Glossary entry (derived from question below)
Spanish term or phrase:
Criterio de cómputo privilegiado o de no-cómputo
English translation:
criterion of privileged counting or non-counting of mandates
Added to glossary by
Charles Davis
Jul 12, 2019 07:56
4 yrs ago
2 viewers *
Spanish term
Ireland
Your ideas in English
Native in: English (Variant: Irish) 
Works in: Spanish to English
Criterio de cómputo privilegiado o de no-cómputo
Spanish to English
Bus/Financial
Finance (general)
SUITABILITY ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE (CREDIT INSTITUTIONS)
This is a Banco de España document and it is a SUITABILITY ASSESSMENT QUESTIONNAIRE (CREDIT INSTITUTIONS) for when credit entities wish to nominate a candidate for a senior position in the company. Target is UK English.
An online version of the document can be viewed here: https://sedeelectronica.bde.es/f/websede/INF/VCS/Ficheros/de...
I'm struggling with this part "Criterio de cómputo privilegiado o de no- cómputo que se considere de aplicación con base en la Norma 34 de la Circular Banco de España 2/2016, 2 de febrero"
specifically, "Criterio de cómputo privilegiado o de no-cómputo". In the next section of the questionnaire "privilegios de cómputo" appears:
"Número total de cargos sin aplicar privilegios de cómputo:
Número total de cargos ejecutivos aplicando privilegios de cómputo:
Número total de cargos no ejecutivos aplicando privilegios de cómputo:"
I can find entries from Argentina but as this is a Spanish text, I'm somewaht baffled as to what cómputo privilegiado o de no-cómputo"/ "privilegios de cómputo" means.
Is it related to acreedores privilegiados?
Input much appreciated colleagues!
An online version of the document can be viewed here: https://sedeelectronica.bde.es/f/websede/INF/VCS/Ficheros/de...
I'm struggling with this part "Criterio de cómputo privilegiado o de no- cómputo que se considere de aplicación con base en la Norma 34 de la Circular Banco de España 2/2016, 2 de febrero"
specifically, "Criterio de cómputo privilegiado o de no-cómputo". In the next section of the questionnaire "privilegios de cómputo" appears:
"Número total de cargos sin aplicar privilegios de cómputo:
Número total de cargos ejecutivos aplicando privilegios de cómputo:
Número total de cargos no ejecutivos aplicando privilegios de cómputo:"
I can find entries from Argentina but as this is a Spanish text, I'm somewaht baffled as to what cómputo privilegiado o de no-cómputo"/ "privilegios de cómputo" means.
Is it related to acreedores privilegiados?
Input much appreciated colleagues!
Proposed translations
(English)
| 4 | criterion of privileged counting or non-counting of mandates |
Charles Davis
|
| 3 | Exempted (head)counting or discounting test |
Adrian MM.
|
Change log
Jul 19, 2019 16:30: Charles Davis Created KOG entry
Proposed translations
17 hrs
Selected
criterion of privileged counting or non-counting of mandates
This is the European Banking Authority's terminology, which is relevant, in that the Banco de España's rules are explicitly based on those of the ECB and cite the relevant EU Directive and Regulations.
The context concerns eligibility criteria for appointments to credit institutions in respect of the number of posts already held by a prospective candidate and how that number is calculated. Rule 34, part of which I've quoted in the discussion area, explains that in certain circumstances multiple posts count as just one.
This issue, by the way, is addressed in the Central Bank of Ireland's rules:
"7.8 The number of directorships held by directors of credit institutions shall be limited. The Central Bank requires that the number of financial directorships (i.e. directorships of credit institutions and insurance undertakings) held by a director of a credit institution shall not exceed five [...]"
Corporate Governance Requirements for Credit Institutions 2015
https://www.centralbank.ie/docs/default-source/Regulation/in...
Here's the relevant EBA Q&A:
"Subject matter:
Calculation of the number of directorships held (privileged counting of mandates).
Question:
How should the mandates be counted in a situation where one person is an active board member in several connected (through IPS, group or qualified holdings) credit institutions and the privileged counting of mandates shows different results depending on the perspective from which the mandates are counted? Especially how the mandates should be counted where there is more than one notifying institution, in particular where the institutions are connected through qualified holdings? How should such a situation be resolved in cases where different competent authorities (in more than one Member State and / or the ECB) are involved?"
Background on the question:
Article 91(3) of Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD) stipulates that one person may hold one executive directorship with two non-executive directorships or four non-executive directorships.
Article 91(4) of Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD) sets out that certain positions, held at the same time, in specific constellations may be counted as one mandate. The following mandates should count as one mandate:
a) Executive or non-executive directorships held within the same group
b) Executive or non-executive directorships held within:
i) institutions which are members of the same Institutional Protection Scheme (IPS) provided that the conditions set out in Article 113(7) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 re fulfilled; or
ii) undertakings (including no[n]-financial entities) in which the institution holds a qualifying holding."
https://eba.europa.eu/single-rule-book-qa/-/qna/view/publicI...
I think that if you compare this with Rule 34 in the Banco de España Circular you'll see that it's talking about exactly the same issues.
For Directive 2013/36/EU, Article 91(3) and 91(4), on which both the above Q&A and the Banco de España Rule are directly based, see here:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN-ES/TXT/?uri=CELEX...
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day 1 hr (2019-07-13 09:20:31 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
The English expression chosen (presumably by translators in the EU Commission's translation unit) to express this in the EBA's answer may or may not be well chosen, but I think it is in any case advisable to follow it since the precise issue at stake here is inherently an EU matter.
The context concerns eligibility criteria for appointments to credit institutions in respect of the number of posts already held by a prospective candidate and how that number is calculated. Rule 34, part of which I've quoted in the discussion area, explains that in certain circumstances multiple posts count as just one.
This issue, by the way, is addressed in the Central Bank of Ireland's rules:
"7.8 The number of directorships held by directors of credit institutions shall be limited. The Central Bank requires that the number of financial directorships (i.e. directorships of credit institutions and insurance undertakings) held by a director of a credit institution shall not exceed five [...]"
Corporate Governance Requirements for Credit Institutions 2015
https://www.centralbank.ie/docs/default-source/Regulation/in...
Here's the relevant EBA Q&A:
"Subject matter:
Calculation of the number of directorships held (privileged counting of mandates).
Question:
How should the mandates be counted in a situation where one person is an active board member in several connected (through IPS, group or qualified holdings) credit institutions and the privileged counting of mandates shows different results depending on the perspective from which the mandates are counted? Especially how the mandates should be counted where there is more than one notifying institution, in particular where the institutions are connected through qualified holdings? How should such a situation be resolved in cases where different competent authorities (in more than one Member State and / or the ECB) are involved?"
Background on the question:
Article 91(3) of Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD) stipulates that one person may hold one executive directorship with two non-executive directorships or four non-executive directorships.
Article 91(4) of Directive 2013/36/EU (CRD) sets out that certain positions, held at the same time, in specific constellations may be counted as one mandate. The following mandates should count as one mandate:
a) Executive or non-executive directorships held within the same group
b) Executive or non-executive directorships held within:
i) institutions which are members of the same Institutional Protection Scheme (IPS) provided that the conditions set out in Article 113(7) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 re fulfilled; or
ii) undertakings (including no[n]-financial entities) in which the institution holds a qualifying holding."
https://eba.europa.eu/single-rule-book-qa/-/qna/view/publicI...
I think that if you compare this with Rule 34 in the Banco de España Circular you'll see that it's talking about exactly the same issues.
For Directive 2013/36/EU, Article 91(3) and 91(4), on which both the above Q&A and the Banco de España Rule are directly based, see here:
https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN-ES/TXT/?uri=CELEX...
--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 1 day 1 hr (2019-07-13 09:20:31 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------
The English expression chosen (presumably by translators in the EU Commission's translation unit) to express this in the EBA's answer may or may not be well chosen, but I think it is in any case advisable to follow it since the precise issue at stake here is inherently an EU matter.
4 KudoZ points awarded for this answer.
Comment: "Thank you for your well thought out answer!"
13 hrs
Adrian MM.
Austria
Austria
Native in English
Specializes in field
Austria
Retd.T&I, Barrister & Austro-Advokat
Native in: English (Variants: Scottish, British)
Works in: Spanish to English, English to Spanish, French to English, and 5 more.
Related KudoZ points
:
143
Exempted (head)counting or discounting test
Pls refer to the discussion entries for further enlightenment.
Notes:
1. privilegio is likely to mean an exemption here (cf. Butterworths SPA/ENG law dictionary).
2. the opposite IMO is 'weighted votes' or 'weighted voting' - see the 1970 ENG company law case of Bushell vs. Faith - some individual company members can double or treble their votes on certtain resolutions.
3. most times, the translation of reckoning for cómputo works in a legal, banking or finance context and non-reckoning or discounting for the negative form of no-cómputo
4. I can't see a connection with acreedores (*super)-privilegiados – (*pre)- preferred or (*pre)-preferential creditors in a ‘suspension of payments' (more often than not in Spain a staff dismissal scam or con trick that need not be canvassed here), insolvency or liquidation, but the terminology is important anyway as many translators or interpreters are often challenged by the 'super.' prefix.
Notes:
1. privilegio is likely to mean an exemption here (cf. Butterworths SPA/ENG law dictionary).
2. the opposite IMO is 'weighted votes' or 'weighted voting' - see the 1970 ENG company law case of Bushell vs. Faith - some individual company members can double or treble their votes on certtain resolutions.
3. most times, the translation of reckoning for cómputo works in a legal, banking or finance context and non-reckoning or discounting for the negative form of no-cómputo
4. I can't see a connection with acreedores (*super)-privilegiados – (*pre)- preferred or (*pre)-preferential creditors in a ‘suspension of payments' (more often than not in Spain a staff dismissal scam or con trick that need not be canvassed here), insolvency or liquidation, but the terminology is important anyway as many translators or interpreters are often challenged by the 'super.' prefix.
Example sentence:
Exemptions, Deferrals and Headcount Tests When will your business begin Single Touch Payroll reporting?
Reference:
Note from asker:
| Thank you for taking the time to look into this. Much appreciated! |
Discussion
"[...] los miembros del consejo de administración y los directores generales o asimilados de dicha entidad y de su sociedad financiera de cartera matriz o sociedad financiera mixta de cartera matriz no podrán ocupar al mismo tiempo más cargos de los previstos en ninguna de las siguientes combinaciones:
a) Un cargo ejecutivo junto con dos cargos no ejecutivos.
b) Cuatro cargos no ejecutivos."
It goes on to explain certain rules about how you count these cargos:
"a) Se computará como un solo cargo el conjunto de los cargos ejecutivos o no ejecutivos ocupados dentro de un mismo grupo.
b) Se computará como un solo cargo el conjunto de los cargos ejecutivos o no ejecutivos ocupados dentro de entidades que formen parte del mismo sistema institucional de protección", etc.
So the "privilegio de cómputo" must be to do with the privilege of posts held counting or not. See Norma 34 here:
https://www.boe.es/diario_boe/txt.php?id=BOE-A-2016-1238