EIOPA's answer to question 2975 is inconclusive as it mentions that "Instruments that are fully, unconditionally, and irrevocably guaranteed by non-EU/EEA central governments are classified similarly as their EU/EEA counterparts should be categorised with CIC 2." Such instruments for EU/EEA counterparts are classified with CIC 1, therefore this answer to question 2975 is unclear. Also, for question 1570, EIOPA had previously stated that, regarding a bond issued by Export Development Canada guaranteed by the Canadian government, "an asset that is a full faith and credit obligation of a government should be categorized with CIC 1".

If the instruments meet the condition of CIC 1 e.g. « Bonds issued by public authorities, whether by central governments supra-national government institutions, regional governments,  local authorities or central banks and bonds that are fully, unconditionally and irrevocably guaranteed by the European Central Bank, Member States' central government and central banks, multilateral development banks referred to in paragraph 2 of Article 117 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 or international organisations referred to in Article 118 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, regional governments and local authorities listed in Article 1 of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/2011, where the guarantee meets the requirements set out in Article 215 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/35.” they shall fall under the CIC 1 category. Otherwise, instruments that are fully, unconditionally, and irrevocably guaranteed by non-EU/EEA central governments should be categorised with CIC code 2.

EIOPA revised Q&As 2975 and 1570.