The report summarises the responses received to the survey by Basel Committee member jurisdictions and those of the Basel Consultative Group.
In brief, the majority of respondents to the survey currently apply proportionality measures in their jurisdictions. In most cases, such measures are applied to banks that represent a relatively small share of total banking assets in the relevant jurisdiction, although there is a fair degree of heterogeneity.
Jurisdictions rely on a number of determinants in identifying proportionality thresholds / segments. These include a wide number of balance sheet metrics and differentiation by banks’ business models. In most cases, these indicators are coupled with supervisory judgment when determining the scope of banks subject to different requirements.
Most jurisdictions apply some form of proportionality related to capital and liquidity requirements. These generally take the form of a modified / simpler version of existing Basel standards, particularly for the more complex risk categories, or an exemption from such requirements for certain banks. Jurisdictions similarly apply proportionate reporting and disclosure requirements, with some banks subject to less onerous requirements and submission frequencies. Most jurisdictions also apply a proportionate approach to their supervisory practices, including the intensity of on- and off-site examinations, requirements related to risk management controls and governance, and supervisory stress tests.