MIL Publishing Engine 1

Source: European Banking Authority

The European Banking Authority (EBA) today issued an Opinion in response to the European Commission’s proposed changes to its draft Regulatory Technical Standards (RTS) on the information to be provided to competent authorities when authorising the offer to the public of asset-referenced tokens or the admission to trade them under the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCAR).

In this Opinion, the EBA accepts the changes proposed by the European Commission, in particular those considered as substantive. At the same time the EBA invites the European Commission to consider amending the Level 1 text at the next available opportunity, to include those elements that were set out in the draft RTS submitted to the Commission, given their importance from a supervisory perspective. Namely, the requirements of a market policy abuse, of an independent third-party audit about the issuer’s proprietary DLT that is operated by the issuer or by a third-party operator, and of a comprehensive notion of good repute aligned with the rest of the financial sector.

Legal basis and background  

This Opinion is based on Article 10(1), para. 5 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010, which requires the EBA to submit its response in the form of an opinion to amendments to draft regulatory technical standards (RTS) proposed by the EC. 

The draft RTS on information for application for authorisation to offer to the public and to seek admission to trading of ARTs specify the information requirements for authorisation to offer to the public or seek admission to trading of asset-referenced tokens under MiCAR. They aim to regulate access to the EU market of ARTs by applicant issuers.

On 6 May 2024, the EBA submitted its final draft RTS to the European Commission and on 13 January 2025, the latter sent a letter to the EBA about its intention to endorse the RTS with amendments and subsequently submitted a modified version of the RTS with the envisaged changes.

Source: Government of the Netherlands

News item | 17-02-2025 | 09:00

Third edition

NATO unveiled its first public mural in January 2024. Made by street artists in Vilnius, Lithuania, in honour of the 2023 summit, it symbolises the alliance’s collective defence mission. The contest continued in Washington, DC, on the occasion of NATO’s 75th anniversary in 2024. This year the honour goes to The Hague, where young artists will have an opportunity to design the NATO summit mural.

The mural contest is part of the campaign #ProtectTheFuture, an alliance-wide programme to encourage involvement by young people, which stresses the importance of freedom, security, democratic values and peace.

The mural created for the first NATO art contest, entitled ‘Life Under a Peaceful Sky‘, was designed by the young Lithuanian artist Žygimantas Amelinas and can be found on a wall next to the Reformers Park in Vilnius. The second mural, entitled ‘Security through Cooperation’, was designed by the young Danish artist Eske Toubourg and painted by Washington muralist Hamilton Glass in the centre of Washington, near the Walter E. Washington Convention Centre.

Criteria

The contest is open to everyone between the ages of 18 and 35 from one of the 32 NATO countries. This includes both aspiring artists and anyone else interested in sharing a visual design related to this year’s theme, ‘Maintaining Our Shared Future’. Artists are encouraged to create an optical illusion of a three-dimensional design for a two-dimensional surface. Entries must be submitted via the NATO website no later than 31 March 2025.

Unveiling

One of the members of the jury is Michiel Corver, director of The Hague Street Art. The winning work will be unveiled in The Hague in June 2025, and will be visible to world leaders and representatives at the summit.

Source: European Banking Authority

The European Banking Authority (EBA) today launched a consultation to amend the Implementing Regulation on the benchmarking of credit risk, market risk and IFRS9 models for the 2026 exercise. The most significant changes, in the market risk framework, are the new templates for the collection of the alternative internal model approach (AIMA) risk measures under the fundamental review of the trading book (FRTB) and the extension of the scope of the exercise to banks that apply solely the Alternative Standardised Approach (ASA) methodology. For the credit risk framework only minor changes are being proposed. This consultation runs until 26 May 2025.

The EBA benchmarking exercise is the basis for both the supervisory assessment and the horizontal analysis of the outcome of internal models. It ensures consistent monitoring of the variability of own funds requirements resulting from the application of internal models as well as of the impact of the several different supervisory and regulatory measures, which influence the capital requirements and solvency ratios in the EU. In this regard, this consultation paper updates the information to be collected in the 2026 exercise.

The changes will be substantial for the market risk part. Besides the new templates and instructions for collecting the AIMA FRTB risk measures (expected shortfall, default risk charge, and stress scenario risk measure),  the scope of the exercise will be extended to banks that apply solely the ASA methodology. This extension is a direct application of the revised wording of the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD VI) and has a massive impact on the number of banks participating in the market risk assessment. In this regard, the FRTB ASA data collection was already developed in the past exercises, so the amendments to the framework of the exercise are less extensive.

As regards the credit risk benchmarking, the amendments to the ITS will provide a mapping between the asset classes used for the definition of the benchmarking portfolios and the breakdown of Credit Risk IRB templates adopted in the revised ITS on supervisory reporting, in line with changes in the regulatory framework related to the new Banking Package (Capital Requirements Regulation – CRR3, and CRD6).

Consultation process

Responses to the consultations can be sent to the EBA by clicking on the “send your comments” button on the consultation page.

All contributions received will be published after the consultation closes, unless requested otherwise. The deadline for the submission of comments is 26 May 2025

A public hearing on this consultation will take place on 10 April 2025 from 14:00 to 15:30 CEST. Deadline for registration is 8 April 2025 at 16:00 CEST.

Legal basis

This draft ITS have been developed in accordance with article 78 of the CRD, which requires the EBA to specify the benchmarking portfolios, templates and definitions to be used as part of the annual benchmarking exercises. These are used by competent authorities to conduct an annual assessment of the quality of internal approaches used for the calculation of own funds requirements.

Source: European Banking Authority

The European Banking Authority (EBA) today published a Report assessing the availability and accessibility of data related to environmental, social and governance (ESG) risks as well as the feasibility of introducing a standardised methodology for identifying and qualifying credit exposures to such risks. The Report finds that while there have been significant improvements over the recent years on availability and accessibility of data, the ESG data landscape remains incomplete at this stage. Key policy initiatives such as the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the supporting European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), as well as further transparency in the methodologies of ESG scores and External Credit Assessment Institutions’ (ECAI) credit risk ratings, are expected to further improve this landscape and mitigate challenges.

Credit institutions are increasingly assessing ESG risks, although progress differs across exposure classes. Data availability, quality and granularity remain among the most significant challenges in developing more advanced approaches.

Methodologies are most mature in the assessment of transition risk in corporate portfolios, where the EBA has observed certain elements of standardisation, such as the use of sectoral classification, greenhouse gas emissions and transition plans of counterparties as the key sources of information.

Similarly, the EBA has observed some degree of standardisation in methodologies for mortgage exposures, which are typically based on the geographical location and energy efficiency of the immovable property collateral.

The methodologies are less mature for other exposure classes where the process of developing relevant methodologies to identify and assess ESG risks is still ongoing. The practices regarding the assessment of environmental risk other than climate, social and governance risks are still at an early stage and mostly qualitative.

While there are emerging practices regarding the assessment of ESG risks, the progress to date on the assessment of how these risks affect the level of credit risk is limited. At this stage, only few institutions apply specific methods for measuring credit risk related to ESG factors, focusing mostly on climate risk. While governance aspects have traditionally been part of the assessment of credit risk, both by institutions and by ECAIs, there is little standardisation and the approaches are mainly qualitative, often based on expert judgement.

Based on the market practices and the current data landscape, the EBA concludes that the feasibility of designing a standardised methodology differs greatly depending on the type of exposures and risks considered. While there have been developments in the identification and assessment of ESG risks, there is still insufficient understanding and evidence of their effective impact on credit risk parameters. Should regulatory efforts towards standardisation be pursued, a sequenced approach would most likely be necessary.

Legal basis

The EBA is mandated under letters (a) and (b) of Article 501c(1) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, i.e. the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR), to assess:

a) the availability and accessibility of reliable and consistent ESG data for credit risk exposure classes;

b) the feasibility of introducing a standardised methodology to identify and qualify these exposures, based on a common set of principles to ESG risk classification, and using the information available from sustainability disclosure frameworks, the guidance and conclusions coming from supervisory stress-testing or scenario analysis of climate-related financial risks, and the relevant ESG score of the credit risk rating by a nominated ECAI.

Source: Government of the Netherlands

News item | 24-02-2025 | 12:02

Why the Netherlands continues to support Ukraine:

For the Ukrainian people

Russia has caused devastation to the daily lives of millions of Ukrainians. Many Ukrainian towns and villages have been completely destroyed. In the areas occupied by Russia, Ukrainians have suffered violence at the hands of Russian soldiers. They have been murdered, tortured and raped. Ukrainian children have also been abducted. With international support, Ukrainians have been defending their country for three years.

For the security of Europe as a whole

Russia’s aggression is about more than Ukraine. President Putin has spoken publicly about a conflict with ‘the West’. And Russia is stepping up its efforts to undermine European countries. This includes cyberattacks, sabotage, election interference and spreading fake news.

In other words: by defending itself against Russia, Ukraine is fighting for the security of Europe as a whole. That’s another reason why it’s important to support Ukraine. A Russian victory in Ukraine will not bring an end to the danger. And the costs for Europe will end up being much higher. Europe may have to deal with even more Russian cyberattacks or other kinds of attacks. And with more Ukrainian refugees who are unable to return home.

For a world in which aggression is not rewarded

A Russian victory would have consequences for the whole world. It would send a signal to Russia and to China, North Korea and Iran that aggression will be rewarded. And that brute strength is more important than international rules and agreements. That could lead to even more wars.

Ukraine must be able to defend itself. And Russia must be made to pay a high price for its aggression. That is why the government is continuing to provide unwavering support to Ukraine. To help secure a positive outcome to the war, based on the idea of: achieving peace by showing strength, not risking further war by showing weakness.

Dutch support for Ukraine

The Netherlands continues to support Ukraine. It is for example providing:

• Military support: equipment, such as munitions, F-16 aircraft and anti-aircraft systems. The Netherlands is also providing training to Ukrainian military personnel.
• Sanctions against Russia: the sanctions imposed by EU member states are hurting the Russian economy. That makes it harder and more expensive for Russia to keep the war going.
• Justice for Ukraine: working to ensure that war crimes do not go unpunished and that people who have suffered damage, loss or injury in the war receive compensation.
• Reconstruction: support to repair damage where it is most needed: water mains, roads, hospitals and the electrical grid. This support is crucial so that Ukraine can continue to function.
• Humanitarian aid: helping international, Dutch and Ukrainian organisations to provide emergency goods, ensure the availability of drinking water, medicine and food, provide protection, and assist civilian victims.
• Protection of Ukrainian cultural heritage: Russia is deliberately attacking cultural targets in Ukraine, in an attempt to erase Ukraine’s culture and identity. The Netherlands is supporting Ukraine in the protection of its cultural heritage.
• Other support: the Netherlands is also helping Ukraine by providing support in areas like healthcare, psychosocial care for victims, agriculture and cybersecurity.

Source: Government of the Netherlands

News item | 19-02-2025 | 00:05

Minister Bruins: “This restitution contributes to redressing a historical injustice that is still being felt today. Cultural heritage is essential for telling and living the history of a country and a community. The Benin Bronzes are indispensable to Nigeria. It is good that they are going back.”

The transfer agreement will be signed in Leiden on 19 February by Mr Bruins and Olugible Holloway, Director-General of the Nigerian National Commission for Museums and Monuments.

DG Holloway: ‘The return from the Netherlands will represent the single largest return of Benin antiquities directly linked to the 1897 British punitive expedition. We thank the Netherlands for their cooperation and hope this will set a good example for other nations of the world in terms of repatriation of lost or looted antiquities.’

The return follows the publication of an advisory report by the Colonial Collections Committee, chaired by Lilian Gonçalves-Ho Kang You. The objects will be returned to the Nigerian government, which will then decide how and where they will be displayed. The Wereldmuseum hopes that the return of the objects will not mark the end of the process, but rather serve as a starting point for further cooperation between museums in Nigeria and the Netherlands.

Return of objects by the municipality of Rotterdam

In addition to the return of 113 objects from the Dutch State Collection, on 19 February the municipality of Rotterdam will also be returning a further six objects that fall under the Benin Bronzes collection. These objects – a bell, three relief plaques, a coconut casing and a staff – were also looted in 1897.

Said Kasmi, a member of the Rotterdam municipal executive: ‘Art and heritage should be where they belong. These objects belong in Nigeria. By returning them, we’re taking an important step towards recognising the past and respecting the value these objects hold for Nigeria.’

Advisory report published by the Colonial Collections Committee

On the basis of a provenance investigation conducted by the Wereldmuseum and the municipality of Rotterdam, the Colonial Collections Committee advised the minister to return these objects in line with the Netherlands’ colonial collections policy. This advisory report resulted from close consultation and collaboration with the Nigerian National Commission for Museums and Monuments. The Committee published the report on its website. This is the fifth time that the Netherlands is returning objects as a direct result of an advisory report by the Committee. The Committee is currently drawing up advisory reports in response to requests submitted by Sri Lanka, India and Indonesia.

Source: Government of the Netherlands

News item | 20-02-2025 | 08:36

These principles form the core of the new development aid policy that the Minister for Foreign Trade and Development, Reinette Klever, sent to the House of Representatives on Thursday. The government has agreed it will impose structural spending cuts of €2.4 billion on development aid from 2027. ‘All the programmes we fund must contribute directly to our own interests: promoting trade, enhancing security and reducing migration,’ Ms Klever said.

The minister believes that current Dutch policy is too fragmented to be sufficiently effective. She has therefore decided to apply a sharper focus and put Dutch interests first. ‘The goal is not merely to reduce development aid, but to make it better. We will make clear choices, doing only what we do best and working wherever possible with Dutch businesses. That will benefit the Netherlands and it will benefit recipient countries,’ the minister explained.

The government is linking aid and trade more explicitly, too. ‘We will give Dutch businesses more opportunity to win development contracts,’ Ms Klever said. ‘And we’ll help the countries concerned to develop into trading partners, which will be good for their economies and employment figures.’

The government will also use development aid as a way to boost security in various conflict regions surrounding Europe: West Africa, the Horn of Africa, the Middle East and North Africa. This should help avoid disruption to trade, combat the rise of terrorist or criminal organisations and prevent people applying for asylum in the Netherlands. ‘Food shortages, for example, are a cause of conflict,’ Ms Klever explained. ‘So we will deploy Dutch agricultural expertise to improve and increase food production.’

The government wants to tackle migration and is therefore investing in migrant return, as well as reception and protection of refugees in their country or region of origin. Ms Klever: ‘Giving people future prospects in those regions will enable them to build livelihoods, meaning they won’t have to make the journey to Europe.’ The government wants to make agreements with migration countries, aimed at combating migration and encouraging return.

Despite the major cutbacks, the government will continue providing humanitarian aid to people in crisis situations. Ms Klever aims to do this via local aid organisations, as they are able to respond swiftly and effectively in crises.

Under the new policy, funding for various programmes will be terminated, in areas such as gender equality, vocational and higher education, sport and culture. Funding for climate action, civil society and UN organisations will be reduced.

Source: European Banking Authority

The European Supervisory Authorities (EBA, EIOPA and ESMA – the ESAs) are advancing in the implementation of the pan-European oversight framework of critical ICT third-party service providers (CTPPs) with the objective to designate the CTPPs and to start the oversight engagement this year.

CTPP designation and engagement

To designate the CTPPs in 2025, the ESAs will perform the following steps:

• Collection of the Registers of Information: Competent Authorities are required to submit to the ESAs, by 30 April 2025, the Registers of Information on ICT third-party arrangements they received from financial entities.
• Criticality assessments: The ESAs will perform the criticality assessments mandated by DORA and notify ICT third-party service providers of their classification as critical by July 2025. This notification will start a six-week period during which ICT third-party service providers may object to the assessment with a reasoned statement and relevant supporting information.
• Final Designation: After the six-week period, the ESAs will designate CTPPs and start oversight engagement with them.

ICT third-party service providers not designated as critical may voluntarily request to be designated as critical once the list of CTPPs is published. Details on how to request this will be provided soon.

Implementation of the oversight framework and setup of the joint ESAs oversight function

The ESAs have been preparing the governance, procedures and methodologies necessary to conduct oversight activities.

To maximise synergies, ensure consistency in the oversight tasks and use resources efficiently, the ESAs have set up a joint DORA oversight function, led since October 2024 by a joint Director. The establishment of this function will allow the ESAs to perform their day-to-day oversight duties with an integrated approach across their sectors.

Next steps

To provide clarity to the market on preparatory activities, the designation process and on the ESAs’ oversight approach, the ESAs plan to organise an online workshop with ICT third-party providers in the second quarter of 2025. Further details on the exact date will be published in due course.

Background

The EU’s Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA), along with the oversight framework of CTPPs, entered into application on 17 January 2025, marking a significant milestone for enhancing the digital operational resilience of the financial sector in the EU.

In addition to Section II of chapter V of DORA, the relevant regulatory references of the oversight framework are the following:

• two Delegated Regulations adopted by the European Commission in Q4 2024 on the basis of two draft Regulatory Technical Standards (RTS) developed by the ESAs covering the items set out in Article 41 of DORA (here and here)
• two Delegated Regulations published in the Official Journal covering the designation criteria to be applied by the ESAs while designating CTPPs (here) and the fees that CTPPs are going to pay according to Article 43 (here)
• Guidelines on cooperation between the ESAs and the relevant Competent Authorities (here)

Financial entities can access the reporting rules for the Registers of Information here. These registers will be used as a basis for the designation of CTPP.

Source: European Banking Authority

The European Banking Authority (EBA) today published its final draft Implementing Technical Standards (ITS) on the Pillar 3 data hub for large and other institutions, which will centralise prudential disclosures by institutions through a single electronic access point on the EBA website. This project is part of the Banking Package laid down in the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR3) and Capital Requirements Directive (CRD6).

The ITS detail the IT solutions and processes to be followed by large and other institutions when submitting their respective Pillar 3 disclosures. This includes the IT solutions to be used, the data exchange formats to be considered and the technical validations to be performed by the EBA. The EBA will provide additional detailed information to the submitters of Pillar 3 information in the onboarding communication plan it expects to publish by the end of the first quarter of 2025.

To submit the information to the EBA, institutions will benefit from a transition period for the information with disclosure reference dates from June to December 2025. This will give them enough time to prepare for the new publication process.

In parallel, the EBA finalised a pilot exercise on a voluntary basis to test the process for large and other institutions. When finalising the draft ITS, the EBA has taken on board the conclusions from this pilot exercise, together with the feedback received during the consultation phase.

Legal basis, backgrounds and next steps

The new Banking Package (CRR3/CRD6), which will implement the latest Basel III reforms in the EU, includes a mandate to the EBA to develop a Pillar 3 data hub. The EBA’s plan on how to implement the mandates included in the Banking Package is explained in the ‘EBA Roadmap on strengthening the prudential framework’, published in December 2023.

The CRR3 (Articles 434 and 434a) mandates the EBA to publish on its website the prudential disclosures for all institutions subject to such requirements, making it readily available in a centralised manner to all the relevant stakeholders through a single electronic access point on its website. To comply with this mandate, the EBA is building a data hub putting together all the disclosures required under Part Eight of the CRR.

The draft ITS for small and non-complex institutions and on the resubmission policy will be subject to a separate consultation, intended to be launched in the first half of 2025.

Source: European Banking Authority

The European Banking Authority (EBA) narrowed down the scope of its existing Guidelines on ICT and security risk management measures, due to the application of harmonised ICT risk management requirements under the Digital Operational Resilience Act (DORA) from 17 January 2025.  These amendments aim at simplifying the ICT risk management framework and providing legal clarity to the market.

DORA has introduced harmonised requirements on ICT risk management that apply to financial entities across the banking, securities/markets, insurance and pensions sectors.

To avoid duplication of requirements and to provide legal clarity to the market, the EBA has amended its Guidelines on ICT and security risk management. In particular, the EBA has narrowed down:

• the entity scope of the Guidelines to only those that are covered by DORA, namely credit institutions, payment institutions, account information service providers, exempted payment institutions and exempted e-money institutions; and
• the scope of the Guidelines to the requirements on relationship management of the payment service users in relation to the provision of payment services.

It is important to note that security and operational risk management requirements under the Payment Services Directive (PSD2), which are applicable since March 2018, continue to apply to other types of payment service providers (PSPs), such as post-office giro institutions and credit unions, that are not covered by DORA. PSPs that are still subject to security and operational risk management under the PSD2 can potentially be subject to additional national requirements, regardless of the existence of the EBA Guidelines that would apply to them. Competent authorities or Member States’ governments wishing to retain the approach set out in the EBA Guidelines for those PSPs can continue to do so under their national legal framework or supervisory measures.

Background, legal basis and next steps

On 27 November 2019, the EBA published the Guidelines on ICT and security risk management (EBA/GL/2019/04) (“Guidelines”) which were built on the provisions of Article 74 of Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD)^[1] and Article 95(3) of Directive (EU) 2015/2366 (PSD2)^[2] . These Guidelines established requirements for credit institutions, investment firms and PSPs on the mitigation and management of their ICT and security risks and aim to ensure a consistent and robust approach across the Single market. The Guidelines entered into force in 2020 and replaced and repealed the preceding Guidelines on security measures for operational and security risks that the EBA had issued three years earlier in fulfilment of a mandate under PSD2 (EBA GL/2017/17).

From 17 January 2025, DORA applies and introduces, inter alia, harmonised requirements for ICT risk management framework (RMF), incident reporting, and third-party risk management and testing.

The amended Guidelines will apply within two months of the publication of the translated versions.