EBA欧洲银行-Annex-I-EBA-questionnaire-on-regulatory-equivalence_publication_37页_698kb

Summary of the Questionnaire on the Assessment of the Equivalence with European Regulatory and Supervisory Framework

Core Content

This questionnaire is designed to evaluate whether the prudential regulatory and supervisory framework of a third country is equivalent to that of the European Union (EU) as outlined in the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR) and the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD). The purpose is to determine if EU banks can apply preferential risk weights to exposures in that third country, which would help maintain financial stability and consistency in the EU's banking sector.

The assessment is qualitative and outcome-based, focusing on the major features of the regulatory and supervisory framework, rather than on specific examples or definitions provided in the questionnaire. It is important to note that the EBA is tasked with assessing equivalence only against the CRR and CRD, not against the Basel II or III frameworks, even though some references to these are included for guidance.

Main Sections of the Questionnaire

Part I – Prudential Supervision

1. General Questions

• 1.1 Identifies the authorities responsible for prudential regulation and supervision, along with their responsibilities.
• 1.2 Specifies the types of institutions subject to prudential regulation.
• 1.3 Describes the legal framework for conducting banking activities, including relevant laws and their issuance dates.
• 1.4 Inquires about supervisory guidance and its legal status.
• 1.5 Requests information on the availability of laws and guidance in English.
• 1.6 Provides an overview of the financial sector and prudential supervision system, including the size, number, and type of institutions.
• 1.7 Asks whether the Basel III framework has been implemented and, if not, the planned implementation timeline.
• 1.8 Inquires about the implementation of Basel II if Basel III has not been adopted.
• 1.9 Requests details on phase-in provisions for Basel III.
• 1.10 Asks about phase-out or grandfathering provisions related to Basel III.

2. Competencies of Supervisory Authorities

• 2.1 Defines the rights and powers of supervisory authorities.
• 2.2 Outlines the requirements for authorisation and withdrawal of authorisation for credit institutions.
• 2.3 Details the initial capital requirements for credit institutions and investment firms.
• 2.4 Explains the qualification of shareholders or members.
• 2.5 Asks about notification and prudential assessment of acquisitions or increases in holdings, and cross-border cooperation between supervisory authorities.

3. Prudential Supervision

• 3.1 Inquires about the level of prudential supervision (individual or consolidated) and the rules for regulatory consolidation.
• 3.2 Asks whether there is a legal obligation for auditors to inform supervisory authorities about material breaches.
• 3.3 Determines if administrative penalties can be imposed by supervisory authorities.
• 3.4 Asks whether supervisory authorities have the equivalent powers to impose administrative measures as those in the CRD.

4. Supervisory Review Process

• 4.1 Inquires whether ICAAP (Internal Capital Adequacy Assessment Process) is required.
• 4.2 Asks about the governance arrangements and the independent risk management function.
• 4.3 Determines if the Supervisory Review and Evaluation Process (SREP) is implemented in an equivalent manner.
• 4.4 Inquires about the ongoing review of internal models.
• 4.5 Asks whether the supervisory authority has the power to levy higher capital or liquidity requirements.

Key Information

• Equivalence Assessment: The process aims to ensure that third countries apply similar objectives and standards to the EU, including financial stability and effective risk oversight.
• Regulatory Framework: The CRR and CRD are the main EU legal acts used for the assessment. The CRR provides detailed prudential requirements, while the CRD focuses on supervisory procedures and governance.
• Basel Frameworks: While Basel II and III are referenced for background, the assessment is only against the CRR and CRD.
• Self-Assessment: Jurisdictions are required to provide a summary of their regulatory framework's equivalence with the EU, highlighting areas of difference and materiality of these differences.

Legislative References

• CRR:
  • Article 1: Scope of regulation
  • Articles 6–9 and 11–19: Consolidated supervision
• CRD:
  • Articles 8–21: Authorization requirements
  • Articles 22–27: Qualifying holdings and cross-border cooperation
  • Articles 73–75, 92–95: Governance arrangements and internal control
  • Articles 97–107 and 110: SREP process
  • Articles 101, 104, 105: Ongoing review of internal models and supervisory powers

Definitions

Key terms used in the questionnaire include:

• Credit Institution: An entity that accepts deposits and grants credit.
• Investment Firm: A legal person that provides investment services or performs investment activities.
• Institution: A term that includes both credit institutions and investment firms.
• Competent Authority: A public body authorized to supervise institutions.
• Prudential Regulation: Rules on authorisation, supervision, capital requirements, liquidity requirements, and public disclosure.

Additional Notes

• The questionnaire must be completed in English.
• Supporting documents should be provided, preferably in English, to assist the assessment team.
• The assessment is not based on the explanations provided in the questionnaire but rather on the actual regulatory and supervisory framework of the jurisdiction.

Conclusion

The questionnaire provides a comprehensive framework for assessing the equivalence of prudential regulatory and supervisory arrangements in third countries with the EU's CRR and CRD. It covers authorisation, capital requirements, governance, supervision, and international cooperation, with a focus on compliance, enforceability, and alignment with EU standards. The self-assessment is a critical part of the process, allowing the jurisdiction to highlight differences and their materiality to the EU's regulatory objectives.