DOCSLIB.ORG

The UK's Approach to Anti-Money Laundering and Its Impact On

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The UK's Approach to Anti-Money Laundering and Its Impact On The UK’s approach to anti-money laundering and its impact on syndicated lending November 2017 This article considers the key features Key points of the UK anti-money laundering regime and its application to syndicated “Know-your-customer” or “KYC” checks lending activity. address financial institutions’ compliance with sanctions, as well as rules designed to combat RISK-BASED CUSTOMER DUE DILIGENCE corruption, fraud, money laundering and UNDER THE 2017 REGULATIONS terrorist financing. The Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing The UK’s AML regime was amended in June to implement the Fourth Money Laundering and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Directive (2015/849) (MLD4), adding significant Payer) Regulations 2017 (the 2017 volume to compliance teams’ summer reading. Regulations), the foundation of the UK anti-money laundering (AML) regime as The UK AML rules as amended do not deviate applicable to financial institutions, from the cornerstone of the pre-existing regime: financial institutions must develop came into force on 26 June 2017. their own, risk-based response to compliance. More detail on how that might be achieved has The 2017 Regulations repealed and been added in certain limited areas, but the replaced The Money Laundering need for institutions to develop an approach Regulations 2007 (the 2007 that is appropriate to their business remains. Regulations), and implemented The differing policies and requirements of the requirements of MLD4 in the each institution that flow from this risk-based UK. approach can make KYC checks particularly time-consuming in multi-partite transactions The 2017 Regulations require such as syndicated loans, where each finance- banks acting in the course of side party essentially acts on its own account. business in the UK to apply customer due diligence (CDD) measures when they establish a ‘business relationships and refresh the CDD if there is a relationship’ or carry out an ‘occasional change in circumstances. transaction’ with a customer. CDD will therefore be relevant at the inception of a The 2017 Regulations go further than the customer relationship, but the institution’s 2007 Regulations, in that they cite a list of obligations do not stop there. CDD must also factors that may be taken into account in be carried out ‘at appropriate times’ on determining whether additional CDD checks existing customers ‘on a risk sensitive basis. are required on existing customers. These Banks are therefore obliged to conduct include where there is ‘an indication that the ongoing monitoring of their customer identity of the customer, or of the customer’s The UK’s approach to anti-money laundering and its impact on syndicated lending 1 beneficial owner, has changed’ or ‘any will involve obtaining and verifying its name, change in the purpose or intended nature of its registration number, its registered the relevant person’s relationship with the address, and principal place of business. customer’. Accordingly, it is to be anticipated Banks must also take reasonable measures to that banks will build these “red flags” into determine and verify the law to which the their compliance processes. However, the list corporate is subject, its constitution (set out of factors is non-exhaustive and contains a in governing documents) and the names of catch-all: renewed CDD is required should the board of directors and its senior there arise ‘any other matter which might management (subject to an exclusion for affect the relevant person’s assessment of companies listed on a regulated market). the money laundering or terrorist financing risk in relation to the customer’. The documentation required to satisfy those requirements is not, however, further Accordingly, while the 2017 Regulations specified, leaving institutions to consider the provide a little more guidance to banks as to sorts of documentation they will accept in when CDD is required, they do not relieve satisfaction of these requirements and, the onus on banks to carry out CDD on a importantly, whether the circumstances “risk-sensitive” basis. warrant a deeper or shallower investigation. The 2017 Regulations take the same approach The 2017 Regulations contemplate that in to the scope of CDD. certain circumstances, Simplified Due Diligence (SDD) or Enhanced Due Diligence CDD involves identifying, and verifying the (EDD) might be appropriate. The Regulations identity of the customer, as well as assessing set out some instances in which each might and obtaining information on the purpose and be appropriate, and in the case of EDD, some intended nature of the business relationship instances in which the process is mandatory or transaction (the requirement to assess this (for example, when particular countries, was not a feature of the 2007 Regulations). If specified by legislation, are involved). When an unlisted corporate customer is beneficially determining what measures to take, and the owned by another person, CDD must also be extent of those measures, firms are required undertaken in relation to that customer’s to take account of the Joint Guidelines beneficial owner. A beneficial owner is an issued by the European Supervisory owner or controller of more than 25% of the Authorities under MLD4, issued on 26 June customer company’s shares or voting rights or 2017. However the precise nature of these who otherwise exercises control over the processes and the circumstances in which management of the company. each should be adopted depends ultimately on the institution’s own risk assessment. HOW SHOULD A BANK GO ABOUT SATISFYING THESE REQUIREMENTS? JOINT MONEY LAUNDERING STEERING COMMITTEE’S GUIDANCE FOR FINANCIAL The 2017 Regulations include a list of INSTITUTIONS (JMLSG GUIDANCE) information to be obtained in the course of CDD. CDD on a body corporate, for example, The UK’s approach to anti-money laundering and its impact on syndicated lending 2 The JMLSG Guidance is an important FCA FINANCIAL CRIME GUIDE influence on how UK banks approach the The FCA’s Financial Crime Guide (FCA Guide) 2017 Regulations. It aims to ‘promulgate provides an additional point of reference for good practice in countering money FCA regulated firms (distinct from the laundering and to give practical assistance in specific FCA guidance issued earlier this year interpreting the [2017 Regulations]’. The on the treatment of politically exposed JMLSG Guidance is not legally binding but persons under the 2017 Regulations). The FCA provides an indication of the courts’ and the Guide does not contain rules and is non- UK supervisors’ expectations and is therefore binding. In line with the statutory an important influence on the approach of framework, it is designed to be applied in a the regulated sector to AML. It comprises risk-sensitive, proportionate way, without general guidance for the regulated sector on detailed application provisions. This also the formulation of a risk-based approach plus presents difficulties, as firms must refer to specialist guidance for particular products another source of guidance, in particular as and transactions. It was updated earlier this the FCA Guide has not been updated for the year to align its provisions with the 2017 2017 Regulations. A number of stakeholders Regulations. have suggested it would be helpful to amalgamate the JMLSG Guidance and the FCA The JMLSG Guidance ‘sets out what is Guide to provide a single point of reference. expected of firms and their staff in relation to the prevention of money laundering and CDD AND SYNDICATED LENDING terrorist financing but allows them some discretion as to how they apply the As should be apparent from the brief outline requirements…. It is not intended [to] be above, the UK AML regime, in common with applied unthinkingly, as a checklist of steps the preferred approach internationally, to take...’ In essence, it adds an important encourages a risk-sensitive, principles-based layer of colour to the statutory regime, but approach to compliance that requires does not recommend an approach for all thought and judgment in its application. As a situations. result, the rules tend not to be prescriptive. Recent amendments to the UK regime to For example, Chapter 17 of Part II relates to implement MLD4 include more detail on syndicated lending. It contains guidance on compliance with certain aspects, but in the who the “customers” are for CDD purposes, main, any more detailed guidance tends to suggests the aspects of these types of be by way of illustration, and the material is transaction that might present the main principles based. It is also complex, involving money laundering risks and addresses when various sources. CDD should be carried out. It does not, however, distinguish between different types This presents a particular challenge in the of syndicated lending transaction (for context of syndicated lending. example, in terms of types of borrower and/or geographies) and how that might Syndicated lending, by definition involves affect the scope or depth of any CDD. multiple parties and very often has a cross- The UK’s approach to anti-money laundering and its impact on syndicated lending 3 border element. There are a number of “customers” to be assessed: The CDD process for a syndicated loan is also complicated by the fact that such facilities Each lender party may have to carry out CDD are designed to accommodate the on the borrower (or each borrower if there is introduction and departure of parties on both more than one, which is often the case) at the the lender and the borrower side during their outset of the transaction. term. CDD must be considered each time a If the primary syndicate are not party to the new borrower or guarantor accedes to the agreement on signing (for example, where the facility and as participations in the loan are deal is underwritten by a smaller group of traded on the secondary market. lenders), the arranging or underwriting banks will need to carry out CDD on the lenders to Initial CDD (on both lender-side and whom they are selling their initial borrower-side parties) should be dealt with commitments.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Syndicated Loan Market
    Syndicated Loan Market Loan Syndications and Trading Association Bram Smith – [email protected] (Executive Director) Elliot Ganz – [email protected] (General Counsel) LSTA member distribution 125 100 75 50 LSTA member firms 25 0 Institutional Investors Banks Law Firms Service Providers The Loan Syndications and Trading Association is the trade association for the floating rate corporate loan market. The LSTA promotes a fair, orderly, and efficient corporate loan market and provides leadership in advancing the interest of all market participants. The LSTA undertakes a wide variety of activities to foster the development of policies and market practices designed to promote just and equitable marketplace principles and to encourage cooperation and coordination with firms facilitating transactions in loans and related claims. 2 U.S. Corporate loan market is a vital source Of capital for American business U.S. Corporate loan and loan commitments outstanding U.S. Corporate loans outstanding Commits/outstandings ($Bils.) Held by non-banks According to government data, the U.S. syndicated loan market totals roughly $2.5 trillion of committed lines and outstanding loans The committed lines are loans in the form of revolvers – they can be drawn, repaid, drawn, repaid, etc. It is a key source of financing for many large and middle market companies in the U.S. Over one-third of outstanding loans are held by non-banks; half of those are held by CLOs Source: Shared National Credit Review U.S. syndicated lending volume U.S. syndicated lending volume Loan volume($Bils.) Investment grade loans are often undrawn revolvers that backstop commercial paper programs for companies like IBM; they are held almost exclusively by banks.
    [Show full text]
  • NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES VOLATILITY in INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL MARKET ISSUANCE: the ROLE of the FINANCIAL CENTER Marco Cipriani
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES VOLATILITY IN INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL MARKET ISSUANCE: THE ROLE OF THE FINANCIAL CENTER Marco Cipriani Graciela L. Kaminsky Working Paper 12587 http://www.nber.org/papers/w12587 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 October 2006 This paper was in part written while Cipriani was visiting the European Institute in Florence and Kaminsky was a visiting scholar at the Hong Kong Monetary Authority. We thank both institutions for their hospitality. We thank the Center for the Study of Globalization at George Washington University for financial support. We also thank Pablo Vega-Garcia for excellent research assistance. The views expressed here are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Hong Kong Monetary Authority or the National Bureau of Economic Research. © 2006 by Marco Cipriani and Graciela L. Kaminsky. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source. Volatility in International Financial Market Issuance: The Role of the Financial Center Marco Cipriani and Graciela L. Kaminsky NBER Working Paper No. 12587 October 2006 JEL No. F3 ABSTRACT We study the pattern of volatility of gross issuance in international capital markets since 1980. We find several short-lived episodes of high volatility. Over the long run, however, volatility has declined, suggesting that international financial integration has not made financial markets more erratic. We use VAR analysis to examine the determinants of the time-varying pattern of volatility, focusing in particular on the role of financial centers.
    [Show full text]
  • No 946 the Pricing of Carbon Risk in Syndicated Loans: Which Risks Are Priced and Why? by Torsten Ehlers, Frank Packer and Kathrin De Greiff
    BIS Working Papers No 946 The pricing of carbon risk in syndicated loans: which risks are priced and why? by Torsten Ehlers, Frank Packer and Kathrin de Greiff Monetary and Economic Department June 2021 JEL classification: G2, Q01, Q5. Keywords: environmental policy, climate policy risk, transition risk, loan pricing. BIS Working Papers are written by members of the Monetary and Economic Department of the Bank for International Settlements, and from time to time by other economists, and are published by the Bank. The papers are on subjects of topical interest and are technical in character. The views expressed in them are those of their authors and not necessarily the views of the BIS. This publication is available on the BIS website (www.bis.org). © Bank for International Settlements 2021. All rights reserved. Brief excerpts may be reproduced or translated provided the source is stated. ISSN 1020-0959 (print) ISSN 1682-7678 (online) The pricing of carbon risk in syndicated loans: which risks are priced and why?1 Torsten Ehlers, Frank Packer and Kathrin de Greiff 2 Abstract Do banks price the risks of climate policy change? Combining syndicated loan data with carbon intensity data (CO2 emissions relative to revenue) of borrowers across a wide range of industries, we find a significant “carbon premium” since the Paris Agreement. The loan risk premium related to CO2 emission intensity is apparent across industries and broader than that due simply to “stranded assets” in fossil fuel or other carbon-intensive industries. The price of risk, however, appears to be relatively low given the material risks faced by borrowers.
    [Show full text]
  • Corporate Loan Spreads and Economic Activity∗
    Corporate Loan Spreads and Economic Activity∗ Anthony Saunders Alessandro Spina Stern School of Business, New York University Copenhagen Business School Daniel Streitz Sascha Steffen Copenhagen Business School Frankfurt School of Finance & Management Danish Finance Institute May 17, 2021 Abstract We use secondary corporate loan market prices to construct a novel loan market-based credit spread. This measure has additional predictive power across macroeconomic outcomes beyond existing bond credit spreads as well as other commonly used predic- tors in both the U.S. and Europe. Consistent with theoretical predictions, our evidence highlights the joint role of financial intermediary and borrower balance sheet frictions. In particular, loan market borrowers are compositionally different from bond mar- ket borrowers, which helps explain the differential predictive power of loan over bond spreads. Exploiting industry specific loan spreads and alternative weighting schemes further improves our business cycle forecasts. JEL classification: E23, E44, G20 Keywords: Credit spreads, Secondary loan market, Bonds, Credit supply, Business cycle ∗Corresponding author: Sascha Steffen, Frankfurt School of Finance & Management, Adickesallee 32-34. 60322 Frankfurt, Germany. E-mail: s.steff[email protected]. We thank Klaus Adam, Ed Altman, Yakov Amihud, Giovanni Dell’Ariccia, Tobias Berg, Nina Boyarchenko, Jennifer Carpenter, Itay Goldstein, Arpit Gupta, Kose John, Toomas Laaritz, Yuearan Ma, Atif Mian, Emanuel Moench, Holger Mueller, Martin Oehmke, Cecilia Palatore, Carolin
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of Financial Infrastructure an Ambitious Look at How Blockchain Can Reshape Financial Services
    The future of financial infrastructure An ambitious look at how blockchain can reshape financial services An Industry Project of the Financial Services Community | Prepared in collaboration with Deloitte Part of the Future of Financial Services Series • August 2016 Foreword Consistent with the World Economic Forum’s mission of applying a multistakeholder approach to address issues of global impact, creating this report involved extensive outreach and dialogue with the Financial Services Community, Innovation Community, Technology Community, academia and the public sector. The dialogue included numerous interviews and interactive sessions to discuss the insights and opportunities for collaborative action. Sincere thanks to the industry and subject matter experts who contributed unique insights to this report. In particular, the members of this Financial Services Community project’s Steering Committee and Working Group, who are introduced in the Acknowledgements section, played an invaluable role as experts and patient mentors. We are also very grateful to Deloitte Consulting LLP in the US, an entity within the Deloitte1 network, for its generous commitment and support in its capacity as the official professional services adviser to the World Economic Forum for this project. Contact For feedback or questions: R. Jesse McWaters [email protected] +1 (212) 703 6633 1 Deloitte refers to one or more of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Limited, a UK private company limited by guarantee (“DTTL”), its network of member firms, and their related entities. DTTL and each of its member firms are legally separate and independent entities. DTTL (also referred to as “Deloitte Global”) does not provide services to clients. Please see www.deloitte.com/about for a more detailed description of DTTL and its member firms.
    [Show full text]
  • CDD and AML Monitoring in Syndicated Lending
    CDD and AML monitoring in syndicated lending tltsolicitors.com/insights-and-events/insight/cdd-and-aml-monitoring-in-syndicated-lending Part two in a series of six highlighting some of the key legal issues that can arise throughout the life of a syndicated loan facility. In this article we examine how the UK's anti-money laundering regime impacts initial Know Your Customer (KYC) and ongoing Customer Due Diligence (CDD) requirements in the syndicated lending market. We will also look at the practical impact GDPR has had on the CDD process over the last year. Overview – a risk-based approach Lenders will be aware of the risk-based approach adopted in the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017 (the 2017 Regulations) which came into force on 26 June 2017. The difficulty or the benefit depending on your perspective, of a risk-based approach is that no one size fits all. Each firm must carry out its own risk assessment by reference to its customers, products or services, transactions, delivery channels and geographical areas of operation. When considering their policies, lenders can have regard to the (non-exhaustive) Risk Factor Guidelines issued by the European Supervisory Authorities as well as the sector specific guidance from the Joint Money Laundering Steering Group (JMLSG). In addition there is the FCA's Financial Crime Guide which applies to regulated firms. This guide is non- binding and utilises the same risk-based proportionality approach found in the 2017 Regulations. With the regulatory spotlight on this area, it is important to adhere to these regulatory obligations throughout the lifecycle of the customer relationship.
    [Show full text]
  • Not Created Equal: Surveying Investments in Non-Investment Grade U.S
    Winter 2016 Not created equal: Surveying investments in non-investment grade U.S. corporate debt Institutional investors seeking yield and current income opportunities have increased their allocations to non-investment grade corporate bonds and loans over the last several years. It is not hard to make the case for investing in these assets with the 10-year Treasury hovering around 2% and with historically low rates across the yield curve. Non-investment grade U.S. corporate debt has historically produced yields in the 6-10% range or greater. And with default rates below their long-term averages, it is not surprising that investment capital has poured into non-investment grade assets, especially as worries over low interest rates continue to persist. But while delivering much-needed yield with manageable levels of risk, non-investment grade corporate debt is far from a monolithic asset class. There are several categories that investors can choose from, and they are markedly different from each other—both in terms of market dynamics and the underlying risk/return profile of the investments. Furthermore, as the credit cycle has shifted into a period of higher volatility, rising defaults and potentially rising rates, now is a good time for investors to consider the differences among the sub- asset classes of non-investment grade debt and determine which strategies best match their long-term objectives. The many flavors of leveraged lending We can illustrate the different risk/return attributes and the drivers of performance in each of the asset classes by putting the main asset classes of U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Construction Loan Syndication and Participation Issues
    CONSTRUCTION LOAN SYNDICATION AND PARTICIPATION ISSUES American Bar Association Section of Real Property, Probate and Trust Law 13th Annual Spring CLE and Council Meeting April 24-28, 2002 Westin St. Francis Hotel San Francisco, California American Bar Association Annual Meeting August 8-13, 2002 Washington, D.C. Advanced Real Estate Law Course Texas Bar Association July 10-12, 2003 Hill Country Hyatt Regency Hotel San Antonio, Texas Construction Loan Syndication and Participation Issues Table of Contents 1. Making Borrowers and Lenders Comfortable in Construction Loan Syndications and Participations. 1.1 Shift to Syndications in the late 1990's 1.2 Basic Legal Differences 1.3 Basic Practical Differences 2. The Funding Issue 2.1 The Practical Perspective 2.2 Participations 2.3 Dealing with the Defaulting Lender in a Syndication 2.3.1 Administrative Agent Advances 2.3.2 Defaulting Lender Provisions 2.3.2.1 Quick Default Determination 2.3.2.2 Electing Lenders 2.3.2.3 Application of Payments/Indemnification 2.3.2.4 Voting and Ownership Percentage Adjustments 2.3.2.5 Removal and Replacement 2.3.2.6 Extreme Protection 3. The Day-to-Day Management Issue 3.1 The Problem with Multiple Lender Approval 3.2 Lead Lender/Administrative Agent Role/Discretion 3.3 Participant/Syndicate Lender Concerns/Approval Rights 4. The Liability and Removal Issue 4.1 Lead Lender in a Participation 4.2 Administrative Agent in a Syndication 4.3 The 50/50 Deal Problem 4.4 The Administrative Agent is not the Lender's "Deep Pocket" 4.5 Rattling the Gross Negligence/Willful Misconduct Chain 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Evidence from the Global Syndicated Loan Market
    ECB LAMFALUSSY FELLOWSHIP WORKING PAPER SERIES PROGRAMME NO 1066 / JULY 2009 UNIVERSAL BANKS AND CORPORATE CONTR OL EVIDENCE FROM THE GLOBAL SYNDICATED LOAN MARKET by Miguel A. Ferreira and Pedro Matos WORKING PAPER SERIES NO 1066 / JULY 2009 ECB LAMFALUSSY FELLOWSHIP PROGRAMME UNIVERSAL BANKS AND CORPORATE CONTROL EVIDENCE FROM THE GLOBAL SYNDICATED LOAN MARKET 1 by Miguel A. Ferreira 2 and Pedro Matos 3 In 2009 all ECB publications This paper can be downloaded without charge from feature a motif http://www.ecb.europa.eu or from the Social Science Research Network taken from the €200 banknote. electronic library at http://ssrn.com/abstract_id=1427233. 1 Any views expressed are only those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the European Central Bank or the Eurosystem. 2 Faculdade de Economia, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Rua Marques da Fronteira 20, Lisboa, 1099-038, Portugal; e-mail: [email protected] 3 Marshall School of Business, University of Southern California, 3670 Trousdale Parkway, BRI 308, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0804, USA; e-mail: [email protected] Lamfalussy Fellowships This paper has been produced under the ECB Lamfalussy Fellowship programme. This programme was launched in 2003 in the context of the ECB-CFS Research Network on “Capital Markets and Financial Integration in Europe”. It aims at stimulating high-quality research on the structure, integration and performance of the European financial system. The Fellowship programme is named after Baron Alexandre Lamfalussy, the first President of the European Monetary Institute. Mr Lamfalussy is one of the leading central bankers of his time and one of the main supporters of a single capital market within the European Union.
    [Show full text]
  • Syndicated Loan Facilities: Non-Bank Lenders, and the Influence of Credit Derivatives: Current Issues and Opportunities for Borrowers
    The Association of Corporate Treasurers Syndicated loan facilities: non-bank Lenders, and the influence of credit derivatives: current issues and opportunities for Borrowers Part 2 Produced with assistance and sponsorship from London, July 2007 This document may be freely quoted with acknowledgement The Association of Corporate Treasurers The ACT is the international body for finance professionals working in treasury, risk and corporate finance. Through the ACT we come together as practitioners, technical experts and educators in a range of disciplines that underpin the financial security and prosperity of an organisation. The ACT defines and promotes best practice in treasury and makes representations to government, regulators and standard setters. We are also the world’s leading examining body for treasury, providing benchmark qualifications and continuing development through education, training, conferences, and publications, including The Treasurer magazine. Our 3,500 members work widely in companies of all sizes through industry, commerce and professional service firms. For further information visit www.treasurers.org. Guidelines about our approach to policy and technical matters are available at www.treasurers.org/technical/resources/manifestoMay2007.pdf. This briefing note was drafted by Slaughter and May for the ACT’s Policy and Technical Department (e-mail: [email protected]) and commented on by members of the Policy and Technical Committee and others to all of whom thanks are due. NOTE Although the ACT and Slaughter and May have taken all reasonable care in the preparation of this guide, no responsibility is accepted by the ACT or Slaughter and May for any loss, however caused, occasioned to any person by reliance on it.
    [Show full text]
  • The Loan Syndications and Trading Association
    July 22, 2019 Via Electronic Filing Mr. Paul Cellupica, Esquire Deputy Director and Chief Counsel Division of Investment Management U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street, NE Washington, DC 20549 Re: Custody Rule and Trading Controls Relating to Bank Loans Dear Mr. Cellupica: The Loan Syndications and Trading Association (“LSTA”)1 appreciates the invitation from the Staff of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“the “Commission”) for industry engagement on Rule 206(4)-2 under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Custody Rule”) as set forth in your letter of March 12, 2019 (“Letter”). As a threshold matter, the LSTA appreciates and supports the investor protection goals of the Custody Rule. However, recent guidance regarding the Custody Rule relating to instruments that do not settle on a delivery- versus-payment (“DVP”) basis2 has caused confusion, as LSTA’s members understood until relatively recently that investing in bank loans as authorized by clients would constitute “authorized trading” and thus would fall outside the definition of “custody” under the Rule.3 1 The LSTA is a not-for-profit trade association that is made up of a broad and diverse membership involved in the origination, syndication, and trade of commercial loans. The 350 members of the LSTA include commercial banks, investment banks, broker-dealers, hedge funds, mutual funds, insurance companies, fund managers, and other institutional lenders, as well as service providers and vendors. The LSTA undertakes a wide variety of activities to foster the development of policies and market practices designed to promote just and equitable marketplace principles and to encourage cooperation and coordination with firms facilitating transactions in loans.
    [Show full text]
  • Faqs What Is a Syndicated Loan?
    FAQs What is a syndicated loan? A syndicated loan facility may encompass a single loan facility or a variety of different facilities, making up a total facility commitment (the "Facility"). Most commonly, this will constitute a term loan and/or a revolving credit facility, but may also include a swingline facility, standby facility, letter of credit facility, guarantee facility or other similar arrangements. Whilst the underlying instruments may differ, however, the structure of a syndicated loan is always the same - in each case, it involves two or more institutions contracting to provide credit to a particular corporate or group. Under a syndicated loan, the borrower or borrowing group (the "Borrower") will typically appoint one or more entities as "mandated lead arranger(s)" (the "MLA"). The MLAs will then proceed to sell down parts of the loan to other lenders (the "Lenders") in the primary market, whilst often retaining a proportion of the loan itself/themselves. The arrangement is put together under one set of terms and conditions (the "Facility Documentation"), usually following LMA recommended form facility documentation, with each Lender's liability contractually limited to the amount of its participation. As a result, the syndicated loan market facilitates the sharing of credit risk, and it is therefore possible for a large number of Lenders to participate in facilities of various amounts, well in excess of the credit appetite of a single Lender. The syndicates themselves can range in size. Syndicates of only a small number of Lenders are often referred to as "club loans". Following final allocation of commitments in respect of the Facility to the Lenders, the Facility then becomes "free to trade", subject to the terms and conditions contained in the Facility Documentation.
    [Show full text]