EBA欧洲银行-CP38_Euroclear_3页_98kb

报告摘要

Euroclear Response to CEBS Consultation Document CP 38

Core Content

Euroclear, a leading global provider of settlement and related services for bond, equity, fund, and derivative transactions, has responded to the Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) consultation document CP 38. The document focuses on the implementation guidelines for Article 106(2)(c) and (d) of Directive 2006/48/EC, which relates to exemptions from the large exposures rules.

Euroclear operates as a user-owned and user-governed group, comprising Euroclear Bank (a credit institution) and several national Central Securities Depositories (CSDs). The group is subject to the Capital Requirement Directive (CRD), which imposes capital requirements on credit institutions and other financial entities.

Main Views and Comments

General Comments

Euroclear supports the CEBS proposals to clarify the scope of the exemption in Article 106(2)(c) and (d). They believe that the definition of "transaction types" refers to services such as money transmission and financial instruments clearing, settlement, and custody. They suggest that the description of these services is clear and recommend referencing the related business line "Payment and settlement" as outlined in Annex X of the CRD.

Consultation Questions

1. Clarity of Exempted Exposures Definition

Euroclear believes that the definition of "transaction types" is clear and that the exemption applies to exposures arising from the provision of such services to clients. However, they note that the description could be enhanced by including a negative criterion to exclude exposures resulting from proprietary activity.

2. Identification of Client Activity

Euroclear states that for Euroclear Bank, it is straightforward to distinguish between exposures from client activity and those from proprietary activity, as they are well identified in internal systems. They also highlight that some exempted exposures are indirectly caused by client activity, particularly "other exposures" that result from diversification due to client activity. This suggests a need for consistency in the eligibility criteria.

3. Timeframe for Reduction of Exempted Exposures

Euroclear agrees that the exemption should not allow exposures to remain above the large exposures limit for extended periods. However, they point out that the volatility of total exposures, especially intraday, makes it challenging to ensure that exposures remain below the limit on a daily basis. They argue that real-time monitoring of intraday exposures and integration of transaction flows across counterparties would be necessary but are not feasible in the short to medium term due to technological constraints.

Specific Comments

Euroclear emphasizes that the CEBS document's reference to "delayed receipts in funding" as the sole driver of exempted exposures is too restrictive. They argue that exposures are often influenced by other factors such as unexpected client inflows or outflows, and that these cannot always be predicted or controlled.

They also suggest that the credit quality criterion in the document should be interpreted as referring to the credit quality step outlined in Directive 2006/45/EC, Annex VI, rather than a specific rating. This would allow for more flexibility in diversifying exposures, as it may not be possible to find counterparties with the same precise rating as AAA.

Key Information

Euroclear Group Overview:
- Provides settlement and related services for various financial instruments.
- Includes Euroclear Bank (credit institution) and national CSDs.
CRD Compliance:
- Euroclear Bank and its consolidated entities must comply with the Capital Requirement Directive.
Exemption Scope:
- Exempted exposures apply to services like money transmission and financial instruments clearing, settlement, and custody.
- Exemption is conditional on the exposure arising from client activity, not proprietary activity.
Challenges with Exemption Implementation:
- Volatility of exposures makes it difficult to ensure compliance with the large exposures limit within the given timeframe.
- Real-time monitoring and integration of transaction flows across counterparties would be necessary but currently unattainable.
Recommendations:
- Clarify the eligibility criteria by adding a negative criterion for proprietary activity.
- Ensure consistency between the eligibility criteria for different types of exposures.
- Avoid overly restrictive interpretations of the credit quality criterion.