Examples of using Structured finance instruments in English and their translations into Polish
{-}
-
Financial
-
Official
-
Colloquial
-
Medicine
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Official/political
-
Programming
-
Computer
Rules on structured finance instruments.
The following Articles 8a and8b are inserted:« Article 8a Information on structured finance instruments.
Article 8 also deals with the concern that ratings for structured finance instruments are not comparable with ratings for conventional debt instruments. .
The ECB welcomes the proposal to increase transparency as regards structured finance instruments 47.
Due to the complexity of structured finance instruments, credit rating agencies have not always succeeded in ensuring a sufficiently high quality of credit ratings issued on such instruments. .
ESMA shall set up a webpage for the publication of the information on structured finance instruments in accordance with paragraph 1.
Recent events have opened up the possibility of identifying the failures of their action and of re-examining their status as certifiers of the subjects of their analysis: companies,the public sector, and structured finance instruments.
When a credit rating agency issues a rating for structured finance instruments it shall ensure either of the following.
Article 8b: this new article requires issuers(or their related third parties)who solicit a rating to engage two credit rating agencies, independent from each other, to issue two independent credit ratings in parallel on the same structured finance instruments.
Some of the issues addressed(conflicts of interests due to the issuer-pays model,disclosure for structured finance instruments) had been identified, but not fully resolved by the existing rules.
The Commission will also reflect on whether investors should be provided with more information about the collateral underlying covered bonds andother structured debt, similar to loan data disclosure requirements on structured finance instruments.
Third, the ECB welcomes initiatives contributing to the enhancement of transparency requirements in the structured finance instruments and covered bonds markets and the harmonisation of disclosure requirements in this area.
Provided they satisfy certain organisational and confidentiality conditions, competing CRAs should be given access, upon request, by the rated entity or a related third party to the information given for the purposes of rating structured finance instruments to the CRAs it hires.
In addition, two ratings from two different rating agencies would be required for complex structured finance instruments and a big shareholder of a credit rating agency should not simultaneously be a big shareholder in another credit rating agency.
In order to regain confidence it would be appropriate to require issuers ortheir related third parties to engage two different credit rating agencies for the provision of credit ratings on structured finance instruments, which could lead to different and competing assessments.
A credit rating agency which, in accordance with paragraph 2, accesses the information referred to in paragraph 1 for more than 10 structured finance instruments within one calendar year shall issue, within the same calendar year, credit ratings in respect of at least 10% of the structured finance instruments in respect of which it accessed the information.
More specifically, the European Parliament supports, amongst others, enhanced disclosure requirements for sovereign ratings,the establishment of a European Rating Index, increased disclosure of information on structured finance instruments and civil liability of credit rating agencies.
In particular, the ECB supports the proposed disclosure requirement of detailed information regarding structured finance instruments(48), namely through a centralised website(49) andthe requirement of two credit ratings for structured finance instruments 50.
This additional information should facilitate that investors, such as UCITS or AIFs, could make their own credit risk assessments and need not systematically and mechanically rely on credit rating agencies to assess the creditworthiness of the instruments, in particular structured finance instruments, in which they invest.
Other amendments aim at addressing the risk of over-reliance on credit ratings by financial market participants as regards structured finance instruments and at increasing the quality of the credit ratings regarding such instruments. .
In cases where the lack of reliable data or the complexity of the structure of a new type, in particular structured finance instruments, raises serious questions as to whether the credit rating agency can produce a credible credit rating, the credit rating agency should refrain from issuing a credit rating or withdraw an existing credit rating.
It seeks to enable investors to distinguish between ratings for structured products and for traditional products(corporate, sovereign)by requiring the use of a different rating category for structured finance instruments or the provision of additional information on their risk characteristics.
Credit rating agencies(CRAs) provide ratings for three different sectors- the public sector,companies and structured finance instruments- and played a significant role in the path that led to the financial crisis, through the assignment of faulty ratings to structured finance instruments, which had to be downgraded on average three to four notches during the crisis.
The requirements to use external credit ratings in legislation, the excessive use of external ratings for internal risk management by investors,the investment strategies directly linked to ratings as well as the insufficient information on structured finance instruments results in overreliance on external credit ratings leading to procyclicality and"cliff" effects9 in capital markets;
The current crisis revealed weaknesses in the methods andmodels used by the agencies to rate structured finance instruments that were financially engineered to give high confidence to investors, and in the agencies' communication with the markets and investors both about the characteristics and limitation of the rating of structured finance instruments and about critical model assumptions.
In order to avoid possible conflicts of interest arising for the CRA under the issuer-pays model, to enhance transparency and to increase competition among CRAs,issuers of structured finance instruments should be required to give access to the information which they have given to the CRA they hired for the purpose of rating structured finance instruments to competing CRAs.
The CRA infringes Article 8a( 2a)( b) where it fails to provide, on a yearly basis in a given calendar year it accessed the information on more than 10 structured finance instruments on a website or websites provided pursuant to Article 8a( 2) but failed to issue credit ratings for at least 10 % of the structured finance instruments for which it has requested accessed to thesuch information on the website provided by the issuer or related third party….
Where a credit rating agency is using an existing credit rating orratings prepared by another credit rating agency with respect to underlying assets or structured finance instruments, it shall not refuse to issue a credit rating of an entity or a financial instrument because a portion of the entity or the financial instrument had been previously rated by another credit rating agency.
In order toavoid possible conflicts of interest arising for the CRA under the issuer-pays model which are particularly virulent regarding the rating of structured finance instruments, to enhance transparency and to increase competition among CRAs, issuers of structured finance instruments or related third parties should be required to give access to the information which they have given to the CRA they hired for the purpose of rating structured finance instruments to competing CRAs.
Where a credit rating agency rates a structured finance instrument, it shall provide in the credit rating information about loss and cash-flow analysis it has performed.