Related provisions for IFPRU 2.2.55
1 - 9 of 9 items.
(1) IFPRU 2.3 sets out guidance on IFPRU 2.2 (Adequacy of financial resources) so far as it applies to an IFPRU investment firm. In particular, guidance on how a firm should carry out its ICAAP, as well as some factors the FCA will take into consideration when undertaking a SREP. The terms ICAAP and SREP are explained in IFPRU 2.3.3 G. IFPRU 2.3.48 G to IFPRU 2.3.52 R are rules that apply to a firm with an IRB permission.(2) IFPRU 2.3 is mainly written on the basis that IFPRU
The adequacy of a firm's capital needs to be assessed both by a firm and the FCA. This process involves:(1) an internal capital adequacy assessment process (ICAAP), which a firm is obliged to carry out in accordance with the ICAAPrules; and(2) a supervisory review and evaluation process (SREP), which is conducted by the FCA.
The FCA will review a firm'sICAAP, including the results of the firm's stress tests carried out under IFPRU and the EUCRR, as part of its SREP. Provided that the FCA is satisfied with the appropriateness of a firm's capital assessment, the FCA will take into account that firm'sICAAP and stress tests in its SREP. More material on stress tests for a firm with an IRB permission can be found in IFPRU 2.3.50 R to IFPRU 2.3.54 G.11
Where the amount or quality of capital which the FCA considers a firm should hold to meet the overall financial adequacy rule or as a capital planning buffer is not the same as that which results from a firm'sICAAP, the FCA usually expects to discuss any such difference with the firm. Where necessary, the FCA may consider the use of its powers under section 166 of the Act (Reports by skilled persons) to assist in such circumstances.
For the purposes of IFPRU 2.3.21 G, 1IFPRU 2.3.20 G1 applies as it applies to individual capital guidance. References in those provisions to individual capital guidance should be read as if they were references to capital planning buffer. In relation toIFPRU 2.2.62 R, where the general stress and scenario testing rule or SYSC 20 (Reverse stress testing), as part of the ICAAPrules, applies to a firm on a consolidated basis, the FCA may notify the firm that it should hold a group
In the circumstance in IFPRU 2.3.23 G, the FCA may ask a firm for alternative or more detailed proposals and plans or further assessments and analyses of capital adequacy and risks faced by the firm. The FCA will seek to agree with the firm appropriate timescales and scope for any such additional work, in the light of the circumstances which have arisen.
IFPRU 2.3.34 G to IFPRU 2.3.36G set out what the FCA considers to be a proportional approach to preparing an ICAAP as referred to in IFPRU 2.2.12 R (The processes, strategies and systems required by the overall Pillar 2 rule should be comprehensive and proportionate), according to the relative degree of complexity of a firm's activities. If a firm adopts the appropriate approach, it may enable the FCA more easily to review a firm'sICAAP when the FCA undertakes its SREP. The FCA
(1) This paragraph applies to a proportional ICAAP in the case of a firm that is a significant IFPRU firm (see IFPRU 1.2.3 R) whose activities are complex.(2) A proportional approach to that firm'sICAAP should cover the matters identified in IFPRU 2.3.34 G and IFPRU 2.3.35 G, but is likely also to involve the use of models, most of which will be integrated into its day-to-day management and operation.(3) Models of the kind referred to in (2) may be linked to generate an overall
In relation to the use of an ECM (see IFPRU 2.3.36 G), the FCA is likely to place more reliance on a firm'sICAAP if the firm provides the following information: (1) a comparison of the amount of capital that the ECM generates in respect of each of the risks captured in the own funds requirements before aggregation with the corresponding components of the own funds requirements calculation; and(2) evidence that the guidance inIFPRU 2.3.68 G to IFPRU 2.3.75 G1 has been followed
A firm controlled by a parent financial holding company in a Member State or a parent mixed financial holding company in a Member State must comply with the ICAAPrules on the basis of the consolidated situation of that holding company, if the FCA is responsible for supervision of the firm on a consolidated basis under article 111 of CRD. [Note: article 108(3) of CRD]
For the purpose of the ICAAPrules as they apply on a consolidated basis or on a sub-consolidated basis: (1) the firm must ensure that the FCA consolidation group has the processes, strategies and systems required by the overall Pillar 2 rule;(2) the risks to which the overall Pillar 2 rule and the general stress and scenario testing rule refer are those risks as they apply to each member of the FCA consolidation group;(3) the reference in the overall Pillar 2 rule to amounts
(1) In identifying an appropriate range of adverse circumstances and events in accordance with IFPRU 2.2.37 R (2):(a) a firm will need to consider the cycles it is most exposed to and whether these are general economic cycles or specific to particular markets, sectors or industries;(b) for the purposes of IFPRU 2.2.37 R (2)(a), the amplitude and duration of the relevant cycle should include a severe downturn scenario based on forward-looking hypothetical events, calibrated against
6The appropriate regulator may formulate macroeconomic and financial market scenarios which a firm may use as an additional input to its ICAAP or ICA submission. In addition, the appropriate regulator may also ask a firm to apply specific scenarios directly in its ICAAP or ICA submission.
(1) If a firm'sremuneration policy is not aligned with effective risk management it is likely that employees will have incentives to act in ways that might undermine effective risk management.(2) The Remuneration Code covers all aspects of remuneration that could have a bearing on effective risk management including salaries, bonuses, long-term incentive plans, options, hiring bonuses, severance packages and pension arrangements. In applying the Remuneration Code, a firm should
(1) If a firm'sremuneration policy is not aligned with effective risk management, it is likely that employees will have incentives to act in ways that might undermine effective risk management. (2) The BIPRU Remuneration Code covers all aspects of remuneration that could have a bearing on effective risk management including salaries, bonuses, long-term incentive plans, options, hiring bonuses, severance packages and pension arrangements. In applying the BIPRU Remuneration Code,
(1) The dual-regulated firms Remuneration Code covers all aspects of remuneration that could have a bearing on effective risk management, including salaries, bonuses, long-term incentive plans, options, hiring bonuses, severance packages and pension arrangements.(2) As with other aspects of a firm's systems and controls, in accordance with SYSC 4.1.2R (general organisational requirements) remuneration policies, procedures and practices must be comprehensive and proportionate to