Basel II op risk survey planned for June 1
Global banking regulators hope to issue another survey on June 1 seeking information from banks on their operational losses in order to help with the development of the complex, risk-based Basel II bank capital adequacy Accord, regulators said.
The op risk survey “is a data collection exercise rather than an impact study”, regulators said. QIS3, which will seek information on the impact of the whole Basel II Accord on banks, is due to go out to banks on October 1.
The op loss data from the tranche 2 survey should also help the regulators with the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, the architect of Basel II, get a further insight into the way banks manage expected operational losses.
The Basel regulators decided some months ago that banks using the advanced approaches would not have to set aside capital against expected losses, where they can show clearly they have adequately budgeted for such losses.
Expected losses are those that are predictable, such as those arising year after year at a constant rate from credit-card fraud.
Technical experts with the Basel Committee’s risk management group, which is charged with developing the op risk proposals, agreed in Luxembourg this week on the June 1 date for the issue of the tranche 2 survey.
However, the date is subject to the proviso that the banking industry is happy with the format of the survey. The latest draft of the survey is being sent to the Washington-based Institute of International Finance, which represents banks, for comment. Any major revisions could delay the issue.
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
Double, but no trouble? CVA capital hit may lack clout
Industry opinion mixed around Basel III endgame derivatives charge
Amid debanking drama, banks try to say ‘no’, safely
A basic risk management tool – the ability to turn a customer away – has become a political football
Erba myth: will US banks choose new capital measure?
B3E gives US banks a dilemma – adopt expanded risk-based approach, or a new standardised alternative
Illiquid assets pricing still needs expert judgement, say banks
EU regulators want more transparency in valuations, but some asset prices remain elusive
Fed to move tailored-capital goalposts soon, says Bowman
Banks hope agencies will index triggers for harsher capital rules to economic growth
Will SEC reporting proposal supercharge alt data providers?
Move that would allow companies to opt out of quarterly reporting disclosures welcomed
EU lawmaker calls for review of Luxembourg’s cross-border rules
Grand Duchy accused of side-stepping rules aimed at prising away banking business from London
Un-American or un-JPM? Surcharge rethink divides G-Sibs
Some see sense in rethink to funding indicator, others call for a backtrack