BCBS Publishes Assessments on Argentina and Korea
Both countries largely successful in implementing standards
Argentina and Korea have been largely successful in their implementation of Basel rules, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) has found in assessments.
The results of these assessments have now been published in reports that form part of a series on committee members' implementation of the Basel risk-based capital framework and the liquidity coverage ratio (LCR).
The committee's Regulatory Consistency Assessment Program assesses the consistency and completeness of a jurisdiction's adopted standards and the significance of any deviations from the regulatory framework.
Overall, the assessment outcomes for both Argentina and Korea are positive. In some aspects, domestic rules in both countries are even more rigorous than required under the Basel framework, the BCBS says.
Argentina's domestic implementation of the framework was found to be "compliant" with the Basel standards. A compliant assessment grade is the highest of the four possible grades.
Korea was found to be overall "largely compliant" with the Basel standards, reflecting the fact that most but not all provisions of the Basel standards are satisfied. A "largely compliant" assessment grade is one notch below the highest possible grade.
In carrying out the reviews of Argentina and Korea, the assessment teams held discussions with senior officials and technical staff of the Central Bank of Argentina and the Financial Supervisory Service of Korea. The teams also met with a select group of banks in both countries.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@waterstechnology.com or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.waterstechnology.com/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.com to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.com to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@waterstechnology.com
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@waterstechnology.com
More on Trading Tech
Doubts raised over new FX platform disclosures
New disclosure sheet template will require platforms to outline how they charge for data
Expanded oversight for tech or a rollback? 2025 set to be big for regulators
From GenAI oversight to DORA and the CAT to off-channel communication, the last 12 months set the stage for larger regulatory conversations in 2025.
DORA flood pitches banks against vendors
Firms ask vendors for late addendums sometimes unrelated to resiliency, requiring renegotiation
IPC’s C-suite shuffle signals bigger changes for trader voice tech
Waters Wrap: After a series of personnel changes at the legacy provider, WatersTechnology examines what these moves might mean for the future of turrets and trader voice.
WatersTechnology latest edition
Check out our latest edition, plus more than 12 years of our best content.
From no chance to no brainer: Inside outsourced trading’s buy-side charm offensive
Previously regarded with hesitancy and suspicion by the buy side, four asset managers explain their reasons for embracing outsourced trading.
Band-aids vs build-outs: Best practices for exchange software migrations
Heetesh Rawal writes that legacy exchange systems are under pressure to scale to support new asset classes and greater volumes, leaving exchange operators with a stark choice: patch up outdated systems and hope for the best or embark on risky but rewarding replacement projects.
Portfolio trading vs RFQ: Understanding transaction costs in US investment-grade bonds
The MarketAxess research team explores how such factors as order size, liquidity profiles and associated costs determine whether a portfolio trade or an RFQ list trade is the optimal choice.