Agencies agree fee reform
Standard & Poor's, Moody's and Fitch have agreed fee reforms at the behest of New York State attorney-general Andrew Cuomo.
The changes affect the loan data required for rating residential mortgage backed security (RMBS) asset pools, as well as the fee structure charged by the rating agencies.
Previously, rating agencies were not paid for initial reviews of portfolios or for negotiations related to the structuring for those pools. As a result of extended discussions with Cuomo, the agencies have now agreed a "fee for service" structure, whereby they receive a fee for initial reviews, regardless of whether they are ultimately selected to rate the transaction.
In addition, rating agencies will now disclose information to any interested party about deals submitted for their initial review before a final rating is agreed.
There will also be a change in the amount of assurance required by the agencies to rate RMBS, with an as yet undefined "series of representation and warranties" required from investment banks on the underlying loan pool backing transactions.
"Moody's has been a strong supporter of increased disclosure and stronger due diligence in the US mortgage market, and we are pleased that, with this agreement, these measures will be adopted even more broadly across the industry," said Michael Madelain, chief operating officer of Moody's in a statement released by Cuomo's office on June 5.
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
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
Fed to move tailored-capital goalposts soon, says Bowman
Banks hope agencies will index triggers for harsher capital rules to economic growth
Will SEC reporting proposal supercharge alt data providers?
Move that would allow companies to opt out of quarterly reporting disclosures welcomed
EU lawmaker calls for review of Luxembourg’s cross-border rules
Grand Duchy accused of side-stepping rules aimed at prising away banking business from London
Un-American or un-JPM? Surcharge rethink divides G-Sibs
Some see sense in rethink to funding indicator, others call for a backtrack
Bank of England softens tone on CCP cross-product margining
Breeden supports margin efficiencies to encourage more repo clearing, but still warns on leverage
UK securitisation reforms trump EU’s, say market players
Originators and investors could find UK securitised assets easier to deal with after tandem reviews