Rundschreiben 14/2026 narrows BaFin's CRR ancillary test

Rundschreiben 14/2026, published by the Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BaFin) on 6 October 2026, adopts European Banking Authority (EBA) guidelines EBA/GL/2026/01 on ancillary services undertakings, while reading dependence on banking activity more narrowly than the EBA under Article 4(1)(18) of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR).

The circular, marked Stand 5 October 2026, says BaFin notified the EBA on 4 May 2026 that it would apply the guidelines, which is also the day they begin to apply. Dependence on banking activity is one of three ancillary-to-banking criteria, dependence on financial means is a subset, and BaFin departs from the EBA’s wider understanding. What follows is that test, the United Kingdom’s older wording, and the nearest published sanction.

Key facts

• Full title on the 6 October 2026 notice: “Rundschreiben 14/2026 (BA): Leitlinien zur Festlegung der Kriterien für die Ermittlung der Tätigkeiten gemäß Art. 4 Abs. 1 Nr. 18 CRR.” PDF marked Stand 5 October 2026. Source: BaFin.
• Compliance notification of 4 May 2026 adopts EBA/GL/2026/01, dated 9 January 2026, into administrative practice. The guidelines apply from 4 May 2026. Source: circular; guideline paragraphs 3 and 10.
• Dependence on banking activity (“Abhängigkeit von der Banktätigkeit”) requires business-model impairment without group banking products or services, and is not assumed if those inputs are replaceable. Source: circular.
• Dependence on financial means (“Abhängigkeit von Finanzmitteln”) is a subset, limited to lending, guarantees and credit commitments in points 2 and 6 of Annex I to Directive 2013/36/EU, the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD), “in agreement with paragraph 15”. Source: circular and the notice.
• Principal activity: at least 50% of assets, revenues or personnel, individually, with a case-by-case route if no threshold is met. Guideline paragraphs 28 and 29. The circular does not restate them.
• Regulation (EU) 2024/1623 of 31 May 2024 amended the definition. BaFin dates the revision to July 2024. PwC’s 2 February 2026 note dates application of the revised article to 1 January 2025.
• Consultation: 7 July to 7 October 2025, 12 responses, seven published. Source: final report, section 5.2.

Methodology and sources

Primary texts opened for this draft are BaFin’s notice of 6 October 2026, the two-page Rundschreiben 14/2026, the English final report on EBA/GL/2026/01 of 9 January 2026, and the German guidelines, used to confirm paragraph 21. The United Kingdom comparator is Article 4(1)(18) on legislation.gov.uk. The enforcement example is the European Central Bank (ECB) press release of 20 December 2024 on BNP Paribas Fortis SA/NV. The window runs from Regulation (EU) 2024/1623 of 31 May 2024 to 6 October 2026, across Germany, the EBA text and the United Kingdom.

Related:Rule 501 notices test knowledge against the wealth gate

The EBA compliance-table spreadsheet was not opened, so this piece does not say how it labels Germany. No source opened here is a fine charged as a wrong ancillary-services classification. Where BaFin says July 2024 and PwC says 1 January 2025, both dates are reported and not merged.

What Rundschreiben 14/2026 changes in the dependence test

After Regulation (EU) 2024/1623, the EBA final report restates an ancillary services undertaking (ASU) — BaFin’s Anbieter von Nebendienstleistungen (AvN) — as an undertaking whose principal activity is a direct extension of banking, an activity ancillary to banking, or an activity the EBA considers similar. An ASU is also a financial institution under Article 4(1)(26), so the label feeds Articles 11 and 18. The report says digital activities ancillary to banking were meant to come inside that consolidation, including at the head of a group. Rundschreiben 14/2026 does not rewrite the direct-extension limb in paragraphs 13 and 14.

Point (b) is the reservation. Paragraph 15 says an activity is ancillary to banking when it supports, complements or relies on listed CRD activities or on listed services in Directive 2014/65/EU, the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID II). Paragraph 16 confines the assessment to undertakings which, if they are ASUs, must or may be consolidated under Articles 11 and 18 and Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/676.

BaFin's dependence test in Rundschreiben 14/2026 is a business-model test, not a mere intra-group funding test. Dependence on banking activity exists only where the principal activity depends on banking products or services, including financing, supplied by a group institution or financial institution, so far that the business model would not function or would be significantly impaired without them. Dependence is not to be assumed if the undertaking could obtain those inputs outside the group, or provide them internally, without significant impairment. Paragraph 21 of EBA/GL/2026/01 instead treats an activity as relying on banking where it significantly relies on group banking products or services, including operational and personnel dependencies, or where it significantly relies on funding, including an explicit commitment to provide funding. The circular does not repeat the operational-and-personnel sentence, and paragraph 21 does not contain the substitutability condition. The notice of 6 October 2026 calls that a departure from the EBA's wider reading.

Financial-means dependence is presented as consistent with paragraph 15, and is limited to lending, guarantees and credit commitments in CRD Annex I points 2 and 6, even though paragraph 21(b) speaks of funding more generally. The notice calls it an Unterfall, not a fourth criterion. Paragraphs 28 and 29 still come with the adoption: a 50% test of assets, revenues or personnel, or a case-by-case finding. The circular records the 4 May 2026 filing as compliance, not as a refusal.

How Germany, the EBA text and the United Kingdom divide the definition

Sources: BaFin notice, 6 October 2026; Rundschreiben 14/2026; EBA/GL/2026/01; UK CRR Article 4; ECB, 20 December 2024. Last updated: 7 October 2026.

An ancillary services undertaking, as the EBA final report restates Article 4(1)(18) after Regulation (EU) 2024/1623, is an undertaking whose principal activity is a direct extension of banking, or leasing, property or data-processing insofar as the activity is ancillary to banking, or another activity the EBA treats as similar. Rundschreiben 14/2026 does not amend the first or third limb. It narrows dependence, and it confines financial-means dependence to lending, guarantees and credit commitments in points 2 and 6 of Annex I to the Capital Requirements Directive. The legislation.gov.uk text of the same article still asks only whether the principal activity is owning or managing property, managing data-processing services, or a similar activity ancillary to one or more institutions. A property or IT company can meet the UK wording and fail BaFin's impairment test. Those are not interchangeable classification memos.

A gloss filed as compliance, rather than as a refusal, splits the level playing field in paragraph 6 of the EBA background. Routing a leverage offer onto a designated contract market (DCM) is a different gate, about where a product may be offered. Release 9306-26 extends a UK swaps no-action position to 2027, a markets split rather than a group-company definition. BaFin had said on 1 October 2026 that it would stop circulars that only record adoption.

"The proposed EBA interpretation of the term "Ancillary Services Undertaking" (ASU) goes beyond the wording and the legislative intent of Article 4(1)(18) CRR III by introducing overly broad criteria—particularly "reliance on banking", including sub-criteria such as "reliance on banking products" and "reliance on funding" which could be seen as exceeding its mandate."

— German Banking Industry Committee, consultation response of 7 October 2025. The named contact is Nicole Quade, Director, Bundesverband deutscher Banken, the coordinator. (EBA consultation response)

Why the nearest published sanction is a subsidiary reporting case

No document opened for this piece fines anyone for mislabelling an ancillary services undertaking. The nearest published sanction is about a subsidiary whose numbers, once inside the prudential picture, were wrong for years.

On 20 December 2024 the ECB announced an administrative penalty of €10.4 million on BNP Paribas Fortis SA/NV for reporting miscalculated risk-weighted assets for credit risk. Between 2014 and 2021, for 31 consecutive quarters, the bank understated risk-weighted assets on factoring exposures of its subsidiary in Belgium. It used internal models after identifying severe deficiencies which, the ECB said, made the models almost inevitably non-compliant with the CRR. It knowingly reported the wrong figures, and told the ECB only when new models were submitted, seven years later. The ECB called the breach “severe”. The sanctioning power cited is Article 18(1) of Council Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013.

Fortis is not precedent for Rundschreiben 14/2026. The charge was credit-risk reporting. Article 4(1)(18) is the prior gate: it decides whether a non-bank company is inside the consolidated picture at all. The German Banking Industry Committee, on the draft, said funding reliance could pull non-financial subsidiaries into consolidation and displace Article 18(8) on step-in risk. The final guidelines kept paragraph 21(b). BaFin has since added substitutability. The circular does not cite Article 18(8), and this piece does not treat that override claim as settled.

What this means for banking groups and compliance teams

For a German institution the operative line is the circular’s negative sentence. Borrowing from the group, or using it for know-your-customer checks, does not by itself make an affiliate an ASU. The question is impairment, and whether the input could be bought outside the group or performed internally. Paragraphs 23 to 25 still illustrate leasing, property and data-processing. The reservation qualifies only dependence. Loan servicing and marketplace lending stay under paragraphs 13 and 14. Substitutability has to be shown, and only on that limb.

Cross-border groups now hold two definitions of the same phrase. The UK article still asks about property, data-processing or a similar ancillary activity. It does not ask BaFin’s impairment question. Different answers for the same service company are what the texts produce. Other perimeters do not answer it either. The Advisers Act crypto-custody proposal is about how an adviser may hold crypto-assets, not about whether a data company is an ASU. The Cash FX Group complaint maps an unregistered foreign-exchange pool. Rule 501 notices test knowledge against a wealth gate, which sorts purchasers, not group companies.

The circular sets no template and no new deadline. The guidelines have applied since 4 May 2026; the reading was published on 6 October 2026. A memo that treated group funding as dependence, without impairment and substitutability, no longer matches German administrative practice. The 50% tests and the duty to notify the EBA of a “similar” activity remain. No fine is named. PwC’s February note already said trial classifications under the draft had moved consolidation perimeters.

"Institutions should consider reviewing the activities of their subsidiaries and analysing the impact of the Draft Guidelines on their perimeter of prudential consolidation already before the guidelines start to apply, to allow for sufficient time for the assessment and any implementation work that may become necessary as a result."

— Janina Heinz, Partner, Freshfields, one of four authors of the 14 July 2025 note, with Florian Klimscha, Jan Struckmann and Eva Schneider. The sentence is about the draft, not about Rundschreiben 14/2026. (Freshfields)

What remains open after the 6 October notice

Other competent authorities had the same 4 May 2026 deadline to say whether they comply. This draft does not report their rows, so it does not claim Germany is the only authority to have narrowed paragraph 21. Point (c) is also still open: an authority that considers an activity “similar” notifies the EBA, and the EBA applies the guidelines. Rundschreiben 14/2026 attaches no list of notified activities.

The 9 January 2026 package included a separate consolidation report, which PwC’s 2 February 2026 note links as EBA/REP/2026/01 under Article 18(10) and treats as advice to the Commission, not as a new rule. PwC draws out simpler sub-consolidation, closer alignment with accounting, a sharper control test, and the Article 49 treatment often called the Danish compromise. None of that is enacted by the German circular.

Do not merge the dates. The final report names Regulation (EU) 2024/1623 of 31 May 2024. BaFin says the definition was revised in July 2024. PwC dates application to 1 January 2025. The EUR-Lex record gives 19 June 2024 as the Official Journal date. Respondents told the EBA reliance could catch almost any funded affiliate. The EBA kept the criterion. BaFin has written a narrower German screen. No Court of Justice case is mentioned in the notice or the circular.

TL;DR

Rundschreiben 14/2026, published on 6 October 2026, adopts EBA/GL/2026/01 into BaFin's administrative practice and narrows one term. Dependence on banking activity requires that the business model would not function, or would be significantly impaired, without group banking products or services, and it is not assumed where those inputs can be replaced. Dependence on financial means is a subset, limited to lending, guarantees and credit commitments. The guidelines, applicable from 4 May 2026, still use a 50% assets, revenues or personnel test for the principal activity. The UK text of Article 4(1)(18) has not moved to the three-limb definition. On 20 December 2024 the ECB announced a €10.4 million penalty against BNP Paribas Fortis for misreported risk-weighted assets across 31 quarters, which is not an ancillary-services fine.

FAQ

What is Rundschreiben 14/2026?

It is BaFin circular 14/2026 (BA), fully titled “Leitlinien zur Festlegung der Kriterien für die Ermittlung der Tätigkeiten gemäß Art. 4 Abs. 1 Nr. 18 CRR”. The PDF is marked Stand 5 October 2026 and the notice is dated 6 October 2026. It records a compliance notification of 4 May 2026 adopting EBA/GL/2026/01 into administrative practice, and it defines two terms: dependence on banking activity and dependence on financial means. It is two pages, and it is not itself a statute.

What is an ancillary services undertaking under Article 4(1)(18)?

As the EBA final report restates the definition after Regulation (EU) 2024/1623, it is an undertaking whose principal activity is a direct extension of banking, or operational leasing, property ownership or management, data-processing or any other activity insofar as it is ancillary to banking, or an activity the EBA considers similar. The activity may be supplied inside the group or to outside clients. The report says an ASU also falls within “financial institution” in Article 4(1)(26) and “financial sector entity” in Article 4(1)(27). That is the link to consolidation under Articles 11 and 18.

How is BaFin’s reading narrower than the EBA’s?

Paragraph 21 treats an activity as relying on banking where it significantly relies on group banking products or services, including operational and personnel dependencies, or on group funding, including an explicit commitment to fund. Rundschreiben 14/2026 requires that, without those products or services, the business model would not function or would be significantly impaired. Dependence is not assumed if the undertaking could source them outside the group or provide them internally without significant impairment. The 6 October notice calls this a departure from the EBA’s wider understanding.

Is dependence on financial means a separate test?

No. The 6 October notice says it is a subset of dependence on banking activity, not a free-standing criterion. The circular limits that subset to lending, guarantees and credit commitments, points 2 and 6 of Annex I to the CRD, and says this agrees with paragraph 15. Paragraph 21(b) of the English guidelines speaks more broadly of funding and of explicit commitments to provide it. A funding line that is not a loan, a guarantee or a credit commitment is not what the circular names. The impairment and substitutability tests still sit on the parent concept.

From when does the revised definition apply?

BaFin’s notice says the definition was revised and widened in July 2024. The final report identifies the amending act as Regulation (EU) 2024/1623 of 31 May 2024. PwC’s note of 2 February 2026 dates the revised Article 4(1)(18) to the introduction of CRR III on 1 January 2025. Those statements appear in documents opened for this piece, and they are not the same claim. The guidelines that interpret the definition apply from 4 May 2026, the date of BaFin’s compliance notification. The circular does not choose between July 2024 and 1 January 2025.

Does the 50% principal-activity test apply in Germany?

The circular does not repeat it. Paragraph 28 says the relevant activities are the principal activity where together they cover at least 50% of assets, revenues or personnel, measured individually. Paragraph 29 lets the authority reach that conclusion case by case where no threshold is met. BaFin says it has adopted the guidelines, and the reservation of 6 October 2026 is confined to the two dependence terms. Silence does not repeal the 50% test.

This article is informational analysis only and does not constitute legal, regulatory, tax, or investment advice. Regulatory frameworks change frequently and interpretation depends on facts and circumstances; primary documents and official regulator guidance always supersede summaries. Firms should consult qualified legal counsel and their relevant supervisory authority before taking any action based on the analysis above.