CESR task force presents plan for rating agencies review
CESR has set out its plan for meeting the European Commission’s request to look at credit rating agencies’ role
BRUSSELS – The Committee of European Securities Regulators (CESR) has released the timetable for its review into the role of credit rating agencies and the future of their self-regulation, at the request of the European Commission.
The Commission requested CESR look specifically at certain areas during its investigation. These include human resources allocation for rating and monitoring, regular monitoring and prompt rating, the transparency of rating methodologies, and potentially crucial conflicts of interest in the remuneration structures of the agencies.
In preparation of its January 2008 consultation paper, CESR is co-operating with the US Securities and Exchanges Commission (SEC) over the role of rating agencies in the rating of structured products, and with the Committee of European Banking Supervisors (CEBS) over their role within the Basel II framework.
The investigation also involves co-operation with the European Securities Markets Experts Group (ESME), the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO), and the Committee on the Global Financial System (CGFS), drawing together conclusions to advise the Commission on whether self-regulation or formalised EU regulation is necessary.
The task force has held four separate hearings with the rating agencies to gather information on their codes of conduct, views on the Commission’s request in relation to their handling of the subprime crisis, and how they intend to address shortcomings within their role in the market. Hearings will be held with other market participants when the paper has been drawn.
The final report is due in May 2008.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Esma denies need for new competitiveness mandate
MEP wants explicit requirement; Esma official says it’s already covered in existing rulebook
US regulators cut FRTB’s IMA capital hit by 59%, Isda finds
Trade body pushes for further changes to cross-product netting, default risk charge
US FRTB glitch could spit out negative capital charges
Effort to recognise risk diversification between IMA and standardised approach went too far
Euronext, LCH back Esma as exchange super-regulator
National oversight hurts Europe, exchange officials say – but some are not ready to accept a single watchdog
Double, but no trouble? CVA capital hit may lack clout
Industry opinion mixed around Basel III endgame derivatives charge
Amid debanking drama, banks try to say ‘no’, safely
A basic risk management tool – the ability to turn a customer away – has become a political football
Erba myth: will US banks choose new capital measure?
B3E gives US banks a dilemma – adopt expanded risk-based approach, or a new standardised alternative
Illiquid assets pricing still needs expert judgement, say banks
EU regulators want more transparency in valuations, but some asset prices remain elusive