Cebs stresses simplicity and communication in report on liquidity buffers
An interim report from Cebs gives preliminary views on developing liquidity survival periods, buffers and the assets they should contain
LONDON - The Committee of European Banking Supervisors (Cebs) has released an interim report highlighting the need for a simple and open approach to developing liquidity buffers and survival periods. The report is Cebs' response to a request from the Economic and Financial Committee and is part of the follow-up to Cebs 30 recommendations on liquidity risk management released in September 2008.
Cebs highlights the diversity of approaches to liquidity buffers across European Union national supervisors, and suggests a simple approach well communicated between stakeholders will allow for flexibility across the great breadth and complexity of institutions in the region.
Preliminary views are offered on steering the banking industry's approach to calibrating and determining the size and composition of liquidity buffers over a range of set time periods, in addition to taking stock of factors such as currency and differing legal jurisdictions. The proposals are the result of dialogue conducted through Cebs' Industry Expert Group on Liquidity.
Cebs says a liquidity buffer is dependent upon three dimenstions: the severity of stress scenarios, the time horizon determined as a 'survival period', and the characteristics of the assets in the buffer.
The report "tentatively" suggests one month is an adequate survival period. Assets used in a buffer should be highly liquid - convertible to cash "immediately or within a very short time". Banks should be able to closely estimate the amount of liquidity the assets can generate, through using haircuts when necessary.
Further work will try to determine the size of buffer necessary and the asset types it should contain. These refined proposals will be laid out in a consultation paper that Cebs says it will bring out in mid-2009.
The interim report can be read here.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
BPI says SR 11-7 should go; bank model risk chiefs say ‘no’
Lobby group wants US guidance repealed; practitioners want consistent model supervision and audit
Esma supervision proposals ensnare Bloomberg and Tradeweb
Derivatives and bonds venues would become subject to centralised supervision
Industry frowns on FCA’s single-sided trade reporting efforts
Buy side warns UK attempt to ease Mifir burden may miss target; dealers aren’t happy either
One vision, two paths: UK reporting revamp diverges from EU
FCA and Esma could learn from each other on how to cut industry compliance costs
Market doesn’t share FSB concerns over basis trade
Industry warns tougher haircut regulation could restrict market capacity as debt issuance rises
FCMs warn of regulatory gaps in crypto clearing
CFTC request for comment uncovers concerns over customer protection and unchecked advertising
UK clearing houses face tougher capital regime than EU peers
Ice resists BoE plan to move second skin in the game higher up capital stack, but members approve
ECB seeks capital clarity on Spire repacks
Dealers split between counterparty credit risk and market risk frameworks for repack RWAs