Impacts of the Transition to the Expected Loss Model on the Portuguese Banking Sector
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study addresses the implementation of the International Financial Reporting Standard 9 (IFRS 9) in the European Union as of 1 January 2018, replacing the International Accounting Standard 39 (IAS 39) to introduce a new model for recognizing Loan Loss Provisions (LLP), based on Expected Credit Loss (ECL). This model responds to criticisms of the former Incurred Credit Loss (ICL) system for its inability to reflect credit losses in a timely manner, potentially exacerbating the effects of financial crises. This study focuses on the effects of adopting the ECL model on the level of Loan Loss Allowances (LLA) in loans, own equity, and the Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) ratio across 13 Portuguese commercial banks. A mean comparison test is used to evaluate scenarios before and after the application of the ECL model, highlighting the importance of regulator actions and the adequacy of loss recognition policies, including the effects of European Union. The results obtained demonstrate significant negative impacts on the net values of loans, own equity, and the CET1 ratio upon adopting the IFRS 9 ECL model due to the widespread increase in LLAs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".