Article 2.2 Reporting by credit institutions permanently affiliated to a central body

In a particular case of an atypical structure of credit institutions permanently affiliated to a central body when: a) none of them is a resolution entity and the central body is a liquidation entity b) the cohort of institutions does not formally qualify as a group nor as a resolution group due to their atypical association c) the cohort is prudentially supervised individually at the level of the central body and in aggregate at the cohort level (our regulations use the term aggregate level, not the consolidated level) d) in case that the central body is liquidated, the whole cohort can no longer function and has to be dissolved, thus, for resolution purposes, the whole construction can be treated as a single liquidation entity.       In this case, is it correct, to read art. 2.2 in conjunction with recital no. 4 and ask the central body to report the templates on an individual basis and by that understand the aggregate level of the whole cohort?

In a particular case of an atypical structure of credit institutions permanently affiliated to a central body when: a) none of them is a resolution entity and the central body is a liquidation entity b) the cohort of institutions does not formally qualify as a group nor as a resolution group due to their atypical association c) the cohort is prudentially supervised individually at the level of the central body and in aggregate at the cohort level (our regulations use the term aggregate level, not the consolidated level) d) in case that the central body is liquidated, the whole cohort can no longer function and has to be dissolved, thus, for resolution purposes, the whole construction can be treated as a single liquidation entity.       In this case, is it correct, to read art. 2.2 in conjunction with recital no. 4 and ask the central body to report the templates on an individual basis and by that understand the aggregate level of the whole cohort?