It is essential to lay down detailed rules on the minimum elements that should be included in a business reorganisation plan for its approval and on the minimum contents of the reports drawn up in case of reorganisation of the institutions and entities subject to the provisions of Directive 2014/59/EU.

The guidelines and communications adopted by the Commission in relation to the assessment of compliance with the Union State aid framework relating to the restructuring of firms in difficulties in the financial sector, pursuant to Article 107(3) of the Treaty, may provide useful reference for the elaboration of the business reorganisation plan even where no State aid has been granted, since they share with the business reorganisation plan the objective of restoring the institution or entity's long-term viability.

Business reorganisation plans should be able to use information contained in the recovery plan and the resolution plan, to the extent that such information is still relevant to the restoration of the long-term viability of the institution or entity referred to in points (b), (c) or (d) of Article 1(1) of Directive 2014/59/EU and taking into account the application of the bail-in tool.

The restructuring of the institution or entity referred to in points (b), (c) or (d) of Article 1(1) of Directive 2014/59/EU and its activities subsequent to the application of the bail-in tool should address the reasons for its failure. The basis for the reorganisation strategy should therefore be the factors that caused the entry of any institution or entity into resolution. That strategy may also take into account the crisis prevention and management measures that have been taken and implemented by the competent authority or the resolution authority respectively. The source and extent of the difficulties encountered by such institution or entity may be illustrated by including information on the fulfilment of the relevant regulatory and prudential requirements prior to resolution.

Although the failure of the institution or entity referred to in points (b), (c) and (d) of Article 1(1) of Directive 2014/59/EU may have been caused by a particular set of reasons, such institution or entity may have suffered from other shortcomings which did not trigger the failure, but could undermine its long-term viability. The reorganisation should address any shortcomings. A successful reorganisation strategy should follow a comprehensive analysis of both the institution or entity under reorganisation, its strengths and weaknesses, as well as the relevant markets where that institution or entity operates and the risks and opportunities that they present. In order for a business reorganisation plan to be considered credible by the resolution authority and the competent authority, it should restore the institution's long term viability based on prudent assumptions.

Restoring the long-term viability of the institution or entity referred to in points (b), (c) and (d) of Article 1(1) of Directive 2014/59/EU following resolution means that, at the latest by the end of the reorganisation period, the institution or entity is capable of fulfilling its internal capital adequacy assessment process, and all the relevant prudential and other regulatory requirements on a forward-looking basis, and that it has a viable business model that is also sustainable in the long-term.

The resolution authority and the competent authority should be provided with sufficiently detailed information to assess the business reorganisation plan and monitor its implementation. The requirement to provide such information should take into account its relevance for the corporate structure of the institution or entity referred to in points (b), (c) and (d) of Article 1(1) of Directive 2014/59/EU, and its relevance for the reorganisation and its reliability, especially in the case of a systemic crisis.

Fluctuations are an inherent part of the economic cycle. Any business plan should therefore be subject to analyses of alternative scenarios, with appropriate changes in the key underlying assumptions. Although long-term viability should be restored under any scenario, the development of full alternative reorganisation strategies would incur disproportionate costs for the institution or entity referred to in points (b), (c) and (d) of Article 1(1) of Directive 2014/59/EU, while alternative scenarios should in principle be less likely to occur than the base-case scenario.

The business reorganisation plan should allow the resolution authority and the competent authority to assess its impact on achieving the resolution objectives, and in particular ensuring continuity of critical functions and avoiding a significant adverse effect on the financial system.

The frequency and detail of the monitoring of the implementation of the business reorganisation plan should allow early identification of any deviations or other difficulties. Quarterly reporting of data and performance is a common methodology in the financial sector and allows such timely observation. The business reorganisation plan should also allow for adjustments to the milestones or measures originally envisaged therein, when justified by the circumstances.

This Regulation is based on the draft regulatory technical standards submitted by the European Banking Authority (‘EBA’) to the Commission.