EBA欧洲银行-Accomplishment-of-2014-EBA-Colleges-Action-Plan-and-2015-EBA-Colleges-Action-Plan_54页_814kb

Summary of the EBA Colleges Action Plan for 2014 and Establishment of the EBA Colleges Action Plan for 2015

Core Content

The European Banking Authority (EBA) implemented and monitored the Colleges Action Plan for 2014, which outlined the objectives and deliverables for supervisory colleges in line with their role under the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD) and the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive (BRRD). The report evaluates the functioning of these colleges and outlines the establishment of the 2015 Colleges Action Plan.

The EBA introduced a new monitoring approach in 2014, dividing colleges into three categories: closely monitored colleges, colleges followed on a thematic basis, and other colleges. This approach aimed to improve the quality and efficiency of college monitoring by tailoring the level of engagement to the specific needs of each college.

In 2014, the EBA monitored 25 closely monitored colleges and 19 colleges followed on a thematic basis, while 95 active colleges were identified across the European Economic Area (EEA), including 143 EEA cross-border banking groups and 126 non-EEA cross-border banking groups.

The 2015 Action Plan introduces new priorities, including the re-establishment of colleges under the updated Regulatory Technical Standards (RTS) and the completion of the first joint decision process on the assessment of group recovery plans, a new requirement under the BRRD.

Main Findings

1. Functioning of Colleges in 2014

• Communication and Interaction:

  • There was an increased level of cooperation among competent authorities.
  • Most colleges held regular physical meetings and conference calls, especially around the AQR and stress test exercises.
  • The intensity and frequency of interactions varied, with 36% of colleges still needing to improve.

• Quality of Meetings:

  • College meetings were generally well-structured and focused on developing a common understanding of the banking group’s risk profile.
  • Half of the colleges had good-quality interactions, while ten were assessed as satisfactory.
  • Some colleges had limited host involvement and lacked structured information flows between different college settings.

• Key Deliverables:

  • Colleges were expected to produce joint risk assessments and joint decisions on capital and liquidity.
  • The joint decisions were documented with full reasoning, but the reasoning was still an area for improvement.
  • By the end of January 2015, only 7 out of 22 closely monitored colleges had finalised joint decisions on capital, and 5 out of 22 had updated them within a 12-month period.
  • For liquidity, only 7 out of 22 had finalised joint decisions, with some taking up to two months to complete.

• Responsiveness:

  • Half of the colleges demonstrated good responsiveness to recommendations and feedback from EBA and other members.
  • Some colleges still had difficulties in incorporating EBA feedback or host proposals, indicating a need for better coordination.

• Joint Risk Assessment and Decision Process:

  • The joint decision process for capital and liquidity was generally standardised and well-structured.
  • The introduction of a new joint decision on liquidity with a different timeline (one month) added complexity.
  • The joint decision on group recovery plans is a new requirement for 2015 under the BRRD.

• IT Platform:

  • The EBA IT platform was used to securely exchange confidential information, especially during the EU-wide stress test exercise.
  • It is available to all competent authorities and facilitates communication within the college context.

2. Challenges and Improvements

• The lack of a common methodology for the SREP in Pillar 2 led to varied outcomes in joint decisions on capital and liquidity.
• The liquidity coverage ratio (LCR) and SREP guidelines are expected to improve consistency in the future.
• The EBA encourages colleges to ensure structured information flows between different college settings to enhance collaboration and transparency.

3. Next Steps for 2015

• The 2015 Colleges Action Plan prioritises the re-establishment of colleges under the new RTS and the successful completion of the first joint decision on group recovery plans.
• The EBA will continue to support colleges by improving co-operation between the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM), non-SSM, and third-country supervisory authorities.
• The EBA will monitor the functioning of colleges and provide structured feedback on their performance.

Key Information

• EBA Role: The EBA plays a key role in monitoring and supporting the functioning of supervisory colleges, especially in ensuring compliance with EU regulations and promoting coordination among competent authorities.
• New Requirements in 2015:
  • Re-establishment of colleges under updated RTS.
  • Implementation of the first joint decision on group recovery plans, in line with the BRRD.
• Improvement Areas:
  • Timely distribution of meeting documents.
  • Structured information sharing between different college settings.
  • Reasoning in joint decision documents.
  • Host authority involvement in college discussions.

Conclusion

The 2014 Colleges Action Plan was largely fulfilled, with improvements noted in the functioning of colleges. The EBA continues to support colleges in their supervisory activities, particularly in enhancing cooperation, improving the quality of meetings, and ensuring that joint decisions are based on consistent methodologies. The 2015 Action Plan builds on these efforts, introducing new tasks and reinforcing the role of colleges in the EU banking supervision framework.