Since the banking turmoil of 2023, the Committee has worked to strengthen supervisory effectiveness in relation to material risks that could result in financial losses, impacting the safety and soundness of financial institutions.
Why this matters
This is an informational newsletter from the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) documenting supervisory cooperation and best practices following the 2023 banking turmoil.
The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) and the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) today published a report that reviews the implementation of margin requirements for non-centrally cleared derivatives.
Why this matters
This is a published assessment by BCBS and IOSCO reviewing implementation of the 2013 margin requirements standard for non-centrally cleared derivatives. The report confirms the framework is working effectively, finds no material issues, and proposes no changes—making it informational rather than prescriptive.
The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) and the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) today published a review of the implementation of the framework for margin requirements for non-centrally cleared derivatives.
Why this matters
The BCBS and IOSCO review of margin requirements for non-centrally cleared derivatives is a substantive assessment of an existing post-2008 framework. The finding of no material issues and recommendation for continued supervisory monitoring represents concrete regulatory guidance, but the absence of new obligations or...
As part of its 2025-2026 work programme, the Basel Committee is advancing various supervisory initiatives related to the digitalisation of finance.
AI Analysis
The Basel Committee has published its Principles for the sound management of third-party risk, setting a common baseline for banks and supervisors as firms become more dependent on third-party service providers. The publication matters because it broadens the supervisory lens beyond traditional outsourcing to a wider range of third-party arrangements, with implications for governance, due diligence, contracts, monitoring, and exit planning.
Key dates
2025-12-10
Basel Committee publication date for the Principles for the sound management of third-party risk
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to map all third-party arrangements against the new lifecycle expectations, including non-traditional outsourcing and intra-group or technology-enabled arrangements.
Firms should consider whether board-approved third-party risk appetite, tolerance for disruption, and reporting lines are documented clearly and align with current governance arrangements.
Banks may wish to review due diligence, contracting, onboarding, monitoring, continuity, and exit procedures to confirm they address the principle-based expectations across the full relationship lifecycle.
Supervisory liaison teams may wish to assess whether concentration risk, critical provider dependencies, and cross-border coordination issues are adequately captured in existing risk registers and escalation frameworks.
What changed
The document sets out 12 principles covering the full third-party service provider lifecycle, divided between bank-facing expectations and supervisor-facing expectations. For banks, the principles cover governance and strategy, board and senior management oversight, risk assessment, due diligence, legally binding contracts, onboarding, ongoing monitoring, business continuity, and termination/exit management.
Compliance impact
The publication is a material supervisory signal rather than a binding rule, but it raises the expected standard for how banks identify, manage, and oversee third-party dependencies. Institutions that rely heavily on external providers may face closer supervisory scrutiny of governance, resilience, and concentration risk, especially where critical services are involved.
The Basel Committee has published principles for the sound management of third-party risk in the banking sector. The principles establish a common baseline for banks and supervisors for the sound management of third-party risk. The Committee will continue to monitor developments related to the digitalisation of…
AI Analysis
The Basel Committee published final principles for the sound management of third-party risk in the banking sector on 2025-12-10. The publication matters because it creates a common prudential baseline for banks and supervisors and explicitly supersedes the Basel/Joint Forum 2005 outsourcing paper for banking-sector purposes.
Key dates
2025-12-10
Basel Committee published the principles for the sound management of third-party risk
2024-10-09 Deadline
Comment deadline for the consultative version of the principles
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to compare existing outsourcing and third-party risk frameworks against the new 12-principle baseline to identify gaps in governance, lifecycle controls, and supervisor-facing documentation.
Firms may wish to review board and senior management oversight arrangements for third-party risk to ensure responsibilities, risk appetite, escalation, and reporting are clearly assigned.
Banks should consider whether their third-party inventories, risk assessments, due diligence files, contracts, monitoring processes, and exit planning are aligned to a full lifecycle model rather than a narrow outsourcing model.
Supervisory relations teams may wish to map the principles against home and host jurisdiction requirements to identify where local rules are already aligned or where additional supervisory engagement may be needed.
Operational resilience teams may wish to test whether critical third-party dependencies, including cloud and technology providers, are sufficiently captured in business continuity and termination planning.
What changed
The Basel Committee replaced the older 2005 Joint Forum outsourcing guidance with a new 12-principle framework focused on third-party service provider arrangements in banking. The framework is broader than traditional outsourcing and is designed to cover the larger, more diverse third-party ecosystem created by digitalisation and financial technology.
Compliance impact
The practical impact is broad for banking-sector third-party risk management because the publication updates the prudential benchmark supervisors may use when assessing governance, controls, and resilience. The Committee does not describe legal sanctions, but firms that lag the baseline may face supervisory challenge, remediation expectations, or pressure to strengthen third-party oversight and lifecycle controls.
The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision has issued a consultation on Machine-readable Pillar 3 disclosure. The consultation proposes to make the data disclosed by banks (so-called Pillar 3 disclosures) available in a machine-readable format.
AI Analysis
The Basel Committee issued a consultation proposing a standard for machine-readable Pillar 3 disclosures, aimed at making banks’ quantitative prudential disclosures easier to aggregate, process, and compare across jurisdictions. The proposal matters because it adds technical format requirements without changing the underlying disclosure content, signaling a move toward standardized supervisory data infrastructure.
Key dates
2025-12-05
Basel Committee publishes the consultation on machine-readable Pillar 3 disclosure
2026-03-05 Deadline
Deadline for comments on the consultative document
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to review current Pillar 3 disclosure production processes and determine whether quantitative disclosures can be generated in a machine-readable format.
Banks may wish to map any existing PDF-based Pillar 3 outputs against likely technical data structure requirements, including whether disclosures could be published on a website or via a central repository.
Supervisors and policy teams may wish to assess how local disclosure arrangements align with the proposed global standard and whether current formats already satisfy the envisaged approach.
Firms subject to overlapping regional disclosure regimes may wish to compare current machine-readable standards with the Basel Committee proposal to identify expected implementation gaps.
What changed
The consultation proposes a new standard for machine-readable quantitative Pillar 3 disclosures across Basel Committee member jurisdictions. It would introduce both a requirement and technical specifications for producing disclosures in a machine-readable format, while leaving the substantive disclosure obligations unchanged. The consultation also contemplates that national supervisors would choose whether disclosures are posted on banks’ own websites or in a central repository.
Compliance impact
The Basel Committee describes the issue as a practical transparency and data-usability problem, because many banks currently publish Pillar 3 information only in PDF format, making cross-bank comparison difficult. The proposal is not a new prudential capital requirement, but it could materially affect disclosure production, data governance, and supervisory reporting processes for affected banks.
The Basel Committee has published a consultation on a standard format for machine-readable disclosures by banks. The proposed standard format would make existing disclosure by banks more accessible and easier to aggregate. Comments on the proposals are requested by 5 March 2026.
AI Analysis
The Basel Committee has opened a consultation on adding a standard format for machine-readable Pillar 3 disclosures by banks. The proposal is designed to make existing disclosure data easier to access, process, aggregate, and compare across banks, without changing the underlying disclosure requirements.
Key dates
2025-12-05
Basel Committee publishes the consultative document on machine-readable Pillar 3 disclosures
2026-03-05 Deadline
Deadline for comments on the proposed additions to the disclosure standard
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to review the consultative document and assess whether current Pillar 3 publication processes could support machine-readable output.
Banks with existing machine-readable disclosure regimes may wish to map their current approach against the proposed global standard to identify any gaps or duplication.
Supervisory affairs teams may wish to consider whether disclosures are currently hosted on bank websites or through a central repository model, since the proposal leaves that implementation choice to national supervisors.
Stakeholders may wish to evaluate the technical specifications for the required machine-readable formats and the associated data taxonomy requirements.
Interested firms may wish to submit comments by the consultation deadline if they want to influence the final standard.
What changed
The Committee is proposing additions to its disclosure standard that would require quantitative Pillar 3 disclosures to be available in standardised machine-readable formats across member jurisdictions. The proposal includes technical specifications for producing machine-readable disclosures, while leaving the substantive disclosure content unchanged. National supervisors would decide whether banks publish the machine-readable disclosures on their own websites or through a centralised data repository.
Compliance impact
The consultation is materially relevant for banks because it could change the format in which Pillar 3 disclosures must be published, including technical delivery and accessibility requirements. The Basel Committee says the goal is not to change substantive disclosure obligations, but it does expect more standardisation and broader comparability across jurisdictions.
This is a Basel Committee assessment report on the UK's implementation of global prudential standards. The content is informational in nature—publishing compliance assessment results rather than imposing new obligations or enforcement actions.
This report describes the Committee's assessment of the implementation of the Basel Committee's large exposures framework (LEX) in the UK. The UK LEX regulations have been assessed as largely compliant.
Why this matters
This is a Basel Committee RCAP assessment report evaluating UK implementation of the large exposures framework. The content explicitly addresses credit risk and supervisory cooperation through a compliance assessment. The report confirms the UK is 'largely compliant' with the Basel Framework's LEX requirements.
This report describes the Committee's assessment of the implementation of the Basel Committee's Net Stable Funding Ratio (NSFR) standard in the UK. The UK NSFR regulations have been assessed as largely compliant.
Why this matters
This is a Basel Committee RCAP assessment report confirming the UK's implementation of the Net Stable Funding Ratio standard. The content is informational and retrospective (assessing past compliance), not prescriptive or imposing new obligations.
This revised version of the Handbook includes specific guidance for the assessments of the Basel III revisions to risk weighted assets and the leverage ratio framework.
AI Analysis
The Basel Committee updated its RCAP Handbook for jurisdictional assessments to reflect how assessors should evaluate domestic prudential rules for consistency and completeness against the Basel framework. The revised handbook matters because it adds specific guidance for assessing the Basel III revisions to risk-weighted assets and the leverage ratio framework, which are core bank capital and leverage standards.
Key dates
2025-12-03
BIS published the revised RCAP Handbook for jurisdictional assessments.
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to review whether their jurisdiction’s Basel III implementation, especially risk-weighted assets and leverage ratio rules, aligns with the standards that RCAP assessors will evaluate.
Supervisory liaison functions may wish to check the updated handbook when preparing for jurisdictional reviews or responding to RCAP questionnaires and evidence requests.
Prudential policy teams may wish to map any domestic deviations from Basel standards and document the rationale, materiality, and implementation status for possible RCAP scrutiny.
What changed
The publication updates the Handbook that RCAP assessors, assessed jurisdictions, and other experts use to conduct jurisdictional reviews of domestic prudential regulations against Basel minimum requirements. The handbook is a flexible compendium, meaning its guidance and principles are revised or elaborated as RCAP evolves and as lessons from past assessments are incorporated.
This revised version specifically adds guidance for assessments of the Basel III revisions to risk-weighted assets and the leverage ratio framework.
Compliance impact
The publication is procedurally significant because RCAP findings can identify material gaps between domestic prudential rules and Basel minimum standards. It does not itself impose sanctions or deadlines, but it can increase supervisory scrutiny and highlight inconsistencies that jurisdictions may need to address.
Basel Committee provides additional information regarding the 2025 G-SIB assessment. Further details include global denominators and individual bank indicators. The release accompanies the Financial Stability Board's updated G-SIB list.
Why this matters
This is an informational release accompanying the FSB's updated G-SIB list. The Basel Committee has published additional transparency on its 2025 assessment methodology, denominators, individual bank indicators, cut-off scores, and bucket thresholds.
This document sets out a technical amendment to the Basel Framework. The amendment relates to the circumstance where a bank uses a guarantee or credit derivative to hedge the counterparty credit risk (CCR) of a derivative exposure subject to the standardised approach to counterparty credit risk or the internal models…
AI Analysis
The Basel Committee has finalized a technical amendment to the Basel Framework clarifying how banks should treat guarantees and credit derivatives used to hedge counterparty credit risk on derivative exposures. The change matters because it affects exposure measurement and capital treatment under SA-CCR and the internal models method, especially where protection is fixed, capped, or only partially covers the exposure.
Key dates
2024-11-27
The technical amendment was published for consultation
2025-01-31 Deadline
Comment deadline on the consultation version
2025-10-28
The BIS page reflects the final consolidated standard
2028-11-01 Deadline
Committee members agreed to implement the revised standard by this date at the latest
Suggested considerations
Compliance teams may wish to identify derivative portfolios where fixed or capped guarantees or credit derivatives are used as CCR hedges under SA-CCR or IMM.
Firms should consider reviewing capital calculation logic and documentation for protected and unprotected exposure portions to confirm the final Basel treatment is reflected.
Banks may wish to assess whether any legacy policy, model, or reporting language still references the consultation version and needs updating ahead of implementation.
Risk and capital teams should consider whether exclusions for securities financing transactions and securitisation exposures are correctly applied in governance, procedures, and systems.
What changed
The amendment clarifies the treatment of guarantees and credit derivatives that hedge counterparty credit risk of derivative exposures subject to the standardized approach to counterparty credit risk or the internal models method. The Basel text indicates the final standard aligns the treatment of fixed or capped protection more closely with the treatment of eligible collateral and residual risk to the original counterparty.
Compliance impact
The impact is moderate to high for banks with material derivative CCR portfolios because the amendment changes how certain hedges are recognized in capital calculations. The regulator describes the change as technical rather than substantial, but it is still a binding Basel Framework adjustment that firms will need to implement consistently to avoid misstatement of CCR capital requirements.
Basel III risk-based capital ratios increase while leverage ratio and Net Stable Funding Ratio remain stable for large internationally active banks.
Why this matters
This is a Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) quantitative impact study (QIS) monitoring report on Basel III framework implementation as of end-December 2024.
This paper studies how banks manage their equity capital in the short run, particularly during periods of distress, based on Basel III monitoring data. The findings challenge the conventional assumption that bank capital is largely exogenous in the short run, meaning that banks cannot adjust their capital level in a…
Why this matters
This is a BIS/BCBS working paper (research publication) analyzing how banks actively manage capital in the short run using Basel III monitoring data. It challenges conventional assumptions and provides evidence-based insights into bank capital dynamics during distress periods.
This literature review aims to support the work of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision by providing insights from academic and policy work (including policy notes and speeches). It also draws on lessons from observed bank failures and supervisory practices.
Why this matters
This is a working paper and literature review from the BCBS that synthesizes academic and policy lessons on banking supervision effectiveness. It is informational and forward-looking rather than prescriptive, supporting the Committee's work on supervisory frameworks.
The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision horizon scanning report on banks' interconnections with non-bank financial intermediaries (NBFIs).
Why this matters
This is a published horizon scanning report from the Basel Committee analyzing interconnections between banks and non-bank financial intermediaries. The report describes direct and indirect linkages, discusses risks and vulnerabilities, includes case studies and stylised failure scenarios, and emphasizes data...
This voluntary framework for the disclosure of climate-related financial risks includes both qualitative and quantitative information. The Committee has agreed this framework will be voluntary in nature, with jurisdictions to consider whether to implement it domestically.
Why this matters
This is a Basel Committee framework document on voluntary disclosure of climate-related financial risks. The content explicitly targets banks and establishes a framework (both qualitative and quantitative) for disclosure. It is informational/guidance in nature (voluntary, not binding), making urgency null.
Technical amendment issued for comment by 25 July 2025, June 2025
Why this matters
This is a BCBS consultative document (closed status as of 10 June 2025) addressing technical amendments and interpretative issues under the Basel Framework, specifically for standardised approaches to operational risk and credit risk.
This is a BCBS guidelines update revising principles for credit risk management first issued 25 years ago. The content describes four key areas of credit risk governance (environment, granting, administration/monitoring, controls) and alignment with Basel Framework.
This report describes the Committee's assessment of the implementation of the Basel Committee's large exposures framework (LEX) in Türkiye. The Turkish LEX regulations have been assessed as compliant.
Why this matters
This is an RCAP assessment report confirming Türkiye's compliance with the Basel large exposures framework. It is informational in nature (assessment/monitoring outcome rather than new obligation), but carries significance as it documents regulatory consistency monitoring by the Basel Committee.
This report presents the findings of an RCAP Assessment Team (Assessment Team) on the adoption of the Basel Net Stable Funding Ratio (NSFR) standard in Türkiye as of 15 January 2025.
Why this matters
This is a Basel Committee RCAP assessment report confirming Türkiye's compliant implementation of the Net Stable Funding Ratio standard. The content is informational and retrospective (assessing past implementation), not introducing new obligations. It addresses liquidity risk prudential requirements for banks.
Basel III risk-based capital ratios increase while leverage ratio and NSFR remain stable for large internationally active banks
Why this matters
This is a Basel III monitoring report (QIS) from the BIS/BCBS dated 26 March 2025, presenting end-June 2024 data on capital ratios, leverage ratios, and NSFR for large internationally active banks.