Hong Kong banks set to struggle with Basel II
Many of Hong Kong’s banks could struggle to implement the new proposals for capital adequacy by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, due to their lack of sophisticated risk management systems, claimed consultants Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu at a press briefing in Hong Kong yesterday.
The new Basel Accord, by addressing the shortcomings of the original 1988 Accord, has adopted a more ‘risk-sensitive’ methodology to credit risk capital adequacy. Most Hong Kong banks, said Xuereb, would implement the standardised approach. Risk weights under this approach are to be determined by reference to external credit ratings agencies such as Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s. An area of contention for Hong Kong banks, pointed out Xuereb, is that a large number of corporates in emerging countries have a credit rating under ‘B’ or are un-rated. The external risk weightings for such corporates will remain at 100% or rise to 150%, leading to an increase in capital charges for the banks.
Additionally, a risk management benchmark survey, also conducted by Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, found the lack of sophisticated risk management systems at Hong Kong banks has caused severe deficiencies in offsetting risk exposures. The over-capitalisation of banks has provided little incentive to integrate risk management on an enterprise-wide scale, which has led to inefficient allocation of capital, the report said.
In spite of these issues, Basel II should act as a catalyst for change in the risk management processes of Hong Kong banks. The banks will be obliged to perform a thorough review of the their risk management frameworks, and upgrade where necessary, said Xuereb.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
FRTB models find salvation in US Basel III proposal
Changes to P&L attribution test and NMRFs make IMA viable for US banks, risk managers say
US blows the floors off Basel III
Barr criticises “downward deviations” in US rule; Bowman rejects “blind adherence” to global standards
Basel III endgame – a timeline
A review of Risk.net’s coverage of the US implementation saga
Leaked EU plans offer extra temporary relief for FRTB models
Risk factors would need only two observations to be modellable. Do changes foreshadow US Basel III?
Iosco chief talks cyber, AI and clearing
Buenaventura discusses Iosco’s role in aiding market resilience and cross-border co-operation
US regulators bid to save FRTB IMA, but it’s no small task
Even if industry wish-list is granted, a 2028 start date might be too soon for model adoption
Hopes rise for cross-product netting under SA-CCR
Banks want rule change in Basel III endgame to lower capital costs of clearing UST repos
Long way round: EU banks lament credit spread saga
EBA ditches some of banks’ preferred qualitative reasonings – and shortcuts – for CSRBB exclusion