EBA欧洲银行-EBF_CP06rev_3页_105kb

CEBS Consultation on Financial Reporting Summary

Core Content

The document outlines the CEBS Secretariat's comments on the proposed changes to the Financial Reporting (FINREP) model, emphasizing the need for clarity, consistency, and alignment with IFRS standards. The feedback is provided by an entity in Brussels on 8 June 2007, addressing concerns related to the implementation of the FINREP framework and its impact on cross-border financial institutions.

Main Points

1. Support for Technical Changes in FINREP

• The entity supports the technical changes to incorporate the option from IAS 19-Employee Benefits.
• They welcome the possibility of recognizing actuarial results in equity rather than in the Profit and Loss Account (P&L).

2. Request for Further Clarifications

• They request more detailed explanations about the new tables 38B and 38C, as well as the relationship between table 38A and tables 38B/C.
• They recommend retaining the sentence in Table 11 B: "Increases or decreases resulting from revaluations and impairment losses recognized or reversed directly in equity," as its removal could complicate the XBRL taxonomy.

3. Non-Binding Nature of CEBS Guidelines

• The entity stresses that the CEBS Guidelines on Financial Reporting should remain non-binding.
• They argue that regulators should not be compelled to adopt the guidelines, especially in countries where the banking industry views FINREP as unnecessary and duplicative of IFRS requirements.

4. Need for Consistency Across Jurisdictions

• They highlight the importance of maintaining a degree of consistency in additional reporting requirements for cross-border institutions.
• Without consistency, contradictory approaches may arise, increasing the reporting burden on institutions.

5. Recommendation for a Unified Reporting Format

• Institutions operating across borders should be able to use a centralized reporting system to meet the requirements of different countries.
• However, significant differences in national frameworks are currently observed, making this challenging.

6. Alignment of Reporting Requirements with IT Frameworks

• The entity emphasizes that reporting requirements and supporting IT frameworks must be synchronized.
• Changes in one could significantly affect the other, so it is crucial to align reporting content with validation rules and the XBRL taxonomy.

7. Need for Enhanced Cooperation with XBRL Experts

• They suggest a more enhanced cooperation with XBRL experts to ensure the taxonomy reflects changes in business requirements.
• However, they clarify that XBRL should not be mandated for the reporting of forward-looking information.

Key Issues Identified

Inconsistencies in Reporting Formats

• Differences in the presentation of operating income and expense, cancellation of minority interest, related party disclosure, and interest gains and losses.
• Variations in the display of previous financial year results and prudential provisions.

Non-Compliance with CEBS Guidance

• Some national regulators do not follow CEBS guidance or apply it incompletely, leading to discrepancies in reporting.
• Examples include unclear definitions of accrued interest, notional amount, and equity instruments.

Inconsistencies with IFRS Rules

• The inclusion of prudential provisions in both the balance sheet and the P&L is inconsistent with IFRS.
• Mentioning related parties on the front of the balance sheet is also incompatible with both CEBS-FINREP and IFRS.

Interpretation of IFRS by National Regulators

• Some national regulators provide interpretations of IFRS that differ between frameworks (e.g., COREP and FINREP).
• This leads to inconsistencies in the definition of collateral and reassessment reserves.

Recommendations

1. Clarify and Retain Key Sentences

• Retain the sentence in Table 11 B about revaluations and impairment losses directly in equity.

2. Maintain Non-Binding Nature of Guidelines

• Ensure that CEBS Guidelines remain non-binding to allow flexibility for national regulators.

3. Enhance Cooperation with XBRL Experts

• Improve collaboration with XBRL experts to ensure the taxonomy reflects evolving business needs.

4. Synchronize Reporting and IT Frameworks

• Ensure that reporting requirements and supporting IT systems are aligned to avoid operational inefficiencies.

5. Promote Consistency Across Jurisdictions

• Encourage consistency in reporting formats and requirements to support cross-border operations.

Conclusion

The entity calls for a rationalized and harmonized approach to FINREP, ensuring that it aligns with IFRS and supports cross-border institutions effectively. They advocate for clarity, consistency, and flexibility in the implementation of the framework, while emphasizing the need for cooperation with XBRL experts and maintaining the non-binding nature of CEBS guidelines.