HOT TOPICS:   Gold   |   Unitary Plan  |    Mortgage rates

The comment stream

Recent comments

Reader poll

How many new houses will the Government-Auckland Council accord produce in Auckland over the next three years?

Choices
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
3 + 14 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.

Join the Interest community to be a registered commenter so you can:
- Edit your comments
- Avoid the CAPTCHA
- Vote on comments
Register Here

Already registered? log back in here ..

Forgotten your password? No problem! Click here

Finance sector jobs

General Manager Finance, Funding & Commercial Services, Northland District Health Board - Whangarei
Significant Management Opportunity - Attractive Lifestyle Options - Values Driven Organisa...more
New Zealand
Fund Analyst - PPP
New Zealand's leading Fund Management business is seeking a highly competent Analyst to wo...more
New Zealand
Governance Account Manager, Australia
MSCI is looking for a Governance Account Manager to be based in Sydney, Australia....more
Australia
Insurance Product Expert
We are currently seeking professionals to join as an Insurance Product Expert....more
Singapore

RBNZ extends full Basel III implementation timeframe by two years to January 1, 2015 after bank lobbying

Posted in News

By Gareth Vaughan

The Reserve Bank has pushed out its timetable for the full New Zealand implementation of new global capital adequacy requirements for banks by two years. The move comes after the banks apparently raised concerns about not being able to meet the new so-called Basel III standards from the central bank's proposed January 1, 2013 start date.

In its second consultation paper on its plans for the implementation of Basel III the Reserve Bank notes some submissions to its first consultation paper, released last November, raised concerns about the timeframe and asked for a more phased approach. Global oversight body the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision has proposed the new standards be phased in from 2013 to 2019. However, in New Zealand the Reserve Bank had proposed a January 1, 2013 launch unless there were "compelling reasons" for a phased approach.

 "While we now consider some transitional arrangements may be appropriate, we remain of the view that Basel III should be implemented in New Zealand ahead of the Basel Committee's timetable," The Reserve Bank says.

It hasn't yet made any of the submissions on the first consultation paper, or a summary of them, public.

TSB Bank managing director Kevin Murphy, who oversees one of the country's most strongly capitalised banks, told interest.co.nz after the release of the Reserve Bank's first Basel III consultation paper that its timeframes for the adoption of Basel III were "aggressive."

Basel III is a set of reform measures, developed by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision and endorsed by Group of 20 leaders, designed to strengthen the regulation, supervision and risk management of the banking sector in the wake of the global financial crisis. It aims to improve the banking sector's ability to absorb shocks arising from financial and economic stress, improve risk management and governance, and strengthen banks' transparency and disclosures.

The Reserve Bank now says a so-called capital conservation buffer won't be introduced until January 1, 2014, with a countercyclical capital buffer framework also in place from that date.

Reserve Bank proposes grand parenting of non-compliant securities

Despite the Basel III framework not including grand-parenting provisions for capital instruments issued by banks after September 2010, the Reserve Bank says capital instruments issued before the release of its final Basel III standards may qualify for grand parenting if they don't comply with the final standards. It has no date set yet for the release of the final Basel III standards.

Any grand-parenting of securities issued by the banks before September 12, 2010 that no longer qualify as equity will take place over three years, but no later than a particular issue's first call date. Non-qualifying securities will be capped at 67% on January 1, 2013 the Reserve Bank says, 33% a year later and from January 1, 2015 there'll be no recognition of non-qualifying securities.

Other Basel III capital requirements already consulted on such as new minimum ratios and regulatory deductions, will take effect from January 1, 2013, the Reserve Bank says.

Currently banks must have a tier one capital ratio of at least 4%, or 6% for ANZ New Zealand, BNZ, Kiwibank and Westpac NZ due to the about NZ$8 billion of debt, combined, those banks still have on issue under the Crown Wholesale Funding Guarantee Scheme. Tier One capital represents the shareholders' funds in the bank. The banks must also have a minimum 8% total capital ratio.

The Reserve Bank's Basel III proposals would see the standard tier one capital ratio rise to 6%. They also propose a 2.5% "conservation buffer"  to ensure banks maintain a buffer of capital over the minimum ratio requirements that can be used to absorb losses in times of financial and economic stress. This will take the tier one capital ratio to 8.5% and total capital ratio to 10.5%. See more on the capital ratios and capital definitions here.

The central bank says a bank will be able to operate inside the conservation buffer without breaching its bank registration conditions. However, when operating within the buffer a bank must fully restrict earnings distributions such as dividends, share buybacks and discretionary payments on other tier one capital instruments such as perpetual non-cumulative fully-paid up preference shares, to the extent necessary to restore the buffer to 2.5% of common equity. This is stricter than the standard Basel III proposal of only partial restrictions on distributions.

Banks to get up to 12 months warning of incoming 'credit bubble' buffer; Finance companies may be included

Meanwhile, the Reserve Bank has confirmed it will introduce a countercyclical buffer of between 0% and 2.5% proposed under Basel III. The central bank would be able to implement this "infrequently" if it felt "excess private sector credit growth was leading to a build-up of system-wide risk." The buffer could then be released when the credit cycle softens. This buffer would comprise tier one common equity.

The Reserve Bank says it won't set a formal limit on the size of the buffer meaning it would be determined by circumstances. That said, banks will be given up to a year's notice before the countercyclical buffer requirements would be introduced, letting them adjust to the buffer level. At its potential 2.5% high point, the countercyclical buffer would take the tier one capital ratio minimum requirement to 11% versus the current 4% and total capital ratio to 13% versus the current 8% requirement.

The Reserve Bank says the countercyclical buffer could potentially be extended from banks to to other lenders such as non-bank deposit takers - finance companies, building societies and credit unions.

Each financial institution will have to submit a plan to the Reserve Bank on how it'll raise the necessary capital to comply with the countercyclical capital buffer, if given the up to 12 months notice of its introduction. The same restrictions on distributions such as dividends as under the conservation buffer will apply.

No write-offs

Under the central bank's proposals all non-common equity securities would have to be converted to equity, rather than written off, either following a Reserve Bank direction, or if a bank is placed in statutory management.

"We do not favour a write-off approach, as write-off with no compensation could rank debt holders below equity holders," the Reserve Bank says. "Moreover we do not propose to introduce any requirements about the rate of conversion."

Submissions on the second Basel III consultation paper are due by April 13. The Reserve Bank is also reviewing its liquidity policy - which includes the core funding ratio - given Basel III liquidity requirements, and plans to draft changes to its Banking Supervision Handbook to incorporate Basel III requirements.

This article was first published in our email for paid subscribers this morning. See here for more details and to subscribe.

We welcome your help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment in the box on the right or click on the "'Register" link at the bottom of the comments. Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making these comments.

13 Comments

Harrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrhaaaha

Harrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrhaaahaaaahaaaahaaaa....splutter..."bank Lobbying" my big fat bum....
What a farce...what an utter monumental load of shite.

I note not many are tackling

I note not many are tackling the Basel lll posts. Is that because many still dont understand what its about?
Just take a look at what current constraints of 8% reserve requirements of what are "near money" assets that themselves are easily able to be bubble inflated by excess liquidity of created credit and ask yourself if increasing the amount of "near money" reserves having to be held will change a thing that has occured previously with increasing regularity?
Truth is any "real" reserves or any "real money" liabilities of preference share shareholders have been removed by hook or by crook lobbying of public representatives a longtime ago that to be forced to do so is an unnecessary constraint upon the corporate charter of maximising profits for shareholders and a constraint upon economic expansion.
As a majority preferred shareholder of a bank with no personal liability you would not be tempted to create unsustainable credit fueled bubble in the interest of short-term personal enrichment, would you?

Iain - probably. Ultimately,

Iain - probably. Ultimately, it's too little, too late anyway. For all time, the goal-post are gonna keep receding now.
http://steadystate.org/growth-debt-and-the-world-bank/
 
No matter how much you make the banks 'hold' in relation to 'loaned', the process will stay ahead of the game. Eventually - and it has to be withing 10 years, given exponential extraction/depletion vs demand - it'll have to be Arab-type loaning - fee only. Nothing else will have a show of being underwritten, pounds of flesh notwithstanding.
 
Expect some paid obfuscation/spin, but that won't change the reality.

PDK, I am the ultimate

PDK, I am the ultimate optimist, but you have to wonder. This great vid explaining clearly the exponential factor makes you wonder in the context of it, just how far into the hour we are and how full the glass is;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rT06ign4BEM
For those without broadband, it is a video showing the rate a glass would fill at if beginning with one microscopic bacteria doubling every in number every minute over an hour. At 55 mins the glass is still under a third full, seemingly plenty of time to adjust, at 59mins the glass is half full, at 60 mins the glass is full. At 59 mins another three glasses were found to expand into, at 61mins a second glass was full, at 62 mins remaining two glasses were full.
 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9DvjkMMULw&feature=related - this one is a great tale of the Persain King who offered the creator of the game of chess anything he wanted, the man said his request was simple, one grain of wheat reinvested 100% for all 64 squares of the chess board, 1+1=2, 2+2=4, 4+4=8, 8+8=16, 16+16=32, 32+32=64, 64+64=128 etc the mathematically challenged King could not see the long game danger and agreed, he ended owing the man his kingdom as there was not enough grain on earth to filful the bargain.
I suggest those at the helm of the private central banking network have pulled off the chess game inventors trick upon the globe?

Cheers Iain - when I teach

Cheers Iain - when I teach 'the Exponential Function', I work it backwards. From whenever you 'used it all up, the final 'doubling' was from half-way-through. That was also the max-out of supply-rate. You're leaving it late to change a fiscal system which was growth-based, when you leave it until the half-way point.
 
The only way to deny it, is the way Hughey, PB and the DavidB types do - by pretending that we have an infinite planet. They hold the common view, but:
"He who joyfully marches to music in rank and file has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake, since for him the spinal cord would suffice."
-Albert Einstein
 
You might enjoy this (note the date:)
 
http://www.odt.co.nz/opinion/opinion/34180/hard-times-here-stay?page=0%2C1
 
 

PDK, lol, great quote about

PDK, lol, great quote about "spinal cord would suffice" and equally good odt article. I have for much of my researching life concentrated in the main upon the financial supply side of commerce but have always advocated for the need to operate within the boundaries and balance of natural resources and population. I now label myself without hesitation a "Steady Stater" advocating that oneday this feeding frenzy of false doctrine perpetual gowth must stop and convert into a steady state balanced economy or we will suffer the ultimate consequences.
Back to the subject of Capital Reserves, this document gives you great idea of how IOU's of issued debt at one level back the IOU's of issued debt at another level;
http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/02/23/citigroup-tangiblecommonequity-idUSN2335724020090223
"The Tier 1 risk-based capital measure considers how risky a bank's assets are. All other things equal, a banks with lower-risk assets such as U.S. government debt would have a better Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio than a bank with higher-risk assets such as junk bonds. This ratio is meant to reflect the fact that banks with safer assets are themselves safer."
grazy, grazy stuff?
This "all things being equal" is a statement that often comes up in debates with banking technocrats and I alledge it is in regard to the clearing house of the entire banking system as a whole not having exceeded what ultimately backs it or more accurately pays-it-forward and that is what they often also mention "Natural capital" i.e. available natural resources and essentially sustainable natural resources at that?
This "all things being equal" also appeared in an Official Information Act request answer signed off by Bill English's office which questions 4+5 make it very clear it is as I described above;
 
4. Could you please tell me what they use to buy our government bonds and if that medium of exchange existed before we pledged to pay it back with attached interest out of the future taxes of the nation or was it an electronic debt book entry, not anyone’s existing savings, but an electronic book entry that brings into circulation new money?
People purchasing government bonds must do so with New Zealand dollars. Settlement of the transaction between the purchaser and the Crown is by electronic cash transfer rather than physical cash. All else being equal, bond purchases result in a reduction in settlement cash balances of the banking system (either at commercial banks, the Reserve Bank or both) as cash is transferred to the Crown.
An explanation for how this cash may originally be created is included in the answer to question 5
http://publiccreditorbust.blog.com/2012/02/03/official-information-act-reply-from-new-zealand-minister-of-finance-bill-english-makes-it-clear-to-anyone-with-basic-knowledge-of-maths-that-national-debt-is-unrepayable-from-the-day-it-is-issued/

Then you might enjoy

PDK, I note the date of that

PDK, I note the date of that ODT article being written 3 years ago suggesting we have only 3 odd yrs to react or it maybe beyond the exponential factor tipping point, I can only hope you are wrong. Its a funny thing about the area's of research folk like you and I are trying to alert people to ahead of time, we must be the only ones hoping like hell what we are saying is going to be wrong and getting more depressed as you we get proven right?

There are a lot like us, and

There are a lot like us, and a lot who wonder why it doesn't get through. Note Hugh tonight, as a classic example. Total unwillingness to find out, but absolutey surety that he 'knows'.
 
We've looked to the past, but no record survives of Cassandras during the end-game of empires. Presumably there were some, and presumably they were brushed aside by those whose status (it's all about being mate-able, funnily enough) depended on the bad news being not so.
 
The records are a bit scanty at that point, though. There's a bit of stress on, and the standard of rune-chiselling tends to deteriorate some.

PDK, there are very good

PDK, there are very good examples of honest public money being used to alleviate private debt based monetary systen distress, such as Australian Commonwealth when founded 1911 which issued its own ledger entry money backed or more accurately paid-forward by the full credit of the nations natural capital 1911-1920's. Canadian govt bank formed 1935 odd issued nations own ledger entry money to fund public infrastructure unto 1974 odd. NZ 1935 Labour govt issued own ledger entry money to fund beginning of State Housing Project, Dairy Board overdraft facilty. India and Russia have histories of public money being the basis of their nations money supplies. Some areas of Germany and Soloman Islands have localised areas using public money. Sad thing is the private banking empire have managed to infiltrate and corrupt most any attempt at reducing its rule by debt.
Despite what they like to hammer us with everyday, there have been tried and tested alternatives to what they describe as their "currently generally accepted worldwide best practice" lets remember overt human slavery by chains was once considered "generally accepted worldwide best practice" that has managed to be changed in many places to now be consensually recognised as morrally unacceptable practice. If we keep our nose to the grind stone maybe oneday the same will be said of the private debt based pyramid debt enslavement scam? 

PDK, yep, very good

PDK, yep, very good recomendations outside of any reform of substance of the current monetary system. I practice most all of your recomendations of preparedness but in fairness to Wally's criticisms of me still having a mortgage with what I know of our economic reality, I myself would sell and sit at the moment but even with my knowledge I cant even convince my wife and wider family that things are at the point we should sell the house my family loves. So my outcome rides with my efforts to advocate reform of substance of the monetary system at local and international levels. Dont tell Wally I said that. 

A lot of folk tumble to it,

A lot of folk tumble to it, then realise their partners/spouses/mates aren't won't going to get there.
 
I've suggested to other folk who won't be debt-free when it all unwinds, that they share. I'm more on about acreages, but it applies to housing too.

Great article here about all

Great article here about all the lovely securitised goodies that are going to be accepted as capital backing under Basel lll;
http://www.claytonutz.com/publications/news/201012/17/rba_measures_for_basel_iii_liquidity_standards_good_news_for_asset-backed_securities_market.page
Qualifying collateral for the facility will comprise all assets eligible for repo transactions with the RBS under normal market operations.
Eligible assets under the RBA's open market operations currently includes the following Australian denominated securities, provided they satisfy certain prescribed conditions: asset-backed commercial paper (ABCP), ADI-issued debt securities and residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS), commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) and securities backed by auto loans/leases and credit card receivable.