Eligible Liabilities

Eligible liabilities are qualifying bank obligations that can count with own funds toward MREL and absorb losses or support recapitalization in resolution.

Eligible liabilities are bank obligations that meet legal conditions to count alongside own funds toward the EU Minimum Requirement for Own Funds and Eligible Liabilities (MREL). They are intended to provide credible loss-absorption and recapitalization capacity if a bank enters resolution.

The term does not mean deposits or other liabilities against which a bank holds central-bank reserves. That separate concept is a reservable liability. Because “eligible” always depends on a specific rule, readers should identify the jurisdiction, resolution entity, instrument terms, and measurement date before treating a liability as eligible.

Key Takeaways

  • MREL is set by a resolution authority to support a bank’s preferred resolution strategy.
  • Own funds and eligible liabilities are different components of the resources used to meet MREL.
  • A liability can be exposed to bail-in without qualifying as an MREL eligible liability; the MREL pool is narrower.
  • Covered deposits and several other protected or operational liabilities are excluded from the bail-in tool and do not become MREL instruments merely because they appear on a bank’s balance sheet.
  • Eligibility depends on instrument-level conditions such as maturity, funding, security, guarantees, ranking, governing law, and contractual terms.
  • An instrument can cease to count as its remaining maturity shortens or if another eligibility condition fails.
  • MREL is a resolution-capacity requirement, not a reserve ratio, liquidity ratio, or guarantee that a bank cannot fail.

How Eligible Liabilities Support Resolution

    flowchart LR
	    A["Bank enters severe stress"] --> B["Losses reduce available capital"]
	    B --> C["Resolution authority applies<br/>the planned strategy"]
	    C --> D["Eligible instruments may be<br/>written down or converted"]
	    D --> E["Losses are absorbed and the<br/>resolved business is recapitalized"]

The actual sequence depends on the resolution decision, creditor hierarchy, statutory safeguards, available own funds, and the instruments in scope. MREL resources make a strategy more feasible; they do not predetermine every creditor’s treatment.

MREL in Simplified Form

Under the current EU framework, authorities express MREL using risk-based and leverage-based measures. A simplified presentation is:

$$ \text{Risk-Based MREL Ratio} = \frac{\text{Own Funds} + \text{Eligible Liabilities}}{\text{Total Risk Exposure Amount}} $$
$$ \text{Leverage-Based MREL Ratio} = \frac{\text{Own Funds} + \text{Eligible Liabilities}}{\text{Total Exposure Measure}} $$

The resolution authority determines the applicable requirement. The target can reflect the preferred resolution strategy, loss-absorption and recapitalization needs, market-confidence adjustments, subordination requirements, and institution-specific decisions. There is no universal percentage that can be applied to every bank.

What May Qualify

Qualifying instruments often include specified unsecured debt issued by the resolution entity, including senior non-preferred or subordinated debt, when all applicable conditions are met. Common eligibility questions include whether the instrument:

  • is issued and fully paid
  • is not directly or indirectly funded by the issuing institution
  • has sufficient remaining maturity
  • is not secured or guaranteed in a way that protects the claim from bearing losses
  • is not a derivative, except where specialized rules for an embedded derivative apply
  • does not contain a prohibited incentive or right that undermines permanence
  • has the required ranking or subordination for the bank’s MREL decision
  • can be effectively written down or converted under the applicable governing law
  • satisfies restrictions concerning ownership within the resolution group

This is a screening list, not a complete legal test. Articles 45b and 45f of the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive (BRRD), the Capital Requirements Regulation, the Single Resolution Mechanism Regulation, and the authority’s decision control the result.

Bail-Inable vs. MREL-Eligible

Liability or resourceCan it absorb losses?Does it automatically count toward MREL?
Common Equity Tier 1 and other qualifying own fundsYes, according to the capital and resolution hierarchyOwn funds can count, but they are not called eligible liabilities in the narrow instrument sense
Qualifying unsecured debt with adequate remaining maturityPotentiallyIt may count if every eligibility condition is met
Other unsecured senior liabilityIt may be bail-inableNot necessarily; bail-inability alone is insufficient
Covered depositExcluded from bail-in under the BRRDNo
Secured liability, including a covered bond to the secured extentGenerally protected to the secured amountGenerally no
Short-term interbank, payment-system, employee, or critical trade liability within an exclusionGenerally excluded under the applicable statutory categoryNo
Withdrawable deposit above the coverage limitTreatment depends on scope and creditor hierarchyIt usually will not qualify if it cannot satisfy maturity and other instrument conditions

The distinction matters to both analysts and investors. A bank’s total unsecured liabilities can be much larger than the amount that qualifies toward its MREL requirement.

External and Internal MREL

External MREL generally refers to eligible instruments issued by a resolution entity outside its resolution group. Those instruments are positioned to absorb group losses under the chosen resolution strategy.

Internal MREL generally refers to qualifying resources issued by a subsidiary or other non-resolution entity within the group to its resolution entity, directly or through permitted structures. It is intended to transfer losses and recapitalization resources within the resolution group.

The distinction is important because the issuer, holder, consolidation level, and write-down mechanism differ.

Worked Example: Identifying an MREL Shortfall

Assume a resolution authority’s decision requires a bank to maintain EUR 24 billion of qualifying own funds and eligible liabilities under a simplified measurement.

The bank reports:

  • EUR 10 billion of qualifying own funds
  • EUR 12 billion of unsecured debt that meets all applicable MREL conditions
  • EUR 5 billion of otherwise similar debt with only nine months of remaining maturity

Only the first two amounts qualify in this simplified example:

$$ 10 + 12 = 22\text{ billion euros} $$

The bank therefore has a EUR 2 billion shortfall against the assumed requirement. The EUR 5 billion short-dated instrument is still a liability and might remain exposed to loss under other rules, but it does not cure the MREL shortfall if it fails the applicable remaining-maturity test.

In practice, the bank must also check entity level, subordination, ownership, deductions, prior permissions, governing law, and the exact resolution decision.

Why Eligible Liabilities Matter to Investors

Eligible debt is designed to bear loss in resolution. A holder can face principal write-down, conversion into equity, payment suspension, valuation uncertainty, or a change in the timing and form of recovery. Seniority reduces or changes loss exposure but does not guarantee repayment.

Before evaluating an instrument, identify:

  1. the issuing legal entity and its role in the resolution group
  2. the instrument’s contractual and statutory ranking
  3. whether it is recognized as external or internal MREL
  4. its remaining maturity and any call or redemption permissions
  5. governing law and contractual recognition of bail-in where relevant
  6. the resolution authority’s latest public decision or disclosure
  7. concentration, liquidity, and suitability risks for the holder

Common Mistakes and Limitations

  • Confusing eligible liabilities with reservable deposits.
  • Assuming every unsecured bank bond qualifies for MREL.
  • Treating bail-inable and MREL-eligible as synonyms.
  • Counting covered deposits, secured claims, or ordinary trade payables as MREL resources.
  • Ignoring the issuer within a banking group.
  • Using original maturity when the rule tests remaining maturity.
  • Assuming a published MREL ratio proves the bank has ample liquidity or cannot fail.
  • Comparing MREL amounts across banks without checking TREA, TEM, subordination, and resolution strategy.
  • Treating an authority’s policy document as a substitute for the bank-specific decision and current legislation.

Authoritative Sources

FAQs

Are eligible liabilities the deposits used to calculate reserve requirements?

No. Deposits or other balances used in a reserve-requirement calculation are reservable liabilities. MREL eligible liabilities are resolution resources that meet separate instrument and legal conditions.

Can every eligible liability be bailed in?

Eligible liabilities are designed to be available for write-down or conversion in resolution, subject to the resolution decision and creditor safeguards. The broader reverse proposition is false: a liability can be bail-inable without qualifying toward MREL.

Does meeting MREL make a bank safe?

No. MREL improves resolution capacity, but it does not eliminate credit, market, liquidity, operational, or execution risk and does not prevent a bank from failing.

This page provides general financial and regulatory education, not legal, resolution-planning, compliance, or investment advice. Current EU legislation and the relevant resolution authority’s decision control a specific instrument or institution.

Browse Banking