Contents    Prev    Next    Last



Title[ Part 2: The First Pillar - Minimum Capital Requirements

Section[ 3. Adoption of the IRB approach across asset classes



256.     Once a bank adopts an IRB approach for part of its holdings, it is expected to extend it across the entire banking group. The Committee recognises however, that, for many banks, it may not be practicable for various reasons to implement the IRB approach across all material asset classes and business units at the same time. Furthermore, once on IRB, data limitations may mean that banks can meet the standards for the use of own estimates of LGD and EAD for some but not all of their asset classes/business units at the same time.


257.     As such, supervisors may allow banks to adopt a phased rollout of the IRB approach across the  banking group. The phased rollout includes (i) adoption of IRB across asset classes within the same business unit (or in the case of retail exposures across individual sub-classes); (ii) adoption of IRB across business units in the same banking group; and (iii) move from the foundation approach to the advanced approach for certain risk components. However,  when  a  bank  adopts  an  IRB  approach  for  an  asset  class  within  a  particular business unit (or in the case of retail exposures for an individual sub-class), it must apply the IRB approach to all exposures within that asset class (or sub-class) in that unit.


258.     A bank must produce an implementation plan, specifying to what extent and when it intends to roll out IRB  approaches across significant asset classes (or sub-classes in the case of retail) and business units over time. The plan should be exacting, yet realistic, and must be agreed with the supervisor. It should be driven by the practicality and feasibility of moving to the more advanced approaches, and not motivated by a desire to adopt a Pillar 1 approach that minimises its capital charge. During the roll-out period, supervisors will ensure that no capital relief is granted for intra-group transactions which are designed to reduce a banking group’s aggregate capital  charge by transferring  credit risk among entities on the standardised approach, foundation and advanced IRB approaches. This includes, but is not limited to, asset sales or cross guarantees.


259.     Some exposures in non-significant business units as well as asset classes (or sub- classes in the case of retail) that are immaterial in terms of size and perceived risk profile may be exempt from the requirements in the previous two paragraphs, subject to supervisory approval.  Capital  requirements  for  such  operations  will  be  determined  according  to  the standardised approach, with the national supervisor determining whether a bank should hold more capital under Pillar 2 for such positions.


260.     Notwithstanding the above, once a bank has adopted the IRB approach for all or part of any of the corporate, bank, sovereign, or retail asset classes, it will be required to adopt the IRB approach for its equity exposures at the same time, subject to materiality. Supervisors may require a bank to employ one of the IRB equity approaches if  its equity exposures are a significant part of the bank’s business,  even though the bank may not employ an IRB approach in other  business lines. Further, once a bank has adopted the general IRB approach for corporate exposures, it will be required to adopt the IRB approach for the SL sub-classes within the corporate exposure class.


261.     Banks  adopting  an  IRB  approach  are  expected  to  continue  to  employ  an  IRB

approach. A voluntary return to the standardised or foundation approach is permitted only in extraordinary circumstances, such  as divestiture of a large fraction of the bank’s credit- related business, and must be approved by the supervisor.


262.     Given the data limitations associated with SL exposures, a bank may remain on the supervisory slotting criteria approach for one or more of the PF, OF, CF, IPRE or HVCRE sub-classes, and move to the foundation or advanced approach for other sub-classes within the corporate asset class. However, a bank should not move to the advanced approach for the HVCRE sub-class without also doing so for material IPRE exposures at the same time.



Contents    Prev    Next    Last


Seaside Software Inc. DBA askSam Systems, P.O. Box 1428, Perry FL 32348
Telephone: 800-800-1997 / 850-584-6590   •   Email: info@askSam.com   •   Support: http://www.askSam.com/forums
© Copyright 1985-2011   •   Privacy Statement