
Morgan Stanley says restructuring will not be required for capital relief
Some protection sellers, for example, claim that the Chinese walls between a bank’s trading and lending businesses aren’t necessarily airtight. They claim that debt capital markets desks may be inclined to make certain client business decisions - such as forcing a restructuring - on the basis that trading desk colleagues’ would then be able to realise in-the-money positions as default swaps are triggered.
Currently, banks typically defend themselves against such accusations by claiming that they only include restructuring as a credit event because of regulatory capital considerations. “If this change goes through, [protection] sellers will become more vocal about getting restructuring dropped completely,” said a New York-based credit derivatives structurer who spoke with RiskNews on condition of anonymity. “But the fact remains that many banks want it included for economic, rather than regulatory capital reasons,” he added.
A member of the credit derivatives research group at a US bank said that he would be “surprised” if Morgan Stanley’s claim about the Basel subcommittee’s recommendation was accurate. “In general, Basel doesn’t move this quickly. In the US, it’s not even clear if the Fed and the OCC would be on board with this change. It’s unlikely that Basel would want to be out of step with Washington,” he said.
Morgan Stanley’s North American credit research group made its claim regarding restructuring in a special report, published yesterday. The group declined to comment further.
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.
You may share this content using our article tools. Printing this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
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. Copying this content is for the sole use of the Authorised User (named subscriber), as outlined in our terms and conditions - https://www.infopro-insight.com/terms-conditions/insight-subscriptions/
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
SEC expected to protect CRT in conflicts of interest rule
Decision could come as early as today; high hopes for credit risk transfer exemption
FRTB managers face hard facts about risk factors
There are ways to reduce the capital charges caused by NMRFs, but they come at a price
SEC official defends delayed dealer registration rule
Regulator says market should be treated like equities, but PTFs warn it will harm market liquidity
New UK clearing rules: same as the old rules?
Clearing experts doubt UK regulation can diverge significantly from Emir and global standards
SEC to delay US Treasury clearing mandate, dealer rule
A final vote on proposed US Treasury market reforms is now expected in early 2024
BoE warns against use of stablecoins in banking
Tokenised payment systems pose compliance and systemic risks, regulator says
Industry unsure of SEC’s new short-selling transparency rule
Requirement aims to provide sufficient transparency while protecting traders from a GameStop-style backlash
EC to adopt NII outlier test within ‘weeks’
New IRRBB rules could come into force in early 2024; industry hoping EBA draft is softened