Rating grade 1 declined € 839,779 thousand to € 4,945,710 thousand, mainly due to credit financing in Great Britain and to rating downgrades of corporate customers in Austria, Denmark, Slovakia and the Netherlands to rating grade 2. The decline was offset by an increase in swap transactions in Great Britain. The decline of € 4,840,323 thousand to € 7,036,636 thousand in rating grade 2 was mainly the result of rating downgrades of Austrian, German, French and Russian customers to rating grade 3, whereby there was also a reduction in credit and facility financing. In addition, the depreciation of the Russian ruble had a negative effect. There was also a decrease in documentary credits in Switzerland and in guarantees issued in Austria, Russia and Great
As the customer ratings that were in a moratorium were frozen, minor rating shifts were recorded in the fourth quarter. As at 31 December 2020, around € 884,692 thousand (total of still active moratoriums) of the retail portfolio (households and small and medium -sized entities) were in a payment moratorium that fulfilled the EBA requirements. This equates to around 3 per cent of the total retail portfolio.
Retail customers – small and medium-sized entities 1,705,573 939,211 430,355 1,740 in € thousand Central Europe Southeastern Europe Eastern Europe Group Corporates &
Retail customers – small and medium-sized entities 1,498,808 798,598 490,513 1,011 hereof non-performing exposure 655,261 455,371 182,647 35,643 1 Adaptation of previous year figures due to changed allocation
2020 in € thousand Central Europe Southeastern Europe Eastern Europe Group Corporates & Markets
Retail customers are subdivided into private individuals and small and medium-sized entities (SMEs). For retail customers a two-fold scoring system is used, consisting of the initial and ad-hoc scoring based on customer data and of the behavioral scoring based on account data. The table below shows the Group’s credit exposure to retail customers.
Retail customers – small and medium-sized entities 3,076,879 7.4% 2,788,931 6.6%
Credit exposure to retail customers by internal rating: in € thousand 2020 Share 2019 Share 4.0 Weak credit standing/sub-standard 436,455 1.0% 428,331 1.0%
Credit exposure to retail customers by segments: 2020 in € thousand Central Europe Southeastern Europe Eastern Europe Group Corporates & Markets
Retail credit exposure by products: in € thousand 2020 Share 2019 Share
The credit exposure came to € 23,338,833 thousand, representing an increase of € 1,360,861 thousand compared to year-end 2019.
In Western Europe, repo transactions in France, Germany, Italy and Spain were responsible for the € 1,824,395 thousand increase to € 12,871,056 thousand. The depreciation of the Russian ruble was responsible for the € 739,910 thousand decline to € 1,271,829 thousand in Eastern Europe.
Rating grade A1 registered an increase of € 247,813 thousand to € 1,146,065 thousand, which was due to the increase in German sovereign bonds. The increase in rating grade A2 of € 7,008,682 thousand to € 20,404,550 thousand was due to deposits with the Austrian National Bank and credit financing with the public sector in Austria. Money market transactions in Austria and the bond portfolio in Germany and France also increased. There was also an increase of € 2,225,621 thousand to € 10,527,934 thousand in rating grade A3. This resulted from the bond portfolio of the Czech Republic, Slovakia and German federal states. The minimum reserve in Slovakia and repo transactions in the Czech Republic also increased. There were also rating upgrades from B1 to A3 for German and Irish bonds. The increase was offset by a decline in money market transactions at the Czech National Bank. The increase in rating grade B2 of € 2,517,755 thousand to € 10,344,098 thousand resulted from the increase in money market transactions at the Hungarian National Bank and overdraft facilities at the National Bank of Romania. In addition, Croatia and Italy registered rating downgrades from B2 to B3, while Hungary’s rating improved from B3 to B2. Rating grade B5 registered an increase of € 414,496 thousand to € 1,806,111 thousand, as a result of increases in money market transactions and bonds with Ukraine.
Credit exposure to sovereigns (including central banks) by product: in € thousand 2020 Share 2019 Share
The € 8,097,975 thousand increase in loans and advances to € 24,186,753 thousand was mainly driven by Austria, Croatia, Russia, Slovakia, Germany and Hungary. The increase was offset by a decline in Spain and Russia (largely due to the depreciation of the Russian ruble). The increase in bonds of € 2,549,174 thousand to € 16,808,787 thousand resulted from Germany, Slovakia, Ukraine and the Czech Republic, and was partly offset by a decline in Hungary, Albania and Russia, which was partly caused by the depreciation of the Russian ruble. The increase in the repo products group of € 579,137 thousand to € 4,206,737 thousand was attributable to the Czech Republic. In addition, the increase in money market transactions in Hungary, Austria, Russia and Ukraine was responsible for the increase in the credit exposure to the sovereign sector.
The Eastern Europe segment registered a decrease in non-performing exposure of € 38,749 thousand to € 399,431 thousand attributable to Ukraine, which recorded an overall decline of € 96,444 thousand, mainly due to sales and derecognitions totaling € 58,064 thousand and the strong depreciation of the Ukrainian hryvnia. In contrast, Russia registered an increase in a total amount of € 59,772 thousand, in the non-financial corporations portfolio of € 33,739 thousand and in the households portfolio of € 26,153 thousand, reduced by the depreciation of the Russian ruble and sales amounting to € 35,325 thousand. The share of non-performing exposure to credit exposure in Eastern Europe increased 0.1 percentage points to 2.1 per cent, and the coverage ratio declined 3.0 percentage points to 57.0 per cent.
Non-performing exposure with restructuring measures: Refinancing Instruments with modified time and modified conditions Total in € thousand 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 1 Adaptation of previous year figures due to an incorrect allocation to households in the previous year (€ 251,325 thousand)
The regional breakdown of the exposures reflects the broad diversification of credit business in the Group’s European markets.
Non-performing exposure in the Group Corporates & Markets segment increased € 50,463 thousand compared to the start of the year to € 821,398 thousand. In the reporting period, the non-performing exposure at RBI AG increased € 74,422 thousand, whereas in contrast, at Raiffeisen Leasing Group it fell € 6,960 thousand to € 87,848 thousand. The NPE ratio remained constant at 1.7 per cent since the start of the year, and the NPE coverage ratio stood at 53.4 per cent, 2.5 percentage points below the figure at the start of the year.
Non-performing exposure with restructuring measures by segments: in € thousand 2020 Share 20191 Share 1 Adaptation of previous year figures due to an incorrect allocation for households in the previous year (€ 251,325 thousand)
The Group’s credit exposure based on original customer’s industry classification: in € thousand 2020 Share 2019 Share
Extraction of crude petroleum and natural gas 1,057,244 0.5% 1,103,217 0.6%
The Group invests in structured products. The total exposure to structured products showed a nominal amount of € 514,826 thousand (2019: € 621,423 thousand) and a carrying amount of € 167,983 thousand (2019: € 348,946 thousand). These are mainly investments in asset-backed securities (ABS), asset-based financing (ABF), and in some cases collateralized debt obligations (CDO). A total of 11.90 per cent of the portfolio (2019: 42.12 per cent) contains loans and advances to European customers. The year-on-year reduction is attributable to sales and interim repayments based on the repayment schedule.
Credit exposure across all asset classes by currencies: in € thousand 2020 Share 2019 Share
Total 5,378 5,734 2,023 12,339 3,616 1 Previous year figures adjusted due to a change in the Vega simulation in the financial year under review
Total 74,202 56,768 29,116 142,791 30,849 1 Previous year figures adjusted due to a change in the Vega simulation in the financial year under review
In March 2020 there were strong daily changes in hypothetical profit and loss against a sharply increasing VaR, following the outbreak of the COVID-19 crisis which led to a backtesting violation. This was due to daily market fluctuations in long-term euro interest rates of up to 17 basis points. A portfolio of equity instruments, measured in the internal model as perpetuals with maturity in 2099, was the main driver.
The following table shows all material open foreign exchange rate positions as at 31 December 2020 and the corresponding values for the previous year. The numbers include both trading positions as well as capital positions of the subsidiaries with foreign currency denominated statements of financial position.
In order to protect the Russian capital from fluctuations in the Russian ruble, in the third quarter of 2020 a short position was established which was a key driver of the regulatory trading book. At the beginning of November 2020, the daily appreciation of the Russian ruble was above the 99 per cent quantile, which resulted in a hypothetical backtesting violation.
The following tables show the largest present value changes for the trading book of the Group given a one-basis-point interest rate increase for the whole yield curve in € thousand for the reporting dates 31 December 2020 and 31 December 2019.
Besides the responsible units in the line functions, there are respective asset/liability management committees (ALCOs) set up in all network banks. These committees act as decision making bodies with respect to all matters affecting the management of the liquidity position and balance sheet structure of a unit including the definition of strategies and policies for managing liquidity risks.
The ALCOs take decisions and provide standard reports on liquidity risk to the Board of Management at least on a monthly basis. On group level these functions are taken by the RBI Group ALCO. Treasury ALM operations and respective ALCO decisions are mainly based on Group-wide, standardized Group rules and their local supplements, which take specific regional factors into account.
Responsibility for ensuring adequate levels of liquidity lies with the overall Management Board. The board members with functional responsibility are the Chief Financial Officer (Treasury/ALM) and the Chief Risk Officer (Risk). Accordingly, the processes regarding liquidity risk are run essentially by two areas within the bank: On the one side the Treasury units, which take on liquidity risk positions within the strategy, guidelines and parameters set by the responsible decision-making bodies. On the other side they are monitored and supported by independent Risk Controlling units, which measure and model liquidity risk positions, set limits and supervise the compliance with those.
In compliance with regulatory requirements for intraday liquidity management, the available liquidity is calculated daily analogous to the outflow assumptions of the regular liquidity stress reports (time-to-wall) for RBI AG. In case of limit breaches, an intraday contingency and escalation process is triggered commensurate with the severity of the breach. For the whole of RBI, the local intraday liquidity management process is within the responsibility of the local Treasury Unit which ensures that the following minimum standards are implemented locally: clear responsibilities and workflows for managing intraday liquidity; daily monitoring of available intraday liquidity; intraday liquidity forecasting model and limit; escalation and contingency processes and measures in case of limit breaches.
Generally, a haircut is applied to all liquidity buffer positions. In the stressed liquidity report (time-to-wall), these haircuts include a market-risk specific haircut and a central bank haircut. While the market risk haircut represents the potential price volatility of the securities held as assets as part of the liquidity buffer, the central bank haircut represents an additional haircut for each individual relevant security that may be offered as collateral.
Group funding is founded on a strong customer deposit base supplemented by wholesale funding – mainly via RBI AG and the Group units. Funding instruments are appropriately diversified and are used regularly. The ability to procure funds is precisely monitored and evaluated by the Treasury ALM units and the ALCOs.
The calculation of expected inflows and outflows of funds and the HQLAs is based on regulatory guidelines. The regulatory limit for LCR is 100 per cent.
The following table shows a breakdown of cash flows according to the contractual maturity of financial assets: Carrying amount
Cash, cash balances at central banks and other demand deposits 33,660,024 33,747,352 33,747,352 0 0 0
Funding liquidity risk is mainly driven by changes in the risk strategy of lenders or by a deterioration in the creditworthiness of a bank that needs external funding. Funding rates and supply rise and fall with credit spreads, which change due to the market or bank specific situation.
Issued loan commitments 13,515,769 15,027,610 4,910,502 2,081,585 6,898,841 1,136,682 1 Adaptation of previous year figures due to an incorrect allocation in the previous year
This risk category is analyzed and managed based on own historical loss data and the results of risk assessments. As with other risk types the principle of firewalling of risk management and risk controlling is also applied to operational risk in the Group. To this end, individuals are designated and trained as Operational Risk Managers for each business area. Operational Risk Managers provide central Operational Risk Controlling with reports on risk assessments, loss events, indicators and measures. They are supported in their work by Dedicated Operational Risk Specialists (DORS).
The COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting consequences for business continuity represent an operational loss event. As part of loss data reporting, all relevant direct and indirect effects were therefore collated on a group-wide basis. The direct effects included, for example, hygiene products such as masks, tests, disinfectants, additional cleaning costs, costs for safe travel to and from the workplace, additional security personnel, equipment for work areas (Plexiglas panels) and additional technical infrastructure such as notebooks. In the financial year under review, the direct costs amounted to € 19,450 thousand.
The equity requirement for a significant part of the Group is calculated using the Advanced Measurement Approach (AMA). This includes units in Bulgaria, Romania, Russia, Slovakia and principal banks in Austria (Raiffeisen Bank International AG, Vienna, Kathrein Privatbank Aktiengesellschaft, Vienna, Raiffeisen Centrobank AG, Vienna, Raiffeisen Bausparkasse Gesellschaft m.b.H., Vienna, Raiffeisen Kapitalanlage-Gesellschaft m.b.H., Vienna). The Standardized Approach (STA) is still used to calculate the operational risk of the remaining units in the CRR scope of consolidation.
To reduce operational risk, business managers decide on preventive risk reduction actions such as risk mitigation or risk transfer. The progress and effectiveness of these actions is monitored by risk control. The former also define contingency plans and nominate responsible persons or departments for initiating the defined actions if losses in fact occur. In addition, several dedicated organizational units provide support to business units for reducing operational risks. An important role in connection with operational risk activities is taken on by Financial Crime Management. Financial Crime Management provides support for the prevention and identification of fraud. The Group also conducts an extensive staff training program and has different contingency plans and back-up systems in place.
A provision is only recognized if there is a legal or constructive obligation as a result of a past event, payment is likely and the amount can be reliably estimated. A contingent liability that arises from a past event is disclosed unless payment is highly unlikely. A contingent asset that arises from a past event is reported if there is high probability of occurrence. In no instance in the description that follows is an amount stated in which, in accordance with IAS 37, this would be severely detrimental. In some cases, provisions are measured on a portfolio basis because this results in the obligation being estimated with greater reliability. RBI has grouped its provisions, contingent assets and contingent liabilities under the headings of consumer protection, banking business, regulatory enforcement and tax litigation.
The RBI Group is involved in various legal, governmental or arbitration proceedings before various courts and governmental agencies mainly arising in the ordinary course of business and involving contractual, labor and other matters.
In Croatia, following litigation initiated by a Croatian consumer association against Raiffeisenbank Austria, d.d., Croatia (RBHR) and other Croatian banks, two contractual clauses used in consumer loan agreements between 2003/2004 and 2008 were declared null and void: an interest change clause and a CHF index clause. The decision on the interest adjustment clause cannot be challenged any more. The decision on the nullity of the CHF index clause was confirmed by the Croatian Supreme Court but was challenged by RBHR at the Croatian Constitutional Court. A final decision by this court may have an impact on the relevant CHF index clause. However, based on the decisions already rendered on the nullity of the interest change clause and/or the CHF index clause, borrowers – subject to the statute of limitations – are now already filing claims against RBHR. Given current legal uncertainties relating to the statute of limitations, the validity of the CHF index clause, the further course of action, the final outcome of the constitutional court challenge and the number of borrowers raising such claims, final quantification of the financial impact and the possible damage is not possible at this point of time as the final legal assessment of the loan agreement clauses has to be made in each individual case. In this connection, the provision recognized on a portfolio basis was increased to € 34,422 thousand (2019: € 21,221 thousand).
In Poland, a significant number of civil lawsuits are pending in relation to certain contractual stipulations connected with consumer mortgage loans denominated in or indexed to foreign currencies. As at the end of December 2020, the total amount in dispute was approximately PLN 726 million (€ 159 million). In this context, a Polish court requested the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to clarify whether certain clauses in these agreements breach European law and are unfair. The ECJ’s preliminary ruling in October 2019 does not answer whether the loan agreements are invalid in whole or part but merely gives interpretative guidance on the principles according to which the national courts must decide in each individual case. According to this, a loan agreement without unfair terms should remain valid provided that it is in conformity with national law. If a loan agreement cannot remain valid without the unfair term, the entire contract would have to be annulled. If the annulment of the entire contract triggers material negative consequences for the borrower, the Polish courts can replace the unfair term by a valid term in accordance with national law. The consequences of the contract being annulled must be carefully examined so that the borrower can consider all potential negative consequences of annulment. However, the consequences of canceling an annulled loan agreement remain unclear and may be serious for the borrower, for example due to the obligation to repay the loan immediately including the costs of using the loan amount. It remains to be seen how the principles developed by the ECJ will be applied under national law on a case-by-case basis.
A significant inflow of new cases has been observed since the beginning of 2020 as a result of the ECJ preliminary ruling and intensified marketing activity by law firms acting on behalf of borrowers. Such an increased inflow of new cases has not only been observed by RBI’s Polish branch, but by all banks handling currency loan portfolios in Poland.
The sensitivity analysis shows that a 10 per cent increase in the number of lawsuits would lead to an 8.5 per cent increase in the provisions. The size of the provisions is also affected by relative weighting of the scenarios. Judgments detrimental to the bank – notably the Supreme Court decision expected at the end of March – may result in a significant increase in the provisions.
In December 2017, a French company filed a lawsuit at the commercial court in Warsaw against Raiffeisen Bank Polska S.A. (RBPL), the former Polish subsidiary of RBI, and RBI. The French company claimed damages from both banks in the aggregate amount of € 15 million alleging that RBPL failed to comply with duties of care when opening an account for a certain customer and executing money transfers through this account, and that RBI acted as a correspondent bank in this context and failed to comply with duties of care when doing so. As regards the lawsuit against RBI, the commercial court in Warsaw declined jurisdiction in May 2019. The decision was appealed. In the course of the sale of the core banking operations of RBPL by way of demerger to Bank BGZ BNP Paribas S.A. in 2018, the lawsuit against RBPL was allocated to Bank BGZ BNP Paribas S.A. However, RBI remains commercially responsible for any negative financial consequences in connection with the said proceeding.
Legal action has been filed against Raiffeisen Zentralbank Österreich Aktiengesellschaft (prior to the merger with RBI in 2010) and Raiffeisen Investment AG (RIAG) in New York. The claimant alleges that RBI, in its capacity as universal successor to Raiffeisen Zentralbank Österreich Aktiengesellschaft, unlawfully paid USD 150 thousand (€ 122 thousand) on a bid bond and that RIAG was involved in a fraud committed by the Serbian privatization agency resulting in damage in the range of USD 31 million to USD 52 million (€ 25 million to € 42 million). At a later point in time, the alleged damage was reduced to USD 31 million (€ 25 million). According to RBI’s assessment, the claim is unfounded and very unlikely to succeed. In February 2014, the action was dismissed, and the plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration with the court which has been pending for several years. The case was assigned to a new judge in 2018 and is now again pending in New York. RBI’s assessment of the claim remains unchanged.
Following an assignment of Tatra banka’s receivable (approximately € 4 million) against a corporate customer to an assignee, two lawsuits in the total amount of approximately € 19 million were filed by the original shareholders of the corporate customer against Tatra banka. Their shares in the corporate customer had been pledged as security for a financing provided by Tatra banka to the corporate customer. The claims are claims for damages which were incurred by the original shareholders as a consequence of an alleged late notification of the assignment to the original shareholders, the fact that the assignee had realized the pledge over the shares and, thus, the original shareholders ceased to be the shareholders of the corporate customer as well as the fact that the assignee had realized a mortgage over real estate of the corporate customer (which had also been created as a security for the financing provided by Tatra banka to the corporate customer). The original shareholders claimed that the value of the corporate customer was € 19 million and that this amount would represent the damage incurred by them due to the assignment of Tatra banka’s claim against the corporate customer. Subsequently, the original shareholders assigned their claims under the lawsuits mentioned above to a Panamanian company which is now the plaintiff. The plaintiff claims that Tatra banka acted in contradiction of good faith principles and that it breached an obligation arising from the Slovak Civil Code. In June 2019, the court entirely rejected the claim. The plaintiff filed an appeal against the judgment of the first-instance court in August 2019.
In 2015, a former client of the Raiffeisenbank a.s. (RBCZ), launched a lawsuit against RBCZ claiming damages in the amount of approximately CZK 371 million (€ 14 million) based on the allegation that RBCZ caused damage to the claimant by refusing to provide further financing. Owing to the non-payment of court fees by the claimant, a court ruling on dismissal of the lawsuit was issued but has been appealed by the claimant. In the meantime, the court has united two proceedings launched by the claimant against RBCZ and therefore the amount claimed has increased to approximately CZK 494 million (€ 19 million). After the firstinstance court decision was revised by the High Court and the claimant finally paid the court fee, the first-instance court was able to issue a verdict on the core matter of the dispute in which the court dismissed the claimant’s claims in September 2019. The claimant has appealed that decision. In June 2020, the claim was dismissed by the appellate court. The claimant again has appealed that decision.
In November 2020, the Austrian Chamber for Workers and Employees (Bundeskammer für Arbeiter und Angestellte) (BAK) filed an application for injunctive relief against Raiffeisen Bausparkasse Gesellschaft m.b.H. (RBSK), a 100 per cent subsidiary of RBI, with the commercial court in Vienna. RBSK had terminated long-term building savings contracts (Bausparverträge) in an aggregate amount of approximately € 93 million. The minimum rate of interest on said overnight building savings deposits was between 1 per cent p.a. and 4.5 per cent p.a. BAK claims that RBSK did not have the right to terminate such contracts whereas RBSK is of the opinion that said contracts constitute a continuing obligation, which can – under Austrian law – be terminated by giving proper notice.
Following an audit review by the Romanian Court of Auditors regarding the activity of Aedificium Banca pentru Locuinte S.A. (former Raiffeisen Banca pentru Locuinte S.A.) (RBL), a building society and subsidiary of Raiffeisen Bank S.A., Bucharest, the Romanian Court of Auditors claimed that several deficiencies were identified and that conditions for state premiums on savings had not been met. Thus, allegedly, such premiums may have to be repaid. Should RBL not succeed in reclaiming said amounts from its customers or providing satisfactory documentation, RBL may be held liable for the payment of such funds. RBL initiated court proceedings to contest the findings of the Romanian Court of Auditors and won on the merits with regard to the most significant alleged deficiencies. The case was appealed at the High Court of Cassation and Justice. In November 2020, the High Court of Cassation and Justice overturned the previous court decision and confirmed the view of the Romanian Court of Auditors. Upon the application of RBL, the High Court of Cassation and Justice requested the Constitutional Court to decide whether the Court of Auditors was, in principle, entitled to perform an audit review of RBL. The proceeding are is still pending and could – depending on its outcome – enable RBL to file an extraordinary appeal against the decision of the High Court of Cassation and Justice. Given current uncertainties, an exact quantification of the negative financial impact is not possible, however, repayment of premiums and potential penalty payments are not expected to exceed € 48 million. In this connection, a provision of € 18,815 thousand was recognized.
From 2014 onwards, a group of former clients of RBHR launched several claims for damages in the amount of approximately HRK 121 million (€ 16 million) based on the allegation that RBHR acted fraudulently by terminating and collecting loans. In some of the court proceedings, the final court decisions dismissed the claims in the amount of approximately HRK 20 million (€ 3 million ).
In April 2018, Raiffeisen Bank Polska S.A. (RBPL), the former Polish subsidiary of RBI, obtained the lawsuit filed by a former client claiming an amount of approximately PLN 203 million (€ 45 million). According to the plaintiff’s complaint, RBPL blocked the client ’s current overdraft credit account for six calendar days in 2014 without formal justification. The plaintiff claimed that the blocking of the account resulted in losses and lost profits due to a periodic disruption of the client’s financial liquidity, the inability to replace loan-based funding sources with financing streams originating from other sources on the blocked account, a reduction in inventory and merchant credits being made available and generally a resulting deterioration of the client’s financial results and business reputation. RBPL contended that the blocking was legally justified and implemented upon the information obtained. In the course of the sale of the core banking operations of RBPL to Bank BGZ BNP Paribas S.A.), the lawsuit against RBPL was allocated to Bank BGZ BNP Paribas S.A. However, RBI remains commercially responsible for negative financial consequences in connection with the said proceeding.
A German customer instructed RBI to issue guarantees in favor of a Polish legal entity and a Polish municipality (together the plaintiffs ). RBI instructed RBPL to issue such guarantees in Poland and granted RBPL corresponding counter-guarantees. RBI itself had received a declaration of full indemnification from the German customer. The plaintiffs demanded payment under the guarantees of Bank BGZ BNP Paribas SA (BNP), which is the legal successor to RBPL regarding those guarantees. BNP rejected the application on the grounds of abusive exercise of rights. In March 2019, a claim for payment of PLN 50 million (€ 11 million) plus interest was served on BNP by the plaintiffs through the Warsaw commercial court. RBI remains commercially responsible for negative financial consequences in connection with said proceedings and was invited by BNP to join the lawsuit in November 2019.
claimant in 1998. The claimant fell into arrears, whereupon RBI called in the guarantee. In 2015 a settlement was reached between RBI and the guarantor as to the claims of RBI under the guarantee. RBI applied all monies received from the guarantor towards payment by the claimant under the loan. In its request for arbitration, the claimant alleges (inter alia) that the settlement was detrimental to it, and that RBI would be obliged to transfer the monies received from the guarantor to the claimant. RBI takes the view that the claims raised by the claimant are baseless. In June 2020, the arbitral tribunal ruled that it had no jurisdiction over the claims and disputes raised by the claimant. This arbitral award is final and can no longer be challenged before English courts.
In February 2020, Raiffeisen-Leasing GmbH (RL) was served with a lawsuit in Austria for an amount of approximately € 43 million. The plaintiff claims damages alleging that RL breached its obligations under a real estate development agreement. According to the assessment of RL and its lawyers, this claim is very unlikely to succeed, in particular given the fact that a similar claim of the plaintiff was rejected by the Austrian Supreme Court in a previous legal dispute. In this case two applications for legal aid filed by the plaintiff have already been rejected by the Commercial Court of Vienna because of malicious abuse of the law.
In September 2020, Raiffeisen-Leasing Immobilienmanagement GmbH (RIM), a wholly owned subsidiary of Raiffeisen-Leasing Gesellschaft m.b.H., was served with a lawsuit filed in a court in Brescia, Italy, by an Italian company. The plaintiff is seeking approximately € 30 million in damages for an alleged breach of a shareholder agreement in connection with the joint development of a factory outlet center in Italy. The shareholder agreement between RIM and the plaintiff was concluded in 2011 upon the establishment of a joint project company. In 2012, however, it turned out that various conditions for the acquisition of the project could not be met. As a result, RIM decided not to proceed with the project and sold its share in the project company to the plaintiff. The plaintiff now alleges that RIM violated the original shareholder agreement by discontinuing the project.
RBI and its subsidiaries are subject to numerous national and international regulatory authorities.
In March 2018, an administrative fine of € 3 million (which was calculated by reference to the annual consolidated turnover of RBI and constitutes 0.06 per cent of the last available annual consolidated revenue) was imposed on RBI in the course of administrative proceedings based on alleged non-compliance with formal documentation requirements relating to the know-your-customer principle. According to the interpretation of the Austrian Financial Market Authority (FMA), RBI had failed to comply with these administrative obligations in a few individual cases. FMA did not allege that any money laundering or other crime had occurred, or that there was any suspicion of, or any relation to, any criminal act. RBI took the view that it had duly complied with all due diligence obligations regarding know-your-customer requirements and appealed against the fining order in its entirety. The administrative court of first instance confirmed FMA’s decision and – again - RBI appealed against this decision in its entirety. In December 2019, the Austrian Supreme Administrative Court (Verwaltungsgerichtshof) revoked the decision of the lower administrative instances and referred the case back to the administrative court of first instance.
In January 2021, a class action, aggregating claims of holders of certificates in four of the above-mentioned investment funds currently in liquidation, was filed against RBI. The total disputed value in this case amounts to approximately PLN 51 million (€ 11 million). The plaintiffs demand the confirmation of RBI's responsibility for the alleged improper performance of RBPL/RBI as custodian bank. Such confirmation would secure and facilitate their financial claims in further lawsuits.
In December 2020, Raiffeisen Bank Sh.A. (RBAL), RBI’s Network Bank in Albania, filed a lawsuit in the Administrative Court of Tirana in order to declare invalid a decision of the Albanian Competition Commission. The decision had been issued in November 2020, following an investigation in the banking sector by the Albanian competition authority with respect to four Albanian banks (among them RBAL). Although it was stated that none of the entities subject to the investigation has a dominant position in the market and that the banks apply different pricing terms to their services, the decision imposes a number of obligations on the banks. Such obligations, among others, include the review of commissions for banking services with a view to decreasing them, the review of interest rates for deposits and loans aiming at narrowing the spread and the review of obstructive costs for customers switching banks. A fine would be imposed in case of failure to comply with the obligations within one year.
Additionally, RBI has received a number of claim notices from BNP in connection with certain bank operations in respect of which BNP is the legal successor to RBPL. Said claim notices primarily relate to administrative proceedings conducted by the PFSA in connection with alleged failures of RBPL/BNP in acting as depositary of investment funds and could lead to cash penalties. Furthermore, claims in this context are or could be raised by investors. BNP and RBI agreed to seek to jointly defend these issues.
In view of the change in the legal and regulatory framework and implementation of Institutional Protection Schemes, RKÖ and its member institutions have decided to discontinue the scheme for new transactions. Accordingly, the supplementary protection by RKÖ will only be granted to transactions entered until 30 September 2019. Customers’ rights under the statutory deposit guarantee scheme are unaffected by this and remain in full force and effect.
Several Institutional Protection Schemes (IPSs) have been set up in the Austrian Raiffeisen Banking Group (RBG) since the end of 2013. To this end, contractual or statutory liability arrangements have been concluded which reciprocally protect the participating institutions and, in particular, ensure their liquidity and solvency if required. These Institutional Protection Schemes are based on uniform and joint risk monitoring as part of an early warning system pursuant to Article 113 (7) of the European Union Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR). In line with RBG’s organizational structure, the IPSs were also designed in two stages (currently one federal IPS and six regional IPSs).
On 21 December 2020, RBI, the regional Raiffeisen banks and Raiffeisen banks filed applications with the Austrian Financial Market Authority and the ECB to create a new institutional protection scheme (Raiffeisen IPS), consisting of RBI, the regional Raiffeisen banks and the Raiffeisen banks, for the purpose of the statutory (Austrian) deposit guarantee scheme within the meaning of the Austrian Deposit Guarantee and Investor Protection Act (Einlagensicherungs- und Anlegerentschädigungsgesetz). In order to be able to form a separate deposit guarantee scheme, it is required that all members of the scheme are also direct members of a single institutional protection scheme, such as, in this case, the Raiffeisen IPS yet to be founded. The Raiffeisen IPS is intended to ultimately replace the existing federal IPS. Approval by the FMA and ECB is pending and may be subject to additional conditions. Should the approval be received, and any conditions agreed, the above-mentioned applicants will subsequently leave the ESA according to the provisions of the Austrian Deposit Guarantee and Investor Protection Act.
Maturity analysis of lease receivables to be received after the reporting date: Gross investment value 3,467,212 3,557,266
There is no lease income from variable lease payments that do not depend on an index or a rate.
Variable lease payments not included in the measurement of lease liabilities (135) 29
The following table shows the development of right-of-use assets for property, plant and equipment, which are presented in the statement of financial position under tangible fixed assets, and related accumulated depreciation, which is presented in profit or loss under administrative expenses: Cost of acquisition or conversion as at 1/1 539,609 455,971
The following tables were prepared pursuant to § 64 (1) 18 of the Austrian Banking Act (BWG).
Number of employees as at reporting date 2019 in € thousand Operating income hereof net interest income Profit/loss before tax Income taxes
The following table was prepared pursuant to § 64 (1) 15 of the Austrian Banking Act (BWG).
The main companies exercising a significant influence are Raiffeisenlandesbank Niederösterreich-Wien AG, Vienna, as the largest single shareholder, its parent company, Raiffeisen-Holding Niederösterreich-Wien registrierte Genossenschaft mit beschränkter Haftung, Vienna, and their fully consolidated subsidiaries. Under affiliated companies, affiliated companies that are not consolidated due to immateriality are shown.
Loan commitments, financial guarantees and other commitments given 134,647 2,519 290,684 126,654
Loan commitments, financial guarantees and other commitments received 6,754 0 29,766 0 in € thousand
Share-based Payment 0 0 1 Adaptation of previous year figures due to changed presentation: without bonus payments from prior periods
Bonus calculation is linked to the achievement of annually agreed objectives. These comprise four or five categories covering specific targets and financial targets adapted to the respective function. These are, for example, profit after tax in a particular segment, return on risk adjusted capital (RORAC), total costs, risk-weighted assets, customer-oriented and employee-oriented targets, as well as process-based, efficiency-based, and infrastructure targets, and if necessary other additional targets. The bonus level is determined by the level of the return on equity and the cost/income ratio, whereby the target values to be achieved reflect the so-called strategic targets for the return on equity and the cost/income ratio at RBI level.
The Annual General Meeting held on 21 June 2018 approved a new remuneration model for the Supervisory Board, beginning in the 2017 financial year. It was decided to distribute the remuneration as follows: Chairman € 120 thousand, Deputy Chairman € 90 thousand, members of the Supervisory Board € 60 thousand, plus attendance fees.
The number of members of RBI AG’s Management Board was reduced from seven to six when Martin Grüll’s Management Board mandate expired at the end of February 2020. The Management Board areas of responsibility have been reorganized, thereby utilizing potential to streamline the organization.
The Supervisory Board as at 31 December 2020 was as follows: Members of the Supervisory Board Original appointment End of term
Andrii Stepanenko 1 March 2018 28 February 2026 1 Effective as of 10 October 2010
Of the 209 entities in the Group, 117 are domiciled in Austria (2019: 115) and 92 abroad (2019: 94). They comprise 20 banks, 134 financial institutions, 12 companies rendering bank-related ancillary services, 9 financial holding companies and 34 other companies.
Niederösterreichische Landes-Landwirtschaftskammer Errichtungs- und Betriebsgesellschaft m.b.H., Vienna (AT) 100.0% 1/1 Sale
Structured units have been designed in such a way that voting rights or other similar rights are not the dominant factor in establishing control of a company.
Aedificium Banca pentru Locuinte S.A., Bucharest (RO) 31,680,000 RON 99.9% BA
AGIOS Raiffeisen-Immobilien Leasing Gesellschaft m.b.H., Vienna (AT) 36,400 EUR 51.0% FI
Campus NBhf RBI Immobilien-Leasing GmbH, Vienna (AT) 35,000 EUR 75.0% OT
Centralised Raiffeisen International Services & Payments S.R.L., Bucharest (RO) 2,820,000 RON 100.0% BR
HABITO Raiffeisen-Immobilien-Leasing GmbH, Vienna (AT) 35,000 EUR 100.0% FI 1 Less own shares 2 Company type: BA Bank, BR Company rendering banking-related ancillary services, FH Financial holding, FI Financial institution, OT Other companies, VV Insurance, SC
Adorant Immobilienleasing GmbH & Co. Projekt Heilsbronn und Neuendettelsau KG, Eschborn (DE) 5,000 EUR 6.0% OT
AL Taunussteiner Grundstücks-GmbH & Co KG, Eschborn (DE) 9,400 EUR 93.6% FI
Raiffeisen-Rent-Immobilienprojektentwicklung Gesellschaft m.b.H., Objekt Lenaugasse 11 KG, Vienna (AT) 6,169,924 EUR 100.0% OT
RALT Raiffeisen-Leasing Gesellschaft m.b.H. & Co. KG, Vienna (AT) 20,348,394 EUR 100.0% BR
Raiffeisen Mandatory and Voluntary Pension Funds Management Company Plc., Zagreb (HR) 143,445,300 HRK 100.0% OT
RBI IB Beteiligungs GmbH, Vienna (AT) 35,000 EUR 100.0% FH 1 Less own shares 2 Company type: BA Bank, BR Company rendering banking-related ancillary services, FH Financial holding, FI Financial institution, OT Other companies, VV Insurance, SC
S.A.I. Raiffeisen Asset Management S.A., Bucharest (RO) 10,656,000 RON 99.9% FI
Valida Holding AG, Vienna (AT) 5,000,000 EUR 57.4% FI 1 Less own shares 2 Company type: BA Bank, BR Company rendering banking-related ancillary services, FH Financial holding, FI Financial institution, OT Other companies, VV Insurance, SC
The Group establishes securitization vehicles which purchase diversified pools of assets, including fixed income securities, company loans, and asset-backed securities (predominantly commercial and residential mortgage-backed securities and credit card receivables). The vehicles fund these purchases by issuing multiple tranches of debt and equity securities, the repayment of which is linked to the performance of the assets contained in the vehicles.
UNIQA Insurance Group AG, Vienna (AT) 309,000,000 EUR 10.9% VV 1 Company type: BA Bank, BR Company rendering banking-related ancillary services, FH Financial holding, FI Financial institution, OT Other companies, VV Insurance,
CP Projekte Muthgasse Entwicklungs GmbH, Vienna (AT) 40,000 EUR 100.0% OT 1 Company type: BA Bank, BR Company rendering banking-related ancillary services, FH Financial holding, FI Financial institution, OT Other companies, VV Insurance,
Austria Leasing GmbH & Co. KG Immobilienverwaltung Projekt Eberdingen, Eschborn (DE) 10,000 EUR 100.0% FI
Kathrein & Co Life Settlement Gesellschaft m.b.H., Vienna (AT) 35,000 EUR 100.0% OT
Raiffeisen INVEST Sh.a., Tirana (AL) 90,000,000 ALL 100.0% FI 1 Company type: BA Bank, BR Company rendering banking-related ancillary services, FH Financial holding, FI Financial institution, OT Other companies, VV Insurance,
Raiffeisen Continuum GmbH & Co KG, Vienna (AT) 65,000 EUR 76.9% FI
Raiffeisen Direct Investments CZ, s.r.o., Prague (CZ) 50,000 CZK 100.0% OT
Accession Mezzanine Capital III L.P., St. Helier (JE) 134,125,000 EUR 3.7% OT
Analytical Credit Rating Agency (Joint Stock Company), Moscow (RU) 3,000,024,000 RUB 3.7% OT
Burza cennych papierov v. Bratislave, a.s., Bratislava (SK) 11,404,927,296 EUR <0.1% OT
DZ BANK AG Deutsche Zentral-Genossenschaftsbank, Frankfurt am Main (DE) 3,646,266,910 EUR 0.1% BA
Einlagensicherung der Banken und Bankiers Gesellschaft m.b.H. in Liqu., Vienna (AT) 70,000 EUR 0.1% BR
Fondul de Garantare a Creditului Rural S.A., Bucharest (RO) 15,940,890 RON 33.3% FI
Company, domicile (country) Subscribed capital in local currency Share Type1 360kompany AG, Vienna (AT) 105,903 EUR 6.6% FI
CONATUS Grundstückvermietungs Gesellschaft m.b.H., St. Pölten (AT) 36,360 EUR 24.5% FI
CULINA Grundstückvermietungs Gesellschaft m.b.H., St. Pölten (AT) 36,360 EUR 25.0% FI
ESQUILIN Grundstücksverwaltungs Gesellschaft m.b.H., St. Pölten (AT) 36,336 EUR 24.5% FI
FORIS Grundstückvermietungs Gesellschaft m.b.H., St. Pölten (AT) 36,360 EUR 24.5% FI
RSAL Raiffeisen Steiermark Anlagenleasing GmbH, Graz (AT) 38,000 EUR 19.0% FI 1 Company type: BA Bank, BR Company rendering banking-related ancillary services, FH Financial holding, FI Financial institution, OT Other companies, VV Insurance,
Steirische Leasing für Gebietskörperschaften Ges.m.b.H., Vienna (AT) 36,336 EUR 50.0% FI
Steirische Leasing für öffentliche Bauten Gesellschaft m.b.H., Vienna (AT) 36,336 EUR 50.0% FI
The Zagreb Stock Exchange joint stock company, Zagreb (HR) 46,357,000 HRK 2.9% OT
Viminal Grundstückverwaltungs Gesellschaft m.b.H. in Liqu., Vienna (AT) 36,336 EUR 25.0% FI
The establishment of a countercyclical buffer is also the responsibility of the national supervisors and results in a weighted average at the level of RBI in order to curb excessive lending growth. This buffer was set at 0 per cent in Austria for the present time due to restrained lending growth. The buffer rates defined in other member states apply at the level of RBI (based on a weighted calculation of averages). Further expected regulatory changes and developments are monitored, and included and analyzed in scenario calculations undertaken by Group Regulatory Affairs on an ongoing basis. Potential effects are considered in planning and governance, insofar as the extent and implementation are foreseeable.
The following consolidated figures have been calculated in accordance with the provisions of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR) and other statutory provisions such as the Implementing Technical Standards (ITS) of the European Banking Authority (EBA).
Common equity tier 1 (CET1) after deductions amounted to € 10,761,683 thousand, representing a reduction of € 100,283 thousand compared to the 2019 year-end figure. While currency effects and loan loss provisioning recognized directly in equity had a negative impact, the profit for the year increased CET1. Following the recommendation from the ECB, the Management Board proposed to the Annual General Meeting on 20 October 2020, for the entire net profit for the 2019 financial year to be carried forward. This proposal was adopted by the Annual General Meeting. However, the proposed dividend for 2020 of € 0.48 per share, as well as the dividend proposal originally announced for the 2019 financial year of € 1.00 per share are deducted from CET1. Tier 1 capital after deductions increased € 397,168 thousand to € 12,488,955 thousand. The increase was primarily attributable to an only slight reduction in CET1 and the issuance of € 500,000 thousand of additional tier 1 capital in July 2020. Tier 2 capital rose € 161,148 thousand to € 2,101,064 thousand. The increase was driven by the issuance of a tier 2 bond in June 2020, offset by regulatory amortization of outstanding issues. Total capital amounted to € 14,590,019 thousand, representing an increase of € 558,316 thousand compared to the 2019 year-end figure.
Total risk-weighted assets (RWA) increased € 897,875 thousand year-on-year to € 78,864,082 thousand. The major reasons for the increase were new loan business as well as business developments at head office, in Russia and in the Czech Republic. Organic growth and rating downgrades were offset by negative currency effects, especially from the Russian ruble, the Ukrainian hryvnia, and the Czech koruna. An increase in market risk, mainly driven by the rise in volatility caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, also led to an increase in risk-weighted assets.
Common equity tier 1 (CET1) capital before regulatory adjustments 11,373,994 11,658,553
Intangible assets (net of related tax liability) (negative amount) (584,870) (762,042)
Deferred tax assets that rely on future profitability excluding those arising from temporary differences (net of related tax liability where the conditions in Article 38 (3 are met) (negative amount) (12,683) (16,169)
Fair value reserves related to gains or losses on cash flow hedges (75) (613)
Gains or losses on liabilities valued at fair value resulting from changes in own credit standing 53,865 55,938
IRB approaches when neither own estimates of LGD nor conversion factors are used 34,923,336 2,793,867 33,560,593 2,684,847
Total regulatory adjustments to common equity tier 1 (CET1) (612,312) (796,588)
Qualifying own funds instruments included in consolidated T2 capital (including minority interests and AT1 instruments not included in rows 5 or 34) issued by subsidiaries and held by third parties 28,586 18,965
Risk-weighted assets in respect of amounts subject to pre-CRR treatment and transitional treatments subject to phase out as prescribed in Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 (i.e. CRR residual amount) 78,864,082 77,966,207
IRB approaches when own estimates of LGD and/or conversion factors are used 6,915,531 553,243 6,546,931 523,755
Retail - Secured by real estate SME 195,664 15,653 167,929 13,434
Retail - Secured by real estate non-SME 2,780,516 222,441 2,558,320 204,666
All other units STA STA STA STA IRB: Internal ratings-based approach Internal model for risk of open currency positions and general interest rate risk in the trading book STA: Standardized approach AMA: Advanced measurement approach
Total risk exposure amount for position, foreign exchange and commodities risk 5,007,054 400,564 3,393,303 271,464
Risk exposure amount for position, foreign exchange and commodities risks under standardized approaches (SA) 2,378,112 190,249 2,108,051 168,644
Risk exposure amount for position, foreign exchange and commodities risks under internal models (IM) 2,628,942 210,315 1,285,252 102,820
Total risk exposure amount for operational risk 7,547,688 603,815 7,802,124 624,170
Recognition and measurement principles The explanations to COVID-19 measures and their accounting effects are shown in the section accounting policies related to COVID-19.
A financial asset is classified into one of these categories on initial recognition.
 Whether sales activity and the collection of contractual cash flows are each integral or incidental to the business model (holdto -collect versus hold-and-sell business model).
For RBI, the sale of more than 10 per cent of the portfolio (carrying amount) during a rolling three-year period will be considered more than infrequent unless these sales are immaterial as a whole.
If RBI has decided that the business model of a specific portfolio is to hold the financial assets to collect the contractual cash flows (or to both collect contractual cash flows and sell financial assets), it must assess whether the contractual terms of the financial assets allocated to this portfolio give rise on specific dates to cash flows that are solely payments of principal and interest on the principal amount outstanding. For this purpose, interest is defined as consideration for the time value of money and for the credit risk associated with the principal amount outstanding during a particular period of time and for other basic lending risks and costs, as well as a profit margin. This assessment will be carried out on an instrument-by-instrument basis on the date of initial recognition of the financial asset.
In assessing whether the contractual cash flows are solely payments of principal and interest, RBI considers the contractual terms of the instrument. This includes assessing whether the financial asset contains a contractual term that could change the timing or amount of contractual cash flows such that it no longer meets this condition. RBI considers amongst other things:  Prepayment or extension terms  Leverage agreements  Claim is limited to specified assets or cash flows  Contractually linked instruments
The time value of money is the element of interest that provides consideration for only the passage of time. It does not take into account other risks (credit, liquidity etc.) or costs (administrative etc.) associated with holding a financial asset. In some cases, the time value of money element is modified (referred to as imperfect). This would be the case, for example, if a financial asset’s interest rate is periodically reset but the frequency of that reset does not match the tenor of the interest rate. In this case units must assess the modification as to whether the contractual cash flows still represent solely payments of principal and interest, i.e. the modification term does not significantly alter the cash flows from a perfect benchmark instrument. This assessment is not an accounting policy option and cannot be avoided simply by concluding that an instrument, in the absence of such an assessment, will be measured at fair value.
A benchmark test is applied for the following main contractual features that can potentially modify the time value of money:  Reset rate frequency does not match interest tenor  Lagging indicator  Smoothing clause  Grace period  Secondary market yield reference (UDRB: Average government bond yields weighted by outstanding amounts)
Loans and advances to customers and banks in particular are assigned to this category. Loans and advances relating to finance lease business, which are recognized in accordance with IFRS 16, and securities which meet the above conditions, are also shown in this measurement category.
on the basis of the gross carrying amount provided the financial asset is not impaired. As soon as the financial asset is impaired, interest income is calculated based on the net carrying amount. The amortized cost is also adjusted by the expected loss recognized, using the expected loss approach in accordance with IFRS 9, as outlined in the chapter impairment general (IFRS 9).
Positive fair values are shown under financial assets – held for trading. Negative fair values are shown under financial liabilities – held for trading. Changes in fair value are shown in net trading income. Derivatives held for hedging purposes pursuant to IAS 39 are shown in the statement of financial position under the item hedge accounting. In addition, any liabilities from the short-selling of securities are shown in financial liabilities – held for trading.
Capital-guaranteed products (guarantee funds and pension plans) are shown as sold put options on the respective funds to be guaranteed. The valuation is based on a Monte Carlo simulation. The Group has provided capital guarantee obligations as part of the government-funded state-sponsored pension plans according to § 108h (1) item 3 EStG (Austrian Income Tax Act).
The bank guarantees that the retirement annuity, available for the payment amount is not less than the sum of the amounts paid by the taxpayer plus credits for such taxable premiums within the meaning of §108g EStG.
Hedge accounting X n/a AC: Amortized Cost FVOCI: Fair Value Through Other Comprehensive Income FVTPL: Fair Value Through Profit/Loss
If market prices are available, the fair value is best reflected by the market price insofar as a publicly quoted market price is available. This category contains equity instruments traded on the stock exchange, debt instruments traded on the interbank market, and derivatives traded on the stock exchange. The valuation is mainly based on external data sources (stock exchange prices or broker quotes in liquid market segments). In an active market, transactions involving financial assets and liabilities are traded in sufficient frequency and volumes, so that price information is continuously available. Indicators for active markets are the number, the frequency of update or the quality of quotations (e.g. banks or stock exchanges). Moreover, narrow bid/ask spreads and quotations from market participants within a certain corridor are also indicators of an active liquid market.
RBI securitizes various financial assets from transactions with retail and commercial customers by placing risks from these financial assets and transferring them to special purpose vehicles (SPV) or structured entities (SE) that issue securities to investors. The assets transferred may be derecognized fully or partly or be reflected in the form of a transfer of risks in the existence of portfolio guarantees received from a third party. Rights to securitized financial assets can be retained in the form of senior or subordinated tranches, interest claims or other residual claims (retained rights).
If no sufficient current verifiable market data is available for the measurement with measurement models, parameters which are not observable in the market are also used. These input parameters may include data which is calculated in terms of approximated values from historical data among other factors (fair value hierarchy Level III). The utilization of these models requires assumptions and estimates of the Management. The scope of the assumptions and estimates depends on the price transparency of the financial instrument, its market and the complexity of the instrument.
 Stage 2 includes those financial instruments whose credit risk has significantly increased since their initial recognition and which, as at the reporting date, are not classified as transactions with limited credit risk. Impairments in Stage 2 are recognized in the amount of the financial instrument’s lifetime expected credit loss. Stage 2 also includes loans where the credit risk has improved and which have thus been reclassified from Stage 3.
The recognition and measurement principles for calculating expected credit losses are set out in the notes under (36) Expected credit losses in the chapter determination of expected credit losses. The recognition and measurement principles for determining a significant increase in the credit risk are set out under (36) Expected credit losses in the chapter significant increase in the credit risk. The expected credit losses are measured on either a collective or individual basis. The requirements for collective measurement are set out under (36) Expected credit losses in the section shared credit risk characteristics.
Both the effect of changes in the carrying amounts of positions requiring hedging and the effects of changes in the clean prices of the derivative instruments are recorded under net gains/losses from hedge accounting.
Within the management of interest rate risks, the hedging of interest rate risk is also undertaken on the portfolio level. Individual transactions or groups of transactions with similar risk structures, divided into maturities according to the expected repayment and interest rate adjustment date in a portfolio, are hedged. Portfolios can contain assets only, liabilities only, or both. For hedge accounting, the change in the value of the hedged asset or liability is shown in net gains/losses from hedge accounting. The hedged amount of the hedged items is determined in the consolidated financial statements including sight deposits (the rules of the EU carve-out are therefore applied).
impairments of the financial asset, in accordance with IFRS 7. The total expected credit losses are shown as a provision if they exceed the gross carrying amount of the financial asset. Contingent liabilities are shown under (33) Loan commitments, financial guarantees and other commitments. Major contingent liabilities from legal disputes are shown under (55) Pending legal issues.
 Stage 3 includes financial instruments which are classified as impaired as at the reporting date. RBI’s criterion for this classification is the definition of a default. The expected credit loss over the entire remaining lifetime of the financial instrument is also to be used as the basis for recognizing impairment of Stage 3 loans in default.
RBI recognizes a right-of-use asset and a lease liability at the lease commencement date which is the date on which a lessor (a supplier) makes an underlying asset available for use by RBI. The right-of-use asset is measured at cost at the commencement date. The cost of the right-of-use asset comprises the amount equal to the lease liability at its initial recognition adjusted for any lease payments made at or before the commencement of the lease plus any initial direct costs incurred and an estimate of costs to dismantle and remove the underlying asset, or to restore the underlying asset or the site on which it is located, less any lease incentives.
At inception of a contract, RBI assesses whether the contract is, or contains, a lease. A contract is, or contains, a lease if the contract conveys the right to control the use of an identified asset for a period of time in exchange for consideration. To assess whether a contract conveys the right to control the use of an identified asset, RBI assesses whether:  The contract involves the use of an identified asset – this is the case if either the asset is explicitly specified in the contract or the asset is implicitly specified at the time that it is made available for use by the customer that is capable of being used to meet the contract terms. If the supplier has a substantive substitution right, then the asset is not identified;  RBI has the right to obtain substantially all of the economic benefits from use of the asset throughout the period of use; and  RBI has the right to direct how and for what purpose the asset is used throughout the period of use or the relevant decisions about how and for what purpose the asset is used are predetermined.
At the commencement date, RBI measures the lease liability at the present value of the lease payments that are not paid at that date. The lease payments shall be discounted using the interest rate implicit in the lease, if that rate can be readily determined. If that rate cannot be readily determined, the lessee shall use the incremental borrowing rate.
corresponding adjustment is made to the carrying amount of the right-of-use asset or is recorded in profit or loss if the carrying amount of right-of-use asset has been reduced to zero.
The Group assesses evidence of control in cases in which it does not hold the majority of voting rights but has the ability to unilaterally govern the relevant activities of the entity. This ability may occur in cases in which the Group has the ability to control the relevant activities due to the extent and distribution of voting rights of the investees.
In debt consolidation, intra-group loans and liabilities are eliminated. Remaining temporary differences are recognized under the item other assets or other liabilities in the consolidated statement of financial position.
Non-controlling interests which confer ownership rights and grant the right to the owner to receive a proportionate share of the net assets of the entity in the event of liquidation, are measured either at fair value or at the non-controlling interest’s proportionate share of net assets of the acquiree at the acquisition date. This accounting policy option can be newly made for every business combination. Other components of non-controlling interests are measured at fair value or with measurement values derived from other standards.
If the consideration transferred includes a contingent consideration, this is measured at the acquisition-date fair value. If the contingent consideration is classified as equity, it is not re-measured on the following reporting date. Its settlement is recognized within equity. A contingent consideration classified as assets or liabilities is measured on the following reporting dates at fair value and a resulting profit or loss is recognized in the income statement.
Group companies use brands to differentiate their services from the competition. According to IFRS 3, brands of acquired companies are recognized separately under the item intangible fixed assets. Brands have an indeterminable useful life and are therefore not subject to scheduled amortization. Brands have to be tested annually for impairment and additionally whenever indications of impairment arise. Details on impairment testing can be found in the notes under (21) Tangible and intangible fixed assets.
Land and buildings as well as office furniture and equipment reported under tangible fixed assets are measured at cost of acquisition or conversion less depreciation. Depreciation is recorded under the item general administrative expenses. The straight-line method is used for depreciation and is based on the following useful life figures: Useful life Years
Investment property is derecognized on disposal or when it is no longer to be used and no future economic benefit can be expected from disposal. The resulting gain or loss from the disposal is determined as the difference between the net proceeds from the disposal and the carrying amount of the asset and is recognized in other net operating income in the reporting period in which the asset was sold.
Non-current assets and disposal groups are classified as held for sale when the related carrying amount will be recovered principally through a sale transaction rather than through continuing use. This condition is only considered met if the sale is highly probable and the asset (or disposal groups) is immediately available for sale and furthermore that the Management Board has committed itself to a sale. Moreover, the sale transaction must be due to be completed within twelve months.
Non-current assets and disposal groups classified as held for sale are valued at the lower amount of their original carrying amount or fair value less costs to sell and are reported under other assets. Income from non-current assets held for sale and discontinued operations is reported in the other result. If the impairment expense of the discontinued operations exceeds the carrying amount of the assets which fall under the scope of IFRS 5 (Measurement), there is no special provision in the IFRS on how to deal with this difference. This difference is recognized in the item provisions for onerous contracts in the statement of financial position.
In RBI, intangible fixed assets acquired in a business combination are reported separately from goodwill and measured at fair value. Goodwill and other intangible fixed assets without definite useful lives are tested for impairment at each reporting date. Impairment tests are performed whenever certain events (trigger events) occur during the year. Whenever circumstances indicate that the expected benefit no longer exists, impairment must be recognized pursuant to IAS 36.
Impairment tests for goodwill based on cash-generating units use a multi-year plan drawn up by the relevant management team and approved by the bodies responsible. This covers the CGU's medium-term prospects for success taking into account its business strategy, overall macroeconomic conditions (gross domestic product, inflation expectations, etc.) and the specific market circumstances. The data is then used to capture the terminal value based on a going concern concept. Discounting of the earnings relevant for the measurement, i.e. potential dividends, is undertaken using risk-adapted and country-specific equity capital cost rates determined by means of the capital asset pricing model. The individual interest rate parameters (risk-free interest rate, inflation difference, market risk premium, country-specific risks and beta factors) were defined by using external information sources. The entire planning horizon is divided into three phases with phase I covering the management planning period of three years. Detailed planning, including macroeconomic planning data, is extrapolated in phase II, which lasts another two years. The terminal value is then calculated in phase III based on the assumption of a going concern. Details on impairment testing can be found in the notes under (21) Tangible and intangible fixed assets.
In the event that the Group has committed to a sale involving the loss of control over a subsidiary, all assets and liabilities of the subsidiary concerned are classified as held for sale provided the aforementioned conditions for this are met. This applies irrespective of whether the Group retains a non-controlling interest in the former subsidiary after the sale or not.
Under defined contribution plans, the company pays fixed contributions into a separate entity (a fund). These payments are recognized as staff expenses in the income statement.
These rules are valid unless any applicable local laws prescribe a different procedure (e.g. Czech Republic).
Interest and interest-like income mainly includes interest income on financial assets such as loans, fixed-interest securities, as well as interest and interest-like income from the trading portfolio. Interest expenses and interest-like expenses mainly include interest paid on deposits, debt securities issued and subordinated capital. Interest income and interest expenses are accrued in the reporting period. Negative interest from asset items is shown in interest income; negative interest from liability items is shown in interest expenses.
Dividends from equities, subsidiaries not fully consolidated, strategic investments and associates not valued at equity are recognized under dividend income. Dividends are recognized through profit/loss if RBI’s legal entitlement to payment has materialized.
Results from discontinued business operations are reported separately in the income statement as result from discontinued business operations.
Variable remuneration including a deferred portion is only allocated, paid or transferred if the following criteria are met:  This is not prohibited at the level of RBI and/or RBI AG on the basis of a decision by the competent supervisory authority (e.g. by the European Central Bank for RBI).
 The legally required CET 1 ratio of RBI is achieved, the capital and buffer requirements of the CRR and CRD for RBI are complied with in full and additionally neither the allocation, payment nor transfer of the variable remuneration is detrimental to the maintenance of a sound capital base for RBI.
Net trading income comprises the trading margins resulting from the foreign exchange business, results due to foreign exchange revaluations and all realized and unrealized gains and losses from financial assets and liabilities at fair value.
The other net operating income does not include any direct core income, but rather special earnings components that arise in connection with the operating business
The other result mainly includes impairments of equity instruments and non-financial assets as well as deconsolidation effects. This primarily includes impairment and reversal of impairment on investments in subsidiaries and associates, impairment of goodwill and other non-financial assets as well as the result from non-current assets and disposal groups held for sale. In addition, RBI shows the tax expenses not attributed to business activity (from corporate restructurings) as well as allocations to credit-linked and portfolio-based provisions for litigation.
Deferred taxes are calculated and recognized in accordance with IAS 12 applying the liability method. Deferred taxes are based on all temporary differences that result from comparing the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities in the IFRS accounts with the tax bases of assets and liabilities, and which will reverse in the future. Deferred taxes are calculated by using tax rates applicable in the countries concerned. A deferred tax asset should also be recognized on tax loss carry forwards if it is probable that sufficient taxable profit will be generated against which the tax loss carry-forwards can be utilized within the same entity. On each reporting date, the carrying amount of the deferred tax assets is reviewed and impaired if it is no longer probable that sufficient taxable income will become available in order to partly or fully realize the tax assets. Deferred tax assets are offset against deferred tax liabilities for each subsidiary to the extent that offsetting is permitted. Income tax credits and income tax obligations are recorded under the items current and deferred tax assets and current and deferred tax liabilities.
Net cash from investing activities shows inflows and outflows from debt instruments (securities held for long-term investment) and equity participations (subsidiaries not fully consolidated, associates and investments), tangible fixed assets and intangible fixed assets, proceeds from disposal of Group assets, and payments for acquisition of subsidiaries.
Net cash from financing activities consists of inflows and outflows of equity and subordinated capital. This primarily covers inflows from capital increases, outflows for dividend payments, and inflows and outflows of subordinated capital.
RBI AG as group parent and 49 of its consolidated domestic subsidiaries are members of a tax group. Current taxes are calculated on the basis of taxable income for the current year taking into account the tax group (in terms of a tax group allocation). If RBI AG generates a negative taxable net income and these taxable losses are not usable in the group, then the group parent does not immediately pay a negative tax group allocation. Only and after withdrawal from the tax group at the latest, a final settlement is carried out. The taxable income deviates from the profit/loss before tax of the consolidated statement of comprehensive income due to expenses and income which are taxable or tax-deductible in the following years or which are never taxable or taxdeductible. The liability of the Group for current taxes is recognized on the basis of the actual tax rate or the expected applicable tax rate.
The statement of cash flows shows the structure and changes in cash and cash equivalents during the financial year and is broken down into three sections:  Net cash from operating activities  Net cash from investing activities  Net cash from financing activities
The narrow scope amendments to IFRS 3 aim to resolve the difficulties that arise when an entity determines whether it has acquired a business or a group of assets. The issue arose from the fact that the accounting requirements for goodwill, acquisition costs and deferred tax differ on the acquisition of a business and on the acquisition of a group of assets. The application of these amendments did not have any impact on the consolidated financial statements of RBI.
Amendments to IFRS 9, IAS 39 and IFRS 7 (Interest Rate Benchmark Reform – Phase 2; effective date: 1 January 2021)
The amendments also published on 25 June 2020 extend the period during which certain insurance companies are temporarily exempted from IFRS 9 so that the insurance companies affected can apply IAS 39 for annual periods beginning before 1 January 2023.
The amendments to IAS 1 aim to clarify the criteria used to classify liabilities as current or non-current. In the future, the classification of liabilities should be solely based on rights that are in existence at the end of the reporting period. The amendments also contain additional guidance for interpreting the right to defer settlement by at least twelve months and make clear what constitutes settlement. The standard has not yet been incorporated by the EU into European law.
Information on capital management, regulatory capital and risk-weighted assets is disclosed in the notes under (71) Capital management and total capital according to CCR/CRD IV and Austrian Banking Act (BWG).
The new Conceptual Framework includes revised definitions of assets and liabilities as well as new guidance on measurement, derecognition, presentation and disclosures. The new Conceptual Framework does not constitute a substantial revision of the document, as was originally intended when the project was first taken up in 2004. Instead, the IASB focused on topics that were not yet covered or that showed obvious shortcomings that needed to be dealt with. The revised Conceptual Framework is not the subject of an endorsement process.
Amendments to IAS 1 and IAS 8 (Definition of Materiality; effective date: 1 January 2020)
The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) issued a revised definition of materiality (Amendments to IAS 1 and IAS 8) to align the various definitions used in the Conceptual Framework and the standards themselves. The application of these amendments did not have any impact on the consolidated financial statements of RBI.
The current IBOR reform replaces existing benchmark interest rates (IBORs: interbank offered rates) by alternative risk-free interest rates. Under coordination of Group Treasury, each affected Group unit worked on the preparation of the reform in relevant projects in 2020. In these coordinated projects, information about the timing and methods of transition were analyzed and the necessary adaptions to contracts, systems and procedures were determined.
Amendment to IFRS 16 (Covid-19-Related Rent Concessions; effective date: 1 June 2020)
Standards and interpretations not yet applicable (already endorsed by the EU)
Annual improvements to IFRS – 2018-2020 cycle (effective date: 1 January 2022)
CCoonnssoolliiddaatteedd rreettuurrnn oonn eeqquuiittyy – Consolidated profit less dividend on additional tier 1 capital in relation to average consolidated equity (i.e. the equity attributable to the shareholders of RBI). Average consolidated equity is based on month-end figures excluding non-controlling interests and does not include current year profit.
NNeett iinntteerreesstt mmaarrggiinn is used for external comparison with other banks as well as an internal profitability measurement of products and segments. It is calculated with net interest income set in relation to average interest-bearing assets (total assets less investments in subsidiaries and associates, tangible fixed assets, intangible fixed assets, tax assets and other assets).
NNPPEE – Non-performing exposure. It contains all non-performing loans and debt securities according to the applicable definition of the EBA document Implementing Technical Standards (ITS) on Supervisory Reporting (Forbearance and non-performing exposures ).
NNPPEE rraattiioo is an economic ratio to demonstrate the proportion of non-performing loans and debt securities in relation to the entire loan portfolio of customers and banks, and debt securities. The ratio reflects the quality of the loan portfolio of the bank and provides an indicator for the performance of the bank’s credit risk management.
Amendment to IAS 16 (Property, Plant and Equipment — Proceeds before Intended Use; effective date: 1 January 2022)
The amendment prohibits deducting from the cost of an item of property, plant and equipment any proceeds from selling items produced while bringing that asset to the location and condition necessary for it to be capable of operating in the manner intended by management. Instead, an entity recognizes the proceeds from selling such items, and the cost of producing those items, in profit or loss. Directly attributable costs include the costs of testing whether an asset is functioning properly. The standard has not yet been incorporated by the EU into European law.
The changes specify that the cost of fulfilling a contract comprises the costs that relate directly to the contract. Costs that relate directly to a contract can either be incremental costs of fulfilling that contract (examples would be direct labor, materials) or an allocation of other costs that relate directly to fulfilling contracts (an example would be the allocation of the depreciation charge for an item of property, plant and equipment used in fulfilling the contract). The standard has not yet been incorporated by the EU into European law.
Alternative Performance Measures (APM) The Group uses alternative performance measures in its financial reporting, not defined by IFRS or CRR regulations, to describe RBI Group's financial position and performance. These should not be viewed in isolation but treated as supplementary information.
NNPPLL – Non-performing loans. It contains all non-performing loans according to the applicable definition of the EBA document Implementing Technical Standards (ITS) on Supervisory Reporting (Forbearance and non-performing exposures).
NNPPLL rraattiioo is an economic ratio to demonstrate the proportion of non-performing loans in relation to the entire loan portfolio to customers and banks. The ratio reflects the quality of the loan portfolio of the bank and provides an indicator for the performance of the bank’s credit risk management.
TToottaall rriisskk--wweeiigghhtteedd aasssseettss ((RRWWAA)) – Risk-weighted assets (credit risk, CVA risk) including market risk and operational risk.
OOppeerraattiinngg iinnccoommee – They are primarily income components of the ongoing business operations (before impairment). It comprises net interest income, dividend income, current income from investments in associates, net fee and commission income, net trading income and fair value result, net gains/losses from hedge accounting and other net operating income.
Equa bank focuses on consumer lending and serves just under 480,000 customers. The proposed acquisition is part of RBI’s strategy to expand its presence in selected focus markets. The business models of Equa bank and Raiffeisenbank are very complementary, which is why the transaction would ultimately lead to strategic synergies as well as enhanced digital capabilities. As of yearend 2020, Equa bank had total assets of more than € 2.8 billion, while Raiffeisenbank a.s. reported total assets of € 15.7 billion.
Statement of legal representatives We confirm to the best of our knowledge that the consolidated financial statements give a true and fair view of the assets, liabilities, financial position and profit or loss of the Group as required by the applicable accounting standards and that the Group management report gives a true and fair view of the development and performance of the business and the position of the Group, together with a description of the principal risks and uncertainties the Group faces.
Managment, Group Sustainability Management, Legal Services, Chairman ’s Office, Group Communications, Group Executive Office, Group
People & Organisational Innovation, Group Internal Audit, Group Investor Relations, Group Planning & Finance, Group Subsidiaries & Equity
Group Regulatory Affairs & Data Governance, Group Risk Controlling, Group Special Exposures Management, International
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of the Group as at 31 December 2020, and its consolidated financial performance and consolidated cash flows for the year then ended in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs) as adopted by the EU, and the additional requirements pursuant to Sections 245a UGB (Austrian Commercial Code) and 59a BWG (Austrian Banking Act).
We conducted our audit in accordance with the EU Regulation 537/2014 (AP Regulation) and Austrian Standards on Auditing. These standards require the audit to be conducted in accordance with International Standards on Auditing (ISAs). Our responsibilities under those standards are further described in the “Auditor´s Responsibilities” section of our report. We are independent of the audited Group in accordance with Austrian company and banking law as well as professional regulations, and we have fulfilled our other responsibilities under those relevant ethical requirements. We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained up to the date of the auditor’s report is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinion on this date.
Loans and advances to non-financial corporations and households of EUR 79.0 billion are reported in the statement of financial position as financial assets – amortized cost. This is split between EUR 44.9 billion for non-financial corporations and EUR 34.1 billion for households.
Impairment calculations of individually-significant loan receivables in default, are based on an analysis of expected and scenarioweighted future cash flows. This analysis is impacted by the respective customer’s assessed economic situation and development, loan collateral values as well as an estimation of both the amount and timing of cash flows derived therefrom.
For loan receivables in default, which are not individually significant, the bank calculates a specific impairment provision based on shared risk characteristics. The valuation model’s parameters are based on statistical historical values as well as assumptions about future risk developments.
In auditing the recoverability of loans and advances to customers, we performed the following key audit procedures:  We analysed existing documentation regarding processes to monitor and provide for customer loans and advances and critically assessed whether these processes are appropriate to identify loan defaults and provide for the impairment of loans and advances to customers. In addition to this, we identified the process flows and tested the design and implementation of key controls, by inspecting the IT systems and testing their effectiveness on a sample basis.
Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements as a whole are free from material misstatement – whether due to fraud or error – and to issue an auditor’s report that includes our audit opinion. Reasonable assurance represents a high level of assurance, but provides no guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with the AP Regulation and Austrian Standards on Auditing (and therefore ISAs), will always detect a material misstatement, if any. Misstatements may result from fraud or error and are considered material if, individually or in aggregate, they could reasonably be expected to influence the economic decisions of users taken on the basis of these consolidated financial statements.
As part of an audit in accordance with the AP Regulation and Austrian Standards on Auditing, we exercise professional judgment and maintain professional skepticism throughout the audit.
 We obtain an understanding of internal control relevant to the audit in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Group's internal control.
This means that the shift in stages and the impairment provisions (taking post model adjustments into account) are, to a significant extent, based on assumptions and estimates. This results in a range of judgements and estimation uncertainties in relation to the amount of the provision of risk. Arising therefrom, is a possible risk of [material] misstatement of the required provision for credit risk.
 Lastly, we assessed whether the disclosures for the approach for determining impairment provisions (under Recognition and Measurement Principles) and significant assumptions and estimation uncertainties (including related sensitivity analyses) are applicable in the notes to the consolidated financial statements.
In conjunction with our audit, it is our responsibility to read this other information and to assess whether, based on knowledge gained during our audit, it contains any material inconsistencies with the consolidated financial statements or any apparent material misstatement of fact. If we conclude that there is a material misstatement of fact in other information, we must report that fact. We have nothing to report in this regard.
Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of the consolidated financial statements in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRSs) as adopted by the EU, the additional requirements pursuant to Sections 245a UGB (Austrian Commercial Code) and 59a BWG and for such internal control as management determines is necessary to enable the preparation of consolidated financial statements that are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.
Management is also responsible for assessing the Group’s ability to continue as a going concern, disclosing, as applicable, matters related to going concern and using the going concern basis of accounting, unless management either intends to liquidate the Group or to cease operations, or has no realistic alternative but to do so.
 We conclude on the appropriateness of management’s use of the going concern basis of accounting and, based on the audit evidence obtained, whether a material uncertainty exists related to events or conditions that may cast significant doubt on the Group’s ability to continue as a going concern. If we conclude that a material uncertainty exists, we are required to draw attention in our audit report to the respective note in the consolidated financial statements. If such disclosures are not appropriate, we will modify our audit opinion. Our conclusions are based on the audit evidence obtained up to the date of our auditor’s report. However, future events or conditions may cause the Group to cease to continue as a going concern.
In our opinion, the group management report is consistent with the consolidated financial statements and has been prepared in accordance with legal requirements. The disclosures pursuant to Section 243a UGB (Austrian Commercial Code) are appropriate.
We were elected as auditors at the Annual General Meeting on 13 June 2019 and were appointed by the supervisory board on 11 July 2019 to audit the financial statements of Company for the financial year ending on 31 December 2020.
We have been auditors of the Company, without interruption, since the consolidated financial statements at 31 December 2005.
TThhiiss rreeppoorrtt iiss aa ttrraannssllaattiioonn ooff tthhee oorriiggiinnaall rreeppoorrtt iinn GGeerrmmaann,, wwhhiicchh iiss ssoolleellyy vvaalliidd..
Bosnia and Herzegovina RRaaiiffffeeiisseenn BBaannkk dd..dd.. BBoossnnaa ii HHeerrcceeggoovviinnaa Zmaja od Bosne bb 71000 Sarajevo Tel: +387-33-75 50 10 SWIFT/BIC: RZBABA2S www.raiffeisenbank.ba
Austria RRaaiiffffeeiisseenn--LLeeaassiinngg GGmmbbHH Mooslackengasse 12 1190 Vienna Tel: +43-1-71 601-0 www.raiffeisen-leasing.at
Belarus „„RRaaiiffffeeiisseenn--LLeeaassiinngg”” JJLLLLCC V. Khoruzhey 31 A 220002 Minsk Tel: +375-17-28 9-9394 www.rl.by
Croatia RRaaiiffffeeiisseenn LLeeaassiinngg dd..oo..oo.. Radnicka cesta 43 10000 Zagreb Tel: +385-1-65 9-5000 www.raiffeisen-leasing.hr
Czech Republic RRaaiiffffeeiisseenn--LLeeaassiinngg ss..rr..oo.. Hvězdova 1716/2b 14000 Prague 4 Tel: +420-2-215 116 11 www.rl.cz
Kosovo RRaaiiffffeeiisseenn LLeeaassiinngg KKoossoovvoo LLLLCC Rr. UCK p.n.222 10000 Pristina Tel: +383-38-222 222-340 www.raiffeisenleasing-kosovo.com
UK RRBBII LLoonnddoonn BBrraanncchh Tower 42, Leaf C 9th Floor 25 Old Broad Street London EC2N 1HQ Tel: +44-20-79 33-8000
RRaaiiffffeeiisseenn FFaaccttoorr BBaannkk AAGG Mooslackengasse 12 1190 Vienna Tel: +43-1-219 74 57-0 www.raiffeisen-factorbank.at
RRaaiiffffeeiisseenn WWoohhnnbbaauubbaannkk AAkkttiieennggeesseellllsscchhaafftt Mooslackengasse 12 1190 Vienna Tel: +43-1-717 07-0 www.raiffeisen-wohnbaubank.at
Ukraine RRaaiiffffeeiisseenn BBaannkk AAvvaall JJSSCC Vul Leskova 9 01011 Kiev Tel: +38-044-490 8888 SWIFT/BIC: AVALUAUK www.aval.ua
Romania RRaaiiffffeeiisseenn LLeeaassiinngg IIFFNN SS..AA.. Calea Floreasca 246 D 014476 Bucharest Tel: +40-21-30 644 44 www.raiffeisen-leasing.ro
Russia OOOOOO RRaaiiffffeeiisseenn--LLeeaassiinngg Smolenskaya-Sennaya Sq. 28 119121 Moscow Tel: +7-495-72 1-9980 www.raiffeisen-leasing.ru
Germany RRBBII FFrraannkkffuurrtt BBrraanncchh Wiesenhüttenplatz 26 60329 Frankfurt Tel: +49-69-29 921 924
China RRBBII BBeeiijjiinngg BBrraanncchh Beijing International Club Suite 200, 2nd Floor Jianguomenwai Dajie 21 100020 Beijing Tel: +86-10-65 32-3388
India RRBBII RReepprreesseennttaattiivvee OOffffiiccee MMuummbbaaii 501, Kamla Hub, Gulmohar Rd, Juhu Mumbai 400049 Tel: +91-22-26 230 657
Vietnam RRBBII RReepprreesseennttaattiivvee OOffffiiccee HHoo--CChhii--MMiinnhh--CCiittyy 35 Nguyen Hue Str., Harbour View Tower Room 601A, 6th Floor, Dist. 1 Ho-Chi-Minh-City Tel: +842-8-38 214 718, +842-8-38 214 719
For Group Investor Relations enquiries Phone: +43-1-71 707-2089 E-mail: ir@rbinternational.com www.rbinternational.com → Investors