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

FORBERANCE CLASSIFICATION

For forborne exposures under probation which, at the time of the initial concession, were performing, if a new measure is granted after 1 year and a half, during which the client has fulfilled points c) and d) of standard 176 when it is still within the probation period, and if the bank, on the basis of its own independent evaluation, does not reclassify the client (see Q&A EBA 2013_618 and 2014_736), is the period of 2 years for exiting the probation period counted again from scratch?Nel caso di una esposizione forbone under probation, che nel momento della prima concessione era performing, se una nuova misura viene concessa dopo 1 anno e mezzo durante il quale il cliente ha rispettato i punti c) e d) dello standard 176, quando è ancora in vigore il periodo probatorio, e se la banca in virtù della propria autonoma valutazione non riclassifica il cliente (vedi Q&A EBA 2013_618 e 2014_736) il conteggio dei 2 anni per l’uscita dal periodo probatorio, riparte da zero?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Draft ITS on Supervisory Reporting of Institutions
  • ID: 2015_1842
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - FINREP (incl. FB&NPE)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 19/03/2021

Sign convention for “Credit risk adjustments during the current period” {C14.00 c225} and definition of "current period".

The sign convention that should be followed to report credit risk adjustments in column 225 of C14.00 is not clear. In the same way, the “current period” should be further specified.

  • 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: 2020_5421
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - COREP (incl. IP Losses)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 19/03/2021

Sign Convention

Column 030 in C 07.00 (-) VALUE ADJUSTMENTS AND PROVISIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE ORIGINAL EXPOSURE) has negative sign, while in C 09.01 columns 050to 070 has (+) sign convention. We would like to know that what is the rationale behind having different sign convention for same fact?

  • 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: 2014_1625
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - COREP (incl. IP Losses)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 19/03/2021

EBA validation rule v7365_m

Is v7365_m stating that for the C14.00 if ({c040} = [eba_RT:x10] or {c040} = [eba_RT:x11]) then {c140} <= {c130} 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)
  • ID: 2020_5402
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - COREP (incl. IP Losses)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 19/03/2021

Amended ranking requirement in point (d) of Article 63 of the CRR

Which interpretation of the new requirement in point (d) of Article 63 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR), as amended by Regulation (EU) 2019/876 is correct?Do all banks need to amend the T&Cs of their Tier 2 instruments due to the new wording of point (d) of Article 63 of the CRR in order to be CRR-compliant (considering that there is no respective grandfathering provision in the CRR)? orDo banks for which the resolution authority does not set a subordination requirement with respect to MREL or banks for which the MREL requirement consists solely of the loss absorption amount (as the respective bank is to be wound up under normal insolvency proceedings and not subject to resolution) remain compliant with the new wording in point (d) of Article 63 of the CRR without the need to amend their respective T&Cs?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2019_4950
  • Topic: Own funds
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 12/03/2021

Grandfathering according to Articles 494a and 494b of the CRR

Should Article 494a(1) and (2) of the CRR also cover points (p), (q), and (r) of Article 52(1) and points (n), (o) and (p) of Article 63, respectively?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2019_4949
  • Topic: Own funds
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 12/03/2021

Minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL) - Waivers

Are the conditions of Article 45f(4) (or (3), depending on the case) exhaustive? In other terms, when assessing a request to waive an individual MREL requirement under Article 45f(4) (or (3) depending on the case) of BRRD, is the resolution authority required to assess only the conditions set out in the relevant paragraph (s), or is it allowed to require, in its policies and procedures, the fulfilment of other additional conditions?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2019_5009
  • Topic: MREL
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 12/03/2021

Minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL) - Calibration

When setting a recapitalisation amount enabling the “resolution group resulting from resolution” to meet its prudential requirements “after the implementation of the preferred resolution strategy”, should the resolution authority consider the changes resulting from the whole sequence of actions which implements the preferred resolution strategy, irrespective of the point in time when they are likely to be taken, or only changes resulting from those actions implemented after entry into the formal resolution phase (post-Failing-Or-Likely-To Fail - FOLTF)?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2019_4901
  • Topic: MREL
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 12/03/2021

Type of accounts accessible through common and secure communication

Should credit lines (namely “credit cards accounts”), accessible online, be available to Account Information Service Provider (AISP), Payment Initiation Service Provider (PISP) and Card Based Payment Instrument Issuer (CBPII)?

  • Legal act: Directive 2015/2366/EU (PSD2)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2019_4856
  • Topic: Strong customer authentication and common and secure communication (incl. access)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 12/03/2021

Payment accounts and reference accounts

Are payment accounts, which are coupled with a reference account, in scope of PSD2 especially Regulation (EU) 2018/389 – RTS on strong customer authentication (SCA) and secure communication (CSC)?

  • Legal act: Directive 2015/2366/EU (PSD2)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2018/389 - RTS on strong customer authentication and secure communication
  • ID: 2018_4272
  • Topic: Strong customer authentication and common and secure communication (incl. access)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 12/03/2021

Minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL) – Transitional periods

1) Can resolution authorities set transition periods with an end-date before 1 January 2024?2) Can resolution authorities set a transition period with an end-date before 1 January 2022 (date referred to in the context of the "intermediate target" introduced in the legislation?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2019_4861
  • Topic: MREL
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 12/03/2021

Credit value date for payment transactions with currency conversion

As a credit entry on an account is possible only in the currency the account is maintained, does this mean that for a payment transaction the credit value date for the payee's account is no later than the business day on which the amount in the payee's account currency is credited to the payee's payment service provider's account?

  • Legal act: Directive 2015/2366/EU (PSD2)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2018_4150
  • Topic: Other topics
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 12/03/2021

Sanctions list screening in the context of TPPs' services - risk management policy

Is the Account Servicing Payment Service Provider (ASPSP) obliged to recognise if a Third Party Payment Service Providers (TPP) is named on a sanctions list or even take some actions when the TPP becomes a designated entity? How the prohibition of directly or indirectly making funds or economic resources available to designated persons and entities is defined in this context?

  • Legal act: Directive 2015/2366/EU (PSD2)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2018_4117
  • Topic: Strong customer authentication and common and secure communication (incl. access)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 12/03/2021

On the application of SCA when cancelling a payment transaction

Should Account Servicing Payment Service Providers (ASPSPs) apply strong customer authentication (SCA) when cancelling recurring transactions?

  • Legal act: Directive 2015/2366/EU (PSD2)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2018_4083
  • Topic: Other topics
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 12/03/2021

On the use and storage of Personalised Security Credentials (PSC)

Do third party providers (TPPs) have the right to ask for payment service users (PSUs)' Personalised Security Credentials (PSC)?Do TPPs have the right to store PSUs' PSC ?

  • Legal act: Directive 2015/2366/EU (PSD2)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2018/389 - RTS on strong customer authentication and secure communication
  • ID: 2018_4077
  • Topic: Strong customer authentication and common and secure communication (incl. access)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 12/03/2021

Minority Interests and guidance on additional own funds (P2G)

Should the guidance on additional own funds be taken into account in the quantification of the minority interests of a subsidiary that is included in an institution`s consolidated CET1 capital according to Article 84(1) CRR?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2018_3658
  • Topic: Own funds
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 12/03/2021

Consumer mandate under Merchant Initiated Transactions

Terms and Conditions to outline future charges (under Merchant Initiated Transactions (MITs)) may be disclosed by the booking entity (such as online travel agent or brand/hotel group) instead of the hotel merchant. Does the consumer acknowledgement of these terms through a party other than the merchant (in this case, the hotel) meet the MIT requirement? Will the merchant in this situation continue to be the hotel, instead of the intermediary?

  • Legal act: Directive 2015/2366/EU (PSD2)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2018/389 - RTS on strong customer authentication and secure communication
  • ID: 2019_4794
  • Topic: Strong customer authentication and common and secure communication (incl. access)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 12/03/2021

Merchant Initiated Transactions exemption for hotel transactions

For the following scenarios, does digital acknowledgement by the consumer at time of booking that subsequent charges may be collected adequately meet the requirement for Merchant Initiated Transactions if SCA is also taken at time of booking:i. total room charges and applicable taxes disclosed to the consumer when a prepaid rate has been selected.ii. deposit amount disclosed to the consumer when the reservation requires payment of a deposit to guarantee the booked room and/or dates.iii. disclosed late cancellation or no-show fee incurred by the consumer if the consumer fails to cancel their reservation per the disclosed cancellation policy.iv. disclosed descriptions of types of charges that will be processed by the hotel merchant if incurred after payment for the stay has been settled. Examples include but are not limited to charge-to-room meals, spa treatments, retail purchases, mini-bar consumption identified by housekeeping and room damage.

  • Legal act: Directive 2015/2366/EU (PSD2)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2018/389 - RTS on strong customer authentication and secure communication
  • ID: 2019_4792
  • Topic: Strong customer authentication and common and secure communication (incl. access)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 12/03/2021

Processing payments for hotel reservations

Can hotels continue to process payments for which strong customer authentication (SCA) has not been completed at the time of reservation, or for charges which do not become apparent until after the customer has departed the hotel and for which he/she may refuse to conclude a first or additional SCA?

  • Legal act: Directive 2015/2366/EU (PSD2)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2018/389 - RTS on strong customer authentication and secure communication
  • ID: 2019_4791
  • Topic: Strong customer authentication and common and secure communication (incl. access)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as final Q&A: 12/03/2021