SEC says rating agencies failed to manage conflicts of interest
Reports suggest the SEC will condemn rating agencies for cutting corners to rate profitable subprime-infested structured products
NEW YORK – Credit rating agencies rushed through ratings for in-demand complex structured products, while failing to effectively divide their analysis from the business side, according to Christopher Cox, chairman of US regulator the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
Speaking in a television interview on Bloomberg Television on Monday, Cox revealed the direction of the findings from the SEC probe on rating agency conduct that will be released next week. Government investigators have spent months sifting through millions of pages of internal records and e-mails related to the ratings of subprime mortgage-related securities.
“The public will see that there have been significant problems. There have been instances in which there were people both pitching the business, debating the fees and were involved in the analytical side,” said Cox.
Cox said ratings analysts were deluged with requests that were highly profitable to the agencies and their clients, and “the volume of work taxed the staff in ways that caused them to cut corners, that caused them to deviate from their models”.
The comments follow SEC proposals last month for new rules for rating agencies, and come only days after European commissioner for the internal market Charlie McCreevy commented they would face regulation in the European Union.
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 Risk management
How AI agents can join the dots for risk managers
Citi risk expert outlines agentic AI tool that would pull together structured and unstructured data on trading and lending approvals to create single, unified view of risk
The interplay between liquidity and collateral
The evolution of financing solutions as institutional investors raise and preserve cash
Do banks still need to validate GenAI models?
Regulators carved out GenAI models from new risk guidance. Banks shouldn’t see this as a reason to stop validating them.
FSB warns of ‘circles of risks’ in bank risk transfer deals
Credit lines, portfolio financing and NAV facilities for private credit funds could rebound on banks
Barclays built a risk framework for GenAI from scratch
Eleven teams contribute to assessing generative AI use cases in a system that includes 35 controls
Hopes, fears and ‘mass confusion’: the sudden end of SR 11-7
Banks welcome chance to prioritise model reviews, but fret over future policy changes and AI
Bootcamps and peer pressure: Goldman preps staff for AI future
Isda AGM: Tone from the top is not enough, says chief information officer Marco Argenti
In Iran war, VAR models ease cliff effect on Ice and CME margins
At 105%, EEX – using Span model – saw largest single-day jump compared with those CCPs