メインコンテンツに移動

Legal clouds hang over RWA-driven netting push

New capital requirements are making it more difficult for banks to trade with counterparties that are not covered by a netting opinion. That is spurring attempts to expand coverage, but can leave banks and lawyers on uncertain ground. By Lukas Becker

alban-caillemer-du-ferrage-hd-1

At first glance, there is not much to unite Azerbaijani oil companies, French covered bond vehicles and the Church of England Pensions Board. Actually, there isn’t much to unite them at second glance either – but what they share is the fact that they have all recently been the subject of a push by banks to obtain netting opinions for individual derivatives users, or classes of user.

This is not

コンテンツを印刷またはコピーできるのは、有料の購読契約を結んでいるユーザー、または法人購読契約の一員であるユーザーのみです。

これらのオプションやその他の購読特典を利用するには、info@risk.net にお問い合わせいただくか、こちらの購読オプションをご覧ください: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe

現在、このコンテンツをコピーすることはできません。詳しくはinfo@risk.netまでお問い合わせください。

Sorry, our subscription options are not loading right now

Please try again later. Get in touch with our customer services team if this issue persists.

New to Risk.net? View our subscription options

無料メンバーシップの内容をお知りになりたいですか?ここをクリック

パスワードを表示
パスワードを非表示にする

Most read articles loading...

You need to sign in to use this feature. If you don’t have a Risk.net account, please register for a trial.

ログイン
You are currently on corporate access.

To use this feature you will need an individual account. If you have one already please sign in.

Sign in.

Alternatively you can request an individual account here