[VIEW] agent=Regulatory Capital Manager | scenario_id=22 | rounds=20

--- Round 0 ---
[R0.1] Regulatory Capital Manager (speak, public): Before we delve into the Tier 2 capital issuance for 2026, I’d like to confirm our current CET1 position and MREL headroom. As of FY25 close, our CET1 is at 12.4%, which is above our internal target of 11.5%. Additionally, our MREL requirement is 24.0% of RWA, and we’re currently at 22.7%. With the 2026 RWA forecast at $68.0B, we need to assess the refinancing pressures and liquidity resilience to ensure a smooth issuance process. What insights do we have on the incremental funding costs and potential market-pricing ceilings?
[R0.2] Treasury Funding Manager (speak, public): Thank you for the update on the CET1 and MREL positions. Given the current CET1 of 12.4% and the MREL headroom, we appear to be in a strong position. Regarding the funding costs, we should consider the recent peer Tier 2 spreads at T+210 bps with a 15 bps new issue concession, which suggests we might target an indicative coupon around 6.35% to 6.60%. We need to assess how these costs will affect our earnings and liquidity metrics as we approach the issuance window in May. Could we also explore any potential pressures on our balance sheet growth that might impact our strategy?
[R0.3] Finance & Investor Relations Partner (speak, public): Building on your insights, I agree that our CET1 position allows for a solid foundation to move forward. However, we need to consider how the proposed coupon range of 6.35% to 6.60% will impact our net interest income. Given the sensitivity of our NII to funding costs—where each 50 bps increase reduces NII by $18M annually—it's crucial to model the potential downside scenarios. Additionally, as we approach the May issuance window, we should also evaluate how these funding costs align with our interest expense budget of $420M for 2026. Let's ensure we have a robust narrative for our stakeholders around these considerations. What are your thoughts on the balance sheet growth pressures affecting our strategy?

--- Round 1 ---
[R1.1] Regulatory Capital Manager (speak, public): I appreciate both your insights on the funding costs and the potential impact on our earnings. To address the balance sheet growth pressures, we should closely monitor our asset growth projections against the backdrop of our Tier 2 issuance. If we anticipate a slowdown in growth, we may need to adjust our issuance strategy accordingly. I propose we prepare a detailed analysis of various scenarios, particularly focusing on how the incremental funding costs will influence our NII and overall financial health. Let’s ensure our communication with stakeholders reflects these considerations clearly. What are your thoughts on this approach?
[R1.2] Treasury Funding Manager (speak, public): I concur with your proposal to prepare a detailed analysis of various scenarios. It’s crucial that we evaluate asset growth projections and their impact on our issuance strategy. We should model how the incremental funding costs will affect our net interest income and overall financial health, especially given the sensitivity of our NII to these costs. Additionally, ensuring open communication with our stakeholders about these dynamics will be key. Let’s set a timeline for this analysis to ensure we’re ready as we approach the May issuance window.
[R1.3] Finance & Investor Relations Partner (speak, public): I agree with the need for a detailed analysis of the various scenarios, particularly focusing on the interplay between our asset growth projections and the impact of funding costs on our net interest income. It will be essential for us to prepare a comprehensive narrative that encapsulates these dynamics as we communicate with our stakeholders. I propose we set a timeline for our analysis and meet again soon to review our findings and adjust our strategy as necessary. How does that sound?

--- Round 2 ---
[R2.1] Regulatory Capital Manager (speak, public): I appreciate the consensus on the need for detailed analysis and a timeline. Let's aim to have our findings ready for review in the next two weeks. This will allow us to adjust our strategy as needed and ensure our communications with stakeholders are timely and informed. I suggest we reconvene at the end of that period to discuss our insights and next steps. Does this timeline work for everyone?
[R2.2] Treasury Funding Manager (speak, public): The proposed timeline of two weeks works well for me. I agree it's critical to have our findings ready to ensure we can strategize effectively before the issuance window. Let’s schedule our next meeting for then and make sure we all align on the analysis we need to present to our stakeholders. I look forward to collaborating on this.
[R2.3] Finance & Investor Relations Partner (leave, public): 

--- Round 3 ---
[R3.1] Regulatory Capital Manager (leave, public): 
[R3.2] Treasury Funding Manager (leave, public): 
[R3.3] Finance & Investor Relations Partner (leave, public): 

--- Round 4 ---
[R4.1] Regulatory Capital Manager (leave, public): 
[R4.2] Treasury Funding Manager (leave, public): 
[R4.3] Finance & Investor Relations Partner (leave, public): 

--- Round 5 ---
[R5.1] Regulatory Capital Manager (leave, public): 
[R5.2] Treasury Funding Manager (leave, public): 
[R5.3] Finance & Investor Relations Partner (leave, public): 

--- Round 6 ---
[R6.1] Regulatory Capital Manager (leave, public): 
[R6.2] Treasury Funding Manager (leave, public): 
[R6.3] Finance & Investor Relations Partner (leave, public): 

--- Round 7 ---
[R7.1] Regulatory Capital Manager (leave, public): 
[R7.2] Treasury Funding Manager (leave, public): 
[R7.3] Finance & Investor Relations Partner (leave, public): 

--- Round 8 ---
[R8.1] Regulatory Capital Manager (leave, public): 
[R8.2] Treasury Funding Manager (leave, public): 
[R8.3] Finance & Investor Relations Partner (leave, public): 

--- Round 9 ---
[R9.1] Regulatory Capital Manager (leave, public): 
[R9.2] Treasury Funding Manager (leave, public): 
[R9.3] Finance & Investor Relations Partner (leave, public): 

--- Round 10 ---
[R10.1] Regulatory Capital Manager (leave, public): 
[R10.2] Treasury Funding Manager (leave, public): 
[R10.3] Finance & Investor Relations Partner (leave, public): 

--- Round 11 ---
[R11.1] Regulatory Capital Manager (leave, public): 
[R11.2] Treasury Funding Manager (leave, public): 
[R11.3] Finance & Investor Relations Partner (leave, public): 

--- Round 12 ---
[R12.1] Regulatory Capital Manager (leave, public): 
[R12.2] Treasury Funding Manager (leave, public): 
[R12.3] Finance & Investor Relations Partner (leave, public): 

--- Round 13 ---
[R13.1] Regulatory Capital Manager (leave, public): 
[R13.2] Treasury Funding Manager (leave, public): 
[R13.3] Finance & Investor Relations Partner (leave, public): 

--- Round 14 ---
[R14.1] Regulatory Capital Manager (leave, public): 
[R14.2] Treasury Funding Manager (leave, public): 
[R14.3] Finance & Investor Relations Partner (leave, public): 

--- Round 15 ---
[R15.1] Regulatory Capital Manager (leave, public): 
[R15.2] Treasury Funding Manager (leave, public): 
[R15.3] Finance & Investor Relations Partner (leave, public): 

--- Round 16 ---
[R16.1] Regulatory Capital Manager (leave, public): 
[R16.2] Treasury Funding Manager (leave, public): 
[R16.3] Finance & Investor Relations Partner (leave, public): 

--- Round 17 ---
[R17.1] Regulatory Capital Manager (leave, public): 
[R17.2] Treasury Funding Manager (leave, public): 
[R17.3] Finance & Investor Relations Partner (leave, public): 

--- Round 18 ---
[R18.1] Regulatory Capital Manager (leave, public): 
[R18.2] Treasury Funding Manager (leave, public): 
[R18.3] Finance & Investor Relations Partner (leave, public): 

--- Round 19 ---
[R19.1] Regulatory Capital Manager (leave, public): 
[R19.2] Treasury Funding Manager (leave, public): 
[R19.3] Finance & Investor Relations Partner (leave, public): 

