Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions as regards requirements for securities financing transactions under the net stable funding ratio
Date: 2025-03-31
Institutions: Directorate-General for Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union, European Commission
Subjects: EU banking union, banking policy, banking supervision, credit institution, financial legislation, financial risk, financial supervision, financial transaction, investment company, private-sector liquidity

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 31.3.2025  COM(2025) 146 final 2025/0077 (COD)  Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions as regards requirements for securities financing transactions under the net stable funding ratio (Text with EEA relevance) {SWD(2025) 77 final}  
 
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

1. 

• 

CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 

Reasons for and objectives of the proposal 

This  proposal  aims  to  amend  Regulation  (EU)  No  575/2013  (Capital  Requirements 
Regulation or CRR) to  maintain the current transitional approach to the  Net Stable Funding 
Ratio (NSFR) requirement. 

The  NSFR  requirement  is  part  of  the  Basel  III  international  standards,  which  the  European 
Union  (EU)  agreed  to  implement  as  part  of  the  wide-ranging  reform  of  the  prudential 
framework for banks in the aftermath of the 2008 Global Financial Crisis (GFC). The NSFR 
requirement aims to ensure that banks have stable funding sources to fund their activities and 
reduce  their  dependency  on  short-term  wholesale  funding.  It  was  designed  to  mitigate 
maturity transformation risk, as a globally consistent regulatory requirement, aiming to foster 
convergence  across  jurisdictions  and  eliminate  opportunities  for  cross-border  regulatory 
arbitrage. 

In particular, the Basel NSFR standard introduces a minimum requirement on the amount of 
stable funding that banks must issue to finance their activities, based on the liquidity profile of 
their assets. It mitigates a bank’s liquidity risk by setting a required stable funding (RSF) level 
based on the bank’s assets, which is then compared to the available stable funding (ASF) that 
results from their liability instruments. 

Securities Financing Transactions (SFTs) as defined under Article 4(1), point 139 of the CRR 
encompass different  secured transaction types in  which assets  (collateral)  are exchanged for 
cash: (i) repurchase (repos) and reverse-repurchase (reverse-repos), (ii) securities lending, (iii) 
buy-sell-back, and (iv) margin lending. Repos and reverse-repos make up the largest share of 
SFTs,  accounting  for  68%  of  the  total,  followed  by  securities  lending  (23%),  buy-sell-back 
(8%), and margin lending (1%) (September 2023 data)1. 

A repo is a collateralised and generally short-term borrowing transaction. A reverse-repo is a 
collateralised  lending  transaction,  mirroring  a  repo  transaction,  where  a  bank  (the  lender) 
temporarily  purchases  securities  or  commodities  (i.e.  collateral)  from  a  counterparty  (the 
borrower) in exchange for cash with a commitment to sell the collateral back in the future at a 
predetermined price. 

Unsecured  lending  transactions  are  loans  that  are  not  secured  by  any  collateral.  They  are 
based on the borrower’s creditworthiness and promise to repay. They were mainly found on 
the interbank markets before the GFC. 

Since  the  GFC  and  the  closure  of  the  unsecured  interbank  markets,  SFTs  have  played  a 
crucial role in the circulation of short-term funding between banks and market players through 
collateralised transactions. SFT market activity also links the short-term money market to the 
longer-term capital market. The bulk of SFTs are collateralised by sovereign debt. SFTs are 
characterised  as  a  high-volume,  low-margin  business  activity  for  large  banks,  and  this 
wholesale  market  activity  is  prone  to  international  competition  as  highlighted  by  the  very 

1 

ESMA Market Report on the EU securities financing transactions (SFT) markets (reference  ESMA50-
524821-3147), published on 9 April 2024. 

EN 

1 

  EN 

 
cross-border nature of these transactions. Only 41% of the EU SFT amounts are between EU 
counterparties, meanwhile 59% of the EU SFT amounts involve one non-EU counterparty2. 

For  monies  due  from  SFTs  with  maturities  up  to  six  months,  the  Basel  NSFR  standard 
requires  a  conservative  non-zero  RSF  requirement  on  banks.  The  objective  is  to  discourage 
excessive short-term exposures between banks, which may give rise to contagion during times 
of financial distress. 

The NSFR standard was implemented in EU law on 20 May 2019 through an amendment of 
the  Capital  Requirements  Regulation  (CRR2).  The  related  requirements  entered  into 
application  at  the  end  of  June  2021.  In  its  proposal  amending  the  CRR,  published  on 
23 November 20163, the Commission suggested the permanent use of RSF levels lower than 
those  included  in  the  Basel  accord.  The  Commission  concluded  at  the  time  that  ‘it  seems 
reasonable  to  bring  limited  changes  to  the  treatment  of  both  short-term  transactions  with 
financial institutions, and of HQLA Level 1 [in order] not to hinder the good functioning of 
EU financial and repo markets’. The arguments and analysis that led to this approach and the 
impact assessment accompanying the Commission proposal are still valid4. 

The co-legislators, however, allowed for a transitional 0% RSF requirement – instead of the 
10%  RSF  specified  in  the  Basel  III  standards  and  the  lower  one  (5%)  proposed  by  the 
Commission  –  for  monies  due  from  SFTs  with  maturities  up  to  six  months,  when 
collateralised with Level 1 High Quality Liquid Assets (HQLA)5, such as sovereign debt. This 
provision  is  set  to  expire  in  June  2025,  when  the  non-zero  RSF  requirement  set  out  in  the 
Basel standard would start to apply. The transitional provision aimed to give banks sufficient 
time  to  adapt  to  the  more  conservative  requirement  imposed  by  the  Basel  standards  and  to 
mitigate any consequential effect on the EU capital market, and in particular on the sovereign 
debt market. 

Similar  transitional  provisions  were  also  agreed  for  short-term  monies  due  from  SFTs 
collateralised by  assets  other  than Level  1 HQLA and for short-term unsecured transactions 
with financial customers. These exposures are relatively less material compared to monies due 
from SFTs collateralised by Level 1 HQLA. They are also characterised by higher margins. 
The  considerations  of  the  co-legislators  when  granting  a  transitional  treatment  for  these 
transactions  were  their  inherent  funding  characteristics  and  the  impact  of  the  level  of  RSF 
factors for these transactions on the market liquidity, especially of assets received as collateral 
in SFT transactions. 

The  transitional  prudential  charge  defined  by  co-legislators  maintains  a  difference  in  the 
stable  funding  requirement  that  is  consistent  with  the  Basel  standard,  between  monies  due 
from SFTs collateralised by Level 1 HQLA, such as sovereign bonds, and monies due from 
SFTs collateralised by other assets. It contributes however not to increase the pressure on very 

2 

3 

4 

5 

ESMA Market Report on the EU securities financing transactions (SFT) markets (reference  ESMA50-
524821-3147), published on 9 April 2024. 
Proposal  for  a  Regulation  of the  European  Parliament  and of  the  Council  amending  Regulation  (EU) 
No 575/2013 as regards the leverage ratio, the net stable funding ratio, requirements for own funds and 
eligible liabilities, counterparty credit risk, market risk, exposures to central counterparties, exposures to 
collective  investment  undertakings,  large  exposures,  reporting  and  disclosure  requirements  and 
amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 (EUR-Lex - 52016PC0850 - EN - EUR-Lex). 
Commission staff working document on the impact assessment, accompanying the proposal amending 
Regulation  (EU)  No 575/2013  on  prudential  requirements  for  credit  institutions  and  investment  firms 
(EUR-Lex - 52016SC0377 - EN - EUR-Lex). 
High  Quality  Liquid  Assets  as  defined  under  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2015/61  supplementing 
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, and in particular Article 460. 

EN 

2 

  EN 

 
high-quality  collateral,  beyond  addressing  the  sovereign-bank  nexus.  It  also  supports  the 
market liquidity and the diversity of collateral assets eligible to the liquidity buffer of banks, 
under the Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR). 

As  regards  unsecured  funding  transactions  with  a  residual  maturity  below  six  months,  with 
financial  customers,  the  transitional  treatment  aims  to  apply  a  proportionate  funding 
requirement  to  these  transactions,  in  line  with  their  funding  risk  profile,  and  to  support  the 
revive of the unsecured funding market that vanished after the 2008 GFC. Unsecured funding 
transactions  should  indeed  be  considered  as  a  necessary  complement  to  secured  funding 
transactions  such  as  SFTs,  to  support  overall  market  liquidity  and  monetary  policy 
transmission, in particular during periods of monetary policy tightening.  

The  United  States,  the  United  Kingdom,  Japan  and  Switzerland  have  adopted  a  similar 
treatment  as  the  EU’s  transitional  treatment,  but  these  countries  have  made  it  a  permanent 
one.  The  US  agencies  argue  that  ‘the  0%  RSF  factor  assignment  was  made  based  on  the 
determination that Level 1 HQLA pose minimal  liquidity  risk and contribute importantly to 
the good functioning of short-term funding markets, i.e. that a non-zero RSF factor on Level 1 
HQLA could discourage intermediation in US Treasury and repo markets’6. 

The  end  of  the  current  transitional  treatment  and  the  resulting  tightening  of  the  NSFR 
requirement  in  the  EU  raises  some  concerns.  It  could  discourage  EU  banks  from 
intermediating  in  government  debt  and  reduce  the  liquidity  in  these  markets  because  these 
high-volume low-margin transactions would become more costly. Further increasing the costs 
of  these  transactions  when  operated  by  EU  counterparties,  while  59%  of  EU  transactions 
already  involve  one  non-EU  counterparty,  may  develop  the  attractiveness  of  non-EU 
counterparties  or  non-EU  capital  markets.  This  would  contradict  the  development  and 
sustainability of capital markets and liquidity for collateral assets, such as sovereign bonds, in 
the EU. If the EU was to increase the RSF factors for these transactions, in a unilateral way, it 
would  distort  the  international  level  playing  field,  putting  EU  banks  at  a  disadvantage 
compared  to  non-EU  peers  operating  on  this  very  international  and  competitive  activity. 
Somehow,  reinforcing  the  unlevel  playing  field  would  be  at  odd  with  one  of  the  initial 
objectives  of  the  Basel  standards  to  support  the  implementation  of  globally  consistent 
regulatory requirements and to reduce opportunities for cross border regulatory arbitrage. 

Conversely,  maintaining  the  current  treatment,  in  line  with  the  approach  retained  by  other 
jurisdictions,  may  support  the  development  of  a  liquid  and  attractive  sovereign  debt  market 
and a deep SFT market for EU collateral instruments. 

The  current  requirements  have  proven  to  be  prudentially  sound  since  their  entry  into 
application  in  mid-2021  and  do  not  seem  to  have  raised  any  financial  stability  concerns,  in 
particular during the recent stress episodes (Russian aggression, UK Gilt crisis, March 2023 
banking  turmoil).  Since  mid-2021,  EU  banks  have  built  up  strong  NSFR  buffers,  beyond 
minimum  requirements,  subject  to  an  ongoing  supervision  by  competent  authorities.  Any 
effect of maintaining  the  transitional  treatment  will continue  to  be monitored  and subject  to 
adequate supervisory scrutiny, including on banks’ funding practices and liquidity risk profile, 
through ongoing supervision and periodic reports. 

Under Article 510(7) of the CRR2, the Commission is required to assess the relevance of the 
transitional  NSFR  treatment  of  monies  due  from  SFTs  and  unsecured  transactions,  with 

6 

See  the  July  2023  BCBS  assessment  of  Basel  NSFR  regulations  -  United  States  (Regulatory 
Consistency  Assessment  Programme  (RCAP):  Assessment  of  Basel  Committee's  Net  Stable  Funding 
Ratio standard - United States). 

EN 

3 

  EN 

 
financial  customers,  with  a  residual  maturity  below  six  months,  by  the  end  of  June  2024, 
based on a report from the European Banking Authority (EBA). As explained in Section 3, the 
EBA’s  report  only  analysed  the  impact  on  banks’  NSFR  levels,  that  appears  negligible. 
However, a broader analysis points to possible undesirable effects of moving towards the RSF 
prescribed  by  Basel  accord.  The  EU’s  SFT  market  plays  a  crucial  role  in  financing  EU 
government  debt  as  the  bulk  of  SFTs  are  collateralised  by  sovereign  debt.  In  addition, 
maintaining  the  transitional  treatment  supports  the  liquidity  and  diversity  of  assets  that  are 
also eligible to the liquidity buffer of banks under the LCR. It may indeed not be appropriate 
to disconnect the two dimensions of the liquidity requirements. 

It is also important to maintain the existing steps between the RSF factors for sovereign bonds 
collateral and other collateral used in SFTs as doing otherwise would affect the preference for 
one or the other, thereby risking  reinforcing the  pressure on  (scarce)  high quality  collateral, 
beyond contributing to the sovereign-bank nexus. 

The unsecured funding market for banks has vanished after the 2008 GFC and has never been 
revived, at least not to a significant level. A non-zero RSF factor already applies to short-term 
unsecured  transactions  under  the  NSFR.  An  increase  in  this  factor  will  not  materially 
strengthen the prudential profile of banks,  i.e. the impact on the NSFR would be negligible, 
while it may disincentivise the use of unsecured funding transactions that may prove helpful 
in a period of monetary policy tightening. 

An increase in the RSF level applicable to monies due from SFTs and unsecured transactions 
could discourage EU banks from intermediating in government debt and other collateral and 
reduce  liquidity  in  the  EU  capital  markets  overall.  An  increase  in  the  RSF  for  these 
transactions will not lead to a material change in the average level of the NSFR ratio of EU 
banks  that  already  appears  above  the  minimum  requirements  and  is  already  subject  to  an 
ongoing supervision by competent authorities. It will therefore not change fundamentally the 
prudential profile of EU banks. This, in turn, could increase funding costs for Member States 
and  EU  market  players  in  a  period  of  normalised  monetary  policy  when  central  banks  are 
expected to reduce their market presence and private market players are expected to take over. 

To avoid possible unintended consequences on capital markets liquidity and considering the 
safeguards  provided  by  the  current  framework  for  banks,  the  Commission  proposes  to 
maintain the transitional  treatment for monies due from  SFT  and for  unsecured transactions 
with a residual maturity of less than six months, with financial customers. In addition to the 
ongoing  monitoring  of  capital  market  developments  by  central  banks  and  to  the  ongoing 
supervision by competent authorities, the Commission also proposes to mandate the EBA to 
report  the  impact  of  this  treatment  every  5  years.  This  would  allow  the  Commission  to  act 
accordingly  and  propose  amendments  if  evidence  emerges  from  these  periodic  monitoring 
reports. 

• 

Consistency with existing policy provisions in the policy area 

Under  Article 510(7)  of  the  CRR,  the  co-legislators  explicitly  require  the  Commission  to 
submit  a  legislative  proposal,  where  appropriate.  This  proposal  must  take  into  account  both 
the  impact  of  the  existing  treatment  on  institutions’  NSFR  and  the  funding  risk  associated 
with SFTs and unsecured transactions with a residual maturity of less than six months, with 
financial  customers.  The  Commission’s  mandate  also  includes  maintaining  the  international 
level playing field in this area, which is particularly prone to international competition. 

Maintaining the NSFR transitional treatment set  out in Article 428r(1)(g), Article 428s(1)(b) 
and Article 428v(a) of the CRR is in line with this mandate. 

EN 

4 

  EN 

First, while EU banks present adequate NSFR buffers above their minimum requirements and 
benefit  from  an  ongoing  supervision  of  their  funding  capacity,  maintaining  the  transitional 
treatment will support the development of liquid capital markets in the EU and the availability 
of a diversified pool of eligible liquid assets under the Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR). SFT 
transactions  support  the  swift  and  orderly  transformation  of  securities  into  cash  at  an 
economical  price,  thereby  being  a  key  element  for  the  monetisation  of  liquidity  pools.  A 
negatively affected SFT market could endanger the effectiveness of the LCR, whose logic is 
to have a buffer of liquid assets that can be easily transformed into cash through SFTs or sold 
on markets, in case of a 30-day liquidity stress scenario.  

Then,  more  broadly,  maintaining  the  transitional  treatment  will  keep  the  EU  funding 
requirements  aligned with other key jurisdictions and avoid an unilateral  departure from the 
international  consensus  that  may  affect  the  level  playing  field  for  EU  banks.  A  permanent 
approach  will  also  give  the  necessary  legal  certainty  to  stakeholders  in  relation  to  the 
perennity and the stability of their business activities. 

Finally, this approach – based on a periodic report by the EBA – also enables the Commission 
to propose amendments if evidence emerges supporting such amendments. 

• 

Consistency with other Union policies 

The proposed amendment to the CRR aims to preserve SFT market activity and the liquidity 
of  sovereign  debt  markets  in  the  EU,  which  will  contribute  to  the  efficiency  of  the  EU 
banking and capital markets without undermining financial stability. 

The  assessment  of  the  degree  of  alignment  with  international  prudential  standards,  equally 
considered  with  its  impact  on  the  economy  led  to  consider  that  the  current  transitional 
treatment did not lead to significant financial stability concerns, as illustrated in particular by 
the recent stress episodes (Russian aggression, UK Gilt crisis, March 2023 banking turmoil) 
that did not unveil heightened concerns in terms of funding risk at EU banks. While the end of 
the transitional treatment would not significantly affect the prudential profile of banks, it may 
negatively alter market liquidity, in particular on the sovereign debt market. 

Maintaining  the  current  transitional  treatment  on  a  steady  state  with  regular  reporting  and 
ongoing  supervision  by  competent  authorities  will  provide  legal  certainty  to  market 
participants,  thereby  supporting  the  perennity  and  stability  of  their  business  activities.  A 
stable prudential treatment for monies due from SFTs and unsecured transactions would also 
contribute to the stability of the reporting framework for banks, as a change of scope would 
require an adjustment of the dedicated templates.  

Beyond  maintaining  the  transitional  treatment  for  SFTs  collateralised  by  sovereign  debt, 
continuing the transitional treatment for monies due from SFTs collateralised by other assets 
will support the diversification of banks’ liquidity buffers and the mitigation of the sovereign-
bank nexus. 

Keeping the RSF factor that applies since June 2021 to short-term unsecured transactions with 
financial customers  will contribute to  the use of these transactions  in  a context of monetary 
policy tightening, as a complement to secured transactions. This would in turn support overall 
capital markets liquidity and ultimately an adequate financing of the real economy. 

By safeguarding the level playing field between the EU and other major jurisdiction that have 
already  implemented,  on  a  permanent  basis,  a  similar  NSFR  prudential  treatment,  the 

EN 

5 

  EN 

proposed amendment will contribute to support the competitiveness and attractiveness of EU 
capital  markets  and  the  intermediation  role  of  EU  banks.  Active  EU  intermediaries  on  SFT 
markets and deep liquid EU markets for collateral assets, such as sovereign bonds, ultimately 
contribute to lower funding costs for the overall EU economy. 

2. 

• 

LEGAL BASIS, SUBSIDIARITY AND PROPORTIONALITY 

Legal basis 

The proposed amendments are built on the same legal basis (Article 114 of the Treaty on the 
Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)) as the legislative acts that are being amended. 

• 

Subsidiarity 

Under  the  principle  of  subsidiarity  set  out  in  Article 5(3)  of  the  Treaty  on  the  European 
Union, ‘in areas which do not fall within its executive competence, the Union shall act only if 
and in so far as the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the 
Member States, either at central level or at  regional level  and local level, but can rather, by 
reason of the scale or effects of the proposed action, be better achieved at Union level.’ 

Given that the objective of the proposed measure aims to amend existing EU legislation, it is 
best  achieved  at  EU level  rather than  through  different  national  initiatives. In fact,  adopting 
national measures would be difficult from a legal standpoint, given that the CRR is directly 
applicable  and  already  regulates  banking  liquidity  and  funding  prudential  requirements  at 
national level. 

In  the  banking  sector,  where  many  institutions  operate  across  the  EU  single  market,  it  is 
particularly  important  to  ensure  a  standard  application  of  prudential  requirements,  the 
convergence of supervisory practices and a level playing field for banking services. 

• 

Proportionality 

Under the principle of proportionality, the content and form of EU action should not exceed 
what is necessary to achieve the objectives of the Treaties.  

The goals of the proposals are to ensure the competitiveness and the attractiveness of the EU 
economy  through  effective  capital  markets  for  SFTs,  sovereign  bond  and  other  collateral 
assets, without creating additional financial stability risks for EU banks. 

Under  this  proposal,  the  ability  of  EU  banks  to  comply  with  NSFR  requirement  with 
substantive prudential buffers is maintained without excessively increasing their dependence 
on short-term funding. 

In addition, the proposed amendments do not go beyond the scope of the transitional measures 
set  out  in  Article 510(8)  of  Regulation  (EU)  No 575/2013.  All  other  liquidity  requirements 
imposed under Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 remain unchanged. 

• 

Choice of the instrument 

The measures are proposed to be implemented by amending the CRR. The proposed measures 
refer to or further develop existing provisions set out in the CRR. No other legal instrument 
would be possible. 

EN 

6 

  EN 

3. 

• 

RESULTS 
CONSULTATIONS AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS 

EVALUATIONS, 

EX POST 

OF 

STAKEHOLDER 

Ex post evaluations/fitness checks of existing legislation 

Not  applicable.  The  proposed  amendment  relates  to  a  specific  action  in  line  with  the 
Commission’s mandate, set out in Article 510(7) of the CRR, to submit a legislative proposal 
to  address  a  very  targeted  aspect  of  the  CRR  (i.e.  the  RSF  factors  applicable  to  securities 
financing  transactions  and  unsecured  transactions,  with  a  residual  maturity  of  less  than  six 
months, with financial customers). This initiative is not an evaluation or revision of the CRR 
in its entirety. 

• 

Stakeholder consultations 

The Commission has taken several steps and carried out various initiatives to assess whether 
the  current  transitional  treatment  is  still  adequate  for  securities  financing  transactions  and 
unsecured  transactions  with  a  residual  maturity  of  less  than  six  months,  with  financial 
customers,  in  light  of  the  objectives  of  the  prudential  framework  for  banks  and  the  EU’s 
broader policy objectives. 

The Commission took into consideration the EBA report on specific aspects of the net stable 
funding ratio framework, which was published on 16 January 2024 and fulfils the requirement 
set out in Article 510(6) of the CRR7. However, the EBA report did not cover all the relevant 
dimensions  surrounding  the  issue,  such  as  the  impacts  on  monetary  policy  transmission,  on 
sovereign  bond  markets  and  on  other  collateral  markets.  It  has  been  one  element  in  the 
broader policy analysis carried out by the Commission. 

The  Commission  discussed  and  exchanged  views  with  various  industry  participants, 
supervisors and the European Central Bank (ECB). 

The  Commission  also  participated  and  contributed  to  the  dedicated  discussions  of  the 
subcommittee  of  the  Economic  and  Financial  Committee  on  EU  Sovereign  Debt  Markets, 
which  represents  the  views  of  Member  States’  debt  management  offices.  Members  of  the 
subcommittee reiterated the concerns reflected in Recitals 49 and 50 of the CRR 28 that SFTs 
are  key  tools  for  the  transmission  of  monetary  policy  and  are  critical  instruments  for  the 
primary  and  secondary  market  of  sovereign  debt.  Increasing  the  prudential  charge  for  SFTs 
would, according to the Members of the subcommittee, impact the level-playing field between 
EU and non-EU capital market-players and potentially affect negatively the liquidity and the 
cost of borrowing in European sovereign debt markets.  

The Commission has considered the concerns raised publicly by three Member States on this 
issue9.  EU  SFT  transactions  are  predominantly  concentrated  in  a  few  Member  States,  with 
France  being  the  primary  domicile  holding  55%  of  EU  SFT  borrowing  in  September  2023. 

7 

8 

9 

The EBA publishes an analysis of specific aspects of the net stable funding ratio framework | European 
Banking  Authority  (https://www.eba.europa.eu/publications-and-media/press-releases/eba-publishes-
analysis-specific-aspects-net-stable-funding). 
Regulation (EU) 2019/876 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2019 amending 
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 as regards the leverage ratio, the net stable funding ratio, requirements 
for  own  funds  and  eligible  liabilities,  counterparty  credit  risk,  market  risk,  exposures  to  central 
counterparties,  exposures  to  collective  investment  undertakings,  large  exposures,  reporting  and 
disclosure 
(https://eur-
and 
lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2019/876/oj/eng) 
Letter  made  public  by  Politico  (https://www.politico.eu/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/03/Letter-to-DG-
Berrigan_241002_152826.clean_.pdf) 

requirements, 

Regulation 

648/2012 

(EU) 

No 

EN 

7 

  EN 

 
Other counterparties are German (holding 17% of EU SFT borrowing), Italian (7%) and Irish 
(5%).  This  concentration  may  be  explained  by  the  central  role  of  Central  Counterparty 
Clearing  Houses  (CCPs)  (LCH,  EuroNext  Clearing  and  EUREX  Clearing)  and  banks 
domiciled  in  those  Member  States  and  acting  as  clearing  members.  Financial  institutions 
concentrate  their  exposures  in  Member  States  where  CCPs  operate  for  more  efficient  risk 
management  and  clearing.  CCPs  contribute  to  20%  of  SFTs,  using  SFTs  in  their  cash 
reinvestment strategy. 

The  European  Commission  published  between  10  February  and  10  March  2025  a  call  for 
evidence on its intention to amend the CRR on the prudential treatment of short-term SFTs for 
the  purpose  of  the  NSFR.  A  detailed  summary  is  developed  in  the  staff  working  document 
accompanying the proposal. 

All these exchanges and consultations have highlighted the critical importance of efficient EU 
SFT, unsecured fundings and government bond markets at a time when the ECB is committed 
to  changes  to  its  monetary  policy  that  gradually  relies  more  on  the  SFTs  and  unsecured 
financial  transactions  markets  to  redistribute  liquidity  among  financial  intermediaries. 
Members  states,  debt  management  offices,  banks  and  capital  market  intermediaries  have 
called on the Commission to amend the current rules and maintain the transitional treatment. 

• 

Collection and use of expertise 

In  addition  to  what  is  mentioned  in  the  previous  section,  the  Commission  has  maintained 
regular  contact  with  staff  in  the  EBA,  the  European  Securities  and  Markets  Authority 
(ESMA), the Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) and the ECB. 

• 

Impact assessment 

The EBA report on specific aspects of the Net Stable Funding Ratio framework finds that the 
end of the transitional measure would only have a limited impact on the average NSFR level 
of EU banks. 

However, this limited impact conceals a more significant impact on banks that are more active 
in the capital markets. Moreover, some of these banks might also have a smaller management 
buffer  because,  in  general,  the  NSFR  is  conservatively  calibrated  for  these  activities.  The 
constant balance sheet assumption in the EBA report, which is based on the assumption that 
bank behaviour is not affected when minimum requirements are met, may not necessarily be 
appropriate. This is because it leaves out possible dynamic and behavioural impacts linked to 
a  bank’s  attempt  to  achieve  a  given  target  NSFR.  The  report  also  overlooks  that  non-EU 
banks may gain market share over EU banks based on an uneven international playing field. 

An increase in the RSF level applicable to monies due from SFTs could discourage EU banks 
from  intermediating  in  government  debt  and  affect  the  liquidity  in  the  collateral  markets 
concerned. This could also lead to higher bid-ask spreads and an increase in funding costs for 
Member States in a period of normalised monetary policy when central banks are expected to 
reduce their market presence and private market players are expected to take over. 

The possible implications for EU SFT and government bond market activity will depend on 
the extent to which banks can pass on an increase in the RSF factors to bid-ask spreads in the 
SFT market. The market-making role of the banks most affected may indicate a rather high or 
even a full pass-through of the regulatory cost.  At the same time, banks might also have an 
incentive to limit this pass-through as it might attract competition from non-EU banks. 

EN 

8 

  EN 

Any increase in the funding charge linked to the RSF level could have potential consequences 
for  the  liquidity  of  the  sovereign  debt  markets,  with  implications  for  the  liquidity  of 
NextGenerationEU bonds. This  would confirm  the concerns raised at  the time of the CRR2 
proposal10. 

The  impact  on  non-EU  banks  operating  in  the  EU  SFT  market  is  less  clear.  The  activities 
concerned are normally carried out by  EU subsidiaries, which would be subject to the same 
NSFR requirements than the one that apply to EU banks. However, they might be able to shift 
those activities to branches or cross-border operations, and, in any case, they would be able to 
back-to-back the activity with support from their parent company to neutralise the increase. In 
short, non-EU banking groups in certain jurisdictions could possibly neutralise the impact of 
an increase in the NSFR, considering that they would not face similar prudential requirements 
on these exposures after June 2025. This situation would, without specific EU action, lead to 
an uneven international playing field. 

• 

Regulatory fitness and simplification 

This initiative is very specific and targeted. As a result, it does not affect regulatory fitness or 
simplification. 

• 

Fundamental rights 

The EU is committed to high standards of protection of fundamental rights and is a signatory 
to a broad set of conventions on human rights. The proposal is not expected to have a direct 
impact  on the rights  listed in  the main  UN  conventions  on human rights and the Charter of 
Fundamental Rights of the European Union, which is an integral part of the EU Treaties and 
the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). 

4. 

BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS 

The proposal does not have implications for the EU budget. 

5. 

• 

OTHER ELEMENTS 

Implementation plans and monitoring, evaluation and reporting arrangements 

Beyond  the  regular  capital  market  monitoring,  supervisory  reviews,  stress  testing  exercises 
and data collection carried out by central banks and supervisory authorities, including at EU 
level, the proposal sets out that the EBA will also monitor the effects of the amendments on 
banks’  NSFR  and  the  liquidity  of  the  underlying  collateral  markets  every  five  years.  The 
development  of  the  periodic  monitoring  report  should  not  introduce  an  additional  reporting 
burden on EU banks as it could rely on available market intelligence and existing supervisory 
reporting requirements. 

• 

Explanatory documents (for directives) 

Not applicable. 

10 

Proposal  for  a  Regulation  of the  European  Parliament  and of  the  Council  amending  Regulation  (EU) 
No 575/2013 as regards the leverage ratio, the net stable funding ratio, requirements for own funds and 
eligible liabilities, counterparty credit risk, market risk, exposures to central counterparties, exposures to 
collective  investment  undertakings,  large  exposures,  reporting  and  disclosure  requirements  and 
amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 (EUR-Lex - 52016PC0850 - EN - EUR-Lex). 

EN 

9 

  EN 

 
• 

Detailed explanation of the specific provisions of the proposal 

Article 1  deletes  the  transitional  provision  set  out  in  Article 510(8)  of  the  CRR  in  order  to 
maintain the existing treatment for monies due from SFTs and unsecured transactions with a 
residual  maturity  of  less  than  six  months,  with  financial  customers.  Article 1  also  amends 
Article 510(6)  in  order  to  introduce  a  periodic  monitoring  where  the  EBA  is  mandated  to 
report  to  the  Commission  every  five  years  on  the  appropriateness  of  the  treatment. 
Article 510(7) becomes redundant and is therefore deleted. 

EN 

10 

  EN 

2025/0077 (COD) 

Proposal for a 

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 

amending Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 on prudential requirements for credit 
institutions as regards requirements for securities financing transactions under the net 
stable funding ratio 

(Text with EEA relevance) 

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 

Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European  Union,  and  in  particular 
Article 114 thereof, 

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission, 

After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments, 
Having regard to the opinion of the European Central Bank (11), 
Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee (12), 

Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, 

Whereas: 

(1) 

Regulation (EU) 2019/876 of the European Parliament and of the Council13 introduced 
into  Regulation  (EU)  No 575/2013  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council14 
the Net Stable Funding Ratio (NSFR) requirement. That requirement reflected part of 
the Basel III standards, i.e. the international standards agreed by the Basel Committee 
on  Banking  Supervision  (BCBS)  which  were  developed  to  ensure  that  credit 
institutions have sufficient  stable funding on a one-year horizon, and thus to  prevent 
an excessive maturity mismatch between assets and liabilities and an overreliance on 
short-term  wholesale  funding.  The  NSFR  requirement  as  laid  down  in  Regulation 
(EU) No 575/2013 has been applicable to credit institutions since 28 June 2021.  

(2) 

Article  428r(1),  point  (g),  Article  428s(1),  point  (b),  and  Article  428v,  point  (a),  of 
Regulation  (EU)  No 575/2013  currently  provide  for  the  stable  funding  factors  for 
monies  due  from  financing  transactions  with  financial  customers,  where  those 

11 
12 
13 

14 

OJ C , , p. 
OJ C , , p. 
Regulation (EU) 2019/876 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2019 amending 
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 as regards the leverage ratio, the net stable funding ratio, requirements 
for  own  funds  and  eligible  liabilities,  counterparty  credit  risk,  market  risk,  exposures  to  central 
counterparties,  exposures  to  collective  investment  undertakings,  large  exposures,  reporting  and 
disclosure  requirements,  and  Regulation  (EU)  No  648/2012  (OJ  L  150,  7.6.2019,  p.  1, 
ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2019/876/oj). 
Regulation  (EU)  No  575/2013  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  26  June  2013  on 
prudential  requirements  for  credit  institutions  and  investment  firms  and  amending  Regulation  (EU) 
No 648/2012 (OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/575/oj). 

EN 

11 

  EN 

 
transactions  have  a  residual  maturity  of  less  than  six  months.  Those  funding  factors 
are, depending on the financing transaction concerned, 0%, 5% or 10%. Article 510(8) 
of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, however, provides for a raise, by 28 June 2025, of 
those funding factors to 10%, 15% and 15%, respectively. That deferred raise aimed at 
giving  credit  institutions  sufficient  time  to  gradually  adapt  to  a  more  conservative 
calibration and  to  assess whether that calibration was appropriate.  In addition  to  that 
deferred  raise,  other  adjustments  were  adopted  to  ensure  that  the  introduction  of  the 
NSFR  requirement  did  not  disrupt  the  liquidity  of  the  related  collateral  markets, 
including sovereign bonds markets. 

Under  Article  510(6),  of  Regulation  (EU)  No 575/2013,  the  European  Banking 
Authority (EBA)  was  mandated to assess the appropriateness of the treatment of  the 
stable  funding  required  to  cover  the  funding  risk  linked  to  SFTs  and  unsecured 
transactions  with  financial  customers  where  those  SFTs  and  unsecured  transactions 
have a residual maturity of less than six months. In line with that mandate, the EBA 
delivered a report on specific aspects  of the NSFR  on 16 January 202415 That report 
concluded  that  a  raise  of  the  funding  factors,  as  provided  for  in  Article  510(8)  of 
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, would have a negligible impact on the levels of NSFRs 
of  institutions.  However,  the  report  does  not  assess  the  broader  dimension  and 
spillover  effects  on  the  liquidity  of  the  sovereign  debt  and  bonds  markets.  The 
considerations that led to the deferral of that raise still prevail. In particular, as the bulk 
of SFTs are collateralised by sovereign debt instruments, a raise in the related required 
stable funding could reduce the liquidity in the markets concerned. That could, in turn, 
risk creating additional funding costs for Member States and altering monetary policy 
transmission mechanisms. 

In addition, other BCBS member jurisdictions have set required stable funding levels 
for SFTs that are identical to those that are currently applicable. In that context, given 
the intense international competition in the SFT market, a raise of the funding factors 
on  28 June  2025  would  create  an  uneven  international  playing  field  that  would  be 
detrimental to Union financial markets. 

To avoid those unintended consequences, the current stable funding factors for SFTs 
and  unsecured  transactions  with  financial  customers,  where  such  transactions  have  a 
residual  maturity  of  less  than  six  months,  as  laid  down  in  Article  428r(1),  point  (g), 
Article  428s(1),  point  (b),  and  Article  428v,  point (a),  of  Regulation  (EU) 
No 575/2013, should be made permanent. 

To ensure sufficient monitoring of the interactions with the market liquidity of assets 
received  as  collateral  in  SFTs  and  unsecured  transactions  with  financial  customers, 
where  such  transactions  have  a  residual  maturity  of  less  than  six  months,  including 
when  collateralized  by  sovereign  debt,  the  funding  risk  for  credit  institutions,  and 
possible  international  developments  in  that  area,  the  EBA  should  report  to  the 
European Commission every five years on the appropriateness of those stable funding 
requirements. 

Report  of  the  European  Banking  Authority  of  16  January  2024  on  specific  aspects  of  the  NSFR 
framework  under  Article 510  (4),  (6)  and  (9)  of  Regulation  (EU)  No  575/2013  (EBA/Rep/2024/01) 
(https://www.eba.europa.eu/sites/default/files/2024-01/8d7c0d40-2d79-4763-bd9c-
ad66c0bf4076/Report%20on%20specific%20aspects%20of%20the%20NSFR%20framework%20under
%20Art%20510%20CRR.pdf). 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

15 

EN 

12 

  EN 

 
(7) 

To ensure the continuity of the prudential treatment for monies due from SFTs and for 
unsecured transactions, with financial customers, with a residual maturity of less than 
six months, as specified under Article 428r(1), point (g), Article 428s(1), point (b), and 
Article  428v,  point (a),  of  Regulation  (EU)  No 575/2013,  the  proposed  Regulation 
should  apply  from  29  June  2025.  Temporarily  discontinuing  the  treatment  would 
create legal uncertainty for market participants and undue administrative and financial 
burden  for  the  Union  banking  sector  in  general  that  could  be  mitigated  by  clearly 
setting the expected date of application of the provisions concerned. 

(8) 

Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 should therefore be amended accordingly, 

HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 

Article 1 
Amendments to Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 

Article 510 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 is amended as follows: 

(1) 

paragraph 6 is amended as follows: 

(a) 

the first subparagraph is replaced by the following: 

‘The  EBA  shall  monitor  the  amount  of  stable  funding  required  to  cover  the 
funding  risk  linked  to  securities  financing  transactions,  including  the  assets 
received  or  given  in  those  transactions,  and  to  unsecured  transactions,  with 
financial  customers,  where  such  transactions  have  a  residual  maturity  of  less 
than six months. The EBA shall report to the Commission by 31 January 2029, 
and  every  five  years  thereafter,  on  the  appropriateness  of  that  requirement. 
Taking into account international developments and the regulatory treatment of 
similar  transactions  in  other  jurisdictions,  the  reports  shall  assess  at  a 
minimum:’; 

(b)  points (d) and (e) are replaced by the following: 

‘(d) 

the  adequacy  of  the  asymmetric  treatment  between  liabilities  with  a  residual 
maturity  of  less  than  six  months  provided  by  financial  customers  that  are 
subject  to  a  0 %  available  stable  funding  factor  in  accordance  with  Article 
428k(3),  point  (c),  and  assets  resulting  from  transactions  with  a  residual 
maturity of less than six months with financial customers that are subject to a 
0 %,  5 %  or  10 %  required  stable  funding  factor  in  accordance  with  Article 
428r(1), point (g), Article 428s(1), point (b), and Article 428v, point (a); 

(e) 

the impact of the introduction of higher or lower required stable funding factors 
for  securities  financing  transactions,  in  particular  with  a  residual  maturity  of 
less than six months, with financial customers, on: 

(i) 

the price structure of those transactions; and 

(ii) 

the market liquidity of assets received as collateral in those transactions, 
in particular of sovereign and corporate bonds;’; 

(2) 

paragraphs 7 and 8 are deleted. 

EN 

13 

  EN 

Article 2 
Entry into force and application 

This  Regulation  shall  enter  into  force  on  the  day  following  that  of  its  publication  in  the 
Official Journal of the European Union. 

This Regulation shall apply from 29 June 2025. 

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in the Member States in 
accordance with the Treaties. 

Done at Brussels, 

For the European Parliament 
The President 

For the Council 
The President

EN 

14 

  EN 

LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL AND DIGITAL STATEMENT 

1. 

1.1. 

1.2. 

1.3. 

FRAMEWORK OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE ................................................. 3 

Title of the proposal/initiative ...................................................................................... 3 

Policy area(s) concerned .............................................................................................. 3 

Objective(s) .................................................................................................................. 3 

1.3.1.  General objective(s) ..................................................................................................... 3 

1.3.2.  Specific objective(s) ..................................................................................................... 3 

1.3.3.  Expected result(s) and impact ...................................................................................... 3 

1.3.4. 

Indicators of performance ............................................................................................ 3 

1.4. 

1.5. 

The proposal/initiative relates to: ................................................................................. 4 

Grounds for the proposal/initiative .............................................................................. 4 

1.5.1.  Requirement(s) to be met in the short or long term including a detailed timeline for 

roll-out of the implementation of the initiative ............................................................ 4 

1.5.2.  Added value of EU involvement (it may result from different factors, e.g. 

coordination gains, legal certainty, greater effectiveness or complementarities). For 
the purposes of this section 'added value of EU involvement' is the value resulting 
from EU action, that is additional to the value that would have been otherwise 
created by Member States alone. ................................................................................. 4 

1.5.3.  Lessons learned from similar experiences in the past .................................................. 4 

1.5.4.  Compatibility with the multiannual financial framework and possible synergies with 
other appropriate instruments ....................................................................................... 5 

1.5.5.  Assessment of the different available financing options, including scope for 

redeployment ................................................................................................................ 5 

1.6. 

1.7. 

2. 

2.1. 

2.2. 

2.2.1. 

2.2.2. 

Duration of the proposal/initiative and of its financial impact .................................... 6 

Method(s) of budget implementation planned ............................................................. 6 

MANAGEMENT MEASURES................................................................................... 8 

Monitoring and reporting rules .................................................................................... 8 

Management and control system(s) ............................................................................. 8 

Justification of the budget implementation method(s), the funding implementation 
mechanism(s), the payment modalities and the control strategy proposed .................. 8 

Information concerning the risks identified and the internal control system(s) set up 
to mitigate them............................................................................................................ 8 

2.2.3.  Estimation and justification of the cost-effectiveness of the controls (ratio between 
the control costs and the value of the related funds managed), and assessment of the 
expected levels of risk of error (at payment & at closure) ........................................... 8 

2.3. 

3. 

3.1. 

Measures to prevent fraud and irregularities ................................................................ 9 

ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE ............ 10 

Heading(s) of the multiannual financial framework and expenditure budget line(s) 
affected ....................................................................................................................... 10 

EN 

15 

  EN 

3.2. 

Estimated financial impact of the proposal on appropriations ................................... 12 

3.2.1.  Summary of estimated impact on operational appropriations.................................... 12 

3.2.1.1.  Appropriations from voted budget ............................................................................. 12 

3.2.1.2.  Appropriations from external assigned revenues ....................................................... 17 

3.2.2.  Estimated output funded from operational appropriations......................................... 22 

3.2.3.  Summary of estimated impact on administrative appropriations ............................... 24 

3.2.3.1. Appropriations from voted budget .............................................................................. 24 

3.2.3.2.  Appropriations from external assigned revenues ....................................................... 24 

3.2.3.3.  Total appropriations ................................................................................................... 24 

3.2.4.  Estimated requirements of human resources.............................................................. 25 

3.2.4.1.  Financed from voted budget....................................................................................... 25 

3.2.4.2.  Financed from external assigned revenues ................................................................ 26 

3.2.4.3.  Total requirements of human resources ..................................................................... 26 

3.2.5.  Overview of estimated impact on digital technology-related investments ................ 28 

3.2.6.  Compatibility with the current multiannual financial framework.............................. 28 

3.2.7.  Third-party contributions ........................................................................................... 28 

3.3. 

4. 

4.1. 

4.2. 

4.3. 

4.4. 

4.5. 

Estimated impact on revenue ..................................................................................... 29 

DIGITAL DIMENSIONS .......................................................................................... 29 

Requirements of digital relevance .............................................................................. 30 

Data ............................................................................................................................ 30 

Digital solutions ......................................................................................................... 31 

Interoperability assessment ........................................................................................ 31 

Measures to support digital implementation .............................................................. 32 

EN 

16 

  EN 

1. 

FRAMEWORK OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE 

1.1. 

Title of the proposal/initiative 

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending 
Regulation  (EU)  No 575/2013  on  prudential  requirements  for  credit  institutions  as 
regards  requirements  for  securities  financing  transactions  under  the  net  stable 
funding ratio. 

1.2. 

Policy area(s) concerned 

Financial stability and financial services. 

1.3. 

Objective(s) 

1.3.1.  General objective(s) 

There are two general objectives: (i) maintain an adequate and efficient functioning 
of  the  SFT  and  collateral  markets,  in  particular  sovereign  debt  markets;  and  (ii) 
maintain an international level playing field, in line with the objectives of the Basel 
standards. 

1.3.2. 

Specific objective(s) 

Associated  with  the  two  general  objectives  are  three  specific  objectives:  (i)  ensure 
that  the  liquidity  and  the  cost  structure  of  SFT  and  collateral  markets  remain 
appropriate; (ii) avoid an undue increase in funding costs for EU banks and Member 
States on short-term funding markets; and (ii) ensure the consistency of the required 
stable funding treatment in the EU with other large jurisdictions. 

1.3.3.  Expected result(s) and impact 

Specify the effects which the proposal/initiative should have on the beneficiaries/groups targeted. 

The proposal contributes to: (i) ensuring adequate liquidity flows between banks and 
market  players  through  collateralised  transactions  in  the  EU;  (ii)  maintaining  the 
international level playing field for EU banks; and (iii) stabilising funding costs for 
EU banks and Member States. 

1.3.4. 

Indicators of performance 

Specify the indicators for monitoring progress and achievements. 

The  Commission  proposes  a  mandate  for  the  European  Banking  Authority  to 
monitor, review and report to the Commission every five years, in particular on the 
impact  of  the  proposed  measure  on  the  market  liquidity  of  assets  received  as 
collateral in SFTs. 

1.4. 

The proposal/initiative relates to: 

 a new action 
 a new action following a pilot project / preparatory action16 

 the extension of an existing action 

 a merger or redirection of one or more actions towards another/a new action 

16 

As referred to in Article 58(2), point (a) or (b) of the Financial Regulation. 

EN 

17 

  EN 

 
1.5. 

Grounds for the proposal/initiative 

1.5.1.  Requirement(s) to be met in the short or long term including a detailed timeline for 

roll-out of the implementation of the initiative 

The  initiative  proposes  to  make  the  current  treatment  permanent  for  securities 
financing  transactions  and  unsecured  transactions  with  a  residual  maturity  of  less 
than  six  months,  with  financial  customers.  The  current  treatment  is  set  to  end  on 
28 June 2025. As such, it does not impose new requirements on EU banks. The entry 
into  application  of  the  proposed  measure  should  be  as  close  as  possible  to  28 June 
2025. 

1.5.2.  Added  value  of  EU  involvement  (it  may  result  from  different  factors,  e.g. 
coordination gains, legal certainty, greater effectiveness or complementarities). For 
the purposes of  this section  ‘added value of  EU  involvement’ is  the value resulting 
from  EU  action,  that  is  additional  to  the  value  that  would  have  been  otherwise 
created by Member States alone. 

Reasons for action at EU level (ex-ante) – Given that the proposed measure aims to 
amend  existing  EU  legislation,  it  is  best  achieved  at  EU  level  rather  than  through 
different  national  initiatives.  To  achieve  the  EU  single  market’s  objectives,  it  is 
crucial to ensure  a standard application of  the proposed measure,  a convergence of 
related supervisory practices and  a level  playing  field  throughout the single market 
for banking services. 

Expected  generated  EU  added  value  (ex post)  –  Adopting  national  measures  would 
be  difficult  from  a  legal  standpoint  given  that  the  CRR  is  directly  applicable  and 
already  regulates  banking  liquidity  and  funding  prudential  requirements  at  national 
level.  In  addition,  a  minimum  degree  of  harmonisation  and  consistency  across 
Member States is necessary to achieve the single market’s objectives. 

1.5.3.  Lessons learned from similar experiences in the past 

The CRR is directly applicable across the EU and already regulates banking liquidity 
and  funding  prudential  requirements  in  all  Member  States.  This  ensures  a  standard 
application  of  prudential  measures,  the  necessary  convergence  in  supervisory 
practices and a level playing field throughout the single market for banking services, 
forming the basis for sound competition across the EU. 

1.5.4.  Compatibility with the multiannual financial framework and possible synergies with 

other appropriate instruments 

Not applicable for this proposal – no budgetary impact. 

1.5.5.  Assessment  of  the  different  available  financing  options,  including  scope  for 

redeployment 

Not applicable for this proposal – no budgetary impact. 

EN 

18 

  EN 

1.6. 

Duration of the proposal/initiative and of its financial impact 

 limited duration  

–    in effect from [DD/MM]YYYY to [DD/MM]YYYY  

–    financial  impact  from  YYYY  to  YYYY  for  commitment  appropriations  and 

from YYYY to YYYY for payment appropriations.  

 unlimited duration 

–  Implementation with a start-up period from YYYY to YYYY, 

–  followed by full-scale operation. 

1.7.  Method(s) of budget implementation planned17  

 Direct management by the Commission 

–   by its departments, including by its staff in the Union delegations;  

–    by the executive agencies  

 Shared management with the Member States  

 Indirect management by entrusting budget implementation tasks to: 

–   third countries or the bodies they have designated 

–   international organisations and their agencies (to be specified) 

–   the European Investment Bank and the European Investment Fund 

–   bodies referred to in Articles 70 and 71 of the Financial Regulation 

–   public law bodies 

–   bodies governed by private law with a public service mission to the extent that 

they are provided with adequate financial guarantees 

–   bodies governed by the private law of a Member State that are entrusted with 
the  implementation  of  a  public-private  partnership  and  that  are  provided  with 
adequate financial guarantees 

–   bodies or persons entrusted with the implementation of specific actions in the 
common  foreign  and  security  policy  pursuant  to  Title  V  of  the  Treaty  on 
European Union, and identified in the relevant basic act 

–  bodies  established  in  a  Member  State,  governed  by  the  private  law  of  a 
Member  State  or  Union  law  and  eligible  to  be  entrusted,  in  accordance  with 
sector-specific  rules,  with  the  implementation  of  Union  funds  or  budgetary 
guarantees,  to  the extent that such bodies are controlled by public law bodies or 
by bodies governed by private law with a public service mission, and are provided 
with adequate financial guarantees in the form of joint and several liability by the 
controlling bodies or equivalent financial guarantees and which may be, for each 
action, limited to the maximum amount of the Union support. 

Comments  

17 

Details of budget implementation methods and references to the Financial Regulation may be found on 
https://myintracomm.ec.europa.eu/corp/budget/financial-rules/budget-
site: 
the 
implementation/Pages/implementation-methods.aspx. 

BUDGpedia 

EN 

19 

  EN 

 
Not applicable for this proposal – no budgetary impact. 

EN 

20 

  EN 

2. 

MANAGEMENT MEASURES  

2.1.  Monitoring and reporting rules  

Not applicable for this proposal – no budgetary impact. 

2.2.  Management and control system(s)  

2.2.1. 

Justification  of  the  budget  implementation  method(s),  the  funding  implementation 
mechanism(s), the payment modalities and the control strategy proposed 

Not applicable for this proposal – no budgetary impact. 

2.2.2. 

Information concerning the risks identified and the internal control system(s) set up 
to mitigate them 

Not applicable for this proposal – no budgetary impact. 

2.2.3.  Estimation  and  justification  of  the  cost-effectiveness  of  the  controls  (ratio  between 
the control costs and the value of the related funds managed), and assessment of the 
expected levels of risk of error (at payment & at closure)  

Not applicable for this proposal – no budgetary impact. 

2.3.  Measures to prevent fraud and irregularities  

Not applicable for this proposal – no budgetary impact. 

EN 

21 

  EN 

3. 

3.1. 

ESTIMATED FINANCIAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL/INITIATIVE  

Heading(s)  of  the  multiannual  financial  framework  and  expenditure  budget 
line(s) affected  

Not applicable for this proposal – no budgetary impact. 

•  Existing budget lines  

In order of multiannual financial framework headings and budget lines. 

Budget line 

Type of 
expenditure 

Contribution  

Heading of 
multiannual 
financial 
framework 

Number  

[XX.YY.YY.YY] 

[XX.YY.YY.YY] 

[XX.YY.YY.YY] 

Diff./Non-
diff.18 

from 
EFTA 
countries
19 

from 
candidate 
countries 
and 
potential 
candidates
20 

From 
other 
third 
countries 

other assigned 
revenue 

Diff./Non
-diff. 

Diff./Non
-diff. 

Diff./Non
-diff. 

YES/NO  YES/NO  YES/NO 

YES/NO 

YES/NO  YES/NO  YES/NO 

YES/NO 

YES/NO  YES/NO  YES/NO 

YES/NO 

•  New budget lines requested  

In order of multiannual financial framework headings and budget lines. 

Budget line 

Type of 
expenditure 

Heading of 
multiannual 
financial 
framework 

Number  

Diff./Non-
diff. 

from 
EFTA 
countries 

Contribution  

from 
candidate 
countries 
and 
potential 
candidates 

from 
other 
third 
countries 

other assigned 
revenue  

[XX.YY.YY.YY] 

[XX.YY.YY.YY] 

[XX.YY.YY.YY] 

Diff./Non
-diff. 

Diff./Non
-diff. 

Diff./Non
-diff. 

YES/NO  YES/NO  YES/NO 

YES/NO 

YES/NO  YES/NO  YES/NO 

YES/NO 

YES/NO  YES/NO  YES/NO 

YES/NO 

18 
19 
20 

Diff. = Differentiated appropriations / Non-diff. = Non-differentiated appropriations. 
EFTA: European Free Trade Association. 
Candidate countries and, where applicable, potential candidates from the Western Balkans. 

EN 

22 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3.2. 

Estimated financial impact of the proposal on appropriations  

3.2.1. 

Summary of estimated impact on operational appropriations  

–    The proposal/initiative does not require the use of operational appropriations  

–    The proposal/initiative requires the use of operational appropriations, as explained below 

3.2.1.1.  Appropriations from voted budget 

Heading of multiannual financial framework  

Number 

EUR million (to three decimal places) 

DG: <…….> 

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

TOTAL MFF 
2021-2027 

Operational appropriations  

Budget line 

Budget line 

Commitments 

Payments 

Commitments 

Payments 

(1a) 

(2a) 

(1b) 

(2b) 

Appropriations of an administrative nature financed from the envelope of specific programmes21 
Budget line 

(3) 

TOTAL appropriations 
for DG <…….> 

Commitments 

Payments 

=1a+1b+3 

=2a+2b+3 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

DG: <…….> 

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

TOTAL MFF 
2021-2027 

Operational appropriations  
Budget line 

Commitments 

(1a) 

0.000 

21 

Technical and/or administrative assistance and expenditure in support of the implementation of EU programmes and/or actions (former ‘BA’ lines), indirect research, direct research. 

EN 

23 

EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Budget line 

Payments 

Commitments 

Payments 

(2a) 

(1b) 

(2b) 

Appropriations of an administrative nature financed from the envelope of specific programmes22 
Budget line 

(3) 

TOTAL appropriations 
for DG <…….> 

Commitments 

Payments 

=1a+1b+3 

=2a+2b+3 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

TOTAL 

operational 

appropriations  

Commitments 

Payments 

TOTAL  appropriations  of  an  administrative  nature  financed 
from the envelope for specific programmes  

TOTAL appropriations under 
HEADING <….> 

Commitments 

of the multiannual financial framework 

Payments 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

=4+6 

=5+6 

Heading of multiannual financial  
framework  

Number 

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

TOTAL MFF 
2021-2027 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

DG: <…….> 

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

TOTAL MFF 
2021-2027 

Operational appropriations  
Budget line 

Commitments 

(1a) 

0.000 

22 

Technical and/or administrative assistance and expenditure in support of the implementation of EU programmes and/or actions (former ‘BA’ lines), indirect research, direct research. 

EN 

24 

EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Budget line 

Payments 

Commitments 

Payments 

(2a) 

(1b) 

(2b) 

Appropriations of an administrative nature financed from the envelope of specific programmes23  
Budget line 

(3) 

TOTAL appropriations 
for DG <…….> 

Commitments 

Payments 

=1a+1b +3 

=2a+2b+3 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

DG: <…….> 

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

TOTAL MFF 
2021-2027 

Operational appropriations  

Budget line 

Budget line 

Commitments 

Payments 

Commitments 

Payments 

(1a) 

(2a) 

(1b) 

(2b) 

Appropriations of an administrative nature financed from the envelope of specific programmes24  
Budget line 

(3) 

TOTAL appropriations 
for DG <…….> 

Commitments 

Payments 

=1a+1b +3 

=2a+2b+3 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

TOTAL 

operational 

appropriations  

Commitments 

(4) 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

TOTAL MFF 
2021-2027 

23 
24 

Technical and/or administrative assistance and expenditure in support of the implementation of EU programmes and/or actions (former ‘BA’ lines), indirect research, direct research. 
Technical and/or administrative assistance and expenditure in support of the implementation of EU programmes and/or actions (former ‘BA’ lines), indirect research, direct research. 

EN 

25 

EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Payments 

TOTAL  appropriations  of  an  administrative  nature  financed 
from the envelope for specific programmes  

TOTAL appropriations under 
HEADING <….> 

Commitments 

of the multiannual financial framework 

Payments 

(5) 

(6) 

=4+6 

=5+6 

•  TOTAL  operational  appropriations 
operational headings) 

(all 

Commitments 

Payments 

•  TOTAL  appropriations  of  an  administrative  nature  financed 
from  the  envelope  for  specific  programmes  (all  operational 
headings) 

TOTAL appropriations Under Heading 1 
to 6 

Commitments 

of the multiannual financial framework 
(Reference amount) 

Payments 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

=4+6 

=5+6 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

0.000 

Year 

2026 

0.000 

Year 

2027 

0.000 

0.000 

TOTAL MFF 
2021-2027 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

Heading of multiannual financial framework  

7 

‘Administrative expenditure’25 

DG: <…….> 

 Human resources  
 Other administrative expenditure  

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

TOTAL 
MFF 2021-
2027 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

25 

The necessary appropriations should be determined using the annual average cost figures available on the appropriate BUDGpedia webpage. 

EN 

26 

EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TOTAL DG <…….> 

Appropriations  

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

DG: <…….> 

 Human resources  
 Other administrative expenditure  
TOTAL DG <…….> 

Appropriations  

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

TOTAL 
MFF 2021-
2027 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

TOTAL appropriations under HEADING 7 of the multiannual financial 
framework  

(Total 
commitments 
= Total 
payments) 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

EUR million (to three decimal places) 

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

TOTAL MFF 
2021-2027 

TOTAL appropriations under HEADINGS 1 to 7 

Commitments 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

of the multiannual financial framework  

Payments 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

3.2.1.2.  Appropriations from external assigned revenues 

Heading of multiannual financial framework  

Number 

EUR million (to three decimal places) 

DG: <…….> 

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

TOTAL MFF 
2021-2027 

Operational appropriations  
Budget line 

Commitments 

(1a) 

0.000 

EN 

27 

EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Budget line 

Payments 

Commitments 

Payments 

(2a) 

(1b) 

(2b) 

Appropriations of an administrative nature financed from the envelope of specific programmes26 
Budget line 

(3) 

TOTAL appropriations 
for DG <…….> 

Commitments 

Payments 

=1a+1b+3 

=2a+2b+3 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

DG: <…….> 

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

TOTAL MFF 
2021-2027 

Operational appropriations  

Budget line 

Budget line 

Commitments 

Payments 

Commitments 

Payments 

(1a) 

(2a) 

(1b) 

(2b) 

Appropriations of an administrative nature financed from the envelope of specific programmes27 
Budget line 

(3) 

TOTAL appropriations 
for DG <…….> 

Commitments 

Payments 

=1a+1b+3 

=2a+2b+3 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

TOTAL 

operational 

appropriations  

Commitments 

Payments 

(4) 

(5) 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

TOTAL MFF 
2021-2027 

26 
27 

Technical and/or administrative assistance and expenditure in support of the implementation of EU programmes and/or actions (former ‘BA’ lines), indirect research, direct research. 
Technical and/or administrative assistance and expenditure in support of the implementation of EU programmes and/or actions (former ‘BA’ lines), indirect research, direct research. 

EN 

28 

EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TOTAL  appropriations  of  an  administrative  nature  financed 
from the envelope for specific programmes  

TOTAL appropriations under 
HEADING <….> 

Commitments 

of the multiannual financial framework 

Payments 

Heading of multiannual financial framework  

Number 

Operational appropriations  

Budget line 

Budget line 

DG: <…….> 

Commitments 

Payments 

Commitments 

Payments 

(6) 

=4+6 

=5+6 

(1a) 

(2a) 

(1b) 

(2b) 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

TOTAL MFF 
2021-2027 

Appropriations of an administrative nature financed from the envelope of specific programmes28 
Budget line 

(3) 

TOTAL appropriations 
for DG <…….> 

Commitments 

Payments 

=1a+1b+3 

=2a+2b+3 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

DG: <…….> 

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

TOTAL MFF 
2021-2027 

Operational appropriations  

Budget line 

Commitments 

Payments 

(1a) 

(2a) 

0.000 

0.000 

28 

Technical and/or administrative assistance and expenditure in support of the implementation of EU programmes and/or actions (former ‘BA’ lines), indirect research, direct research. 

EN 

29 

EN 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Budget line 

Commitments 

Payments 

(1b) 

(2b) 

Appropriations of an administrative nature financed from the envelope of specific programmes29 
Budget line 

(3) 

TOTAL appropriations 
for DG <…….> 

Commitments 

Payments 

=1a+1b+3 

=2a+2b+3 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

TOTAL 

operational 

appropriations  

Commitments 

Payments 

TOTAL  appropriations  of  an  administrative  nature  financed 
from the envelope for specific programmes  

TOTAL appropriations under 
HEADING <….> 

Commitments 

of the multiannual financial framework 

Payments 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

=4+6 

=5+6 

•  TOTAL  operational  appropriations 
operational headings) 

(all 

Commitments 

Payments 

•  TOTAL  appropriations  of  an  administrative  nature  financed 
from  the  envelope  for  specific  programmes  (all  operational 
headings) 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

TOTAL MFF 
2021-2027 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

TOTAL MFF 
2021-2027 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

29 

Technical and/or administrative assistance and expenditure in support of the implementation of EU programmes and/or actions (former ‘BA’ lines), indirect research, direct research. 

EN 

30 

EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TOTAL appropriations under Headings 1 
to 6 

Commitments 

of the multiannual financial framework (Reference 
amount) 

Payments 

=4+6 

=5+6 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

Heading of multiannual financial framework  

7 

‘Administrative expenditure’30 

DG: <…….> 

 Human resources  
 Other administrative expenditure  

TOTAL DG <…….> 

Appropriations  

DG: <…….> 

 Human resources  
 Other administrative expenditure  

TOTAL DG <…….> 

Appropriations  

EUR million (to three decimal places) 

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

TOTAL 
MFF 2021-
2027 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

TOTAL 
MFF 2021-
2027 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

TOTAL appropriations under HEADING 7 of the multiannual 
financial framework  

(Total 
commitments 
= Total 
payments) 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

Year 

Year 

Year 

Year 

TOTAL MFF 

EUR million (to three decimal places) 

30 

The necessary appropriations should be determined using the annual average cost figures available on the appropriate BUDGpedia webpage. 

EN 

31 

EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TOTAL appropriations under HEADINGS 1 to 7 

Commitments 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

of the multiannual financial framework  

Payments 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

2024 

2025 

2026 

2027 

2021-2027 

3.2.2.  Estimated output funded from operational appropriations (not to be completed for decentralised agencies) 

Year  
2024 

Year  
2025 

Year  
2026 

Year  
2027 

OUTPUTS 

Commitment appropriations in EUR million (to three decimal places) 

Enter as many years as necessary to show the 
duration of the impact (see Section1.6) 

TOTAL 

o
N

Cost 

o
N

Cost 

o
N

Cost 

o
N

Cost 

o
N

Cost  N

o

Cost 

o
N

Cost 

Total 
No 

Total 
cost 

Indicate 
objectives and 
outputs  

 

Type31 

Avera
ge 
cost 

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 132… 

- Output 

- Output 

- Output 

Subtotal for specific objective No 1 

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE No 2 ... 

- Output 

Subtotal for specific objective No 2 

31 
32 

Outputs are products and services to be supplied (e.g. number of student exchanges financed, number of km of roads built, etc.). 
As described in Section 1.3.2. ‘Specific objective(s)’. 

EN 

32 

EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
TOTALS 

EN 

33 

EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3.2.3. 

Summary of estimated impact on administrative appropriations  

–    The  proposal/initiative  does  not  require  the  use  of  appropriations  of  an 

administrative nature  

–    The proposal/initiative requires the use of appropriations of an administrative 

nature, as explained below 

3.2.3.1. Appropriations from voted budget 

VOTED APPROPRIATIONS 

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

TOTAL 
2021 - 2027 

HEADING 7 

Human resources  

Other administrative expenditure  

Subtotal HEADING 7 

Outside HEADING 7 

Human resources  

Other expenditure of an administrative nature 

Subtotal outside HEADING 7 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

TOTAL 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

3.2.3.2.  Appropriations from external assigned revenues 

EXTERNAL ASSIGNED REVENUES 

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

TOTAL 
2021 - 2027 

HEADING 7 

Human resources  

Other administrative expenditure  

Subtotal HEADING 7 

Outside HEADING 7 

Human resources  

Other expenditure of an administrative nature 

Subtotal outside HEADING 7 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

TOTAL 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

3.2.3.3.  Total appropriations 

TOTAL 
VOTED APPROPRIATIONS + EXTERNAL 
ASSIGNED REVENUES 

Year 

Year 

Year 

Year 

2024 

2025 

2026 

2027 

TOTAL 
2021 - 
2027 

HEADING 7 

Human resources  

Other administrative expenditure  

Subtotal HEADING 7 

Outside HEADING 7 

Human resources  

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

EN 

34 

  EN 

 
 
 
Other expenditure of an administrative nature 

Subtotal outside HEADING 7 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

TOTAL 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

The  appropriations  required  for  human  resources  and  other  expenditure  of  an  administrative  nature 
will  be  met  by  appropriations  from  the  DG  that  are  already  assigned  to  management  of  the  action 
and/or  have  been  redeployed  within  the  DG,  together,  if  necessary,  with  any  additional  allocation 
which may be granted to the managing DG under the annual allocation procedure and in the light of 
budgetary constraints. 

3.2.4.  Estimated requirements of human resources  

–    The proposal/initiative does not require the use of human resources  

–    The  proposal/initiative  requires  the  use  of  human  resources,  as  explained 

below 

3.2.4.1.  Financed from voted budget 

VOTED APPROPRIATIONS 

Estimate to be expressed in full-time equivalent units (FTEs)33 

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

 Establishment plan posts (officials and temporary staff) 

20 01 02 01 (Headquarters and Commission’s Representation Offices) 

20 01 02 03 (EU Delegations) 

01 01 01 01 (Indirect research) 

01 01 01 11 (Direct research) 

Other budget lines (specify) 

• External staff (inFTEs) 

20 02 01 (AC, END from the ‘global envelope’) 

20 02 03 (AC, AL, END and JPD in the EU Delegations) 

Admin. Support 
line 
[XX.01.YY.YY] 

- at Headquarters 

- in EU Delegations  

01 01 01 02 (AC, END - Indirect research) 

01 01 01 12 (AC, END - Direct research) 

Other budget lines (specify) - Heading 7 

Other budget lines (specify) - Outside Heading 7 

TOTAL 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

3.2.4.2.  Financed from external assigned revenues 

EXTERNAL ASSIGNED REVENUES 

 Establishment plan posts (officials and temporary staff) 

20 01 02 01 (Headquarters and Commission’s Representation Offices) 

20 01 02 03 (EU Delegations) 

Year 

2024 

Year 

2025 

Year 

2026 

Year 

2027 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

33 

Please specify below the table how many FTEs within the number indicated are already assigned to the 
management of the action and/or can be redeployed within your DG and what are your net needs. 

EN 

35 

  EN 

 
 
 
01 01 01 01 (Indirect research) 

01 01 01 11 (Direct research) 

Other budget lines (specify) 

• External staff (in full time equivalent units) 

20 02 01 (AC, END from the ‘global envelope’) 

20 02 03 (AC, AL, END and JPD in the EU Delegations) 

Admin. Support 
line  
[XX.01.YY.YY] 

- at Headquarters 

- in EU Delegations  

01 01 01 02 (AC, END - Indirect research) 

01 01 01 12 (AC, END - Direct research) 

Other budget lines (specify) - Heading 7 

Other budget lines (specify) - Outside Heading 7 

TOTAL 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

3.2.4.3.  Total requirements of human resources 

TOTAL VOTED APPROPRIATIONS + EXTERNAL ASSIGNED 
REVENUES 

Year 

Year 

Year 

Year 

2024 

2025 

2026 

2027 

 Establishment plan posts (officials and temporary staff) 

20 01 02 01 (Headquarters and Commission’s Representation Offices) 

20 01 02 03 (EU Delegations) 

01 01 01 01 (Indirect research) 

01 01 01 11 (Direct research) 

Other budget lines (specify) 

• External staff (in full time equivalent units) 

20 02 01 (AC, END from the ‘global envelope’) 

20 02 03 (AC, AL, END and JPD in the EU Delegations) 

Admin. Support 
line  
[XX.01.YY.YY] 

- at Headquarters 

- in EU Delegations  

01 01 01 02 (AC, END - Indirect research) 

01 01 01 12 (AC, END - Direct research) 

Other budget lines (specify) - Heading 7 

Other budget lines (specify) - Outside Heading 7 

TOTAL 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

The staff required to implement the proposal (in FTEs):  

To be covered by 
current staff 
available in the 
Commission 
services  

Exceptional additional staff* 

To be financed 
under Heading 7 
or Research 

To be financed 
from BA line 

To be financed 
from fees 

EN 

36 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
Establishment 
plan posts 

External 
staff 
(CA, SNEs, INT) 

0 

0 

N/A 

Description of tasks to be carried out by: 

Officials and temporary staff 

External staff 

3.2.5.  Overview of estimated impact on digital technology-related investments 

Compulsory: the best estimate of the digital technology-related investments entailed 
by the proposal/initiative should be included in the table below.  

Exceptionally,  when  required  for  the  implementation  of  the  proposal/initiative,  the 
appropriations under Heading 7 should be presented in the designated line.  

The appropriations under Headings 1-6 should be reflected as “Policy IT expenditure 
on operational programmes”. This expenditure refers to the operational budget to be 
used to re-use/ buy/ develop IT platforms/ tools directly linked to the implementation 
of the initiative and their associated investments (e.g. licences, studies, data storage 
etc).  The  information  provided  in  this  table  should  be  consistent  with  details 
presented under Section 4 “Digital dimensions”. 

TOTAL Digital and IT appropriations 

Year 

Year 

Year 

Year 

2024 

2025 

2026 

2027 

TOTAL 
MFF 
2021 - 
2027 

HEADING 7 

IT expenditure (corporate)  

Subtotal HEADING 7 

Outside HEADING 7 

Policy IT expenditure on operational 
programmes 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

Subtotal outside HEADING 7 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

TOTAL 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

0.000 

3.2.6.  Compatibility with the current multiannual financial framework  

The proposal/initiative: 

–    can be fully financed through redeployment within the relevant heading of the 

multiannual financial framework (MFF) 

Not applicable for this proposal – no budgetary impact. 

–    requires use of the unallocated margin under the relevant heading of the MFF 

and/or use of the special instruments as defined in the MFF Regulation 

Not applicable for this proposal – no budgetary impact. 

EN 

37 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
–    requires a revision of the MFF 

Not applicable for this proposal – no budgetary impact. 

3.2.7.  Third-party contributions  

The proposal/initiative: 

–    does not provide for co-financing by third parties 

–    provides for the co-financing by third parties estimated below: 

Appropriations in EUR million (to three decimal places) 

Year  
2024 

Year  
2025 

Year  
2026 

Year  
2027 

Total 

Specify the co-financing body  

TOTAL appropriations co-
financed  

3.3. 

Estimated impact on revenue  

–    The proposal/initiative has no financial impact on revenue. 

–    The proposal/initiative has the following financial impact: 

– 

– 

– 

Budget revenue line: 

Article …………. 

 

 

on own resources  

on other revenue 

  please indicate, if the revenue is assigned to expenditure lines 

Appropriations 
available for the 
current financial 
year 

EUR million (to three decimal places) 

Impact of the proposal/initiative34 

Year 2024 

Year 2025  Year 2026 

Year 2027 

For assigned revenue, specify the budget expenditure line(s) affected. 

Not applicable for this proposal – no budgetary impact. 

Other  remarks  (e.g.  method/formula  used  for  calculating  the  impact  on  revenue  or 
any other information). 

Not applicable for this proposal – no budgetary impact. 

4. 

DIGITAL DIMENSIONS 

4.1. 

Requirements of digital relevance 

The initiative has no requirement of digital relevance. It relates to elements that are used by 
banks to determine their liquidity requirements under the CRR and has no bearing on any 

34 

As regards traditional own resources (customs duties, sugar levies), the amounts indicated must be net 
amounts, i.e. gross amounts after deduction of 20% for collection costs. 

EN 

38 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
existing  reporting  requirements.  It  has  no  effect  on  the  cross-border  interoperability  of 
network and information systems  which are used to  provide  or manage public services in 
the Union. 

4.2. 

Data 

Not applicable for this proposal – no new data generated. 

4.3. 

Digital solutions 

Not applicable for this proposal – no specific digital solutions required. 

4.4. 

Interoperability assessment 

Not applicable for this proposal – no interoperability concern. 

4.5.  Measures to support digital implementation 

Not applicable for this proposal – no need for further support for digital implementation. 

EN 

39 

  EN