Nonperforming Loans in Western Europe – A Selective Comparison of Countries and National Definitions

As a follow-up study to the author’s previous paper on “Nonperforming Loans in CESEE – What Do They Comprise?”, the present contribution focuses on the definitions of nonperforming loans (NPLs) in a number of Western European nations – Austria, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Portugal, Spain and the United Kingdom. Supervisors or at least general practice in the majority of Western European countries seem to endorse the rule that for a loan to be nonperforming, at least one of two (primary) elements has to be present: (1) principal or interest 90 days or more overdue, and (2) existence of underlying well-defined weaknesses of loan or borrower. However, there are also other (secondary) elements that have an impact on NPL measurement and the comparability of definitions: the question whether a restructured loan is classified as NPL or not, whether the presence of a collateral or guarantee influences loan classification or not, whether the full outstanding value or only part of a loan is reported as nonperforming, and whether a bank is required to downgrade all loans to a given debtor if any of these loans are classified as impaired or not. While these elements may introduce upward or downward biases into some nations’ NPL definitions and ratios, and these would need to be further investigated, the above-outlined NPL rule appears to constitute a feasible yardstick for most of the countries mentioned above. Moreover, this definition is also in line with a draft EU ruling for a Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR).