1 April 2021
The ABA recommends that the final policy settings accurately reflect the proven resilience of banks and the needs of the Australian economy.
The ABA also expects further calibration to be undertaken to ensure there is no increase to the overall level of capital in the banking system, considers that the proposed application of a non-standard treatment to interest-only mortgages with terms greater than five years is unduly punitive, considers that the proposed capital allocation to New Zealand exposures at Level 2 is set at a conservative level that is not commensurate with the level of risk
ABA members also feel consideration should be given to increasing the default level of the proposed CCyB, it considers that the required IT updates makes the 1 January 2023 commencement date challenging, encourages APRA to promptly update its 2015 International capital comparison study and some of APRA’s current proposals may amplify volatility without necessarily improving the measurement of risk.Download PDF
Currently, significant delay, financial costs and opportunity costs result from the need to sign and witness deeds and statutory declarations on paper; these costs also result from inconsistent and
uncertain regulations under Commonwealth, State and Territory laws.
The ABA strongly advocates for the reforms to remain technology neutral and provide a single, consistent approach to executing deeds and statutory declarations. Otherwise the reforms may make it
harder to use, and therefore disincentivise the use of, electronic execution.
• The eligibility requirements to trigger the safe harbour protections are too onerous and should be amended
• Use of the safe harbour should be made more cost effective
• The safe harbour regime would be improved by reducing complexity and providing more certainty in interpretation
• The safe harbour regime should provide for better incentives for the involvement of professional advisers
• Provide for advice to be obtained from a registered liquidator to ensure that it is appropriate
• Increase awareness of the safe harbour regime
• Any changes to the disclosure requirements for safe harbour should recognise that disclosure of the safe harbour restructuring plan is not appropriate in all circumstances
• Consider shifting the burden of proof to establish safe harbour defences to insolvent trading
While individual FICA members have provided their own detailed submissions, and these highlight several specific issues relevant to their membership, the purpose of this submission is to outline the key areas of common agreement between FICA members and suggested next steps.
Topics covered include:
– Introduction of civil penalties
– Flexible remedies – Rebuttable presumption
– Flexible remedies – Injunctions
– Existing remedies available under the UCT regime
– Definition of Small Business and Monetary Value of Contracts
– Transitional provisions