Short Term Has No Future XBRL CEBS Workshop

Short Term Has No Future XBRL CEBS Workshop Giancarlo Pellizzari Head of Prudential Policy Dexia Group Amsterdam, 6 -7 November 2007

Agenda XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 1. Dexia and XBRL: a reminder - Introduction - Dexia’s views on XBRL development - Organization and structure - Some words on COREP 2. FINREP: the first step to a Dexia “public” taxonomy - FINREP challenges - The FINREP Common Trunk (FINREP TC) - The link with our financial statements - The first step to a Dexia’s financial statements taxonomy 3. Conclusions 2

Dexia and XBRL : a reminder XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 Introduction : What is Dexia? Dexia Holding: 23, 2 EURBn Capitalization, world leader in public financing – Dexia Bank Belgium – Dexia Crédit Local (France) – Dexia BIL (Luxembourg) – – FSA (Financial Security Assurance) – USA – Credit enhancement Dexia Insurance Belgium Deniz Bank (6 th largest private bank in Turkey) Factoring, leasing, real estate, IT, etc. A group of 241 entities, 33. 321 staff members and present in 33 countries 3

Dexia and XBRL : a reminder XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 Introduction : What is Dexia? 4

Dexia and XBRL : a reminder XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 Organization and structure: the regulatory environment Home – host supervisors: Home supervisors (working in a college) – CBFA – Belgian Banking, Finance and Insurance Commission (as lead supervisor) – The French Commission Bancaire – Commission de Surveillance du Secteur Financier (Luxembourg) - CSSF Host supervisors – EU supervisors • • Bundesbank – Bafin (Germany) Banca d’Italia (Italy) Banco d’Espana (Spain) Etc. – Other countries • • • 5 BRSA (Turkey) SEC (USA) OFSI (Canada) Japan FSA Singapore Etc.

Dexia and XBRL : a reminder XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 Organization and structure: the regulatory environment COREP and FINREP reporting: COREP – 23 COREP to deliver to 12 different regulators – 7 other Basel II reporting to other 7 regulators – Of which: • 4 regulators requiring XBRL • 3 using XBRL as an option FINREP – 13 FINREP to deliver to 8 different regulators – Of which: • 4 regulators requiring XBRL • 3 using XBRL as an option 6

Dexia and XBRL : a reminder XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 Organization and structure: infrastructure STATUTORY CONSOLIDATED CONSO DHLD SAP Holding CONSO DBB BE FR LU DBB DCL DBL 7 MAGNITUDE COMMON PARAM SPEC. LOCAL PARAM CHECK VISUAL SCOPE CHECK MIS CONSO ESSBASE CONSO DCL CONSO DBL INTERNAL REPORTING EXTERNAL REPORTING

Dexia and XBRL : a reminder XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 Organization and structure: infrastructure Booking entity. X Accounting systems Management systems Market risk Operational Risk FERMAT J-Port MAGNITUDE Files DMV 3 FERMAT INPUT datas RWA calculation engine Aggregated results Market risks Operational risks Data’s Equity Aggergated results Accounting Detailed results Regulatory reporting Aggregated results Credit risks COREP forms 8 FINREP forms

Dexia and XBRL : a reminder XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 Dexia’s views on XBRL development • Use XBRL as a tool for more harmonization, flexibility and gain of time both vertically and horizontally • We thus need: – XBRL at the beginning of the reporting processes (public, COREP, FINREP and internal) – Softwares that read XBRL – One integrated database (kind of Group taxonomy) • “One fits all” • This is more efficient if XBRL used by “non-regulators” (Tax in Netherlands, AML in Spain, Ministry of Finance in Belgium, Central balance sheet offices, etc. ) 9

Dexia and XBRL : a reminder XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 Some words on COREP • The main issue in COREP is the “risk gathering”, i. e. COREP is build using information from different departments working in different ways (FINREP is “easier” on this because produced by only one department): – Accounting, Operational risk and market risk decentralized on a centralized system – Credit risk centralized on a centralized system – Other banks may have other structures (but this is often the one chosen for cross-border groups) • This combined with the “national discretions” for COREP implementation makes it a nightmare 10

Dexia and XBRL : a reminder XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 Some words on COREP Etc. Operational systems Exel template Finrep Excel template Belgian Corep Etc. Xbrl taxonomy Finrep Xbrl taxonomy Belgian Corep ETL Input via scripts BO universe 11 Oracle Creating Excel Feed manuel corrections (automatic) Construction XBRL and validation Etc. Finrrep xbrl XBRL Corep UBMatrix/ Report. Builder (XBreeze) XBRL database

FINREP: the first step to a Dexia “public” taxonomy XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 FINREP challenges • • Link with IFRS and banks’ financial statements National discretions: – – – • Dimensions: – – – • • 12 CEBS guidelines not always clear CEBS guidelines not always respected by member states Changes in the “business format” may have insidious impact on the taxonomy (deleting a line changes the definition of the total – unless “among which”) Additional information inconsistent with the CEBS format Sometimes, regulators may give interpretations to IFRS rules Preferred instead of tuples (link with IASCF? ) More standardization may be a benefit (exhaustive list of flows used throughout FINREP) Definitions of some dimensions (counterparties => links with COREP, ECB, etc. ) Translations may add confusion (or precision) Better definition of the concepts for the IASCF but not only (equity detail)

FINREP: the first step to a Dexia “public” taxonomy XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 The FINREP CT: the principle “The same information should be produced only once” as such, certain elements have been defined as common i. e. : – Elements requested by the 3 mains regulators (CB, CBFA, CSSF) – Elements requested by the holding (in the consolidated financial statements) 13

FINREP: the first step to a Dexia “public” taxonomy XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 The FINREP CT: practical issues • Counterparties 14

FINREP: the first step to a Dexia “public” taxonomy XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 The FINREP CT: examples • CEBS’ B/S • CB’ B/S 15

FINREP: the first step to a Dexia “public” taxonomy XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 The FINREP CT: examples • CSSF’ B/S 16

FINREP: the first step to a Dexia “public” taxonomy XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 The FINREP CT: examples • CBFA’ B/S 17

FINREP: the first step to a Dexia “public” taxonomy XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 The FINREP CT: examples • Dexia’ B/S 18

FINREP: the first step to a Dexia “public” taxonomy XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 The FINREP CT: examples • Dexia’ B/S: links with Magnitude’s chart of account 19

FINREP: the first step to a Dexia “public” taxonomy XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 Links with our financial statements • According to the principles applied to FINREP, we have to map FINREP tables to the financial statements. It implies that: – Interpretations used for financial statements and mapping from financial statements to magnitude accounts have to be applied for FINREP – The detail in the financial statements have to be reproduced in FINREP – Analysis of the financial statements will be mapped to the FINREP tables 20

FINREP: the first step to a Dexia “public” taxonomy XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 Links with our financial statements • Example 1: link from F/S to FINREP 21

FINREP: the first step to a Dexia “public” taxonomy XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 Links with our financial statements • Example 2: additional detail 22

FINREP: the first step to a Dexia “public” taxonomy XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 The first step to a first Dexia’s financial statements taxonomy • Taxonomies – – – IASCF FINREP CBFA CB CSSF • Dexia ? – – – 23 For financial statements For FINREP What would be the link with COREP taxonomy (if one could exist? ) For tax purposes ? Others ?

Conclusions XBRL CEBS Workshop – Nov ‘ 07 Conclusions • • Dexia has developed strong links between FINREP and its published financial statements. This will help for the Pillar 3 publication. From recent CEBS’ Public Hearing on supervisory reporting: – – Long term: CEBS intention to have harmonized reporting for 2011 Short term: • • Issues : differences in procedure, definitions, national implementation and IT Solutions: – – 24 Group-wide basis Home-host perspective Where it is relevant Case by case basis.