RBI announces new regulatory framework for big Banks
PrintListen to this Article
The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) announced a new framework on Tuesday for identifying and dealing with large banks in the country, termed domestic systemically important banks (D-SIB).
Due to their size, cross-jurisdictional activities, complexity, lack of substitutability and interconnectedness, such banks become systemically important. These big lenders, perceived as “too big to fail”, will be publicly identified as such by the regulator from August 2015.
The move comes as remedial measures to the problems faced during the global financial crisis of 2008, when certain large and highly interconnected financial institutions hampered the orderly functioning of the financial system, which in turn, negatively impacted the real economy.
RBI said from data it had compiled as of March 31, 2013, four to six domestic banks would qualify under the D-SIB category.
It also said four sub-categories of D-SIB lenders would be created, each with different requirements for additional common equity tier-1 capital requirements that would range from 0.2-0.8 per cent of risk-weighted assets.
“The banks designated as D-SIBs will be subjected to more intensive supervision in the form of higher frequency and higher intensity of on- and offsite monitoring. It is also important that these banks adopt sound corporate governance of risk and risk management culture,” it said.
Based on the sample of banks chosen for computation of their systemic importance, a relative composite systemic importance score of the banks will be computed and then RBI will determine a cut-off score beyond which banks will be considered D-SIBs.
The amount of additional capital requirements for D-SIBs is based on a mix of quantitative calibration and consideration of country-specific factors. D-SIBs will also be subjected to differentiated supervisory requirements and a higher intensity of supervision, based on the risks they pose to the financial system.
On foreign banks with a branch presence in India, those with a parent which is not a global-SIB but is a D-SIB in India will have to maintain a D-SIB additional capital surcharge here.
“In case a foreign bank having branch presence in India is both a G-SIB and a DSIB in India, it has to maintain a capital surcharge in India at a rate which is the higher of the two,” the central bank added. (Business Standard)
Category : Bank | Comments : 0 | Hits : 786
TEST
The country's largest lender State Bank of India on Tuesday reported about Rs 12,000 crore divergence in their bad loans for the last fiscal.As per the assessment done by the RBI, the gross NPA of SBI was Rs 11,932 crore more at Rs 1,84,682 crore as against Rs 1,72,750 crore reported by the bank for 2018-19, SBI said in a regulatory filing. Similarly, the net NPA was Rs 77,827 crore as compared to disclosed figure of Rs 65,895 crore, reflecting divergence of Rs 11,932 crore, it said.As a ...
The Indian Banks’ Association is planning to lobby the government against an arbitrary tax notice which seeks to extract as much as Rs 40,000 crore from the country’s banks. In a notice served earlier this month, all banks were asked to pay service tax, penalties and interest on free services offered to customers. ET was the first to report the move in its April 24 edition. The demand is retrospective with a 12% service tax claimed since 2012, 18% interest on the amount and ...
Cash deposits of Rs15.39 crore made in a Delhi bank post demonetisation have been held as ‘benami’ property by a special court even as the depositor and the beneficial owner of the stash are “untraceable”. The deposits were declared ‘benami in the ruling in one of the first adjudication cases of the new anti-black money law. The Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led government had brought into force the new Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 from No...
The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought to prevail on the Centre to open a fresh window for exchange of scrapped Rs 500 and Rs 1,000 notes+ for people who missed the December 30 deadline, if they could establish that the money was theirs and they had a genuine reason for not changing it. The court was a step away from ensuring an exchange opportunity when the Centre sought two weeks to respond to the suggestion. The court's previous inquiries had so far failed to move the Centre. The gover...
Comments