EBA欧洲银行-Report-on-the-peer-review-of-the-RTS-on-passport-notifications_47页_1mb

EBA Report on the Peer Review of the RTS on Passport Notifications Summary

Core Content

This report presents the findings of a peer review exercise conducted by the European Banking Authority (EBA) on the implementation of the Regulatory Technical Standards (RTS) and Implementing Technical Standards (ITS) related to passport notifications for credit institutions in the EU. The review period was from 1 July 2016 to 30 June 2017.

Main Objectives

• Assess how competent authorities (CAs) manage passport notifications in accordance with the RTS and ITS.
• Evaluate the cooperation between home and host CAs.
• Identify best practices and areas for improvement in the implementation of passporting procedures.
• Determine the adequacy of the current RTS and ITS and whether legislative changes are needed.

Key Findings

1. Compliance with RTS

• Most CAs strictly applied the RTS requirements.
• The self-assessment questionnaire (SAQ) included benchmarked questions on the completeness, granularity, and timeliness of information received from credit institutions.
• CAs generally applied the requirements comprehensively or largely comprehensively, with only a few reporting partial or weak processes.
• One CA indicated that no branches operated in its jurisdiction, while another did not respond to the SAQ.

2. Notification Data

• CAs received more notifications about services than about the establishment of new branches.
• The highest ratio of services to branch notifications was 20:1.
• Only two CAs received more than 10 branch notifications, indicating limited cross-border branch establishment.
• In the SSM (Single Supervisory Mechanism) countries, only six CAs sent notifications to the ECB/SSM, with one CA sending 15 notifications and the rest sending fewer than 3.

3. Additional Requirements from National Laws

• Some CAs applied additional requirements beyond the RTS, which were generally consistent with the RTS framework.
• Common additional requirements included:
  • Detailed description of cross-border services and risk management.
  • A thorough 3-year business plan.
  • Information on internal control systems, outsourcing, and compliance with host Member State regulations.

4. Branch Activities

• The most common activities of branches were lending (71%) and taking deposits (65%).
• Other activities were specific to individual jurisdictions, such as trading or safekeeping and administration of securities.

5. Cancellation of Authorisations

• There was very limited cancellation activity of branch authorisations during the reference period.
• 20 CAs reported no cancellations, 7 CAs reported one cancellation, and 3 CAs reported two.

6. Communication and Guidance

• CAs communicated with credit institutions within 2 weeks on average to request additional information.
• 8 CAs provided additional guidance to institutions on how to comply with information requirements, mostly through website publications.
• Some CAs used structured dialogue with managers, which helped simplify procedures and improve the quality of notifications.

7. Information Quality and Management

• CAs used internal systems or databases to track notifications.
• Some CAs maintained dedicated registers or public repositories for passport notifications.
• A few CAs used Excel spreadsheets to record notifications, which were then made public.

8. Cooperation and Convergence

• The Review Panel noted inconsistencies in the exchange of information, timing, and granularity of data between CAs.
• Cooperation between home and host CAs is generally efficient, but could be improved.
• Convergence of supervisory practices is not fully achieved, especially in the context of Brexit and the single market.

9. Proportionality and Flexibility

• CAs expressed concerns about the lack of flexibility in the RTS framework regarding proportionality.
• They suggested that proportionality could be incorporated into operational arrangements and cooperation mechanisms between CAs.
• The current framework does not allow for internal procedures that consider proportionality, despite the requirement for full harmonisation.

10. Granularity of Information

• CAs generally agreed that the current level of detail in the RTS and ITS was suitable.
• However, they suggested expanding the granularity of information to better reflect interlinkages with other legislation such as MiFID, PSD, and MCD.

Key Recommendations

• Enhance cooperation channels between CAs to ensure consistency in information sharing.
• Consider introducing proportionality in the operational procedures for handling passport notifications.
• Expand the level of detail in the RTS and ITS to better align with other relevant legal frameworks.
• Promote the dissemination of best practices to improve supervisory consistency and efficiency.

Conclusion

The peer review confirmed that CAs have developed consistent and robust procedures to comply with the RTS. However, convergence and cooperation remain areas for improvement, particularly in the context of Brexit and the single market. The EBA may consider reviewing the RTS and ITS or providing additional operational guidance to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of passport notifications.