Discrepancies between taxonomy packages

Can you please provide clarity on whether or not the identified differences between ECB's SFRDP taxonomy 5.2 and EBA's FINREP9_DP in DPM 4.2 will be addressed /aligned in a future DPM publication, or if these are intentional and will remain as they are in DPM 4.2? If they will be aligned, please indicate when this can be expected.

ollowing the publication of DPM, we have noticed it includes FINREP9_DP. With this FINREP9_DP replacing the ECB's SFRDP, we were expecting the content to be identical to the latest publication of the SFRDP by ECB. The following deviations have been found, whereby the question is if this is intentional or if EBA will align with ECB's SFRDP taxonomy 5.2 in a future taxonomy publication by EBA. In terms of reportable data points and report templates, we have identified the following differences: - Report F 02.00.dp: Rows 0440 and 0450 are missing. - Report F 11.02.dp: This report is no longer included and will not be reported going forward. - Report F 18.00.dp:   = Columns previously implemented under the ECB 5.2 framework (0030 and 0055) are no longer present.   = Additionally, the entire content of F 18.00.dp.e included in version 5.2 is absent in 4.2. Specifically, all rows from 0340 to 0550 for columns 0010, 0020, and 0060 are missing. - Report F 19.00.dp:   = Column 0020, implemented under the ECB 5.2 framework, is now missing in the EBA 4.2 framework.   = Furthermore, the entire content of F 19.00.dp.d present in version 5.2 is absent in 4.2, specifically row 0340. In addition to this, the following differences have been spotted in the validation rules: - Validations Removed   = A total of 199 validation rules previously included are no longer present in the EBA 4.2 framework. - New validations introduced in the 4.2 framework   = The 4.2 framework also introduces 111 new validation rules applicable to SFRDP.