Path to Effective Supervision – Convergence of Practices in Europe
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 2
Outline
• Drivers for change in banking supervision
• Basel II implementation in Europe
• CEBS' role and tasks
• Challenges for the supervision of cross-border groups
• CEBS’ response: examples– Supervisory disclosure
– Enhanced co-operation between home and host supervisors
– Supervisory Review Process (Pillar 2)
– Common reporting
• Creating European supervisory culture
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 3
Drivers for change in the EU banking supervision
• Banking market: • Cross-border activity• Consolidation• Centralisation of business functions at group level• Outsourcing of activities• Diversity of banking structures
• Regulatory framework: • Basel II (CRD) risk-focused supervision• IAS/IFRS new standards, with impact on
supervisory tools• Post FSAP implementation and convergence of
practices
Response: the Lamfalussy process
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 4
CEBS’ role and focus
EBC¹
Commission Parliament
EIOPC¹ ESC¹ EFCC¹
Enforcement Commission
Council
CEIOPS³ CESR³
L1
L2
L3
L4
CEBS²
EBC = European Banking CommitteeEIOPC = European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Committee ESC = European Securities CommitteeFCC = Financial Conglomerates CommitteeCEIOPS = Committee of European Insurance and Occupational Pensions SupervisorsCESR = Committee of European Securities Regulators
¹ Finance ministries ² Supervisors and Central Banks³ Supervisors
Framework legislation
Implementing details
Convergence
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 5
Basel II implementation
in Europe
5
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 6
Implementation in the EU
• Legal instrument to transpose Basel II to European legislation: Capital Requirements Directive (CRD).
• Across all 25 EU countries (and 3 EEA countries); 8300 banks and more than 40 cross-border groups
• Importance of the scope: The directive will apply to all credit institutions and investment firms.
• CEBS guidelines for consistent implementation and convergence of supervisory practices
Basel II – a global agreement
The CRD – European legislation
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 7
Implementation in the EU
• Basel II: three pillars with checks and balances
• Complex in detail but clear purpose and architecture
• Based on the best practices of the industry => efficient regulation from an economic perspective
• Flexible framework for small and big banks
• QIS 5
• The CRD from January 2007
3 pillars
Minimum Capital
Requirements
Regulatory view
Supervisory review and evaluation
(SREP)+
Banks’ internal view (ICAAP)
Market discipline
Market view
Credit riskMarket riskOperational
risk
Supervisory judgment
Disclosure requirements
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 8
Implementation in the EU
• Recognises and encourages developments in risk management and supervisory practices
• Incentives for all institutions to adopt more sophisticated approaches
• A good business tool with business value (not just costs!)
Capital adequacy requirements
Internal controls,
reporting, audit and contingency
planning
The board and senior
management
Risk management
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 9
CEBS – role and tasks
9
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 10
CEBS’ role and tasks
Main tasks:
– to give advice to the Commission
– to promote consistent implementation of EU legislation
– to enhance convergence of supervisory practices
Objectives:
Promoting cross-border supervisory co-operation and the safety and soundness of the EU financial system through:
– good supervisory practices
– efficient and cost-effective approaches to supervision of cross-border groups
– effective regulation
– level playing field and proportionality
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 11
CEBS role and tasks
CEBS focus on:
• Consistent implementation and convergence of supervisory practices (Level 3)
• Prudential issues, in particular Capital Requirements Directive (CRD)
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 12
Work Programme
Priority areas of work
Regulatory advice to the CommissionOwn funds, large exposures; possibly follow up on cross-border mergers and deposit guarantee schemes
Convergence of supervisory practiceSupervisory Review Process (Pillar 2)Validation of IRB and AMA systemsExternal Credit Assessment Institutions (ECAIs)Harmonisation of reporting requirements Supervisory disclosure
Co-operation and information exchangeSupervision of cross-border groups (home-host) Crisis management (joint with the BSC)Information exchange
Cross-sectoral issuesSupervision of financial conglomeratesOff-shore financial centresOutsourcing and internal governance
Other areas of work
Risks to banking stabilityOutsourcingInternal governanceImpact of IFRS on prudential requirementsThe role of the audit function for prudential supervision
Delivered products
Advice: national discretions (work continues), prudential filters, cross-border mergers, e-money, DGS
Consultation papers: consultation practices, outsourcing, supervisory review process, common reporting, financial reporting, validation, ECAIs, CEBS role and tasks, home host
Guidelines: Supervisory disclosure
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 13
Work programme
• Main priority for CEBS in 2006 is implementation of the Capital Requirements Directive
• Final guidelines on:
– Supervisory disclosure (tool to monitor implementation)
– Supervision of cross-border groups
– Validation of IRB and AMA systems
– Supervisory Review Process (Pillar 2)
– Common reporting frameworks (IFRS and solvency ratio)
– Recognition of External Credit Assessment Institutions (ECAIs)
• Consistent implementation and application
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 14
CEBS - toolbox
• Standards
• Guidelines
• Recommendations
• Public disclosure
• Training and staff exchange
Voluntary co-operation, unanimity
commitment from members toimplement common decisions
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 15
Challenges for the supervision of cross-border groups
15
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 16
Challenges for the supervision of cross-border groups
1) Potential divergence in implementation– National options and discretions– Additional layers of national rules (“goldplating”)– Different interpretations
2) Complex and possibly fragmented supervisory process – Misalignment of legal and operational structures in banking groups – Risk of overlapping or conflicting supervisory assessments– Validation of models and Art. 129– Supervisory Review Process (Pillar 2)
3) Administrative burden
– Compliance costs, large vs. small banks – Differences in supervisory reporting– Duplication of contacts
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 17
CEBS’ response
1) Potential divergence in implementation
supervisory disclosure
2) Complex and possibly fragmented supervisory process
enhanced home-host co-operation, Pillar 2
3) Administrative burden
common reporting requirements
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 18
Supervisory disclosure
18
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 19
CEBS’ response: supervisory disclosure
• Supervisors are required to publish (CRD Art. 144):– Rules and guidance
– How options and national discretions are exercised
– Supervisory review and evaluation
– Statistical data on key implementation issues
• Easy access and meaningful comparison peer group pressure– Internet access via CEBS website www.c-ebs.org
– Links to national websites
– Comparable information
– Common language - English
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 20
CEBS’ response: supervisory disclosure
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 21
Home-host co-operation
21
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 22
CEBS’ response: enhanced home-host co-operation
• CRD Art. 129 to 132, enhanced co-operation and role of the consolidating supervisor
• CEBS draft Guidelines, a practical framework for:
–Co-ordinated planning
–Structured exchange of information
–Avoidance of redundancies
–Optimal use of supervisory resources
• Concrete examples: risk assessment and validation
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 23
CEBS’ response: enhanced home-host co-operation
• The notion of significance and systemic relevance
• The process of information exchange
• The respect of the legal allocation of responsibilities
• Operational networks and delegation of tasks
• Transparency of the arrangements
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 24
Supervisory Review Process (Pillar 2)
24
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 25
Supervisory Review Process
Objectives of Pillar 2 are to:
• Ensure institutions have adequate capital to support all risks in their business
• Encourage institutions to manage risk and hold capital above Pillar 1 minimum requirements
• Foster an active dialogue between institutions and supervisors
• Covers the relationship between:
– Supervisor’s SREP (the Supervisory Review and Evaluation Process); and
– Institution’ ICAAP (the Internal Capital Adequacy Assessment Process)
Basel II
Minimum Capital
Requirements
Regulatory view
Supervisory review and evaluation
(SREP)+
Institutions’ internal view
(ICAAP)
Market discipline
Market view
Credit riskMarket riskOperational
risk
Supervisory judgment
Disclosure requirements
Banks and investment firms
Pillar 1 Pillar 2 Pillar 3
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 26
Supervisory Review Process
• Proportionality is the key:- For large complex institutions in-depth and “tailor-made”
- For smaller institutions likely to be quite standardised
- CEBS considering possible guidance for smaller institutions
• Second consultation finished in October
• CEBS guidelines in January 2006– Mixed response: high level principles or detailed guidance?
– Small banks ask for detailed guidelines
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 27
Common reporting
27
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 28
CEBS’ response: common reporting
The challenge:
HOW TO
• limit the costs of pan-European institutions
WHILE
• respecting the diversity of the Single Market (large/small firms) and limit the impact on small local institutions
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 29
CEBS’ response: common reporting
• Common frameworks for:– Financial data for prudential purposes
– Reporting of the solvency ratio
• CRD and IFRS window of opportunity for change: less administrative burden for cross-border groups; limited impact on small, local banks
• Common templates and possibilities presented by new technologies (XBRL)
• Consultation: criticisms on size and national flexibility
• But new rules are complex and supervisors move from quite different starting points
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 30
CEBS’ response: common reporting
• Layer approach: harmonization & flexibility
– Core: key information which more or less can be expected throughout the EU
– Detailed: comprehensive information which a majority of supervisors may require
• Reduction after consultation:
– COREP: ± 75% (level of detail between US and Canada)
– FINREP: ± 40%
• Finalization in December 2005 due to pressure from the industry, no second round of consultation
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 31
CEBS’ response: common reporting
Reporting now… and later…
EU GroupReporting
Supervisor 1
Supervisor 3
Supervisor 2
Various data streams Common frameworkDifferent reporting standards Single formatManual processes Automated data collection
EU GroupReporting
Supervisor 1
Supervisor 2
Supervisor 3
XBRL
XBRL
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 32
Creating a European supervisory culture
32
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 33
Creating a European supervisory culture
• Compendium of CEBS’ standards, guidelines and recommendations– for supervisors and market participants
– flexible, internet-based structure, easy to update
– consistent terminology, definitions
• Inventory of implementation issues
• Training programmes and staff exchange
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 34
Conclusions
• Differences across countries not wiped out, but visible, so that priorities for further work can be identified
• Not a single supervisory interface, but a more coordinated and streamlined process
• Not a single compliance process, but greater commonality of approaches and a process for further convergence where needed
a structured process for convergence, whose pace and end result are not predetermined
José María Roldán | 14 Nov 2005 35
Questions?
Thank you!
35
Contact details:
Chairman José María RoldánEmail: [email protected]: +44 20 7382 1770