2015年-EBA欧洲银行管理局_EBA_Peer_Review_Report_on_suitability_59页_1mb

Summary of EBA Peer Review on Guidelines for Suitability Assessment

Core Content

This report presents the findings of the European Banking Authority (EBA) peer review on the application of the EBA Guidelines on the assessment of the suitability of members of the management body and key function holders (EBA/GL/2012/06) across 31 EU/EEA-EFTA countries. The peer review aimed to evaluate the convergence of supervisory practices, identify best practices, and assess the effectiveness of the implementation of the guidelines.

Main Findings

Overall Implementation

• Most competent authorities (CAs) have largely or fully applied the EBA Guidelines.
• A small number of CAs reported that the guidelines were partially applied or not applied.
• The EBA identified several best practices in supervisory approaches, but noted divergences in the interpretation and application of the guidelines.

Key Areas of Divergence

• Definition of suitability: Varies across jurisdictions, with some using alternative terms such as "fitness and probity" or "trustworthiness".
• Time commitment: Not all CAs have established a maximum time period for suitability assessments.
• Assessment criteria: Divergence in the criteria used for evaluating candidates, including differences in the focus on collective knowledge, skills, and experience.
• Independence and conflict of interest: Interpretations vary on how these concepts are applied.
• Sanctions: While all jurisdictions impose administrative penalties on institutions, not all impose sanctions on individual members.
• Governance structures: Most have either a unitary or dual board structure, but some use a three-tier model.

Key Practices and Recommendations

Best Practices Identified

• Mandatory periodic re-assessments: Some CAs conduct annual or regular suitability assessments.
• Use of interviews: Several CAs use interviews as a method to assess candidates, including the timing, methodology, and panel composition.
• Clear definitions of Key Function Holders (KFH): Some jurisdictions have provided explicit definitions and lists of KFHs.
• Assessment of collective knowledge, skills, and experience: Some CAs include this in their suitability assessment process.
• Application of the proportionality principle: A few CAs have applied this principle effectively.
• Meetings with the management body: Some CAs engage in meetings with the management body as part of the supervisory process.

Recommendations

• The EBA recommends that best practices be embedded in a revised version of the EBA Guidelines to promote consistency and convergence.
• It also proposes to submit an opinion to the European Commission for a legislative initiative to further harmonize supervisory practices.
• The EBA is developing guidelines on internal governance requirements to incorporate outcomes from this review.

Methodology Overview

The peer review was conducted in four phases:

1. Preparatory Phase: Development and finalization of the self-assessment questionnaire (SAQ).
2. Self-Assessment Phase: CAs submitted their initial self-assessments.
3. Peer Review Phase: The Review Panel analyzed the responses, identified best practices, and revised them to promote consistency.
4. On-site Visits: The Review Panel conducted on-site visits to gain a deeper understanding of some CAs’ practices.

Implementation and Compliance

• CAs used binding and non-binding instruments to implement the guidelines, including legal acts, internal procedures, and soft law tools.
• Some CAs have already transposed the guidelines into their national legal frameworks.
• A few CAs have not fully implemented the guidelines and have not provided their contributions by the deadline, leading to their classification as non-contributing.

Convergence and Harmonization

• The EBA noted that convergent supervisory practice has not been achieved in many areas.
• The transposition of CRD IV by Member States has not eliminated divergence, as national laws still allow for different interpretations.
• The EBA emphasizes the need for further harmonization of supervisory practices to ensure consistency and effectiveness across the EU.

Annexes Overview

• Annex I: List of participating competent authorities.
• Annex II: Detailed summary of self-assessments.
• Annex III: Outcomes of the self-assessment questionnaire.
• Annex IV: List of best practices identified.
• Annex V: Final overview summary assessment after peer review.
• Annex VI: Self-Assessment Questionnaire used in the review.