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

C14.00 - v7364_m - Type of Assets (column 0160)

The EBA Validation Rule v7364_m states that: For securitization programs qualified for differentiated capital treatment and classified as traditional (and Non NPE), synthetic or ABCP, then the asset class of the portfolio (C14.00 - c0160) must be “Loans to SME (treated as corporate)” or “Loans to SME (treated as retail). Should this control be applicable?

  • 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

Template C 14.00 - Validation rule v11661_m - ({C 14.00, c0231} >= {C 14.00, c0251}) or ({C 14.00, c0265} >= {C 14.00, c0251}) - If value missing (but table prerequisites met) “treat as zero/empty string”, Template C 13.01 – Validation rule v7430_m - {c0710} = {c0720} + {c0740} + {c0760} + {c0830} + {c0850}

Range of applicability of validation rules v11661_m and v7430_m in force starting from June 2023 with DPM 3.2.

  • 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

Loan collateralized by commercial/residential immovable property in CRR Pillar 3 Template 2 and Template 5

What should be included in the line item "loan collateralized by commercial/residential immovable property" in CRR Pillar 3 Template 2 and Template 5?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2022/2453 - ITS on ESG disclosures

Reference of the cells and reports layouts to use for the public disclosures (NOT the XBRL reporting)

Question 1: What are the cells references that must be publicly disclosed into annual and semiannual public disclosures: the reference of the cells from the ITS or the references of the cells from the XBRL? Question 2: What are the reports layouts that must be publicly disclosed into annual and semiannual public disclosures: the layout from the ITS or the layout from the XBRL?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2022/2453 - ITS on ESG disclosures

Template 1 - exposures towards companies excluded from EU Paris-aligned Benchmarks

Should the EU Paris-aligned Benchmarks exclusion criteria be applied at consolidated group level and to that end, exclude the total gross carrying amount of the exposure towards the consolidated group level?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2022/2453 - ITS on ESG disclosures

Template 3: Banking book - Indicators of potential climate change transition risk: Alignment metrics

In relation to the minimum ‘list of NACE sectors to be considered’ in template 3, when detailed assumptions/ specific scenarios are not available on the IEA website for one of the NACE codes included in the “the minimum ‘list of NACE sectors to be considered’” (e.g. 29.32 Manufacture of other parts and accessories for motor vehicles), should it be left blank in the template?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2022/2453 - ITS on ESG disclosures

Template 2 - EBA val rules and Column 0160 Of which level of energy efficiency EP score in kWh_m of collateral estimate

Question 1: Are the validation rules v16092_m; v16090_m; v16088_m; v16086_m; v16084_m;v16082_m; v16080_m; v16078_m; v16049_m correctly defined?    Question 2:  How to deal with exposure for which and EPC is available, but the Level of energy efficiency (EP score in kWh/m² of collateral) is absent from the EPC?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2022/2453 - ITS on ESG disclosures

Permission to reduce AT1, Tier 2 or eligible liabilities instruments and deduction rules in the context of a liability management exercise without replacement.

When should deductions from own funds and eligible liabilities be applied in the context of a liability management exercise without replacement (i.e. a tender offer)? When can the unredeemed part of own funds or eligible liabilities be included in own funds or eligible liabilities again?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 241/2014 - RTS for Own Funds requirements for institutions

Template 3: Banking book - Indicators of potential climate change transition risk: Alignment metrics

1.           Should the year of reference column refer to the year for which the latest emission intensities are available for a specific sector included in the template? 2.           Could you please confirm if alignment metrics should be calculated based on actual gross carrying amount (column c) in combination with the latest emission intensity information that is available for the specific sector?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2022/2453 - ITS on ESG disclosures

Sum of breakdowns in Template 1 (financed emissions)

Should the sum of NACE sub-sectors for GHG financed emissions in columns i and j of Template 1 be equal to the total GHG financed emissions for that NACE sector?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2022/2453 - ITS on ESG disclosures

Template 1 – Equity instruments

The instructions state “Institutions shall disclose the gross carrying amount, referred to in Part 1 of Annex V to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/451, of those exposures towards non-financial corporates, including loans and advances, debt securities and equity instruments, classified in the accounting portfolios in the banking book in accordance with that Implementing Regulation, excluding financial assets held for trading or held for sale assets”.In this case, should the definition of equity instruments also include investments in subsidiaries, joint ventures and associates, or should entities consider the definition of accounting portfolios of financial instruments provided by Annex V of FINREP, which specifically excludes investments in subsidiaries, joint ventures and associates?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2022/2453 - ITS on ESG disclosures

Disclosure of transactions with zero exposure value

Under Article 274(5) and 273 there are circumstances where transactions may have a zero exposure value e.g. netting sets made up entirely of written options or certain CDS transactions. Should these be reported in the C34.02 with values in columns 0020-0140 and then have c0150 onwards set to 0 (or c0170 onwards?) or should they be disregarded from population of values in any columns as there is no requirement to calculate exposure for these transactions. Similarly should they be included in the same C34.03 columns?

  • 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

ITS ESG P3 - Template 2 - Should loan/collateral ratio (loan-to-value) be taken into account?

We have interpreted column a in Template 2 to be filled in with the gross carrying amount of the loan collateralized with commercial and residential immovable property and of repossessed real estate collaterals. What if the collateral value is less than the gross carrying amount of the loan? Should we in this case fill in the gross carrying amount of the loan or use the amount of the loan that is actually collateralized with commercial/residential immovable property in Template 2? 

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2022/2453 - ITS on ESG disclosures

Discrepancy between definition of ‘investment holding company’ and ‘consolidated situation.’

Could a financial institution the subsidiaries of which are mainly tied agents or ancillary services undertakings, but which also has at least one investment firm as subsidiary, be considered an  investment holding company as referred to in Article 4(1)(23) IFR?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 2019/2033 (IFR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

Minimum loss coverage for non-performing exposures under Article 469a

In case a default occurred on a debt obligation originated before 26 April 2019, and if the originating bank grants the defaulted obligor a forbearance measure in the form of a partial refinancing of a debt obligation to cover past due payments on the original debt obligation and thus effectively increases the bank’s total exposure towards the obligor, will the original debt obligation, which has not been increased, cease to be subject to the derogation provided for in Article 469a(1) CRR?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

Allocating exposures into the correct vintage buckets of the „NPL-backstop“ acc. to Art. 47c CRR applying Art. 469a CRR

For exposures classified as non-performing prior to 26 April 2019 and not exempt from the deductions from CET1 items for non-performing exposures acc. to Art. 36 (1)(m) applying the second subparagraph of Art. 469a CRR, which date should be considered when allocating those exposures into the vintage buckets of the “NPL-backstop” in COREP template C 35.01 to C 35.03 in order to determine the applicable amount of insufficient coverage for non-performing exposures acc. Art. 36 (1)(m) in conjunction with Art. 47c CRR: Is it the date on which the exposures were originally classified as non- performing, as it is with purchased non-performing exposures (see EBA ITS regarding C 35.01 c0010 - c0100) – in the example above a date prior to 26 April 2019? Or is it the date on which the criteria of the second subparagraph Art. 469a CRR (terms and conditions of the exposure - originated prior to 26 April 2019 - were modified by the institution in a way that increases the institution’s exposure to the obligor) were fulfilled and therefore the exposure shall be considered as having been originated on the date when the modification applies?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable

Treatment of intragroup liabilities when one of the institutions is established in a country being a member of EEA and EFTA (i.e. non-EU Member State but EEA Member State)

Should, according to Article 5(1)(a) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/63, intragroup liabilities be deducted from the contribution base when one side of the transaction is an institution established in a country being a member of the EEA and EFTA (e.g. Norway)? If so, from which date such deductions shall be applied?

  • Legal act: Directive 2014/59/EU (BRRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/63 - DR on ex ante contributions to resolution financing arrangements

Eligibility of communication by AISPs with ASPSP throughout two access interfaces in parallel

Question no 1: Do art. 30(1), art. 31 and art. 33 of the Commision Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/389 of 27 November 2017 supplementing Directive (EU) 2015/2366 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to regulatory technical standards for strong customer authentication and common and secure open standards of communication (”RTS”) should be interpreted in that manner, that in scenario, where account servicing payment service provider (”ASPSP”) has introduced a so-called dedicated interface within a meaning of art. 31 RTS, which meets requirements provided for in art. 32 and 33 RTS, than ASPSP has a right and it is up to ASPSP’s sole discretion, whether, for purposes of communication with account information service providers (”AISPs”), to: make available to AISPs, in parallel, two access interfaces, as referred to in art. 31 RTS (i.e. dedicated interface and interface made available to the payment service users for the authentication and communication with their ASPSPs); or make available to AISPs only dedicated interface (without prejudice to, among others, contingency measures set forth in art. 33 RTS)? Question no 2: If answer to question no 1 is that in scenario of introduction by ASPSP of dedicated interface, ASPSP has a right and it is up to ASPSP’s sole discretion to make available to AISPs, in parallel, two access interfaces, as referred to in art. 31 RTS (i.e. dedicated interface and interface made available to the payment service users for the authentication and communication with their ASPSPs), does this mean that AISPs, with observation of further requirements set forth in art. 30, art. 34 and art. 35 RTS, might communicate with this ASPSP, in parallel, throughout both access interfaces? Question no 3: If answer to question no 1 is that in scenario of introduction by ASPSP of dedicated interface, ASPSP has no right and it is not up to ASPSP’s sole discretion to make available to AISPs, in parallel, two access interfaces, as referred to in art. 31 RTS, i.e. a contrario ASPSP is allowed to make available to AISPs only dedicated interface (without prejudice to, among others, contingency measures set forth in art. 33 RTS), does ASPSP is under obligement to engange necessary and proportional measures, including technical measures, for AISPs to communicate with ASPSP only via dedicated interface, i.e. with exclusion of interface made available to the payment service users for the authentication and communication with their ASPSPs? Question no 4: If answer to question no 1 is that in scenario of introduction by ASPSP of dedicated interface, ASPSP has no right and it is not up to ASPSP’s sole discretion to make available to AISPs, in parallel, two access interfaces, as referred to in art. 31 RTS, i.e. a contrario ASPSP is allowed to make available to AISPs only dedicated interface (without prejudice to, among others, contingency measures as set forth in art. 33 RTS) but nevertheless ASPSP has not engange necessary and proportional measures, including technical measures, for AISPs to communicate with ASPSP only via dedicated interface, i.e. with exclusion of interface made available to the payment service users for the authentication and communication with their ASPSPs, does this fact in any measure reflects AISPs right to communicate with this ASPSP throughout both access interfaces, or whether AISPs should undertake any additional actions, and if yes, what kind of actions?

  • 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

Template F 16.01 validation rule v5693_s

Is it possible to report negative income from General Government debt securities in F 16?

  • 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

Determination of exposure value cap for netting sets subject to a margin agreement.

CRR Art. 274 (3) states that the exposure value of a netting set that is subject to a margin agreement may be capped at the exposure value of the same netting set assuming it would not be subject to a margin agreement. In this context the question arises if variation margin that the institution has already received or posted should be disregarded in order to determine this cap.  

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable