Search for Q&As

Enquirers can use various factors to search for a Q&A:

  • These include searching by the Q&A ID; legal reference, date submitted, technical standard / guideline, or by keyword if known.
  • Searches can be extended to more than one legal act, topic, technical standard or guidelines by making multiple selections (i.e. pressing 'Ctrl' on your keyboard, and selecting the relevant ones from the drop-down lists by left mouse-click).

Disclaimer:

Q&As refer to the provisions in force on the day of their publication. The EBA does not systematically review published Q&As following the amendment of legislative acts. Users of the Q&A tool should therefore check the date of publication of the Q&A and whether the provisions referred to in the answer remain the same.

Please note that the Q&As related to the supervisory benchmarking exercises have been moved to the dedicated handbook page. You can submit Q&As on this topic here.

Final Q&As Q&As under review Rejected Q&As Archived Q&As All Q&As

List of Q&A's

Remaining maturity of the transactions for collateralised transactions

As per CRR Article 162(2)(c)& (d)- This states (as per below). Can the term "remaining maturity" in the below paragraphs be defined as Margin Period of Risk for collateralised transactions and Contractual maturity for un-collateralised transactions? (c)  for exposures arising from fully or nearly-fully collateralised derivative instruments listed in Annex II and fully or nearly-fully collateralised margin lending transactions which are subject to a master netting agreement, M shall be the weighted average remaining maturity of the transactions where M shall be at least 10 days; (d)  for repurchase transactions or securities or commodities lending or borrowing transactions which are subject to a master netting agreement, M shall be the weighted average remaining maturity of the transactions where M shall be at least five days. The notional amount of each transaction shall be used for weighting the maturity;

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: EBA/GL/2016/11 - Guidelines on disclosure requirements under Part Eight of CRR
  • ID: 2024_7204
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 07/03/2025

Treatment of Net Interest Income Stress Outlier Test (NII SOT) in scenarios where breaches occur due to one-off effects (EBA/RTS/2022/10)

Could you please provide guidance on how banks should approach the reporting of such NII SOT breaches arising from such short-term, non-structural events and in addition how is it foreseen that the regulator should govern such cases? Specifically, are there any provisions or considerations that can be applied to account for these temporary effects without misrepresenting the bank's overall NII sensitivity? 

  • Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 530/2014 - RTS on materiality of thresholds for internal approaches to specific risk in the trading book
  • ID: 2025_7343
  • Topic: Interest Rate Risk for Banking Book (IRRBB)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 03/03/2025

Exemption from approval for financial holding companies or mixed financial holding companies as per Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD) Article 21a (4) (d)

Should the criterion in Article 21a (4) (d) CRD (engagement in taking management, operational or financial decisions affecting the group or its subsidiaries) be considered to be met if the some persons are represented on the governing bodies of both the (mixed) financial holding company and an institution that is a subsidiary?

  • Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2025_7330
  • Topic: Other issues
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 03/03/2025

Template EU MR4 missing from Annex

The EBA Pillar 3 mapping tool mentions template EU MR4. I cannot find this in any of the annexes. Is this template relevant?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: EBA/GL/2016/11 - Guidelines on disclosure requirements under Part Eight of CRR
  • ID: 2025_7339
  • Topic: Transparency and Pillar 3
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 28/02/2025

Reported amount in F09.02 col0010 if overcollateralization can occur

How should financial guarantees be reported in F09.02 if the value of the guarantee exceeds the loan exposure (possible overcollateralization)?Example:There is a credit risk mitigation group including 2 financial guarantees and 1 loan exposure as follows:Financial guarantee nr.1 - 15 000 EURFinancial guarantee nr.2 - 17 000 EURLoan exposure - 14 000 EURReported amount in F09.02 col0010 = ?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2021/451 – ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (repealed)
  • ID: 2025_7328
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - FINREP (incl. FB&NPE)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 28/02/2025

Date of Disclosure

CRR Art. 433 states that the disclosure should happen the date of the publication of the financial statements. Due to the imlempentation of CRR III EBA granted an extention to submit Q1 regulatory reports to the 30.06. How should the disclosure be handled?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: EBA/GL/2016/11 - Guidelines on disclosure requirements under Part Eight of CRR
  • ID: 2025_7327
  • Topic: Transparency and Pillar 3
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 28/02/2025

EBA_v10862 (Type – Warning validation): Assets under custody ({G01.00,r0060,c0010}) should be equal to the value in FINREP ({F22.02,r0060,c0010}).

a) The “Custody assets” referred in FINREP 22.2 is described as “service of safekeeping & administration of financial instruments for the account of clients provided by the institution and services related to custodianship such as cash and collateral management”. How the word “Service” in above definition needs to be interpreted? Does it mean to populate balance only in those cases where some fee is being charged for services provided or record all custody assets irrespective of any fee is charged /revenue being generated? 21.2. Assets involved in the services provided (22.2)285. Business related to asset management, custody functions, and otherservices provided by the institution shall be reported using the followingdefinitions:(a) ‘Asset management’ shall refer to assets belonging directly to thecustomers, for which the institution is providing management. ‘Assetmanagement’ shall be reported by type of customer: collective investmentundertakings, pension funds, customer portfolios managed on adiscretionary basis, and other investment vehicles;(b) ‘Custody assets’ shall refer to the services of safekeeping andadministration of financial instruments for the account of clients providedby the institution and services related to custodianship such as cash andcollateral management. ‘Custody assets’ shall be reported by type ofcustomers for which the institution is holding the assets distinguishingbetween collective investment undertakings and others. The item ‘of which:entrusted to other entities’ shall refer to the amount of assets included incustody assets for which the institution has given the effective custody toother entities; b)    As the validation rule “V10862" matches 2 data points (AUM and Custody assets) which in GSIB is reported in one cell under table G01.00 Row 0060 “Assets under Custody” whereas in FINREP table 22.2 there are two different cells representing it “Assets Management(by type of customer) Row 0010” & “Custody assets (by type of customer) Row 0060” , thus making the validation incorrect? Hence, please clarify as to how to interpret the validation and whether it will be updated to include Asset Management and Custody Assets in FINREP 22.2 (i.e. validation will be Asset Management + Custody Assets in FINREP 22.2 to "Assets Under Custody" in GSIB) such that the number then reported will tie back with GSIB "Assets under custody”.

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2024/3117 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions
  • ID: 2025_7320
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - FINREP (incl. FB&NPE)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 28/02/2025

Inclusion of expected loss for equity exposures in calculation of Expected loss amount reducing CET1

Are the expected loss amount for equity exposures calculated in accordance with Article 158(7), (8) or (9) CRR included in the impairment comparison according to Article 159 CRR or not? Shall the expected loss amount for equity exposures be deducted directly from Common Equity Tier 1 capital in row 380 of CA1 (in accordance with Article 36 (1)(d) CRR)? Even if as a consequence validation rule v4811_m would fail?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (repealed)
  • ID: 2022_6466
  • Topic: Model validation
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 27/02/2025

Validation Rule for Marginal Impact of Reintegration of CVA Exemptions

The guidance for the population of rows 0040-0110 specifies that firms should populate the marginal impact of reintegration of CVA exemptions "separately for each exemption". However there is a warning validation rule v23083_m which specifies that the sum of the individual exemptions should be equal to the total "{r0040} = {r0050} + {r0060} + {r0090} + {r0100} + {r0110}". We would like to query whether the validation rule is valid and therefore whether we should be calculating a single CVA exemption reintegration impact of excluded transactions and then attributing by type of exemption or genuinely calculating the marginal impact separately by type of exemption. 

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Draft ITS on Supervisory Reporting of Institutions
  • ID: 2025_7295
  • Topic: Supervisory reporting - COREP (incl. IP Losses)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 26/02/2025

Validation rules taxonomy V4.0 C09.02 v23650_h

According to the formulae v23650_h : {r0030} = {r0050} + {r0051} in c0010, c0030, c0040, c0050, c0055, c0060, c0070, c0105, c0110, c0120, c0121, c0122, c0125, c0130 in C09.02 “CR GB 2”.This control makes the comparative between r0030 “Corporates” and the sum of lines r0050 “Of Which: SME” and r0051 “Of Which: Large Corporates" in CR GB 2.However, in Annex 2, the instructions for line 0030 refer to Article 147(2), point (c), of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 which classifies Corporates as the following : i)General Corporate, ii) Specialized financing exposures and iii)Purchased receivables. The control seems incoherent since lines r0050 and r0051 expect "of which" items.To be compliant with the corporate categories defined in Article 147, line 0030 should be compared with the totalization of lines 0052 "Specialized lending", 0057 "Purchased receivables" and 0058 "Others".Could you please therefore confirm that the control needs to be modified?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2024/3117 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions
  • ID: 2025_7323
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 26/02/2025

Validation rules taxonomy V4.0 C09.02 v6052_m

According to the formulae v6052_m : {r0150} = {r0010} + {r0011} + {r0012} + {r0013} +{r0020} + {r0030} + {r0060} + {r0132} +{r0140} in c0010, c0030, c0040, c0050, c0055, c0060, c0070, c0105, c0110, c0120, c0125, c0130 in C09.02 “CR GB 2”.This control ensures that the sum of exposures declared in line 0150 "Total exposures" is equal to the sum of lines 0010 "Central governments or central banks", 0011 "Of which: Regional governments or local authorities", 0012 "Regional governments or local authorities", 0013 "Public sector entities", 0020 "Institutions", 0030 "Corporates", 0060 "Retail", 0132 "Collective investments undertakings (CIU)" and 00140 "Equity" in CR GB 2.However, the line 0011 is an "of which" of the line 0010 which is also in the formula, this means that it will be doubly taken into account in the totalization.Could you please therefore confirm that the line 0011 should be deleted from the formula?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2024/3117 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions
  • ID: 2025_7324
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 26/02/2025

Validation rules taxonomy V4.0 C08.01 v4769_m

The formula v4769_m specifies that for C08.01, the total sheet is the sum of all the IRB Advanced sheets, including the memorandum items.However, Final ITS instructions specify that memo subcategories must be reported separately as a subclass of exposure, not linked to the total IRB exposures classes. Also, in the C02.00, lines with reference to memorandum items are shaded and not included in the totalization.The control seems incoherent.Could you please therefore confirm that sheets  with reference to memo items should not be taken into account in the formula?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2024/3117 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions
  • ID: 2025_7325
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 26/02/2025

Validation rules taxonomy V4.0 C08.01 v4770_m

The formula v4770_m specifies that for C08.01, the total sheet is the sum of all the IRB Foundation sheets, including the memorandum items.However, Final ITS instructions specify that memo subcategories must be reported separately as a subclass of exposure, not linked to the total IRB exposures classes. Also, in the C02.00, lines with reference to memorandum items are shaded and not included in the totalization.The control seems incoherent.Could you please therefore confirm that sheets with reference to memo items should be removed from the formula?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2024/3117 - ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions
  • ID: 2025_7326
  • Topic: Credit risk
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 26/02/2025

Sign convention on EVE, NII and MV levels in Template J_01.00 and J_02.00

If the value of EVE,  NII and MV level in columns c0030, c0100, c0130 of template J_02.00 result in a negative sign, is it correct to input a positive sign in template J_01.00 for the same items as requested by the validation rules?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Regulation (EU) 2021/451 – ITS on supervisory reporting of institutions (repealed)
  • ID: 2025_7333
  • Topic: Interest Rate Risk for Banking Book (IRRBB)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 21/02/2025

Computation of the secured part of Non-IPRE according to Art.125(1)

In the computation of the secured part of Non-IPRE exposures, should senior liens from banks within the same group be taken into account?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2025_7305
  • Topic: Other issues
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 21/02/2025

Clarification of allocation of cash flows from floating rate instruments with amortizing principal for evaluating interest rate risk in the banking book using the standardised methodology

How should cash flows from floating rate instruments with amortizing principal be allocated into repricing time buckets under the standardised methodology for evaluating interest rate risk in the non-trading book?

  • Legal act: Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2024_7218
  • Topic: Interest Rate Risk for Banking Book (IRRBB)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 21/02/2025

Are trust services under the scope of DORA, whatever the nature of the services

Financial institutions (EEFFs) subject to the DORA Regulation understand that Trust services, whatever they are, are “ICT services” and therefore their providers (Trust Service Providers / TSPs) are included in the scope of the DORA Regulation. However, these Trust services do not always constitute or are part of an essential or important function for the operation of such entities, but serve for auxiliary or internal functions of the entities.  Let's take the case of an electronic signature certificate used by a representative to sign contracts with suppliers or internal legal documents: is it essential for the continued operation of a bank, and would the suspension of the service significantly affect the authorized activity of the entity?  Another example: could the use of a platform that allows the remote management of electronic notifications sent to EEFFs by public administrations thanks to connectors that allow the entity to be identified with electronic certificates be considered essential for the EEFFs' operations? It is really a tool that facilitates the administrative procedures of the entity and is not part of the services it provides to its customers.    

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 2022/2554 (DORA)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2024_7200
  • Topic: ICT third-party risk management
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 19/02/2025

Lex Specialis NIS2 Directive

Are financial entities in scope of DORA required to submit incident reports under the NIS2 Directive ahead of DORA coming into effect in January 2025?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 2022/2554 (DORA)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2024_7060
  • Topic: ICT-related incidents (management / classification / reporting)
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 18/02/2025

Application of DORA Regulation to sub-threshold AIFMs which have chosen to opt-in to the application of the AIFMD (Art. 3(4)), if the thresholds regarding AuM referred to under Article 3(2) of AIFMD are not exceeded

Are sub-threshold alternative investment fund managers (AIFMs) as referred to in Article 3(2) of Directive 2011/61/EU (“AIFMD”), which have chosen to opt-in to the application of the AIFMD according to Article 3(4) of that Directive, captured within the scope of application of Regulation (EU) 2022/2554 (“DORA”) under Articles 2(1)(k) and 2(3)(a) of DORA, if the thresholds regarding assets under management (“AuM”) referred to under Article 3(2) of AIFMD are not exceeded by such AIFM?

  • Legal act: Regulation (EU) No 2022/2554 (DORA)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2024_7260
  • Topic: Other DORA topics
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 18/02/2025

Regulated financial service

In case of a “regulated financial service” provided by a financial entity authorized / licensed / registered as financial entity to deliver that service, shall it be considered an ICT service in the meaning of DORA?  

  • Legal act: Directive 2022/2556/EU (DORA)
  • COM Delegated or Implementing Acts/RTS/ITS/GLs: Not applicable
  • ID: 2024_7246
  • Topic: Other DORA topics
  • Date of submission:
  • Published as Rejected Q&A: 18/02/2025