of the banking counterparts, corresponding to a creditor nostro balance.Our question is how to fill in the LE3 template in this situation ?

  • 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)

C 22.00 (Market Risk FX) - Scope of Memorandum Items

Please clarify whether the Memorandum Items on COREP template C 22.00 (Market Risk FX) which are to be reported on rows 130 and below should include all of an institution's gross and net FX positions, regardless of the approach used for capital requirements of these positions. Please also clarify whether these items should be reported by all institutions with the relevant COREP reporting requirement, or only by those institutions which meet (i.e. exceed) the 'de minimis' threshold defined in Article 351 CRR.

  • 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)

Inconsistency between Annex II C 14.00, column 190 and DTS categorisation of COREP C 14.00, ei86 measure.

In return C 14.00, the Annex II states that ‘If no country exceeds a 20 % threshold based on the amount of assets/liabilities, then ‘OT’ (other) shall be reported.’This would imply that ei86 must report ‘OT’ value.Measure ei86 has link to GA domain, GA4 hierarchy.The GA4 doesn't contain ‘OT’ member. It contains eba_x28 - Other Countries member.We believe there to be an inconsistency between the GA4 hierarchy and the Annex II.

  • 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)

Consideration and representation within the LE templates in case of existing indirect exposure resulting out of credit risk mitigation (CRM) – here unfunded credit protection under a guarantee between two partners within a Group of connected clients (GCC).

In case of large exposures to a Central Government (SOV) which is part of a Group of Connected Clients (GCC) according to CRR Art. 4 para 1 (39) and reported as explained in the Q&A 2013_681 (separate aggregation of the SOV and each GCC), in which way would be a guarantee considered if the SOV is the guarantor of the entity A and they are both part of the same GCC?We see the following options:the indirect exposure towards the SOV is reported for each Group of connected clients (e.g. GCC1 consisting of SOV and entity A and GCC2 consisting of SOV and entity B) and the direct exposure and the effect from credit risk mitigation is reported only to entity A;in this case there is double counting of the exposure (SOV+A) when calculating the original exposure and the exposure before CRM and exemptions of the GCC;the indirect exposure towards the SOV is reported for each Group of connected clients (e.g. GCC1 consisting of SOV and entity A and GCC2 consisting of SOV and entity B) and the direct exposure to A is omitted (being part of the same GCC): in this case there is no double counting of the exposure (only exposure to SOV);the indirect exposure towards the SOV is not reported at all while the direct exposure to A is reported (out of the existing intragroup guarantee there is no effect from CRM): in this case there is no double counting of the exposure (only direct exposure to A).

  • 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)

Definition of encumbrance relating to retained interest of the issuer of securitisations

Does the ‘underlying retained securities’ of a securitization position include retained interest of the issuer as defined in article 405 of CRR? Does the retained interest of the issuer shall be considered as encumbered?

  • 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)

Reporting of own funds requirements for non-continuous options

Where do own funds requirements for non-delta risks related to non-continuous options have to be reported, if the institution applies the delta plus approach?

  • 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)

Asset Encumbrance Reporting for firms with Accounting Reference Date other than 31 December

Article 2(3) of the ITS on Supervisory Reporting allows the uniform reporting and remittance dates for reporting financial information (i.e. FINREP) to be adjusted where institutions are permitted by national laws to report their financial information based on their accounting year-end which deviates from the calendar year (this was also clarified in the response to Q&A 147). The supervisory reporting templates on Asset Encumbrance follow, from a methodological point of view, FINREP and the current ITS also includes some cross validation checks between certain data points in FINREP and the AE templates.In this regard, can the same flexibility with the reporting and remittance dates (in Article 2(3) of the ITS on Supervisory Reporting) provided to institutions that have an accounting year-end which deviates from the calendar year in terms of reporting FINREP also be extended to the reporting of the Asset Encumbrance templates?

  • 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)

LE reporting - reporting of exposures exempted under Article 400(1)(c) - exposures carrying explicit guarantees of central governments

What is the correct reporting of an exposure to company A if this exposure is guaranteed by the explicit guarantee by central government (this central government with 0% RW) - such exposure is subject to an exemption under Article 400(1)(c)?

  • 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)

FINREP, F 31.02 vs F 02.00 – dividend income from joint ventures and associates

Could you clarify the inconsistency between the references of template F 31.02 (IAS24) and the instructions and deactivate the validation rule v1374_m, or if not, clarify the reasons of this one?

  • 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)

FINREP Templates F 30.01 and F 30.02, validation v1019_m

For interests in unconsolidated structured entities for which no liquidity support is drawn, what is the treatment for validation v1019_m?

  • 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)

Inconsistency between validation rules and ITS/CRR for C 07.00

Why is there an inconsistency between the provisions of the CRR / the ITS on Reporting and several validation rules (e4891_n // e4894_n)?

  • 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)

Validation rules v2815_m, v2821_m vs. FINREP / AE instructions

Validation rules v2815_m and v2821_m imply that customer loans on demand are reported in different rows in the Asset Encumbrance template F 32.01.Our understanding of FINREP and AE instructions differs as follows:In Asset Encumbrance template F 32.01, all loans on demand are reported in row 020 ‘Loans on demand’, whether they are due from credit institutions or customers. In French accounting (PCEC), credit institution loans on demand are classified in class of accounts 1, and customer loans on demand in class of accounts 2.In FINREP template F 01.01, class 1 loans on demand are reported in row 030 ‘Cash balances at central banks’ and class 2 loans on demand in row 200 ‘Loans and advances’.We believe validation rules v2815_m and v2821_m are inconsistent with FINREP and AE instructions on customer loans on demand.

  • 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)

FINREP, F 08.01: Breakdown of financial liabilities, amount contractually required to pay at maturity

We need a clarification regarding FINREP template F 08.01 Breakdown of financial liabilities by product and by counterparty sector, column 050 (Amount contractually required to pay at maturity). It is not clear which types of deposit liabilities (overnight deposits, deposits with agreed maturity, deposits redeemable at notice and repurchase agreements (repos)) are required to be included in this column. Does FINREP template F 08.01, column 050 refer to all of the four aforementioned deposit types or only those ‘deposits with agreed maturity’ and ‘repurchase agreements (repos)’? IF we are to include all four types of deposits, it is not clear what maturity date to use for overnight deposits and deposits redeemable at notice.

  • 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)