On October 21 and 22, 2014, pursuant to the requirements of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (the “Dodd-Frank Act”), the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and various federal...more
More than a decade after its initial proposal,1 the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has at long last adopted a final rule2 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the Securities Act), prohibiting material...more
More than a decade after its initial proposal,1 the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has re-proposed a new rule 2 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the Securities Act), prohibiting material conflicts...more
The Loan Syndications & Trading Association prevailed in its quest to eliminate credit risk retention requirements for open-market CLO managers, in a ruling that has other important implications....more
Possible changes would include loosening qualified asset requirements under risk retention rules, limiting asset-level disclosure under Reg. AB II, and rationalizing capital and liquidity requirements for securitized assets....more
In order to finance ABS interests retained as required by the credit risk retention rules, a securitization sponsor first must wend its way through a thicket of unclear and sometimes apparently contradictory requirements....more
The challenges of complying with both the US rules and the EU rules.
Both United States and European Union laws now require 5 percent credit risk retention for securitization transactions. While the jurisdictional scope...more
2/27/2017
/ Asset-Backed Securities ,
Dodd-Frank ,
EU ,
Hedging ,
Interest Rates ,
Multi-Jurisdictional Litigation ,
Qualified Residential Mortgages (QRB) ,
Risk Retention ,
Securities Act of 1933 ,
Securitization ,
Sponsors
In a complex securitization structure, determining the identity of the sponsor under the credit risk retention rules can be a daunting task.
Introduction
Under the credit risk retention rules adopted pursuant to the...more