EBA欧洲银行-Accomplishment-of-Action-Plan-2013-and-Action-Plan-for-2014_24页_757kb

Summary of the Colleges Action Plan for 2013 and the Establishment of the Colleges Action Plan for 2014

Core Content

The European Banking Authority (EBA) is responsible for promoting and monitoring the functioning of colleges of supervisors across the European Economic Area (EEA). These colleges are essential for the supervision of cross-border banking groups, especially in times of financial stress. The report outlines the accomplishments of the 2013 Colleges Action Plan and details the 2014 plan, emphasizing the need for improved coordination, transparency, and consistency in the supervisory process.

Main Points of the 2013 Colleges Action Plan

1. Colleges Overview

• A total of 105 colleges were identified in 2013, including 43 closely monitored colleges.
• 94 EEA colleges were confirmed, with 46 operating under a fully-fledged format.
• 10 colleges were set up for banking groups with a parent undertaking in a third country.

2. Collaboration and Engagement

• There was an increase in cooperation among supervisors, with more frequent meetings and regular communication.
• 77 face-to-face meetings were held by closely monitored colleges, with 71 attended by EBA staff.
• Some colleges held quarterly meetings and used conference calls to maintain ongoing dialogue.

3. Joint Risk Assessment and Decision Process (JRAD)

• JRAD is a mandatory process under the CRD IV, involving both home and host supervisors.
• The quality of joint risk assessment documents improved, with 15 out of 43 considered very good or good, 17 satisfactory, and 3 not satisfactory.
• Challenges included:
  • Insufficient detail in risk assessment reports.
  • Late distribution of reports, limiting preparation time for college members.
  • Lack of shared individual assessments among college members, hindering informed discussions.

4. Joint Decision Process

• The process for joint decisions on capital became more structured and standardised.
• However, inconsistencies remain due to the absence of a common methodology for Pillar 2 SREP.
• Joint decision documents were of mixed quality, with some consolidating supervisors providing good and satisfactory approaches, while others did not.

5. Crisis Management

• The Crisis Management Group (CMG) and Crisis Management Framework were key elements in managing potential risks.
• Crisis management planning and recovery and resolution planning were actively discussed, especially after the EBA Recommendation on recovery plans issued in January 2013.

6. Challenges Identified

• Limited coverage of third-country banking groups in EEA colleges (only about 10% of entities are covered).
• Only 30% of third-country banking groups underwent equivalence assessments.
• Inconsistent application of SREP and lack of common templates for joint decisions on capital and liquidity.
• Insufficient reasoning in joint decisions, especially regarding own funds adequacy and capital requirements.

Key Improvements in 2013

• Increased frequency of meetings and communication.
• More structured and detailed joint risk assessments.
• Better engagement of EBA in college activities.
• Improved cooperation among supervisory authorities, especially in joint on-site examinations and AQR preparation.

Colleges Action Plan for 2014

Objectives and Deliverables

• A detailed action plan for 2014 with clear objectives and deliverables.
• Focus areas include:
  • Joint risk assessment
  • Joint decision on capital and liquidity
  • Assessment of recovery plans
  • Asset quality review (AQR)
  • EU-wide stress test

Regulatory Impact

• CRD IV and BRRD will influence the functioning of colleges.
• ITS on joint decision and SREP liquidity methodology will be introduced to support a common approach.

Expected Activities

• Crisis management planning will be integrated into regular college activities.
• Mapping of cross-border banking groups and secure information exchange will be enhanced.
• Home-host cooperation will be strengthened, especially for banking groups under the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM).

Implementation of SSM

• The SSM will not significantly reduce the number of colleges.
• Cross-border cooperation will remain important, especially for large banking groups with a presence in both SSM and non-SSM countries.
• Five banking groups will be under SSM supervision only, while the rest will have a presence in both.

Key Areas for Improvement

• Better integration of joint risk assessment into coordinated supervisory action plans.
• Enhanced communication and information sharing between core and general colleges.
• More detailed reasoning in joint decision documents, especially regarding capital adequacy and risk exposure.
• Full coverage of all entities in the banking group in joint decisions.
• Consistent application of SREP and Pillar 2 methodologies across EEA countries.

Conclusion

The EBA continues to play a central role in promoting supervisory convergence and cooperation across the EEA. While significant progress was made in 2013, improvements are still needed in terms of consistency, transparency, and coordination. The 2014 plan aims to address these challenges and enhance the effectiveness of colleges in the context of the SSM and new regulatory requirements.