Specific <strong>Capital</strong> Treatment of Credit Risk in Pillar 1In future, banks will be able to choosebetween three different methods ofcalculating capital charges for creditrisk: Standardized Approach, FoundationIRB Approach and Advanced IRBApproach. Based on <strong>Basel</strong> I in its methodology,the Standardized Approach usesratings from external rating agencies toset capital charges, while both internalrisk-based (IRB) approaches rely on thebank’s internal rating processes (todetermine risk weights).The choice of approach has a directinfluence on the level of capital chargesrequired.Standardized ApproachConsistent with the current approach,the Standardized Approach defines certainrisk weights for individual categoriesof credit exposures. Numerically,the current weighting rates 0%, 20%,50% and 100% will remain, with theaddition of a new weighting of 150%for higher-risk borrowers. To a largerextent than to date, banking supervisionwill recognize the securitizationinstruments used by banks, such ascollateral, guarantees, credit derivativesand netting agreements for on-balancesheet items. For the current risk groupsof sovereigns, banks and non-banks, riskweighting will mainly depend on theassessment of external rating institutionsor rating agencies. The respectivenational banking supervisory authoritiesare to review which agencies’ ratings forsupervisory risk weighting may be used.Claims on sovereigns will be weightedbetween 0% and 150% depending ontheir rating. Public sector claims in Germanywill continue to be weighted at0% in the Standardized Approach.Claims on non-central governmentpublic sector enterprises (PSEs) are tobe weighted as claims on banks. However,countries will have the right tochoose to treat them as sovereigns, suchthat the practice in Germany of 0%weighting for federal states and certainspecial funds may be retained.For claims on banks, <strong>Basel</strong> II proposesa right for national supervisors tochoose between two options. In the firstoption, the risk weighting will be directlylinked to the rating of the countrywhere the bank has its seat and then setone category higher. In the secondoption, the bank’s risk weighting will bedirectly determined by an externalrating.For claims on corporates, three newrisk weighting classes of 20%, 50% and150% will be introduced, dependent onexternal ratings, in addition to thecurrent weighting of 100%. As at present,claims will be weighted at 100%if an external rating is not available.Calculationof Credit RiskStandardizedApproachFoundationIRB ApproachAdvancedIRB Approach14 ERNST & YOUNG – NEW BASEL CAPITAL ACCORD
SPECIFIC CAPITAL TREATMENT OF CREDIT RISK IN PILLAR 1Ernst & Young offers you competent, comprehensiveassistance in the development andimplementation of the new Pillar 1 capitalrequirements in your institution, taking fullaccount of the relevant supervisory framework.Foundation Internal RatingApproachWith the recognition of internal ratings,it will for the first time be possible touse banks’ own management and riskmeasurement methods to calculate thecapital charges for credit risk. In orderto achieve widespread application of theIRB Approach, the measurementmethods for quantitative risk componentsare restricted in the FoundationIRB Approach, in contrast to the AdvancedIRB Approach, to the probabilityof default (PD) in individual riskexposure classes. The other risk components,however, are prescribed.Collateral, credit derivatives and nettingagreements are taken into account in theresult as in the Standardized Approach.Advanced Internal RatingApproachIn the Advanced IRB Approach, banksalso have the option to apply their internallyestimated parameters to otherrisk components, with the exception ofresidual maturity. Thus in this model,which is more complex than the FoundationApproach, expected loss (EL) atthe time of default as well as expectedamount of claim at the time of default,for example, can be calculated specificallyfor each bank on the basis of thebank’s historical realized loss rates.Additionally, the range of eligible collateralis less restricted.Banks have to adhere to qualitative minimumrequirements to be able to use theAdvanced IRB Approach, however.Certain qualifying criteria shouldensure that the rating system and ratingprocess as well as risk components areadequate for each bank.Partial Use of the IRB Approach fora Limited PeriodFor a limited, transitional period bankswill be allowed to apply the IRBApproach to just a share of exposures.At the same time, however, the scopeand timing of partial use must beagreed with the supervisory authorityuntil full conversion to the IRBApproach in order to avoid the best alternativebeing "cherry picked" each time.ERNST & YOUNG – NEW BASEL CAPITAL ACCORD15