According to Article 127 of the CRR: “The unsecured part of any item where the obligor has defaulted in accordance with Article 178, or in the case of retail exposures, the unsecured part of any credit facility which has defaulted shall be assigned a risk weight of:(a) 150%, where specific credit risk adjustments are less than 20% of the unsecured part of the exposure value if these specific credit risk adjustments were not applied;(b) 100%, where specific credit risk adjustments are no less than 20% of the unsecured part of the exposure value if these specific credit risk adjustments were not applied.” In order to assess whether the specific credit risk adjustments are higher or lower than 20% of the unsecured part of the exposure value, shall the institution consider all IFRS 9 provisions (without applying any scaling factor) or instead reduce the amount of IFRS 9 provisions by applying the scaling factor?” Two alternative views are possible to answer to this question. 1) According to the first view, banks have to consider all IFRS 9 accounting provisions as specific credit risk adjustments. In particular, Article 473a(7)(b) does not include any reference to the risk weight for exposures in default among those items that need to be recalculated to not take into account the effect of the portion of the expected credit loss that is included in CET1 based; 2) According to an alternative view, the scaling factor should be applied when determining the specific credit risk adjustments according to the intent of Article 473a(7)(b) in conjunction with Recital 8 of Regulation 2017/2395 which states that "Institutions that decide to apply transitional provisions should be required to adjust the calculation of the regulatory elements directly affected by the expected loss of credit provisions to ensure that they do not receive an inappropriate capital reduction".