Cebs issues guidelines for revised large exposures regime
CP26 on large exposures issued by Cebs for the amended Capital Requirements Directive
LONDON - The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (Cebs) has released a consultation paper of implementation guidelines for the revised large exposures regime, which will form part of the updated Capital Requirements Directive (CRD).
The draft guidelines focus on three aspects of the revised regime. The first is the definition of 'connected clients' and particularly the concept of 'interconnectedness'.
The second and third aspects are calculation of exposure values for schemes with exposure to underlying assets, and reporting requirements - particularly their linkage with the Common Reporting (Corep) framework for a harmonised European reporting system.
The draft guidelines set out in CP26 build on Cebs' earlier advice to the European Commission. In elaborating this document, Cebs has benefited from input provided by industry experts nominated by members and observers of Cebs' Consultative Panel.
A revised large-exposures regime was included in the amended CRD following Cebs' second issue of advice delivered to the Commission in April 2008. The amended CRD provisions are due for transposition into European Union member state legislation by October 31, 2010, and will be applied from December 31, 2010.
Cebs says CP26 is open to all interested parties, including supervised institutions and other market participants, until September 11. It can be read here.
Cebs has also announced that on July 9 it will hold a public hearing on its April 15 consultation paper (CP25) on operational risk mitigation techniques. Click here to register.
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
Snap! Derivatives reports decouple after Emir Refit shake-up
Counterparties find new rules have led to worse data quality, threatening regulators’ oversight of systemic risk
Critics warn against softening risk transfer rules for insurers
Proposal to cut capital for unfunded protection of loan books would create systemic risk, investors say
Barr defends easing of Basel III endgame proposal
Fed’s top regulator says he will stay and finish the package, is comfortable with capital impact
Bank of England to review UK clearing rules
Broader collateral set and greater margin transparency could be adopted from Emir 3.0, but not active accounts requirement
The wisdom of Oz? Why Australia is phasing out AT1s
Analysts think Australian banks will transition smoothly, but other countries unlikely to follow
EU trade repository matching disrupted by Emir overhaul
Some say problem affecting derivatives reporting has been resolved, but others find it persists
Barclays and HSBC opt for FRTB internal models
However, UK pair unlikely to chase approval in time for Basel III go-live in January 2026
Foreign banks want level playing field in US Basel III redraft
IHCs say capital charges for op risk and inter-affiliate trades out of line with US-based peers