2016年-FSB全球金融稳定委员会_Key_Attributes_Assessment_Methodology_for_the_Banking_Sector_71页_950kb

Key Attributes Assessment Methodology for the Banking Sector Summary

Introduction

The Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes for Financial Institutions were adopted in 2011 and endorsed by the G20 in 2011 as an international standard. This methodology provides a framework for assessing how well a jurisdiction complies with these Key Attributes specifically for the banking sector. It applies to all financial institutions that could be systemically significant or critical if they fail, including banks, insurers, investment firms, and financial market infrastructure (FMI) entities. The methodology also covers financial groups and conglomerates, particularly those with banks.

Core Content

The methodology outlines a structured approach to evaluating compliance with the Key Attributes, which are divided into 12 Key Attributes (KAs). Each KA has essential criteria (ECs) and explanatory notes (ENs) to guide the assessment. The assessment is not limited to legal texts but also considers practical implementation and the effectiveness of the resolution regime.

Main Views and Key Information

1. Purpose and Use of the Methodology

• Purpose: To assess compliance with Key Attributes and promote consistency across jurisdictions.
• Use Cases:
  • Assessments of existing or reforming resolution regimes.
  • Peer reviews within the FSB framework.
  • IMF and WB evaluations (e.g., FSAPs and ROSCs).
• Audience: Assessors, resolution authorities, and legislative developers.

2. Conduct of Compliance Assessment

• Objective: Evaluate whether the resolution regime meets the Key Attributes in practice.
• Comprehensive Evaluation: Must consider both the legal framework and practical implementation.
• Proportionality: The assessment should reflect the complexity and systemic importance of the banking sector, and some KAs or ECs may be deemed "not applicable" if they are not relevant to the jurisdiction.
• Grading Scale:
  • Compliant: All ECs are met without significant deficiencies.
  • Largely compliant: Minor shortcomings exist, but the regime is robust and comprehensive.
  • Materially non-compliant: Severe shortcomings exist, even if formal rules are in place.
  • Non-compliant: No substantive implementation or the regime is ineffective.

3. Essential Criteria and Explanatory Notes

• Essential Criteria (ECs): The only elements used for compliance assessment and grading. They are not interpreted in a way that conflicts with the underlying KA.
• Explanatory Notes (ENs): Provide context, examples, and cross-references to other KAs. They do not serve as assessment criteria but guide interpretation.

4. Cross-Border Aspects

• Focus on Cooperation: Assessors must evaluate the presence and effectiveness of cross-border cooperation frameworks and processes.
• KA 7, 8, 9, and 12: These KAs specifically address cross-border cooperation.
• Legal and Practical Implementation: The legal and practical application of KA 7 is critical to ensuring the cross-border effectiveness of resolution powers.

5. Access to Information and Stakeholders

• Information Sources: Assessors must have access to a wide range of information, including laws, policies, self-assessments, and cooperation agreements.
• Confidentiality: If confidentiality issues prevent access to certain information, ad hoc arrangements may be necessary to resolve them.
• Impact of Non-Compliance: Failure to provide required information may lead to a lower compliance rating.

6. Recommended Actions ("Action Plan")

• Action Plan Development: The jurisdiction is responsible for developing a plan to improve its resolution regime.
• Focus on Recommendations: The specific grade is secondary to the recommendations and commentary that accompany each KA assessment.
• Interconnected KAs: When ECs are interrelated, the Action Plan should address these connections to ensure a coherent improvement strategy.

Key Attributes and Their Essential Criteria

Conclusion

This methodology provides a structured and proportionate approach to assessing the effectiveness of resolution regimes in the banking sector. It emphasizes the importance of practical implementation, cross-border cooperation, and the development of targeted action plans. The assessment process is designed to ensure that jurisdictions meet the international standards set by the FSB while allowing for sector-specific adaptations and legal differences.