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

Retroactivity concerning customer consent for data sharing and processing

Is there the expectation that such consent clauses, under Article 4 of the Delegated Regulation, be incorporated into contracts on a go-forward basis from the date the Regulation entered into force (i.e. with new customers and existing customer contract renewals) or is there the expectation that all existing customer contracts will be remediated to meet this requirement? What approach should be used with former customers?

  • Legal act: Directive (EU) 2015/849 (AMLD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2019/758 – RTS on implementation of group wide AML/CFT policies in third countries

Absolute materiality threshold for Retail based on the new RTS

How to apply Article 123(c) CRR to set the absolute component of the materiality threshold in the case of transition of exposures to or from Retail.

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: EBA/GL/2016/07 - Guidelines on the application of the definition of default under Article 178 CRR

Retail Classification

Retail classification if an obligor has exposure under both the STA and IRB approach. This question is relevant for banks that are partially using the SA and partially using the IRB approach and where the use of the different methods is on the basis of the product type i.e. mortgages are under IRB, other Retail loans under SA. Article 123 allows for the exclusion of exposures fully and completely secured on residential property that have been assigned to the exposure class laid down in point (i) of Article 112 (exposures secured by mortgages on immovable property) when calculating the total amount owed the institution.

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

Authorisation for the provision of PIS and AIS on behalf of other legal entities belonging to the same corporate group / Autorizzazione ad offrire servizi di PIS e AIS per conto di altre Legal Entity appartenenti allo stesso Gruppo societario

In a corporate group which is not listed in the register of banking groups and in which there is both an electronic money institution and a credit institution, can the electronic money institution offer payment initiation services (PIS) and account information services (AIS), including on behalf of the group’s credit institution that also provides the same service? Must the electronic money institution as a service provider offering PIS and AIS to clients of the group’s credit institution provide its own certificate, the group certificate, or the credit institution’s certificate to the other account servicing payment service providers (ASPSPs)? Or, as it is merely a service provider, is it the credit institution’s certificate that should be displayed? Can a corporate group request a group certificate to provide to the other ASPSPs and/or third party providers (TPPs)? *** IT:  In un Gruppo societario, che non è iscritto al registro dei Gruppi Bancari e al cui interno sono presenti sia un Istituto di moneta elettronica che un Ente creditizio, l’Istituto di moneta elettronica può offrire i servizi di PIS e AIS, anche per conto dell’Ente creditizio del Gruppo in qualità di fornitore del servizio stesso? L’Istituto di moneta elettronica che offre i servizi di PIS e AIS ai clienti dell’Ente creditizio di Gruppo, in qualità di fornitore del servizio, si deve presentare verso gli altri ASPSP con il proprio certificato, con il certificato di Gruppo oppure con il certificato dell’Ente creditizio? O in quanto mero fornitore del servizio, il certificato da esporre è quello dell’Ente creditizio? Un Gruppo societario può richiedere un certificato di Gruppo per presentarsi alle altre ASPSP e/o TPP?

  • 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

Losses due to fraud per liability bearer / Perdite dovute a frode per portatore di responsabilità

Please clarify the requirement in guideline 1.6 (b) of the EBA Guidelines on fraud reporting under PSD2 with regard to recognising losses due to fraud per liability bearer. *** IT: Si chiede cortesemente di chiarire il requisito espresso all'interno dell'orientamento 1.6(b) in materie di obblighi di segnalazione delle perdite dovute a frode per portatore di responsabilità

  • Legal act: Directive 2015/2366/EU (PSD2)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: EBA/GL/2018/05 - Guidelines on fraud reporting under PSD2 (amended by EBA/GL/2020/01)

SCA profiles and multiple-use of devices

Can multiple users use the same device (i.e. smartphone) and have different strong customer authentication (SCA) profiles on the same device?

  • 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

Relying on vendor mechanisms processing the biometric data for strong customer authentication; Multiple fingerprint samples stored on a mobile device and used for purpose of user authentication.

Are the obligations of a payment service provider (PSP) laid down in the Article 8 of RTS on strong customer authentication and secure communication fulfilled in case the biometric credentials of customer are stored at the device level and the strong customer authentication itself is processed by the mobile device? In this context, are the obligations of the PSP laid down in Article 8 and 24 of RTS on Strong Customer Authentication fulfilled in case the mobile device stores multiple fingerprint samples for user authentication?

  • 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

Delayed or deferred PIN for wearable devices

Is the PIN entered when the cardholder takes on wearable device on, still valid as a knowledge element for one or several transactions later the same day, if it can be ensured that the device has not been taken off?

  • 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

Whitelisting

Will a clearing house for distribution be enabled to facilitate the on-going maintenance of the whitelisting process?

  • 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

Failed Authentication Code

Please clarify under what circumstances Article 4 Paragraph 3(a) of the Regulation (EU) 2018/389 – RTS on SCA and SC might it be impossible to apply in remote authentication where SMS based One time passwords (OTPs) are used as the authentication method.

  • 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

Authentication code

Is an extra strong customer authentication (SCA) required, after logging in (with or without SCA) in the mobile application, to initiate the provisioning step to add the customers card to a third party wallet (e.g. Apple or Google pay)?

  • 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

SCA for contactless payments at a POS executed via a mobile device

1) Can we consider the strong customer authentication (SCA) outsourced from the issuer of cards to the payer? 2) Is it necessary for the issuer of the cards to perform SCA based on the elements of identification that are beyond its control?

  • 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

"Push based" authentication and SCA requirements

Does "push based" authentication fall in the Strong customer authentication (SCA) requirements, based on the security risks "push authentication" poses?

  • 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

Treatment of secured lending or capital market-driven transactions that would require an outflow rate higher than 25 % but they have been closed with eligible counterparties

Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/1620 in article 1 (17) (a) states that a 25% outflow rate has to be applied to secured lending or capital market-driven transactions, closed with eligible counterparties, that would require an outflow rate higher than 25 %. Based on the new LCR Templates published on EBA websites and Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/1620, it’s not clear in which row these transactions should be reported. Could you provide some instructions for the right reporting?

  • 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)

Treatment of Central Bank Overnight deposits in ALMM Template C71

Should central bank fixed term overnight deposits be included within ALMM Template C71 Row 120 "ALL OTHER ITEMS USED AS COUNTERBALANCING CAPACITY"?

  • 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)

C66: undrawn ECB open market operations backed with pre-positioned own issuances (retained CB or ABS) as “Undrawn committed facilities received”.

In the specific case of own issued (Retained Covered Bonds or ABS) pre-positioned assets in collateral pools with the Central Bank. Can the amount of additional funding that could be obtained out of such pre-positioned assets be reported in the counterbalancing section of C66 template in the row 1000 as “Undrawn committed facilities received”? In particular, undrawn part of ECB open market operations backed but those assets.

  • 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)

EBA validations rules for DPM 2.8 with reference to rule V3975_S.

According Q&A 2014_1203, interest income/expenses generated by hedge accounting derivatives used to hedge interest risk shall be presented "according to the contribution of the hedged instrument to profit or loss, i.e. in the column corresponding to the interest expenses / income of the hedged instrument, and therefore, with a negative sign. Validation rules v3900_s and v5693_s have been demoted non-blocking also to allow for that treatment." The Q&A 2014_1203 refers to templates F02.00 “Statement of profit or loss” (rows 070 and 130) and F16.01 “Interest income and expenses by instrument and counterparty sector” (row 250), but does not consider the template F 31.2 “Related parties: expenses and income generated by transactions with” (rows 010 and 020, column 010).

  • 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)

The additional column C015 “Code” to template C 67.00 contains ambiguity in the Annex IV guidance under the ITS to be implemented at Mar-20: 1.2.8.015 “This code is a row identifier and shall be unique for each row in the template”. It is unclear what identifiers are required in column C015.

The additional column C015 “Code” to template C 67.00 contains ambiguity in the Annex IV guidance under the ITS to be implemented at Mar-20: 1.2.8.015 “This code is a row identifier and shall be unique for each row in the template”. It is unclear what identifiers are required in column C015. The annotated template released in DPM 2.9.1 under ‘Changes compared to previous version phase 2.9.1’ for COREP states that “Metric = (si289) Entity code [si]”. However the guidance does not specify what this entity code is required to be, and the cell appears to require a free-text value (si289 does not appear to be included in the list of values in the 2.9.1 release documentation). In final ITS 2019/01 “Final Report on Draft Implementing Standards amending Implementing Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 with regard to COREP” and the associated Annex IV “Instructions for completing the additional monitoring tools template of Annex XVIII” a new column is added to C 67.00 (C015 “Code”) – what values are required to be populated in this column?

  • 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)

Treatment of fiduciary assets for the purpose of asset encumbrance reporting

Do fiduciary assets have to be included in asset encumbrance reporting?

  • 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)

Failed validation checks due to the implementation of a new separate line item ‘cash contributions to resolution funds and deposit guarantee schemes’ (r385) in template F 02.00 and missing consistent change in template F 20.03 under DPM 2.9

Regardless of an institution’s view on the nature of cash contributions to resolution funds and deposit guarantee schemes in the financial statements, the introduction of a new separate line item ‘cash contributions to resolution funds and deposit guarantee schemes’ (r385) in template F 02.00 under DPM 2.9 combined with an unchanged template F 20.03 leads to a break of blocking validation rules. That shows the need for further guidance or requires an adjustment of template F 20.03 in conformity with the structure of template F 02.00 regarding single line items and totals items.

  • 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)