Author: Selwyn Manning

Source: Government of the Netherlands

News item | 30-07-2025 | 15:00

It is currently the case that the substance of an asylum application cannot be considered if the asylum seeker in question has a link to another safe country outside the EU. The proposal would legally allow for this also to be the case in situations in which an asylum seeker has already travelled through another safe country, or in which the EU or the Netherlands have agreements in place with a safe country for the asylum procedure to be conducted there.

As Minister van Hijum for Asylum and Migration explains: “The Netherlands argued for this in Brussels, so it’s good that the European Commission has come up with this proposal. It will establish a legal basis for not every asylum application having to be processed in the Netherlands. We’re continuing to work hard in the European context to get a grip on migration and that’s what I’m committed to going forwards.”

Changing the ‘safe third country’ concept will make it easier to decide that an asylum request is not going to be considered because there is another safe country the asylum seeker in question can go to. However, certain conditions do apply. For example, the asylum seeker must actually be able to gain access to that safe country. In addition, international law and the Asylum Procedures Directive set out criteria a country must meet in order to be considered safe. That will continue to be the case.

Moreover, the point of departure is still that anyone seeking asylum should be able to do so safely. However, if agreements exist with a third country, the asylum application will not necessarily have to be processed in the Netherlands or the European Union. In the coming period, the Netherlands is committed to completing the negotiations on this proposal, both with the other member states and the European Parliament, as soon as possible.

Source: European Banking Authority

The European Banking Authority (EBA) today launched a public consultation on its draft Guidelines on the methodology institutions shall apply for their own estimation and application of credit conversion factors (CCF) under the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR). The consultation runs until 15 October 2025.

These Guidelines are a part of the IRB repair programme, are built on the now-stabilised CRR framework, and aim to provide institutions with clear and consistent expectations for Credit Conversion Factor (CCF) estimation.

By leveraging on existing guidance, particularly through the Guidelines on the Probability of Default (PD) and Loss Given Default (LGD) estimation, the EBA aims to ensure alignment and coherence across key risk parameters in the IRB approach, thus promoting a harmonised and reliable modelling landscape.

Much of the CCF guidance formalises existing expectations already in place for PD and LGD, ensuring consistency for institutions while enhancing clarity for CCF models. Recognising the relatively lower materiality and narrower scope of CCF compared to PD and LGD, the EBA aims to introduce with these new Guidelines simplified approaches where appropriate, to support the efficient implementation of risk sensitive methodologies without compromising prudence.

The Consultation Paper includes a list of detailed questions on the proposed approaches to ensure that the EBA receives relevant feedback in order to provide meaningful guidelines to maintain robust internal models while reducing unnecessary complexity.

Consultation process

Responses to this consultation can be sent to the EBA by clicking on the “send your comments” button on the consultation page. Please note that the deadline for the submission of comments is 15 October 2025.

A public hearing will take place via conference call on 3 September 2025 from 15:00 to 16:00 CET. The deadline for registration is the 29 August 2025, 16:00 CET.

All contributions received will be published after the consultation closes, unless requested otherwise.

Legal basis and next steps

Under Article 182(5) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 amended by Regulation (EU) No 2024/1623, the EBA is mandated to provide guidance to specify the methodology institutions shall apply for the own estimation and application of CCFs, i.e. the IRB-CCF GL.

Source: European Banking Authority

The European Banking Authority (EBA) today launched a public consultation on its draft amended  Guidelines on the application of the definition of default under the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR). As part of its commitment to financial stability, transparency, and consistency, the EBA is proposing to maintain the existing 1% threshold for net present value (NPV) loss in debt restructuring. This approach reflects a careful balance between flexibility for institutions and the need to uphold robust risk management standards. The consultation runs until 15 October 2025.

The proposal to retain the 1% threshold is based on three key considerations:

• The current framework is already flexible and risk-sensitive, allows effective restructuring without misclassifying defaults, and is aligned with established accounting principles.
• Maintaining consistency with existing prudential standards helps safeguard the progress made in reducing non-performing loans and prevents regulatory arbitrage.
• A stable threshold supports reliable credit risk modelling, ensuring accurate capital and provisioning assessments across portfolios under both IRB and IFRS 9.

To allow for more proactive debt restructuring and reduce the potential burden on debtors, the EBA is considering a shortened probation period from 1 year to e.g. 3 months for certain forborne exposures. The draft amended Guidelines, however, do not incorporate this change, also because it would widen the gap between the definition of non-performing exposures and the definition of default.

Besides the changes brought forward by the revised CRR, the EBA is also proposing to increase the exceptional treatment of days past due at invoice level from 30 to 90 for non-recourse factoring arrangements to better reflect the economic reality of purchased receivables.

Consultation process

Responses to this consultation can be sent to the EBA by clicking on the “send your comments” button on the consultation page. Please note that the deadline for the submission of comments is 15 October 2025.

A public hearing will take place via conference call on 3 September 2025 from 11:00 to 12:00 CET. The deadline for registration is the 29 August 2025, 16:00 CET.

All contributions received will be published after the consultation closes, unless requested otherwise.

Legal basis and background

The definition of default is laid down in Article 178 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (Capital Requirements Regulation – CRR) and further detailed in Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/171 and the EBA Guidelines on the definition of default.

Under Article 178(7) of CRR, as amended by Regulation (EU) 2024/1623, the European Banking Authority is mandated to review the Definition of Default guidelines which were drafted by the EBA based on the mandate in Article 178(7) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. While the mandate explicitly mentions that the EBA shall duly consider the need for granting a sufficient flexibility to institutions when specifying what constitutes a diminished financial obligation, the mandate also allows for the review of other parts of the framework.

Source: European Banking Authority

The European Banking Authority (EBA) today published its final Guidelines on the treatment of Acquisition, Development and Construction (ADC) exposures to residential property under the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR). The Guidelines specify the conditions under which institutions may apply a risk weight of 100% instead of 150% to ADC exposures that meet defined credit risk-mitigating requirements. These Guidelines form part of the first phase of the EBA’s roadmap on credit risk implementation of the EU Banking Package. The Guidelines follow a public consultation launched in May 2024 and take into account stakeholder feedback as well as data collected through the related 2024 Quantitative Impact Study (QIS).

The Guidelines specify further the two conditions introduced in the CRR for ADC exposures to residential property to benefit from a risk weight of 100% instead of 150%:

• Condition 1: a significant portion (at least 50%) of total contracts are either:
  • pre-sale contracts with a cash deposit equal to or above 10% of the sale price, or
  • pre-lease contracts with a cash deposit equal to or above three times the monthly lease rate, or
  • sale and lease contracts.
• Condition 2: the obligor has substantial equity at risk, i.e. obligor-contributed equity amounting to at least 25% of the residential property’s value upon completion.

While the first condition remains unchanged compared to the consultation, the second condition has been revised, lowering the equity threshold from 35% to 25% in response to industry feedback and leveraging on QIS data.

In addition, the Guidelines now offer more flexibility for public housing projects, allowing them to meet the first condition if applicant demand exceeds unit supply, even at municipality level. Furthermore, the equity requirement for public housing has been reduced to 20%, and the scope of eligible equity broadened to include committed subsidies, grants, and preferential junior loans. These changes aim to better reflect the specific characteristics of public housing while maintaining a prudential approach.

Legal basis and background

The draft Guidelines have been developed according to Article 126a(3) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (CRR), as amended by the CRR3. 

Source: European Banking Authority

The European Banking Authority (EBA) today published its response to the European Commission’s Call for Advice on fees to validate pro forma models under the European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR).

The Technical Advice makes a series of recommendations to the Commission in view of its Delegated Acton fees to be charged by the EBA for the performance of its new role as central validator of pro forma models, such as ISDA SIMM, under EMIR.

First, the EBA proposes that the Delegated Act allows for all costs – whether direct or indirect – relating to the activities linked to the central validation function of pro forma models to be covered.

Second, to address the feedback received on the difficulties in calculating the 12-month average notional amount of non-centrally cleared OTC derivatives, the EBA proposes to rely on simpler approaches than the ones consulted upon. To this end, the EBA makes proposals on the practical details of the calculation methodology that would ensure proportionality amongst all counterparties in the determination of the annual fee.

Finally, the EBA makes recommendations on the payment modalities and the information to be communicated to EBA for the determination of the individual fees and the invoicing process.

Legal basis

Article 11(12a) of EMIR mandates the EBA to set up a central validation function for the elements and general aspects of pro forma models, and changes thereto, used or to be used by financial and non-financial counterparties. The EBA shall charge an annual fee, per pro forma model, to financial and non-financial counterparties using the pro forma models validated by the EBA. The fees are expected to cover the costs incurred by the EBA in performing this role as central validator.

Pro forma models, such as ISDA SIMM, are used by the industry to calculate initial margin.

On 31 July 2024, the EBA received a Call for advice on a possible Delegated Act on fees with the request to submit its response by Q2 2025.

In March 2025, the EBA consulted market participants as part of its response. The feedback received to this Discussion Paper helped the EBA finalise its response to the European Commission.

Source: European Banking Authority

The European Supervisory Authorities (EBA, EIOPA and ESMA – the ESAs) today launched a public consultation on their draft Joint Guidelines on ESG stress testing, as mandated by the Capital Requirements Directive and the Solvency II Directive. The draft Guidelines set out how competent authorities for the banking and insurance sectors should integrate environmental, social and governance (ESG) risks when performing supervisory stress tests. They aim to harmonise methodologies and practices among supervisors in banking and insurance, to ensure proportionality and to enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of ESG stress testing. The consultation runs until 19 September 2025.

The draft Guidelines, put forward by the Joint Committee of the ESAs, establish a common framework for developing ESG-related stress testing methodologies and standards across the EU’s financial system. They provide comprehensive guidance on the design and features of stress tests with ESG elements, as well as the organisational and governance arrangements such stress tests would need to have. These include sufficient human resources with relevant expertise, data collection and management systems that support access to high-quality ESG data and appropriate timelines for scenario analysis.

Aiming to foster a consistent and long-term approach to ESG stress testing, the draft Guidelines are designed to accommodate future methodological advancements and improvements in data availability.

Consultation process

The ESAs invite stakeholders to provide their feedback on the consultation paper by responding to the questions via an online survey no later than 19 September 2025. All responses will be published on the ESAs’ respective websites unless otherwise requested.

Public hearing

The ESAs will hold an online public hearing on the draft Guidelines on 26 August 2025, from 10:00 to 12:00 CEST. Further details, including dial-in credentials, will be provided closer to the date of the event.

Background

The draft Consultation Paper on Joint Guidelines on ESG stress testing has been prepared to ensure that consistency, long-term considerations, common methodologies and related standards are integrated into the stress testing of environmental, social and governance risks pursuant to Article 100(4) of the Capital Requirements Directive – CRD (Directive 2013/36/EU) and Article 304c(3) of Solvency II (Directive 2009/138/EC) which mandate the ESAs to develop Joint Guidelines on this matter by 10 January 2026.

The draft Guidelines are addressed to competent authorities in the banking and insurance sectors. They do not include new requirements for competent authorities to carry out supervisory stress tests focused on ESG risks.

The Joint Committee is a forum with the objective of strengthening cooperation between the European Banking Authority (EBA), the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) and the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), collectively known as the three European Supervisory Authorities (ESAs). Through the Joint Committee, the three ESAs coordinate their supervisory activities in the scope of their respective responsibilities and ensure consistency in their practices.

Source: European Banking Authority

The European Banking Authority (EBA) today released the Spring 2025 edition of its risk assessment report (RAR), which also analyses the funding plans of banks within the European Union/European Economic Area (EU/EEA). This report is supplemented by the Spring Risk Assessment Questionnaire (RAQ).

Key findings from the EBA risk assessment

•    As of the end of 2024, banks maintained a robust capital base, while profits were at historically high levels. Increased uncertainty and financial market volatility could pose challenges for the sustainability of these.
•    Liquidity levels remained substantial and significantly exceeded minimum standards, although potential risks may emerge due to heightened volatility.
•    EU/EEA banks’ credit risks could rise due to their exposure to sectors affected by tariffs or supply chain disruptions stemming from geopolitical events.
•    Operational risks are on the rise, particularly in relation to cyber threats and a surge in fraudulent activities.
•    The funding plans of EU/EEA banks indicate a focus on leveraging their deposit base and issuing secured debt to facilitate strong asset growth.
•    A significant portion of EU/EEA banks’ exposures could be affected by both transitional and physical climate-related risks, although there is considerable variation among different banks and countries.

Documents

Risk Assessment Report – Spring 2025 [digital]

Source: Government of the Netherlands

News item | 26-06-2025 | 09:59

NATO Public Forum: discussions on peace and security

On this final day of the Summit, the NATO Public Forum was again broadcast live online. Heads of government, young people, experts and opinion leaders participated in panels and talks on current issues relating to peace and security. The sessions are available to watch at www.natopublicforum.org.

With the conclusion of the Summit, the Netherlands can look back on two intensive days of talks and cooperation. It has been a week in which The Hague’s full focus has been on international security and the NATO alliance.

Source: Government of the Netherlands

Source: Government of the Netherlands

News item | 20-06-2025 | 15:20

Minister Van Weel of Justice and Security: ‘Criminals are often after information, data, access to a market or a means to launder money. To achieve that, they need inside help. So they recruit staff – and not in a subtle way. Everyone in a business or organisation needs protection against this. From the municipal officer who issues passports to the port worker checking containers or the haulage company exporting goods. This strategy pushes criminals out and tackles corruption and criminal subversion head-on.’

Minister Uitermark of the Interior and Kingdom Relations: ‘Fighting corruption is an essential pillar to strengthen the resilience and integrity of public administration. Trust in our government depends on our ability to shield our civil servants and administrators from criminal influence. This anti-corruption strategy must contribute to a safer working environment and, by extension, to a safer society.’ 

The strategy includes measures, such as designing processes to make it increasingly difficult to ‘do a job for a criminal’, act unethically or commit corruption offences. At flower auctions, for example, drug detection dogs are deployed at unpredictable times to deter drug traffickers from using staff to smuggle drugs through flower shipments. These dogs not only help detect drugs but also empower staff to adopt a firmer position when approached by criminals. Other measures include tighter authorisation controls for IT systems, greatly reducing the risk of access and limiting leaks of information to criminals.

The Research and Documentation Centre (WODC) is examining where the greatest corruption risks exist in the Netherlands and assessing whether current practices are adequately aligned. The findings are expected early next year. In the meantime, the government is moving ahead with specific processes and sectors whose importance to national security and the economy is so great that we must address them decisively. These at least include central government operations, the issue of travel and identity documents, the resilience of local government officials, and the transport and logistics sectors.

In addition to robust preventive measures, the government is making sustained investments in the National Police Internal Investigations Department, the Fiscal Intelligence and Investigation Service (FIOD), the Public Prosecution Service and the judiciary to detect and punish corruption and criminal interference. The Netherlands is also working with other EU Member States on an EU anti-corruption directive. It includes various criminal offences, some of which are new, aligns the minimum maximum sentences and limitation periods for corruption across the EU, and contains preventive provisions, such as regular national risk assessments and anti-corruption training for all civil servants and government-affiliated organisations.