2

Acceptable outcomes when using subordinated guarantees in connection with capital instruments

2.1

The PRA is aware that firms utilise subordinated guarantees for a variety of reasons within a variety of corporate structures (two illustrative examples are provided in Section 5 of this statement). Regardless of the reason or structure, subordinated guarantees should not serve to undermine the quality of capital held by firms to meet capital requirements. Generally, the quality of capital is undermined when firms take on additional potential liabilities that are not taken into account in, and would have to be met from, the guarantor firm’s capital resources.

2.2

Any subordinated guarantee arrangement will be assessed by the PRA to ascertain whether it is consistent with one of the following two situations deemed acceptable by the PRA, and whether it displays the characteristics set out in paragraph 2.3 below.

Situation 1

  • From the perspective of the guarantor firm, if a subordinated guarantee is called upon, the guarantee should effectively extinguish or replace an existing subordinated liability. Otherwise the guarantee represents an additional potential liability that has not been reflected in, and would have to be met from, the guarantor’s capital resources. The subordinated guarantee should possess the same, or better, features regarding quality of capital (eg loss absorbency and subordination) as the subordinated liability it is replacing.

Situation 2

  • Where a subordinated guarantee does not extinguish or replace an existing subordinated liability, the firm should acknowledge the existence of the guarantee by disqualifying the guaranteed amount from the guarantor’s Tier 1 capital. The amount may still count towards a lower tier of capital if the terms of the subordinated guarantee meet all of the relevant criteria — in effect a relegation. Whether the relegated amount can count towards total capital resources will also depend on the capital gearing rules, which constrain the amount of lower quality capital.

2.3

In either case, any capital instrument that is guaranteed should still fulfil its regulatory purpose. The subordinated guarantee should not override the loss-absorbing features of a capital instrument and investors in a capital instrument should not avoid bearing losses when it is appropriate for them to do so.