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
Top 10 op risks: Resilience put to the test in 2026
Firms reinforce first line, ‘nth’-party diligence, scenario analysis and vendor exit plans
Vida portfolio solutions on J.P. Morgan Markets
J.P. Morgan’s Vida portfolio solutions are being applied across financing and portfolio management, reflecting a shift towards more scalable, integrated investment infrastructure
Top 10 operational risks for 2026
Industry shares intel on biggest collective threats, as well as remedies and loss gauges
Top 10 op risks 2026: Cyber stays top, AI risk enters at fifth
Third-party and outsourcing risk climbs to third; fraud and fincrime edge out geopolitical risk
Deutsche Bank CRO’s year of living dangerously
Marcus Chromik explains his approach to geopolitical risk, operational resilience and AI adoption
EU can handle energy price pressure – it’s been here before
Reforms made after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine have made region more resilient to energy shocks, officials say
Rising reliance on internal auditors spooks regulators and industry
Risk managers warn US is substituting supervisors with auditors; could compromise independence
What futures and options say about the cost of war
Spot prices reveal major disruption, futures indicate this will pass, options imply ongoing instability