XBRL within Dutch Banks VIII European Banking Supervisors XBRL Workshop Amsterdam November 6, 2007

1. XBRL within Dutch BanksVIII European Banking Supervisors XBRL WorkshopAmsterdamNovember 6, 2007

2. Agenda Introduction XBRL within Fortis Adoption of XBRL within Dutch banks

3. Introduction Alexander Carp Director Fortis Integrated Reporting Enablers³ Email: alexander.carp@fortis.com Phone: +31 30 2263863 Paul Rothwell KPMG, Manager Financial Services Email: rothwell.paul@kpmg.nl Phone: +31 20 656 8095

4. Agenda Introduction XBRL within Fortis Adoption of XBRL within Dutch banks

5. FinRep NL (XBRL not mandatory) NL Q1 08 GO LIVE Design Build QA LU Q1 08 GO LIVE FinRep LU GO LIVE Design Build QA BE Q1 08 GO LIVE FinRep BE + Pillar II BE GO LIVE Design Build QA FR Q4 07 GO LIVE Design Build QA FinRep FR GO LIVE Functional requirements - regulatory deadlines 01/10/07 15/12/07 15/05/08 15/06/08 15/03/08 15/04/08

6. Which tool for which reporting ?

7. Magnitude Taxonomy Designer Report Builder Scope - architecture FinRep (BE – LU – FR – NL) + Pillar II (BE) Download taxonomies and report templates Regulators (BE – LU – FR – NL)

8. External reports Scope - next step Magnitude Financial Data Financial Data ETL layer XBRL Database Taxonomies and report templates FINREP Report

9. Other systems Project scope Fermat Crew Market Risk Operational Risk ETL layer FRAS BI systems Data Warehouse External reports COREP Report Interactions - possible future architecture Magnitude Financial Data Financial Data XBRL Database Taxonomies and report templates FINREP Report

10. Agenda Introduction XBRL within Fortis Adoption of XBRL within Dutch banks

11. Round table discussion2 November 2007 • Participants • Fortis • ABN AMRO • Rabobank • ING • SNS REAAL • De Nederlandsche Bank (DNB) • Autoriteit Financiële Markten (AFM) • XBRL Nederland • Nederlandse Vereniging van Banken (NVB) • KPMG • Objectives • Exchange experiences with XBRL • Discuss the potential business case for banks • Explore possibilities for working together

12. Current status of XBRL within banks • General conviction that an overall information/data standard is required, XBRL could be it • Many banks have considered XBRL and have decided to await further development • No actions planned by banks to further explore potential unless mandatory • Banks remain very interested in future national and international developments that could renew interest in XBRL and fuel the business case

13. Master Data Management Commercial banking Reporting • Annual reports commercial clients • Efficiency & speed • Accuracy of risk assessment • Client driven • Invoicing • Total information requirements • Performance&compliance driven • (Sub)Group & functional level • Multi-dimensional • COREP/ FINREP • IFRS/ US GAAP • Tax & statistics + + Banks & Customers Banks (internal) Banks & Supervisors Scenario’s for using XBRL within banks

14. Master Data Management Master Data Management Commercial banking Commercial banking Reporting Reporting • NTP for companies • Credit Taxonomy • Endorsed by software suppliers & accountants • Annual reports commercial clients • Efficiency & speed • Accuracy of risk assessment • Client driven • Invoicing • Total information requirements • Performance&compliance driven • (Sub)Group & functional level • Multi-dimensional • XBRL not powerful for multi-dimensional • Reporting vs. data standard • Mapping master data to taxonomies • DNB can receive XBRL • AFM will provide support • NTP for Dutch GAAP, tax & statistics • COREP/ FINREP • IFRS/ US GAAP • Tax & statistics + + + + Banks & Customers Banks & Customers Banks (internal) Banks (internal) Banks & Supervisors Banks & Supervisors Current status of the scenarios

15. SWOT analysis XBRL from the banking industry’s perspective Strengths • International standard for reporting that is gaining momentum • Endorsed by the Dutch government • Someone is keeping the fire alive Weaknesses • Financing the implementation, who will pay, who will benefit? • Timing: already many costly initiatives that must be implemented • Limited depth of taxonomies, not suitable for multi-dimensional data (storage and retrieval) • National standardization is perceived as only going half-way XBRL Opportunities • Banks are following developments to build-up knowledge • XBRL for operational efficiency when receiving company data • Opportunity for insurers who are at the beginning of their regulatory ‘revolution’ • Local authorities see the benefits Threats • E-Line already fills the gap that XBRL is trying to fill • Master Data is a strategic asset for banks • Difficult to discuss subject at Senior Management level • Not a strong business case • XBRL is not mandatory

16. Conclusions • Less haste, less waste: how to obtain a truly international standard (i.e. taxonomy) for reporting? • As long as it is not mandatory, banks and authorities alike will remain hesitant to adopt it • Business case is only evident on the receiving side of the information chain, but no material advantages are expected soon • Who should take the lead? Everyone is waiting for each other to start • General conclusion: structure and standardization is good thing and XBRL could play an important role

17. Next steps • The participating banks have agreed to meet again in half a year time to discuss these developments and their response • Other departments (not only reporting) should be involved where the business case is more evident: front-office

18. Whose sweet is this anyway?

19. “The train is riding, but not as fast as we thought”