Meeting the steadily increasing demands on intraday liquidity reporting presents a challenge to financial institutions, said April Frazer of Wells Fargo, who chaired a session on the issue. In 2013, the Basel Committee published a series of monitory tools on liquidity requirements, which complemented the liquidity ratios set out in the Basel III regime.
However, progress must be accelerated if banks are to be ready for Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) reporting by the start of 2016. “Real-time liquidity management could prove a complex project,” said Frazer. A SWIFT survey asked banks if they’ve started or planned a project for complying with BCBS liquidity intraday monitoring requirements received a definite ‘no’, with 37% reporting that they had not even commenced preliminary work on implementing the rules.
“The fact so many of us have not started working on this yet is not entirely surprising,” said Anurag Bajaj of Standard Chartered. “There is a real lack of understanding among banks and, similarly, very little has been done to help regulators understand what intraday liquidity tools should deliver.”
According to Joel Feazell, head of intraday liquidity management at Bank of New York Mellon, the lack of understanding is largely due to the uncertainty over whether intraday liquidity reports are principally a reporting issue or a liquidity management issue.
Frazer added that conversations with the regulators suggest that the fundamental issue is one of governance, with management taking precedence over reporting as the overriding aim is to avoid another financial crisis.
History of little use
Christian Goerlach of Deutsche Bank suggested that historic data is of little use to banks in managing risk. “DB has dedicated intraday liquidity risk management,” he said. “But collecting historic data is like driving a car using the rear view mirror; it means that you’re not looking ahead to the next curve.
Goerlach believes that collaboration between the banks is essential in defining the new standards expected of them and one area could be building a data bank of information contributed by all the banks into a single system.
However, Frazer expressed scepticism in winding up the session.”If we could get all the regulators around the world to agree [to one single standard], I’d be shocked,” she said. “More likely it will vary according to individual jurisdictions and with different timelines applying.”
For more Sibos 2014 coverage…
Are the Costs of Regulatory Reform Too High?
Apple Pay, Cyber Risk are Game Changers
Is Corporate Transaction Banking Almost Here?
Will Banks and Businesses Embrace Bitcoin?
SWIFT Chief’s Three Key Lessons about Payments
The UK’s Prompt Payment Code will have a significant impact on the relationship between large businesses and their suppliers. What does the Code mean for your business? And how can you navigate this change effectively?
When it comes to the relationship between Europe and Britain – uniformity isn’t a word that currently springs to mind. And that’s not just a reference to Brexit. Whilst the Europe and Britain do find themselves in the midst of a political break-up – their monetary policies are also showing signs of divergence.
Europe’s introduction of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) next May will have implications for businesses around the world and US corporates should start getting ready if they haven’t already done so.
The recent NotPetya cyberattack underlined the need for organisations to address their exposure and how to mitigate the risk.