Basel iii Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA) www.basel-iii-association.com 1 Basel iii Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA) 1200 G Street NW Suite 800 Washington, DC 20005-6705 USA Tel: 202-449-9750 Web: www.basel-iii-association.com Dear Member, The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision has completed its review of the October 2006 Core principles for effective banking supervision and the associated Core principles methodology. The revised Core Principles were endorsed by banking supervisors at the 17th International Conference of Banking Supervisors held in Istanbul, Turkey, on 13-14 September 2012. Both the existing Core Principles and the associated assessment methodology have served their purpose well in terms of helping countries to assess their supervisory systems and identify areas for improvement. While conscious efforts were made to maintain continuity and comparability to the extent possible, the revised document combines the Core Principles and the assessment methodology into a single comprehensive document
Transcript
1. 1 Basel iii Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
1200 G Street NW Suite 800 Washington, DC 20005-6705 USA Tel:
202-449-9750 Web: www.basel-iii-association.comDear Member,The
Basel Committee on BankingSupervision has completed its review of
theOctober 2006 Core principles for effectivebanking supervision
and the associatedCore principles methodology.The revised Core
Principles were endorsed by banking supervisors at the17th
International Conference of Banking Supervisors held in
Istanbul,Turkey, on 13-14 September 2012.Both the existing Core
Principles and theassociated assessment methodology haveserved
their purpose well in terms of helpingcountries to assess their
supervisory systemsand identify areas for improvement.While
conscious efforts were made tomaintain continuity and comparability
to theextent possible, the revised documentcombines the Core
Principles and theassessment methodology into a singlecomprehensive
document Basel iii Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
2. 2Bank for International SettlementsBIS, Core principles for
effective banking supervisionSeptember 2012The revised set of
twenty-nine Core Principles has also been reorganisedto foster
their implementation through a more logical structure,highlighting
the difference between what supervisors do and what theyexpect
banks to do:Principles 1 to 13 address supervisory powers,
responsibilities andfunctions, focusing on effective risk-based
supervision, and the need forearly intervention and timely
supervisory actions.Principles 14 to 29 cover supervisory
expectations of banks, emphasisingthe importance of good corporate
governance and risk management, aswell as compliance with
supervisory standards.Important enhancements have been introduced
into the individual CorePrinciples, particularly in those areas
that are necessary to strengthensupervisory practices and risk
management.As a result, certain "additional criteria" have been
upgraded to "essentialcriteria", while new assessment criteria were
warranted in otherinstances.Close attention was given to addressing
many of the significant riskmanagement weaknesses and other
vulnerabilities highlighted in thefinancial crisis.In addition, the
review has taken account of several key trends anddevelopments that
emerged during the last few years of market turmoil: - the need for
greater supervisory intensity and adequate resources to deal
effectively with systemically important banks; - the importance of
applying a system-wide, macro perspective to the microprudential
supervision of banks to assist in identifying, analysing and taking
pre-emptive action to address systemic risk; and Basel iii
Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
3. 3 - the increasing focus on effective crisis management,
recovery and resolution measures in reducing both the probability
and impact of a bank failure.The Committee has sought to give
appropriate emphasis to theseemerging issues by embedding them into
the Core Principles, asappropriate, and including specific
references under each relevantPrinciple.In addition, sound
corporate governance underpins effective riskmanagement and public
confidence in individual banks and the bankingsystem.Given
fundamental deficiencies in banks corporate governance that
wereexposed during the crisis, a new Core Principle on corporate
governancehas been added by bringing together existing corporate
governancecriteria in the assessment methodology and giving greater
emphasis tosound corporate governance practices.Similarly, the
Committee reiterated the key role of robust marketdiscipline in
fostering a safe and sound banking system by expanding anexisting
Core Principle into two new ones dedicated respectively togreater
public disclosure and transparency, and enhanced financialreporting
and external audit.As a result of the Committees review, the number
of Core Principles hasincreased from 25 to 29.There are a total of
39 new assessment criteria, comprising 34 newessential criteria and
5 new additional criteria.In addition, 34 additional criteria from
the existing assessmentmethodology have been upgraded to essential
criteria that representminimum baseline requirements for all
countries.A consultative version of the revised Core Principles was
issued for publicconsultation in December 2011. Basel iii
Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
4. 4The Committee appreciates the constructive comments
received andthanks those who have taken the time and effort to
express their views onthe consultative document.Core Principles for
Effective Banking Supervision (The BaselCore Principles)Executive
summary1. The Core Principles for Effective Banking Supervision
(CorePrinciples) are the de facto minimum standard for sound
prudentialregulation and supervision of banks and banking
systems.Originally issued by the Basel Committee on Banking
Supervision (theCommittee) in 1997, they are used by countries as a
benchmark forassessing the quality of their supervisory systems and
for identifyingfuture work to achieve a baseline level of sound
supervisory practices.The Core Principles are also used by the
International Monetary Fund(IMF) and the World Bank, in the context
of the Financial SectorAssessment Programme (FSAP), to assess the
effectiveness of countriesbanking supervisory systems and
practices.2. The Core Principles were last revised by the Committee
in October2006 in cooperation with supervisors around the world.In
its October 2010 Report to the G20 on response to the financial
crisis,the Committee announced its plan to review the Core
Principles as part ofits ongoing work to strengthen supervisory
practices worldwide.3. In March 2011, the Core Principles Group was
mandated by theCommittee to review and update the Core
Principles.The Committees mandate was to conduct the review taking
into accountsignificant developments in the global financial
markets and regulatory Basel iii Compliance Professionals
Association (BiiiCPA) www.basel-iii-association.com
5. 5landscape since October 2006, including post-crisis lessons
for promotingsound supervisory systems.The intent was to ensure the
continued relevance of the Core Principlesfor promoting effective
banking supervision in all countries over time andchanging
environments.4. In conducting the review, the Committee has sought
to achieve theright balance in raising the bar for sound
supervision while retaining theCore Principles as a flexible,
globally applicable standard.By reinforcing the proportionality
concept, the revised Core Principlesand their assessment criteria
accommodate a diverse range of bankingsystems.The proportionate
approach also allows assessments of compliance withthe Core
Principles that are commensurate with the risk profile andsystemic
importance of a broad spectrum of banks (from largeinternationally
active banks to small, non-complex deposit-takinginstitutions).5.
Both the existing Core Principles and the associated Core
PrinciplesMethodology (assessment methodology) have served their
purpose wellin terms of helping countries to assess their
supervisory systems andidentify areas for improvement.While
conscious efforts were made to maintain continuity andcomparability
as far as possible, the Committee has merged the CorePrinciples and
the assessment methodology into a single comprehensivedocument.The
revised set of twenty-nine Core Principles have also been
reorganisedto foster their implementation through a more logical
structure startingwith supervisory powers, responsibilities and
functions, and followed bysupervisory expectations of banks,
emphasising the importance of goodcorporate governance and risk
management, as well as compliance withsupervisory standards. Basel
iii Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
6. 66. Important enhancements have been introduced into the
individualCore Principles, particularly in those areas that are
necessary tostrengthen supervisory practices and risk
management.Various additional criteria have been upgraded to
essential criteria as aresult, while new assessment criteria were
warranted in other instances.Close attention was given to
addressing many of the significant riskmanagement weaknesses and
other vulnerabilities highlighted in the lastcrisis.In addition,
the review has taken account of several key trends anddevelopments
that emerged during the last few years of market turmoil: - the
need for greater intensity and resources to deal effectively with
systemically important banks; - the importance of applying a
system-wide, macro perspective to the microprudential supervision
of banks to assist in identifying, analysing and taking pre-emptive
action to address systemic risk; - and the increasing focus on
effective crisis management, recovery and resolution measures in
reducing both the probability and impact of a bank failure.The
Committee has sought to give appropriate emphasis to theseemerging
issues by embedding them into the Core Principles, asappropriate,
and including specific references under each relevantPrinciple.7.
In addition, sound corporate governance underpins effective
riskmanagement and public confidence in individual banks and the
bankingsystem.Given fundamental deficiencies in banks corporate
governance that wereexposed in the last crisis, a new Core
Principle on corporate governancehas been added in this review by
bringing together existing corporate Basel iii Compliance
Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
7. 7governance criteria in the assessment methodology and
giving greateremphasis to sound corporate governance
practices.Similarly, the Committee reiterated the key role of
robust marketdiscipline in fostering a safe and sound banking
system by expanding anexisting Core Principle into two new ones
dedicated respectively togreater public disclosure and
transparency, and enhanced financialreporting and external audit.8.
At present, the grading of compliance with the Core Principles is
basedsolely on the essential criteria.To provide incentives to
jurisdictions, particularly those that areimportant financial
centres, to lead the way in the adoption of the highestsupervisory
standards, the revised Core Principles will allow countries
theadditional option of voluntarily choosing to be assessed and
gradedagainst the essential and additional criteria.In the same
spirit of promoting full and robust implementation, theCommittee
has retained the existing four-grade scale of assessingcompliance
with the Core Principles.This includes the current materially
non-compliant grading that helpsprovide a strong signalling effect
to relevant authorities on remedialmeasures needed for addressing
supervisory and regulatory shortcomingsin their countries.9. As a
result of this review, the number of Core Principles has
increasedfrom 25 to 29.There are a total of 39 new assessment
criteria, comprising 34 newessential criteria and 5 new additional
criteria.In addition, 34 additional criteria from the existing
assessmentmethodology have been upgraded to essential criteria that
representminimum baseline requirements for all countries. Basel iii
Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
8. 810. The revised Core Principles will continue to provide a
comprehensivestandard for establishing a sound foundation for the
regulation,supervision, governance and risk management of the
banking sector.Given the importance of consistent and effective
standardsimplementation, the Committee stands ready to encourage
work at thenational level to implement the revised Core Principles
in conjunctionwith other supervisory bodies and interested
parties.I. Foreword to the review11. The Basel Committee on Banking
Supervision (the Committee) hasrevised the Core Principles for
Effective Banking Supervision (CorePrinciples).In conducting its
review, the Committee has sought to balance theobjectives of
raising the bar for banking supervision (incorporating thelessons
learned from the crisis and other significant
regulatorydevelopments since the Core Principles were last revised
in 2006) againstthe need to maintain the universal applicability of
the Core Principles andthe need for continuity and comparability.By
raising the bar, the practical application of the Core Principles
shouldimprove banking supervision worldwide.12. The revised Core
Principles strengthen the requirements forsupervisors, the
approaches to supervision and supervisors expectationsof banks.This
is achieved through a greater focus on effective
risk-basedsupervision and the need for early intervention and
timely supervisoryactions. Basel iii Compliance Professionals
Association (BiiiCPA) www.basel-iii-association.com
9. 9Supervisors should assess the risk profile of banks, in
terms of the risksthey run, the efficacy of their risk management
and the risks they pose tothe banking and financial systems.This
risk-based process targets supervisory resources where they can
beutilised to the best effect, focusing on outcomes as well as
processes,moving beyond passive assessment of compliance with
rules.13. The Core Principles set out the powers that supervisors
should have inorder to address safety and soundness concerns.It is
equally crucial that supervisors use these powers once weaknesses
ordeficiencies are identified.Adopting a forward-looking approach
to supervision through earlyintervention can prevent an identified
weakness from developing into athreat to safety and soundness.This
is particularly true for highly complex and bank-specific issues
(egliquidity risk) where effective supervisory actions must be
tailored to abanks individual circumstances.14. In its efforts to
strengthen, reinforce and refocus the Core Principles,the Committee
has nonetheless remained mindful of their underlyingpurpose and
use.The Committees intention is to ensure the continued relevance
of theCore Principles in providing a benchmark for supervisory
practices thatwill withstand the test of time and changing
environments.For this reason, this revision of the Core Principles
builds upon thepreceding versions to ensure continuity and
comparability as far aspossible.15. In recognition of the universal
applicability of the Core Principles, theCommittee conducted its
review in close cooperation with members of Basel iii Compliance
Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
10. 10the Basel Consultative Group which comprises
representatives from bothCommittee and non-Committee member
countries and regional groupsof banking supervisors, as well as the
IMF, the World Bank and theIslamic Financial Services Board.The
Committee consulted the industry and public before finalising
thetext.General approach16. The first Core Principle sets out the
promotion of safety andsoundness of banks and the banking system as
the primary objective forbanking supervision.Jurisdictions may
assign other responsibilities to the banking supervisorprovided
they do not conflict with this primary objective.6 It should not be
an objective of banking supervision to prevent
bankfailures.However, supervision should aim to reduce the
probability and impact ofa bank failure, including by working with
resolution authorities, so thatwhen failure occurs, it is in an
orderly manner.17. To fulfil their purpose, the Core Principles
must be capable ofapplication to a wide range of jurisdictions
whose banking sectors willinevitably include a broad spectrum of
banks (from large internationallyactive banks to small, non-complex
deposit-taking institutions).Banking systems may also offer a wide
range of products or services andthe Core Principles are aligned
with the general aim of catering todifferent financial needs.To
accommodate this breadth of application, a proportionate approach
isadopted, both in terms of the expectations on supervisors for the
Basel iii Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
11. 11discharge of their own functions and in terms of the
standards thatsupervisors impose on banks.Consequently, the Core
Principles acknowledge that supervisors typicallyuse a risk-based
approach in which more time and resources are devotedto larger,
more complex or riskier banks.In the context of the standards
imposed by supervisors on banks, theproportionality concept is
reflected in those Principles focused onsupervisors assessment of
banks risk management, where the Principlesprescribe a level of
supervisory expectation commensurate with a banksrisk profile and
systemic importance.18. Successive revisions to existing Committee
standards and guidance,and any new standards and guidance will be
designed to strengthen theregulatory regime.Supervisors are
encouraged to move towards the adoption of updated andnew
international supervisory standards as they are issued.Approach
toward emerging trends and developments(i) Systemically important
banks (SIBs)19. In the aftermath of the crisis, much attention has
been focused onSIBs, and the regulations and supervisory powers
needed to deal withthem effectively.Consideration was given by the
Committee to including a new CorePrinciple to cover SIBs.However,
it was concluded that SIBs, which require greater intensity
ofsupervision and hence resources, represent one end of the
supervisoryspectrum of banks. Basel iii Compliance Professionals
Association (BiiiCPA) www.basel-iii-association.com
12. 12Each Core Principle applies to the supervision of all
banks.The expectations on, and of, supervisors will need to be of a
higher orderfor SIBs, commensurate with the risk profile and
systemic importance ofthese banks.Therefore, it is unnecessary to
include a specific stand-alone CorePrinciple for SIBs.(ii)
Macroprudential issues and systemic risks20. The recent crisis
highlighted the interface between, and thecomplementary nature of,
the macroprudential and microprudentialelements of effective
supervision.In their application of a risk-based supervisory
approach, supervisors andother authorities need to assess risk in a
broader context than that of thebalance sheet of individual
banks.For example, the prevailing macroeconomic environment,
businesstrends, and the build-up and concentration of risk across
the bankingsector and, indeed, outside of it, inevitably impact the
risk exposure ofindividual banks.Bank-specific supervision should
therefore consider this macroperspective.Individual bank data,
where appropriate, data at sector level andaggregate trend data
collected by supervisors should be incorporated intothe
deliberations of authorities relevant for financial stability
purposes(whether part of, or separate from, the supervisor) to
assist inidentification and analysis of systemic risk.The relevant
authorities should have the ability to take pre-emptive actionto
address systemic risks. Basel iii Compliance Professionals
Association (BiiiCPA) www.basel-iii-association.com
13. 13Supervisors should have access to relevant financial
stability analyses orassessments conducted by other authorities
that affect the bankingsystem.21. This broad financial system
perspective is integral to many of the CorePrinciples. For this
reason, the Committee has not included a specificstand-alone Core
Principle on macroprudential issues.22. In supervising an
individual bank which is part of a corporate group, itis essential
that supervisors consider the bank and its risk profile from
anumber of perspectives: on a solo basis (but with both a micro and
macrofocus as discussed above); on a consolidated basis (in the
sense ofsupervising the bank as a unit together with the other
entities within thebanking group) and on a group-wide basis (taking
into account thepotential risks to the bank posed by other group
entities outside of thebanking group).Group entities (whether
within or outside the banking group) may be asource of strength but
they may also be a source of weakness capable ofadversely affecting
the financial condition, reputation and overall safetyand soundness
of the bank.The Core Principles include a specific Core Principle
on the consolidatedsupervision of banking groups, but they also
note the importance ofparent companies and other non-banking group
entities in anyassessment of the risks run by a bank or banking
group.This supervisory risk perimeter extends beyond
accountingconsolidation concepts.In the discharge of their
functions, supervisors must observe a broadcanvas of risk, whether
arising from within an individual bank, from itsassociated entities
or from the prevailing macro financial environment. Basel iii
Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
14. 1423. Supervisors should also remain alert to the movement,
or build-up, offinancial activities outside the regulated banking
sector (the developmentof shadow banking structures) and the
potential risks this may create.Data or information on this should
also be shared with any otherauthorities relevant for financial
stability purposes.(iii) Crisis management, recovery and
resolution24. Although it is not a supervisors role to prevent bank
failures,supervisory oversight is designed to reduce both the
probability andimpact of such failures.Banks will, from time to
time, run into difficulties, and to minimise theadverse impact both
on the troubled bank and on the banking andfinancial sectors as a
whole, effective crisis preparation and management,and orderly
resolution frameworks and measures are required.25. Such measures
may be viewed from two perspectives:(i) The measures to be adopted
by supervisory and other authorities(including developing
resolution plans and in terms of informationsharing and cooperation
with other authorities, both domestic andcross-border, to
coordinate an orderly restructuring or resolution of atroubled
bank); and(ii) Those to be adopted by banks (including contingency
funding plansand recovery plans) which should be subject to
critical assessment bysupervisors as part of their ongoing
supervision.26. To reflect, and to emphasise, the importance of
crisis management,recovery and resolution measures, certain Core
Principles include specificreference to the maintenance and
assessment of contingencyarrangements. Basel iii Compliance
Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
15. 15The existing Core Principle on home-host relationships
has also beenstrengthened to require cooperation and coordination
between home andhost supervisors on crisis management and
resolution for cross-borderbanks.(iv) Corporate governance,
disclosure and transparency27. Corporate governance shortcomings in
banks, examples of whichwere observed during the crisis, can have
potentially seriousconsequences both for the bank concerned and, in
some cases, for thefinancial system as a whole.A new Core
Principle, focused on effective corporate governance as anessential
element in the safe and sound functioning of banks, hastherefore
been included in this revision.The new Principle brings together
existing corporate governance criteriain the assessment methodology
and gives greater emphasis to soundcorporate governance
practices.28. Similarly, the crisis served to underline the
importance of disclosureand transparency in maintaining confidence
in banks by allowing marketparticipants to understand better a
banks risk profile and thereby reducemarket uncertainties about the
banks financial strength.In recognition of this, a new Core
Principle has been added to providemore direction on supervisory
practices in this area.Structure and assessment of Core
PrinciplesStructure29. The preceding versions of the Core
Principles were accompanied by aseparate assessment methodology
that set out the criteria to be used togauge compliance with the
Core Principles. Basel iii Compliance Professionals Association
(BiiiCPA) www.basel-iii-association.com
16. 16In this revision, the assessment methodology has been
merged into asingle document with the Core Principles reflecting
the essentialinterdependence of Core Principles and Assessment
Criteria and theircommon usage.The Core Principles have also been
reorganised: Principles 1-13 addresssupervisory powers,
responsibilities and functions, and Principles 14-29cover
supervisory expectations of banks, emphasising the importance
ofgood corporate governance and risk management, as well as
compliancewith supervisory standards.This re-ordering highlights
the difference between what supervisors dothemselves and what they
expect banks to do. For comparability with thepreceding version, a
mapping table is provided in Annex 1.Assessment30. The Core
Principles establish a level of sound supervisory practicethat can
be used as a benchmark by supervisors to assess the quality oftheir
supervisory systems.They are also used by the IMF and the World
Bank, in the context of theFinancial Sector Assessment Programme
(FSAP), to assess theeffectiveness of countries banking supervisory
systems and practices.31. This revision of the Core Principles
retains the previous practice ofincluding both essential criteria
and additional criteria as part of theassessment
methodology.Essential criteria set out minimum baseline
requirements for soundsupervisory practices and are of universal
applicability to all countries.An assessment of a country against
the essential criteria must, however,recognise that its supervisory
practices should be commensurate with therisk profile and systemic
importance of the banks being supervised. Basel iii Compliance
Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
17. 17In other words, the assessment must consider the context
in which thesupervisory practices are applied.The concept of
proportionality underpins all assessment criteria even if itis not
always directly referenced.32. Effective banking supervisory
practices are not static.They evolve over time as lessons are
learned and banking businesscontinues to develop and
expand.Supervisors are often swift to encourage banks to adopt best
practiceand supervisors should demonstrably practice what they
preach interms of seeking to move continually towards the highest
supervisorystandards.To reinforce this aspiration, the additional
criteria in the Core Principlesset out supervisory practices that
exceed current baseline expectationsbut which will contribute to
the robustness of individual supervisoryframeworks.As supervisory
practices evolve, it is expected that upon each revision ofthe Core
Principles, a number of additional criteria will migrate tobecome
essential criteria as expectations on baseline standards change.The
use of essential criteria and additional criteria will, in this
sense,contribute to the continuing relevance of the Core Principles
over time.33. In the past, countries were graded only against the
essential criteria,although they could volunteer to be assessed
against the additionalcriteria too and benefit from assessors
commentary on how supervisorypractices could be enhanced.In future,
countries undergoing assessments by the IMF and/or theWorld Bank
can elect to be graded against the essential and
additionalcriteria. Basel iii Compliance Professionals Association
(BiiiCPA) www.basel-iii-association.com
18. 18It is anticipated that this will provide incentives to
jurisdictions,particularly those that are important financial
centres, to lead the way inthe adoption of the highest supervisory
standards.As with the essential criteria, any assessment against
additional criteriashould recognise the concept of proportionality
as discussed above.34. Moreover, it is important to bear in mind
that some tasks, such as acorrect assessment of the macroeconomic
environment and the detectionof the build-up of dangerous trends,
do not lend themselves to a rigidcompliant/non-compliant
structure.Although these tasks may be difficult to assess,
supervisors should makeassessments that are as accurate as possible
given the informationavailable at the time and take reasonable
actions to address and mitigatesuch risks.35. While the publication
of the assessments of jurisdictions affordstransparency, an
assessment of one jurisdiction will not be directlycomparable to
that of another.First, assessments will have to reflect
proportionality.Thus, a jurisdiction that is home to many SIBs will
naturally have a higherhurdle to obtain a Compliant grading10
versus a jurisdiction which onlyhas small, non-complex
deposit-taking institutions.Second, with this version of the Core
Principles, jurisdictions can elect tobe graded against essential
criteria only or against both essential criteriaand additional
criteria.Third, assessments will inevitably be country-specific and
time -dependent to varying degrees.Therefore, the description
provided for each Core Principle and thequalitative commentary
accompanying the grading for each Core Basel iii Compliance
Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
19. 19Principle should be reviewed in order to gain an
understanding of ajurisdictions approach to the specific aspect
under consideration and theneed for any improvements. Seeking to
compare countries by a simplereference to the number of Compliant
versus Non-Compliant gradesthey receive is unlikely to be
informative.36. From a broader perspective, effective banking
supervision isdependent on a number of external elements, or
preconditions, whichmay not be within the direct jurisdiction of
supervisors.Thus, in respect of grading, the assessment of
preconditions will remainqualitative and distinct from the
assessment (and grading) of compliancewith the Core Principles.37.
Core Principle 29 dealing with the Abuse of Financial
Servicesincludes, among other things, supervision of banks
anti-moneylaundering/combating the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT)
controls.The Committee recognises that assessments against this
Core Principlewill inevitably, for some countries, involve a degree
of duplication withthe mutual evaluation process of the Financial
Action Task Force(FATF).To address this, where an evaluation has
recently been conducted by theFATF on a given country, FSAP
assessors may rely on that evaluation andfocus their own review on
the actions taken by supervisors to address anyshortcomings
identified by the FATF.In the absence of any recent FATF
evaluation, FSAP assessors willcontinue to assess countries
supervision of banks AML/CFT controls.Consistency and
implementation38. The banking sector is only a part, albeit an
important part, of afinancial system and in conducting this review
of its Core Principles, theCommittee has sought to maintain
consistency, where possible, with the Basel iii Compliance
Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
20. 20corresponding standards for securities and insurance
(which havethemselves been the subject of recent reviews), as well
as those foranti-money laundering and transparency.Differences
will, however, inevitably remain as key risk areas andsupervisory
priorities differ from sector to sector. In implementing theCore
Principles, supervisors should take into account the role of
thebanking sector in supporting and facilitating productive
activities for thereal economy.II. The Core Principles39. The Core
Principles are a framework of minimum standards for
soundsupervisory practices and are considered universally
applicable.The Committee issued the Core Principles as its
contribution tostrengthening the global financial system.Weaknesses
in the banking system of a country, whether developing ordeveloped,
can threaten financial stability both within that country
andinternationally.The Committee believes that implementation of
the Core Principles by allcountries would be a significant step
towards improving financialstability domestically and
internationally, and provide a good basis forfurther development of
effective supervisory systems.The vast majority of countries have
endorsed the Core Principles andhave implemented them.40. The
revised Core Principles define 29 principles that are needed for
asupervisory system to be effective.Those principles are broadly
categorised into two groups: the first group(Principles 1 to 13)
focus on powers, responsibilities and functions of Basel iii
Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
21. 21supervisors, while the second group (Principles 14 to 29)
focus onprudential regulations and requirements for banks.The
original Principle 1 has been divided into three separate
Principles,while new Principles related to corporate governance,
and disclosure andtransparency, have been added.This accounts for
the increase from 25 to 29 Principles.41. The 29 Core Principles
are:Supervisory powers, responsibilities and functions Principle 1
Responsibilities, objectives and powers:An effective system of
banking supervision has clear responsibilities andobjectives for
each authority involved in the supervision of banks andbanking
groups.A suitable legal framework for banking supervision is in
place to provideeach responsible authority with the necessary legal
powers to authorisebanks, conduct ongoing supervision, address
compliance with laws andundertake timely corrective actions to
address safety and soundnessconcerns. Principle 2 Independence,
accountability, resourcing andlegal protection for supervisors:The
supervisor possesses operational independence,
transparentprocesses, sound governance, budgetary processes that do
not undermineautonomy and adequate resources, and is accountable
for the dischargeof its duties and use of its resources.The legal
framework for banking supervision includes legal protection forthe
supervisor. Basel iii Compliance Professionals Association
(BiiiCPA) www.basel-iii-association.com
22. 22 Principle 3 Cooperation and collaboration:Laws,
regulations or other arrangements provide a framework
forcooperation and collaboration with relevant domestic authorities
andforeign supervisors.These arrangements reflect the need to
protect confidential information. Principle 4 Permissible
activities:The permissible activities of institutions that are
licensed and subject tosupervision as banks are clearly defined and
the use of the word bank innames is controlled. Principle 5
Licensing criteria:The licensing authority has the power to set
criteria and rejectapplications for establishments that do not meet
the criteria.At a minimum, the licensing process consists of an
assessment of theownership structure and governance (including the
fitness and proprietyof Board members and senior management) of the
bank and its widergroup, and its strategic and operating plan,
internal controls, riskmanagement and projected financial condition
(including capital base).Where the proposed owner or parent
organisation is a foreign bank, theprior consent of its home
supervisor is obtained. Principle 6 Transfer of significant
ownership:The supervisor has the power to review, reject and impose
prudentialconditions on any proposals to transfer significant
ownership orcontrolling interests held directly or indirectly in
existing banks to otherparties. Basel iii Compliance Professionals
Association (BiiiCPA) www.basel-iii-association.com
23. 23 Principle 7 Major acquisitions:The supervisor has the
power to approve or reject (or recommend to theresponsible
authority the approval or rejection of), and impose
prudentialconditions on, major acquisitions or investments by a
bank, againstprescribed criteria, including the establishment of
cross-borderoperations, and to determine that corporate
affiliations or structures donot expose the bank to undue risks or
hinder effective supervision. Principle 8 Supervisory approach:An
effective system of banking supervision requires the supervisor
todevelop and maintain a forward-looking assessment of the risk
profile ofindividual banks and banking groups, proportionate to
their systemicimportance; identify, assess and address risks
emanating from banks andthe banking system as a whole; have a
framework in place for earlyintervention; and have plans in place,
in partnership with other relevantauthorities, to take action to
resolve banks in an orderly manner if theybecome non-viable.
Principle 9 Supervisory techniques and tools:The supervisor uses an
appropriate range of techniques and tools toimplement the
supervisory approach and deploys supervisory resourceson a
proportionate basis, taking into account the risk profile and
systemicimportance of banks. Principle 10 Supervisory reporting:
The supervisor collects, reviews and analyses prudential reports
andstatistical returns from banks on both a solo and a consolidated
basis, andindependently verifies these reports through either
on-site examinationsor use of external experts. Basel iii
Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
24. 24 Principle 11 Corrective and sanctioning powers
ofsupervisors:The supervisor acts at an early stage to address
unsafe and unsoundpractices or activities that could pose risks to
banks or to the bankingsystem.The supervisor has at its disposal an
adequate range of supervisory toolsto bring about timely corrective
actions.This includes the ability to revoke the banking licence or
to recommendits revocation. Principle 12 Consolidated
supervision:An essential element of banking supervision is that the
supervisorsupervises the banking group on a consolidated basis,
adequatelymonitoring and, as appropriate, applying prudential
standards to allaspects of the business conducted by the banking
group worldwide. Principle 13 Home-host relationships:Home and host
supervisors of cross-border banking groups shareinformation and
cooperate for effective supervision of the group andgroup entities,
and effective handling of crisis situations. Supervisorsrequire the
local operations of foreign banks to be conducted to the
samestandards as those required of domestic banks.Prudential
regulations and requirements Principle 14 Corporate governance:
Basel iii Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
25. 25The supervisor determines that banks and banking groups
have robustcorporate governance policies and processes covering,
for example,strategic direction, group and organisational
structure, controlenvironment, responsibilities of the banks Boards
and seniormanagement, and compensation.These policies and processes
are commensurate with the risk profile andsystemic importance of
the bank. Principle 15 Risk management process:The supervisor
determines that banks have a comprehensive riskmanagement process
(including effective Board and senior managementoversight) to
identify, measure, evaluate, monitor, report and control ormitigate
all material risks on a timely basis and to assess the adequacy
oftheir capital and liquidity in relation to their risk profile and
market andmacroeconomic conditions.This extends to development and
review of contingency arrangements(incuding robust and credible
recovery plans where warranted) that takeinto account the specific
circumstances of the bank.The risk management process is
commensurate with the risk profile andsystemic importance of the
bank. Principle 16 Capital adequacy:The supervisor sets prudent and
appropriate capital adequacyrequirements for banks that reflect the
risks undertaken by, and presentedby, a bank in the context of the
markets and macroeconomic conditionsin which it operates. Basel iii
Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
26. 26The supervisor defines the components of capital, bearing
in mind theirability to absorb losses.At least for internationally
active banks, capital requirements are not lessthan the applicable
Basel standards. Principle 17 Credit risk:The supervisor determines
that banks have an adequate credit riskmanagement process that
takes into account their risk appetite, riskprofile and market and
macroeconomic conditions.This includes prudent policies and
processes to identify, measure,evaluate, monitor, report and
control or mitigate credit risk (includingcounterparty credit risk)
on a timely basis.The full credit lifecycle is covered including
credit underwriting, creditevaluation, and the ongoing management
of the banks loan andinvestment portfolios. Principle 18 Problem
assets, provisions and reserves:The supervisor determines that
banks have adequate policies andprocesses for the early
identification and management of problem assets,and the maintenance
of adequate provisions and reserves. Principle 19 Concentration
risk and large exposure limits:The supervisor determines that banks
have adequate policies andprocesses to identify, measure, evaluate,
monitor, report and control ormitigate concentrations of risk on a
timely basis. Basel iii Compliance Professionals Association
(BiiiCPA) www.basel-iii-association.com
27. 27Supervisors set prudential limits to restrict bank
exposures to singlecounterparties or groups of connected
counterparties. Principle 20 Transactions with related parties:In
order to prevent abuses arising in transactions with related
parties andto address the risk of conflict of interest, the
supervisor requires banks toenter into any transactions with
related parties on an arms length basis;to monitor these
transactions; to take appropriate steps to control ormitigate the
risks; and to write off exposures to related parties inaccordance
with standard policies and processes. Principle 21 Country and
transfer risks:The supervisor determines that banks have adequate
policies andprocesses to identify, measure, evaluate, monitor,
report and control ormitigate country risk and transfer risk in
their international lending andinvestment activities on a timely
basis. Principle 22 Market risks:The supervisor determines that
banks have an adequate market riskmanagement process that takes
into account their risk appetite, riskprofile, and market and
macroeconomic conditions and the risk of asignificant deterioration
in market liquidity.This includes prudent policies and processes to
identify, measure,evaluate, monitor, report and control or mitigate
market risks on a timelybasis. Principle 23 Interest rate risk in
the banking book: Basel iii Compliance Professionals Association
(BiiiCPA) www.basel-iii-association.com
28. 28The supervisor determines that banks have adequate
systems to identify,measure, evaluate, monitor, report and control
or mitigate interest raterisk in the banking book on a timely
basis.These systems take into account the banks risk appetite, risk
profile andmarket and macroeconomic conditions. Principle 24
Liquidity risk:The supervisor sets prudent and appropriate
liquidity requirements(which can include either quantitative or
qualitative requirements orboth) for banks that reflect the
liquidity needs of the bank.The supervisor determines that banks
have a strategy that enablesprudent management of liquidity risk
and compliance with liquidityrequirements.The strategy takes into
account the banks risk profile as well as marketand macroeconomic
conditions and includes prudent policies andprocesses, consistent
with the banks risk appetite, to identify, measure,evaluate,
monitor, report and control or mitigate liquidity risk over
anappropriate set of time horizons.At least for internationally
active banks, liquidity requirements are notlower than the
applicable Basel standards. Principle 25 Operational risk:The
supervisor determines that banks have an adequate operational
riskmanagement framework that takes into account their risk
appetite, riskprofile and market and macroeconomic conditions.This
includes prudent policies and processes to identify, assess,
evaluate,monitor, report and control or mitigate operational risk
on a timely basis. Basel iii Compliance Professionals Association
(BiiiCPA) www.basel-iii-association.com
29. 29 Principle 26 Internal control and audit:The supervisor
determines that banks have adequate internal controlframeworks to
establish and maintain a properly controlled operatingenvironment
for the conduct of their business taking into account theirrisk
profile.These include clear arrangements for delegating authority
andresponsibility; separation of the functions that involve
committing thebank, paying away its funds, and accounting for its
assets and liabilities;reconciliation of these processes;
safeguarding the banks assets; andappropriate independent internal
audit and compliance functions to testadherence to these controls
as well as applicable laws and regulations. Principle 27: Financial
reporting and external audit:The supervisor determines that banks
and banking groups maintainadequate and reliable records, prepare
financial statements in accordancewith accounting policies and
practices that are widely acceptedinternationally and annually
publish information that fairly reflects theirfinancial condition
and performance and bears an independent externalauditors
opinion.The supervisor also determines that banks and parent
companies ofbanking groups have adequate governance and oversight
of the externalaudit function. Principle 28 Disclosure and
transparency: The supervisor determines that banks and banking
groups regularlypublish information on a consolidated and, where
appropriate, solo basisthat is easily accessible and fairly
reflects their financial condition, Basel iii Compliance
Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
30. 30performance, risk exposures, risk management strategies
and corporategovernance policies and processes. Principle 29 Abuse
of financial services:The supervisor determines that banks have
adequate policies andprocesses, including strict customer due
diligence rules to promote highethical and professional standards
in the financial sector and prevent thebank from being used,
intentionally or unintentionally, for criminalactivities.42. The
Core Principles are neutral with regard to different approaches
tosupervision, so long as the overriding goals are achieved.They
are not designed to cover all the needs and circumstances of
everybanking system. Instead, specific country circumstances should
be moreappropriately considered in the context of the assessments
and in thedialogue between assessors and country authorities.43.
National authorities should apply the Core Principles in
thesupervision of all banking organisations within their
jurisdictions.Individual countries, in particular those with
advanced markets andbanks, may expand upon the Core Principles in
order to achieve bestsupervisory practice.44. A high degree of
compliance with the Core Principles should fosteroverall financial
system stability; however, this will not guarantee it, norwill it
prevent the failure of banks. Banking supervision cannot, andshould
not, provide an assurance that banks will not fail. In a
marketeconomy, failures are part of risk-taking. Basel iii
Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
31. 3145. The Committee stands ready to encourage work at the
national levelto implement the Core Principles in conjunction with
other supervisorybodies and interested parties.The Committee
invites the international financial institutions and donoragencies
to use the Core Principles in assisting individual countries
tostrengthen their supervisory arrangements.The Committee will
continue to collaborate closely with the IMF and theWorld Bank in
their monitoring of the implementation of theCommittees prudential
standards.The Committee also remains committed to further enhancing
itsinteraction with supervisors from non-member countries. Basel
iii Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
32. 32Policymaking in an interconnectedworldLuncheon speech by
Jaime CaruanaGeneral Manager, Bank for InternationalSettlementsThe
Federal Reserve Bank of KansasCitys 36th Economic Policy
Symposiumon The changing policy landscapeJackson HoleLet me extend
my thanks to PresidentGeorge and the organisers for theopportunity
to address this gathering atan event that is more keenly
anticipated bypolicymakers and journalists with every passing
year.My question today is: Is there scope for more international
cooperation inmonetary policy?After all, we see international
cooperation as essential for financialregulation.Why do we reject
keeping ones own house in order as a precept forfinancial
regulation but accept it for monetary policy?The question is not a
new one. In his famous Critical essays on monetarytheory, Sir John
Hicks argued that individual central banks have onlylimited
influence because: they have been national central banks. Only in a
national economythat is largely self-contained, can a national
central bank be a true centralbank; with the development of world
markets, and (especially) of worldfinancial markets, national
central banks take a step down, becomingsingle banks in a
world-wide system . Thus the problem that was Basel iii Compliance
Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
33. 33(partially) solved by the institution of national central
banks hasreappeared . on the world level.That was in 1967, during
the waning days of Bretton-Woods.And financial integration over the
past 45 years has made the problemthat Hicks identified even more
intractable.The burden of my remarks today is that central banks
need to take a moreinternational perspective, recognise their
collective influence and takeinto account monetary policy
spillovers.Monetary policy that contributes to financial stability
needs more of thecooperation that we already practise in financial
regulation.Let me break my main question into four questions and
then turn to each:1. What was the state of cooperation infinancial
regulation and monetary policybefore the crisis?2. Where does
cooperation stand after thecrisis?3. Why is the scope for
internationalcooperation in monetary policy oftenunderestimated?4.
Do we need to improve the institutionalframework for monetary
policycooperation? Basel iii Compliance Professionals Association
(BiiiCPA) www.basel-iii-association.com
34. 34Q1. What was the state of international cooperation in
financialregulation and monetary policy before the crisis?Since the
financial liberalisation of the 1970s, the cooperation onregulatory
standards for large international banks as embodied in Basel Iand
II extended well beyond any cooperation in monetary policy
outsidethe euro area.This cooperation involved:(i) Exchange of
information;(ii) Information-sharing based on a common
understanding of how theworld works;(iii) Joint decision-making;
and(iv) Standards set by an international committee.The very first
papers circulated to the Basel Committee on BankingSupervision
(BCBS) in 1975 surveyed the Rules and practices to protectthe banks
solvency and liquidity.It turned out that these varied a great
deal.Subsequently, regulators evolved a common intellectual
framework andcame to speak a common language.In 1988, Basel I went
one step further, to joint decision-making. It setdefinitions of
capital, risk weights for assets, and, crucially, a minimumratio of
capital to assets.These formulations were based on consensus, not
enshrined in a treaty orin international law. Basel iii Compliance
Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
35. 35Instead, the original Basel accord was enacted in
national law andenforced by national regulators.In fact, market
pressure quickly made Basel I the standard even for banksin
countries not represented on the BCBS.The driving forces for this
cooperation are well known.As countries liberalised their capital
accounts and moved to floatingexchange rates, banks seized the
opportunity to intermediateinternational capital flows.Soon after,
Bankhaus Herstatt and Franklin National collapsed.These banks were
not globally systemically important financialinstitutions, in
todays parlance, but their messy failures did help to driveforward
international cooperation on bank regulation.When, in August 1982,
the big banks suddenly stopped lending to LatinAmerica, Congress
increased the IMFs resources but demanded highercapital levels for
big US banks.Concerns about competitive neutrality then prompted
the FederalReserve to pursue joint action in what became Basel
I.Basel III, to be discussed in a moment, has marked an even more
explicitshift towards internalising the externalities imposed by
big banks andbanks collective behaviour.By contrast, monetary
policy remained mainly national after thebreakdown of Bretton
Woods.Attempts at cooperation were episodic, mainly relating to
exchange rates.This gave monetary cooperation a bad name especially
in countries withcurrent account surpluses, which came under
pressure to expanddemand. Basel iii Compliance Professionals
Association (BiiiCPA) www.basel-iii-association.com
36. 36At the level of theory, monetary policy shifted from the
1930s focus oncompetitive devaluation, first to the post-war
treatment of monetarypolicy as just one instrument in overall
macroeconomic stability policy,and then in the past 25 years to the
guardian of domestic price stability.Flexible exchange rates, it
was thought, would provide buffers againstexternal shocks while
policymakers kept their own house in order.In fact, the largest
economies not only remained relatively closed but alsohad banking
systems with very low proportions of foreign currency assets.To be
sure, the quality of global monetary policy discussions hasadvanced
over the past generation, as a common intellectual
frameworkevolved.Indeed, one could argue that monetary policymakers
shared a morethoroughly elaborated intellectual framework than did
their counterpartsin financial regulation.Even so, this shared
framework could be indifferent (or even hostile) tocooperation in
monetary policy.Q2. Where does cooperation stand after the
financial crisis?The short answer is that we have agreed to
cooperate more deeply on theregulatory/financial stability
front.But on the monetary policy front, the pre-crisis convergence
of views hasbecome strained.There is little doubt that, since the
crisis, we have had the widest, deepestand most far-reaching
regulatory cooperation in history.Participation has broadened,
coordination has intensified, andimplementation will be
peer-reviewed.Institutionally, all G20 members have joined the
BCBS. Basel iii Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
37. 37Similarly, the Financial Stability Boards membership has
become moreinclusive.Emerging market representatives bring useful
macroprudentialexperience to the table.And attention is being paid
to vulnerabilities in the shadow bankingsystem, outside the narrow
scope of the regulated sector.Cooperation has intensified with
Basel IIIs requirement for more andbetter capital, backstopped by a
simple leverage ratio and internationaloversight of weights and
implementation.Cooperation has also widened with the inclusion of
internationalstandards on liquidity management.Recognition of
potential procyclicality in the operation of capitalstandards has
led to the adoption of mutual recognition in the newcountercyclical
capital requirement, which empowers host countryauthorities.Tougher
solvency standards have been set for banks whose failure couldhave
system-wide effects.We should not minimise the challenges ahead.I
am acutely aware that, even as intended regulatory cooperation
hasreached an all-time high, the risks of fragmenting banking along
nationallines have grown.While there are long-standing differences
in the tax treatment of loan-lossprovisions, national bank bonus
taxes have been imposed and nowfinancial transaction taxes are
being discussed regionally. Basel iii Compliance Professionals
Association (BiiiCPA) www.basel-iii-association.com
38. 38While Dodd-Frank is improving the funding model of
US-charteredbanks, other banks that rely on wholesale funding have
gained marketsshare in dollar intermediation.While important
advances have been made, serious obstacles remain inconcerting
resolution regimes given different bankruptcy laws.A particularly
troubling source of fragmentation along country lines is
theinclination to put up national barriers against contagion.As
Mario Draghi has said, even though each of them may be
right,collectively they have been wrong.While regulatory
cooperation is the prerequisite for open financialmarkets and the
free flow of funds, capital controls seem to be gainingacceptance
as a response to the challenge of managing currencies whenyields
are zero in most major money markets.These developments threaten to
segment financial markets, not only inthe euro area but around the
world.Nevertheless, I remain hopeful that the movement towards
globalconsistency and more harmonisation will prevail over the
forces workingto fragment international banking regulation and
supervision.On monetary policy cooperation, there were notable
steps during thecrisis.Widespread, and ultimately in some cases,
open-ended, cooperation inforeign-currency funding through central
bank swaps had both themonetary goal of controlling the relevant
market rates like Libor and thefinancial-stability goal of
providing emergency funding.Such arrangements are temporary. Basel
iii Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
39. 39But the willingness of central banks not least the
Federal Reserve toact quickly and massively averted what could have
been a meltdown.The global nature of the crisis also saw episodic
cooperation in policy ratesetting.For instance, on 8 October 2008,
interest rates were simultaneously cut bythe Bank of Canada, the
Bank of England, the ECB, the Federal Reserve,the Riksbank, the
Swiss National Bank and the Peoples Bank of China,in a concerted
move that was strongly backed by the Bank of Japan.But a number of
issues have strained the pre-crisis convergence of viewson monetary
policy.What can monetary policy contribute to financial stability?
And how doesmonetary policy work alongside macroprudential
action?Q3. Why is the scope for international cooperation in
monetarypolicy often underestimated?This question raises three
more.First, do flexible exchange rates insulate economies as some
theorysuggests?Second, are bond markets so globally integrated that
policies affectingyields in major countries now have a bigger
impact on yields in othercountries than they once did, possibly
exerting an even larger effect thanlocal policies and
conditions?And third, can central banks properly assess the
aggregate impact of theiractions on global outcomes, or do they
suffer from a fallacy ofcomposition? Basel iii Compliance
Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
40. 40Starting with exchange rates, flexible rates do of course
help to insulate acountry from inflationary or deflationary shocks
coming from abroad. Butthey do it imperfectly.First, since major
currencies are used internationally, the policy rates setby their
issuers directly affect monetary conditions elsewhere.Borrowing in
foreign currencies may be rare in the biggest economies,but it can
be significant elsewhere.And common monetary and risk factors
affect the flow of internationalbank credit and portfolio
capital.Since the crisis, while credit to US households and
businesses has barelyresumed its growth, dollar loans to such
borrowers in the rest of the worldhas grown at up to 20% and has
reached about $7 trillion.Second, the foreign exchange markets
behaviour does not always satisfythe textbook interest rate or
purchasing power parity conditions.Exchange rate movements do not
merely compensate for interest orinflation differentials.Instead,
most of the time, currencies with an interest rate
advantageactually appreciate against lower yielding currencies and
can do so forsome time, making the domestic industry less
competitive.The depreciation of higher-yielding currencies tends to
happen fastduring episodes of stress in global asset markets, and
many emergingmarket economies have found this destabilising.Next,
there is the issue of international bond markets.As policy interest
rates and official bond purchases affect bond yields,their effects
ripple across globally integrated bond markets. Basel iii
Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
41. 41This happens even with independent setting of policy
rates and floatingexchange rates.Large-scale bond purchases can
have global effects whether they are partof an explicit monetary
policy or a side-effect of currency intervention.There is evidence
that the large Japanese interventions of 200304lowered global bond
yields, as dollars purchased in the foreign exchangemarket were
invested in bonds.There is also evidence that the Federal Reserves
recent large-scalebond-buying has also reduced global bond
yields.So the integration of global bond markets makes for a global
interest inpolicies that, intentionally or not, affect bond yields
in major markets.Turning to the possibility of a fallacy of
composition, I believe that aninternational perspective is
essential if we are to correctly assess theimpact of central bank
policies on global outcomes.The price dynamics in commodity markets
which are increasinglysimilar to those in financial markets could
be taken as a signal of globaldemand pressure rather than being
considered by central banks as asupply shock for each of
them.Similarly, each emerging market central bank might hesitate to
raiseinterest rates out of concern for capital inflows, given the
very low interestrates prevailing in major currencies.Indeed, if
central banks were to take an international perspective, theymight
discover that they would all be better off by raising rates,
therebysetting global average interest rates more
appropriately.These questions are not easy to answer. Basel iii
Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
42. 42How can we cope with these spillovers: the
interconnections arising fromthe behaviour of exchange rates, the
globalisation of bond markets, andthe collective impact of
policies?John Hicks knew that the one simple answer to the
limitations heidentified a global central bank would be totally
unrealistic.National central banks have national mandates, and
meeting these isalready difficult enough.We know less about the
workings of international linkages than we doabout domestic
linkages.How interest rates will affect the major centres in other
countries dependsin part on those countries own policies and
institutions.And it would not be difficult to add to this list.A
number of factors combine to make nation states less than willing
tocooperate on monetary policy.For instance, monetary policy can be
redistributional, shifting wealth andincome between creditors and
debtors.This makes it even more politically charged than regulatory
policy ifthat is possible.Nevertheless, I do not believe that
monetary policy can be restricted tokeeping ones house in order at
all times.While such house-keeping is necessary, monetary policy
does requireinternational perspective and cooperation, particularly
when it providesthe backing for financial stability.Q4. Do we need
to improve the institutional setting for monetarycooperation? Basel
iii Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
43. 43We hope that the structural trend that deepens
interdependence, namelythe globalisation of financial markets,
continues.If it does, there will be periods, in good times and bad,
when internationalspillovers will be substantial and highly
relevant for monetary policy.If this notion and the underlying
analysis are accepted, then the questionarises of how to strengthen
cooperation in monetary policy.This does not necessarily mean
monetary policy coordination at theglobal level, but it does
require central banks to better appreciate,internalise and share
the side effects that arise from individual monetarypolicies.This
will require a shift to a more global analytical approach, one
thatseeks to factor in collective behaviour, interactions and
feedback effects.This would also help us to better frame
international cooperation.I therefore tend to agree with the recent
call from prominent academicsand practitioners for global
considerations to play a more explicit role inmonetary policy
frameworks.But I am more sceptical about their proposal to
formalise cooperativearrangements.The major central banks would not
be able to publicly outline the mutualconsistency of their
policies.Drawing attention to areas of inconsistency and dissent
would probablyundermine effective cooperation.Traditionally, the
BIS and the various Basel committees have alwayssought to
complement the domestic analysis at central banks with a moreglobal
perspective. Basel iii Compliance Professionals Association
(BiiiCPA) www.basel-iii-association.com
44. 44The informal but structured nature of the meetings that
take place at theBIS has often facilitated analysis and discussion
of the many internationaldimensions of monetary policies.For
example, after providing support to a central bank review of
globalliquidity we are working on regular indicators that seek to
capture globalfinancial conditions.These and other global measures
also serve as inputs to vulnerabilityanalysis and the early warning
exercise conducted by the FinancialStability Board and the IMF.The
IMF is playing a role as well, with its spillover reports
andmacroeconomic policies consistency analysisLet me conclude by
saying that much needs to be done.Moving towards a more cooperative
approach makes more sense thanreversing the internationalisation of
markets and segmenting thosemarkets in the hope of protecting them
against spillovers.We need more research on these questions and I
hope that some of thepowerful analytic talents represented here at
Jackson Hole will bebrought to bear on them. Basel iii Compliance
Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
45. 45FSA statement regarding CRD IV implementationThe draft
European Union legislation to update thecapital requirements
framework, known as CRD IV, hasbeen under discussion between the
European Parliament,European Commission and Council of
Ministers.These discussions originally aimed to finalise an agreed
position by endJune 2012 enabling adoption by the European
Parliament plenary in earlyJuly 2012.Following the delay of the
Parliaments plenary vote and the recentstatement by the Rapporteur
of the European Parliament and thediscussion of the Council of
Economic and Finance Ministers, it is clearthe legislation will not
be adopted earlier than autumn 2012.Following adoption it is
necessary for verification, translation andsignature of the EU
legislation to take place before it can be published inthe Official
Journal of the European Union.Publication in the Official Journal
is a necessary pre-cursor of EUlegislation entering into force.On
this basis it does not appear feasible that the legislation can
enter intoforce in line with the implementation date of 1 January
2013 as included inthe original European Commission proposal of
July 2011.No alternative date has yet been communicated by the EU
institutions.Furthermore, reflecting the delay in the negotiation
process, theEuropean Banking Authority (EBA) issued a press release
on 31 Julysetting out the potential need to phase-in or flexibly
apply certaintechnical standards to ensure a practical approach to
implementation. Basel iii Compliance Professionals Association
(BiiiCPA) www.basel-iii-association.com
46. 46In light of these developments the FSA will keep the
situation underactive review and continue to support the European
institutions in theirefforts to reach a conclusion on the final
version of the legislation.The FSA will continue to undertake all
preparatory work that is possiblein the absence of finalised
legislative text, in full expectation that the EUlegislation will
follow the Basel III implementation timetable.We expect all firms
in scope of CRD to do likewise.Banks must remain mindful of the
vital importance of the direction set byBasel III for banking
system stability.In particular the FSA will continue to undertake
its supervision of banksin a manner consistent with the
recommendations of the 22 June meetingof the interim Financial
Policy Committee (FPC) of the Bank of England.The interim FPC
recommended that: taking into account eachinstitutions risk
profile, the FSA works with banks to ensure they build asufficient
cushion of loss-absorbing capital in order to help to
protectagainst the currently heightened risk of losses; that
cushion maytemporarily be above that implied by the official
transition path to BaselIII; and banks should continue to restrain
cash dividends andcompensation in order to maximise the ability to
build equity throughretained earnings.The FSA reminds those
investment firms that are currently subject to theCapital
Requirements Directive that they will be impacted by the CRD
IVlegislation and that they too should prepare accordingly.The
introduction of Common Reporting, which is incorporated into
therequirements in CRD IV, is dependent on delivery of the
necessarytechnical systems and on implementing technical standards
to be draftedby EBA under CRD IV and adopted by the European
Commission. Basel iii Compliance Professionals Association
(BiiiCPA) www.basel-iii-association.com
47. 47The FSA is proceeding with the necessary preparatory work
to be ready tobegin collecting data under Common Reporting for the
period beginning1 July 2013, should the legislation and related
standards be finalised bythis date.In line with the press release
issued by EBA, the FSA will take account ofany phase-in plans
incorporated into the implementing technicalstandards on
supervisory reporting. Basel iii Compliance Professionals
Association (BiiiCPA) www.basel-iii-association.com
48. 48EBA, EIOPA and ESMAJoint Consultation Paper on Draft
Regulatory Technical Standards on theuniform conditions of
application of the calculation methods underArticle 6.2 of the
Financial Conglomerates Directive (JC/CP/2012/02)I. Responding to
this ConsultationEBA, EIOPA and ESMA (the ESAs) invite comments on
all matters inthis paper and in particular on the specific
questions stated in theattached document Overview of questions for
Consultation at the endof this paper.Comments are most helpful if
they:- respond to the question stated;- indicate the specific
question to which the comment relates;- contain a clear rationale;-
provide evidence to support the views expressed/ rationale
proposed; and- describe any alternative regulatory choices EBA
should consider.II. Executive SummaryThe CRR/CRD IV proposals (the
so-called Capital RequirementsRegulation - henceforth CRR- and the
so-called Capital Requirements Basel iii Compliance Professionals
Association (BiiiCPA) www.basel-iii-association.com
49. 49Directive henceforth CRD) set out prudential requirements
for banksand other financial institutions which are expected to
apply from 1January 2013.In anticipation of the finalisation of the
legislative texts for theCRR/CRD IV, the EBA, EIOPA and ESMA
(hereafter the ESAs) throughthe Joint Committee, have developed the
draft RTS in accordance withthe mandate contained in Article 46(4)
of the CRR and Article 139 ofCRDIV (amending Article 21 a (2a) of
the Directive 2002/87/EC) on thebasis of the European Commissions
proposals.This Article provides the ESAs through the Joint
Committee, to developdraft Regulatory Technical Standards (RTS)
with regard to the conditionsof the application of the Article 6(2)
of the Directive 2002/87/EC(hereafter the Directive).Further the
ESAs have developed the draft RTS having regard to Article230 in
connection with Articles 220 and 228 of the
Directive2009/138/EC2.To the extent that the texts may change
before their adoption, the ESAsshall adapt its draft RTS
accordingly to reflect any developments.The RTS included in this
consultation have to be submitted to the EUCommission by 1 January
2013.Please note that the ESAs have developed the present draft RTS
based onthe European Commissions legislative proposals for the
CRR/CRD IV.They have also taken into account major changes
subsequently proposedby the revised texts produced by the Council
of the EU and the EuropeanParliament, during the ordinary
legislative procedure (co-decisionprocess).Following the end of the
consultation period, and to the extent that thefinal text of the
CRR/CRD IV changes before the adoption of the RTS, Basel iii
Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
50. 50the ESAs will adapt the draft RTS accordingly to reflect
anydevelopments.Main features of the RTSThis consultation paper
puts forward draft RTS in order to ensure thatinstitutions that are
part of a financial conglomerate apply the appropriatecalculation
methods for the determination of required capital at the levelof
the conglomerate.They are based in particular on the following
elements:General Principleso Elimination of multiple gearing;o
Elimination of intra-group creation of own funds;o Transferability
and availability of own funds; ando Coverage of deficit at
financial conglomerate level having regard todefinition of
cross-sector capital.Technical calculation methods1. Method 1:
Accounting consolidation method:The FICOD provides in relation to
Method 1 that the own funds arecalculated on the basis of the
consolidated position of the group.According to this general
provision, the calculation of own funds shouldbe based on the
relevant accounting framework for the consolidatedaccounts of the
conglomerate applicable to the scope of the Directive. Basel iii
Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
51. 51The use of consolidated accounts eliminates all own funds
intra-groupitems, in order to avoid double counting of capital
instruments.According to the Directive provisions, the eligibility
rules are thoseincluded in sectoral provisions.2. Method 2:
Deduction and aggregation method.This method calculates the
supplementary capital adequacyrequirements of a conglomerate based
on the accounts of solo entities.It aggregates the own funds,
deducts the book value of the participationsin other entities of
the group and specifies treatment of the proportionalshare
applicable to own funds and solvency requirements.All intra-group
creation of own funds shall be eliminated.3. Method 3: Combination
of methods 1 and 2.The use of combination of accounting
consolidation method 1 anddeduction and aggregation method 2 is
limited to the cases where the useof either method 1 or method 2
would not be appropriate and is subject tothe permission by the
competent authorities.III. Background and rationaleThe
supplementary supervision of financial entities in a
financialconglomerate is covered by the Financial Conglomerates
Directive2002/87/EC, hereafter known as the Directive.This
Directive provides for competent authorities to be able to assess
at agroup-wide level the financial situation of credit
institutions, insuranceundertakings and investment firms which are
part of a financialconglomerate, in particular as regards solvency
(including the eliminationof multiple gearing of own funds
instruments). Basel iii Compliance Professionals Association
(BiiiCPA) www.basel-iii-association.com
52. 52The nature of RTS under EU lawDraft RTS are produced in
accordance with Article 10 of the ESAsregulation.According to
Article 10(4) of the ESAs regulation, they shall be adoptedby means
of Regulations or Decisions.According to EU law, EU regulations are
binding in their entirety anddirectly applicable in all Member
States.This means that, on the date of their entry into force, they
become part ofthe national law of the Member States and that their
implementation intonational law is not only unnecessary but also
prohibited by EU law,except in so far as this is expressly required
by them.Shaping these rules in the form of a Regulation would
ensure alevel-playing field and would facilitate the cross-border
provision ofservices.Background and regulatory approach followed in
the draft RTSThese draft RTS are produced in accordance with CRD
IV/CRRproposals, which provide that the EBA, ESMA and EIOPA
(hereafter theESAs), through the Joint Committee, shall develop
draft regulatorytechnical standards with regard to the conditions
of the application of thecalculation methods with regard to Article
6(2) of the Directive and shallsubmit those draft regulatory
technical standards to the Commission by 1January 2013.The proposed
draft RTS covers the uniform conditions for the use of themethods
for the determination of capital adequacy of a
financialconglomerate under the Directive. Basel iii Compliance
Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
53. 53They elaborate on Technical principles applying to all of
the threemethods provided for by Directive; and also contain an
Annex providingfurther detail for Method 2.The requirements
contained in the draft RTS are mainly directed atinstitutions,
although some of them are directed at competent authorities.IV.
Draft Regulatory Technical Standards on the uniformconditions of
application of the calculation methods underArticle 6.2 of the
Financial Conglomerates DirectiveCommission Delegated Regulation
(EU) No XX/2012supplementing Directive xx/XX/EU [CRD] of the
European Parliamentand of the Council of [date], Regulation (..) No
xx/XXXX [CRR] of theEuropean Parliament and of the Council of
[date] and Directive2002/87/EC [Financial Conglomerates Directive]
of the EuropeanParliament and of the Council of [date] with regard
to regulatorytechnical standards for the uniform conditions of
application of thecalculation methods under Article 6.2 of the
Financial ConglomeratesDirective of XX Month 2012THE EUROPEAN
COMMISSION,Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the
European Union,Having regard to the [proposal for a] Regulation
(...) No xx/xxxx of theEuropean Parliament and of the Council of dd
mm yyyy on prudentialrequirements for credit institutions and
investment firms Regulationxx/xxxx [CRR] and in particular Article
46 (4) thereof.Having regard to the [proposal for a] Directive
(...) No xx/xxxx of theEuropean Parliament and of the Council of dd
mm yyyy on the access tothe activity of credit institutions and the
prudential supervision of creditinstitutions and investment firms
[CRDIV] and in particular Article 139thereof. Basel iii Compliance
Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
54. 54Having regard to the Directive 2002/87/EC, as amended, of
theEuropean Parliament and of the Council on the
supplementarysupervision of credit institutions, insurance
undertakings and investmentfirms in a financial conglomerate
(hereinafter the Directive) and inparticular to Article 6(2) and
Annex 1 thereof.Whereas:(1) Directive 2002/87/EC provides in
Chapter II, Section 2, rules oncapital adequacy of financial
conglomerates, such that the elements ofown funds are available at
the level of a Financial Conglomerates arealways at least equal to
the capital adequacy requirements as calculated inaccordance with
Annex I of the Directive.(2) Regulation (...) No xx/xxx (CRR)
provides in Article 46, within PartII, Chapter 2, Section 3,
Sub-Section 2 and in the context of commonequityTier I rules,
requirements for deduction where consolidation orsupplementary
supervision are applied.This section of the CRR provides
empowerments to the EuropeanCommission to adopt delegated acts
(regulatory technical standards) inaccordance with articles 10-14
of the Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010establishing the European
Banking Authority (EBA), Articles 10-14 ofthe Regulation (EU) No
1094/2010 establishing the European Insuranceand Occupational
Pensions Authority (EIOPA), and Articles 10-14 of theRegulation
(EU) No 1095/2010 (ESMA), establishing the EuropeanSecurities and
Markets Authority.These acts will complete the EU single rulebook
for institutions in thearea of own funds.(3) Directive (...) No
xx/xxx (CRDIV) provides in Article 139 that theDirective 2002/87/EC
shall be amended, such that the EBA, EIOPA andESMA through the
Joint Committee, to develop draft Regulatory Basel iii Compliance
Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
55. 55Technical Standards (RTS) with regard to the conditions
of theapplication of the Article 6(2) of the Directive.(4) For
effective supervision of Financial Conglomerates,
supplementarysupervision should be applied to all such
conglomerates, thecross-sectoral financial activities of which are
significant, which is thecase when certain thresholds are reached,
no matter how they arestructured.Supplementary supervision should
cover all financial activities identifiedby the sectoral financial
legislation and all entities principally engaged insuch activities
should be included in the scope of the supplementarysupervision,
including asset management companies and alternativeinvestment fund
management companies.(5) Without prejudice to sectoral rules,
supplementary supervision of thecapital adequacy rules is necessary
to bring more convergence in theapplication of the calculation
methods listed in Annex 1 of the Directive.(6) For financial
conglomerates which include significant banking orinvestment
business and insurance business, multiple use of elementseligible
for the calculation of own funds at the level of the
financialconglomerate (multiple gearing) as well as any
inappropriate intra-groupcreation of own funds must be
eliminated.(7) The financial conglomerate should seek an acceptable
timeframe forthe transferability of funds across entities within
the financialconglomerate, which shall depend on whether the
specific entity issubject to the Directive 2009/138/EC or the
CRDIV/CRR.Moreover for an entity subject to the CRD IV/CRR this
timeframe shouldbe expediated based on the fact that due to the
nature of their activities,they are more vulnerable to a rapid
deterioration in confidence and/orsudden resolution situation.
Basel iii Compliance Professionals Association (BiiiCPA)
www.basel-iii-association.com
56. 56(8) In addition any non-sector-specific own funds, in
excess of sectoralrequirements, need to originate from entities
which are not subject totransferability/availability
impediments.(9) It is important to ensure that own funds are only
included atconglomerate level if there are no impediments to the
transfer of assets orrepayment of liabilities across different
conglomerate entities, includingacross sectors.(10) If there is a
deficit of own funds at the level of the financialconglomerate, the
financial conglomerate should inform the coordinatoron the measures
taken to cover this deficit.(11) Further