The peer review looked at what the 'competent authorities' (CAs) of all EU, and European Free Trade Association countries, have done to ensure "consistent and comprehensive" implementation of supervisory reporting, including the procedures and IT systems used to collect data and ensure data quality, the process of dealing with enquiries by reporting institutions, governance issues and measures taken to update the reporting framework.
"Generally, the peer review has not identified any significantly negative outliers," the report said. "Most of the supervisory authorities have put in place consistent and comprehensive processes and sophisticated IT systems to ensure a timely, complete and correct data reporting."
The review identified examples of good practice and highlighted differences in approaches across authorities in the operational implementation of regulatory reporting as well as the level of sophistication of their IT systems, the EBA said.
Every CA raised concerns about one issue, the EBA said: the uncertainty stemming from the late endorsement and publication in the EU's Official Journal by the European Commission of updates to the Implementing Technical Standard on Supervisory Reporting. The EBA board has submitted an opinion to the European Commission to improve the decision-making framework for reporting requirements, it said.
Self-assessments were conducted by CAs based on an agreed questionnaire, and those self-assessments were then reviewed by peer review teams composed of EBA staff members and volunteers from the CAs. Finally, further reviews were carried out during on-site visits by the peer review teams to all participating CAs, the EBA said.
Financial regulation expert Michael Ruck of Pinsent Masons, the law firm behind Out-Law.com said: "It must be viewed as a positive message from the EBA that the peer review process produced such a glowing endorsement of the mechanisms for reporting."