Description

A focused course, tailored for you

Regulatory Reporting Reconciliation for Banking Finance Teams

Close the gap between your IFRS ledger and your COREP/FINREP submissions before the next supervisor review.

Every quarter the numbers reconcile on the day of submission. Six weeks later a supervisor question arrives about a row three levels into the consolidation. The answer is somewhere in the mapping, but the mapping was not documented the way the examiner is reading it.

$199 one-time

Tailored to your situation. Access within 24 hours. 30-day money-back.

Includes a hand-built implementation playbook delivered alongside course access, generated for your specific situation.

Why this course

Financial and regulatory reporting sit closer together than the org chart suggests, but the methodology that connects them is almost never written down in one place. COREP own-funds pulls from the IFRS equity line but skips certain minority interest components. FINREP scope follows CRR consolidation, not IFRS 10. LCR stress scenarios use contractual cash flows that the GL never sees. Each of these is a documented EBA standard, but applying it to a specific bank's chart of accounts is a local translation exercise that the team carries in its heads. When a key person leaves, or when a supervisor asks for the audit trail, the answer is a two-week reconstruction project. This course replaces that reconstruction with a standing methodology.

What you walk away with

Map every material IFRS line to its EBA regulatory data point with a documented, defensible rationale.
Build a COREP own-funds reconciliation that an external examiner can follow without a walkthrough.
Close FINREP scope gaps where CRR consolidation diverges from IFRS 10.
Produce an LCR and NSFR data-sourcing memo that satisfies supervisor requests without reconstruction.
Design an internal sign-off trail that covers the preparers, reviewers, and approvers the ECB expects.
Respond to ad-hoc supervisor data requests without pulling the team off the quarterly close.

The 12 modules

Module 1. The CRR/CRD Reporting Architecture

Before any reconciliation can be documented, the preparer needs a clean map of which regulation drives which return. This module covers the CRR, CRD IV/V, and EBA ITS hierarchy, what each submission covers, the legal basis for each data point, and how the architecture changed across the most recent ITS amendments. Participants leave with a one-page authority matrix they can attach to any reconciliation workbook.

Module 2. IFRS to Regulatory Capital: The Own-Funds Bridge

COREP own-funds starts from the IFRS equity line but applies a set of regulatory filters that most ledger systems do not capture automatically. This module works through each filter: deductions for goodwill and intangibles, minority interest eligibility under CRR Article 84, prudential valuation adjustments, and the treatment of unrealised gains. The output is a documented bridge worksheet that maps each adjustment to its CRR article and the relevant IFRS line.

Module 3. FINREP Scope and Consolidation Boundary

FINREP consolidation follows the CRR prudential perimeter, not IFRS 10. Entities consolidated under IFRS may be excluded from FINREP, and some entities excluded under IFRS 10 are included in the prudential scope. This module covers the CRR Article 18 consolidation methods, how to identify boundary differences in a typical banking group, and how to document the in-scope entity list so it survives a supervisor request or an internal audit review.

Module 4. FINREP Template Mapping for Balance Sheet and P&L

F 01.01 through F 16.01 cover the balance sheet, income statement, and off-balance-sheet items using EBA taxonomy categories that do not map one-to-one to any IFRS chart of accounts. This module takes the most common taxonomy mismatches, explains the EBA's classification logic for each, and provides a mapping workbook template that links each FINREP row to the relevant IFRS 9 measurement category and the specific GL account ranges in a typical banking chart of accounts.

Module 5. LCR Data Sourcing and the Contractual Cash-Flow Gap

The liquidity coverage ratio draws on contractual cash flows, behavioural assumptions, and stress haircuts that the general ledger was not designed to capture. This module covers the CRR Delegated Act categories, which data points require system extraction versus manual overlay, how to document the behavioural assumption methodology the supervisor expects, and the common errors in the high-quality liquid asset stock that surface in exam findings.

Module 6. NSFR: Available and Required Stable Funding

The net stable funding ratio introduces a second set of balance sheet categories that differ from both IFRS and LCR classifications. This module covers the CRR Article 428 ASF and RSF factor tables, how to source each factor from the ledger, the treatment of undrawn committed facilities, and the documentation standard for the internal model assumptions that determine which factor applies to products without a clear contractual maturity.

Module 7. Large Exposures: Identification, Netting, and the Connected-Clients Register

The large-exposures regime requires an entity-level exposure calculation that pulls from credit risk, trading book, and off-balance-sheet data in a way no single system typically covers end to end. This module covers the CRR Article 395 limit structure, the connected-clients determination process under Article 4(1)(39), the exemptions register, and the reconciliation between the large-exposures submission and the credit risk data in COREP C 27-29.

Module 8. The ECB Ad-Hoc Request: Response Without Reconstruction

Supervisors request data outside the standard submission calendar, and the ability to respond quickly and accurately without pulling the team off the close is a meaningful operational differentiator. This module covers a standing ad-hoc request framework: a data dictionary that maps supervisor request language to internal data sources, a response memo template that satisfies the SREP documentation standard, and a triage process for requests that require methodology disclosure versus those that require only data extraction.

Module 9. The Internal Sign-Off Trail

ECB SREP assessments and EBA thematic reviews both evaluate the governance of regulatory reporting, not just the numbers. This module covers the sign-off trail the supervisor expects: preparer, reviewer, and approver roles; the evidence standard for each; how to document methodology changes between quarters; and how to structure the committee submission package so that the CFO-office approval is supported by traceable working papers rather than a summary figure.

Module 10. Automation and System Controls

Spreadsheet-based reporting creates reconciliation risk that supervisors increasingly flag as a governance concern. This module covers the control framework for automated regulatory reporting: input validation rules that catch taxonomy errors before submission, reconciliation checks that run against the published EBA validation rules, the change-management log that documents system modifications, and the test-environment approach that lets the team validate a new ITS version before the production submission window.

Module 11. Handling Restatements and Late Amendments

A submission error or a post-close accounting restatement triggers a re-submission process that is procedurally distinct from the original submission and carries its own supervisor notification obligations. This module covers the EBA ITS resubmission taxonomy, the notification threshold under SREP supervisory dialogue, the internal post-mortem format that prevents recurrence, and how to document a restatement in a way that does not create a disclosure liability in the statutory accounts.

Module 12. Building the Standing Reconciliation Methodology

The final module assembles the individual components from the prior eleven into a standing reconciliation methodology document: the authority matrix, the IFRS-to-regulatory bridge worksheets, the entity scope list, the sign-off trail, the ad-hoc response framework, and the resubmission procedure. This document is the deliverable the supervisor will request in the next SREP cycle and the document that survives personnel turnover. Participants leave with a populated template calibrated to their own reporting perimeter.

How this addresses your situation

Specific modules that map to what you said you are dealing with.

Supervisor follow-up on a COREP own-funds row that the team cannot trace back to the ledger without a two-week reconstruction. Modules 2 and 9 address this directly.

FINREP scope question from internal audit about an entity that is consolidated under IFRS but not under FINREP. Module 3 covers the CRR boundary logic and the documentation standard.

LCR examination finding about a behavioural assumption that was applied but not documented. Module 5 covers the documentation standard the supervisor expects.

Key person leaves the team and the next quarter's submission requires a methodology walkthrough nobody can give. Module 12 is the standing methodology document that prevents this.

What you get with this course

12 written modules covering COREP, FINREP, LCR, NSFR, large exposures, and ECB ad-hoc response
Downloadable reconciliation bridge worksheet template (IFRS equity to COREP own-funds)
FINREP scope entity list template with CRR Article 18 consolidation method fields
Ad-hoc request response memo template formatted to the SREP documentation standard
Standing reconciliation methodology document template (the Module 12 deliverable)
Hand-built implementation playbook calibrated to your specific reporting perimeter, delivered alongside course access

What you will have in hand by Day 1, Week 1, Month 1

Course access provisioned within 24 hours of purchase

Hand-built implementation playbook delivered alongside course access within 24 hours

Before and after

Before

The reconciliation exists in the heads of two or three senior people. Supervisor questions require a reconstruction. Restatements surface methodology gaps. A new ITS version means starting the mapping from scratch.

After

The reconciliation methodology is a standing document, traceable to CRR articles and EBA taxonomy rows. Ad-hoc requests are answered from the data dictionary, not from memory. A new team member can run the next quarter's close with the methodology as the guide.

What happens if you do not address this

The EBA 2025 SREP thematic review flagged regulatory reporting governance as a priority area. Banks without documented reconciliation methodologies are being asked to remediate within two supervisory cycles. The remediation cost in staff time and external consultant support typically exceeds the course investment many times over.

Who it is for

Finance professionals in bank regulatory reporting teams who own the reconciliation between IFRS financial statements and prudential submissions to the EBA, ECB, ACPR, or national regulators. Typically senior analysts, team leads, or finance managers responsible for COREP, FINREP, LCR, NSFR, or large-exposures reporting. The course is also relevant for finance controllers and CFO-office staff who review or sign off on those submissions.

Who this is NOT for. Compliance officers focused on conduct or AML. Accountants working purely on statutory accounts with no regulatory reporting mandate. Risk managers who consume the reporting output rather than produce it.

How it arrives

Text-based course in the Art of Service learning environment, plus downloadable templates and worked examples for every module, plus the hand-built implementation playbook delivered alongside course access.

Time investment. Each module is designed to be completed in one focused working session of 45-60 minutes. The full course can be completed in three to four weeks alongside a normal reporting cycle, or condensed into a single week before a supervisor review.

Why $199 is the right number

External regulatory reporting consultants typically charge between 1,500 and 3,000 EUR per day for methodology documentation work. The EBA publishes its ITS and validation rules at no cost, but translating them into a bank-specific reconciliation methodology requires the interpretive layer this course provides. Internal training programmes at peer institutions cover the taxonomy but not the reconciliation methodology or the supervisor response framework.

FAQ

The course covers EBA templates. Does it apply to a bank reporting to the ACPR or a non-EBA national regulator?

The EBA ITS applies across all EU member states and the core methodology is the same regardless of which national competent authority receives the submission. The ACPR and other NCAs implement the EBA ITS directly. Module 1 covers the authority hierarchy so you can identify where any national variation applies.

We use a vendor regulatory reporting system. Is the course still relevant?

Yes. Vendor systems automate the data extraction and template population, but the reconciliation methodology, the scope decisions, and the sign-off trail remain the responsibility of the finance team. Module 10 covers the control framework for automated systems specifically.

The ITS is updated regularly. Will the course content stay current?

The reconciliation methodology is built on the CRR framework and the EBA ITS structure, which are stable. The implementation playbook is calibrated to the current taxonomy version at the time of delivery. Module 10 covers the change-management process for handling ITS updates.

30-day money-back guarantee. If after a week of working through the materials this is not what you needed, reply to the receipt email and a full refund is processed. No questions, no forms.

Within 24 hours your account in the learning environment is provisioned and the tailored implementation playbook is delivered alongside it.