DOCSLIB.ORG

Financing Energy Efficiency Through Mortgage Loans Untapped Opportunities for Lenders and Building Owners

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Financing Energy Efficiency Through Mortgage Loans Untapped Opportunities for Lenders and Building Owners MARKET ANALYSIS FINANCING ENERGY EFFICIENCY THROUGH MORTGAGE LOANS UNTAPPED OPPORTUNITIES FOR LENDERS AND BUILDING OWNERS Imagine closing the deal INTRODUCTION on your next big real For decades, mortgage loans have been the primary means of financing estate investment. The residential and commercial building ownership.1 The lending community’s use of traditional, multi-year loans for both commercial and multifamily properties lighting upgrades, a new alike spread costs over a long period to lessen financial burden for buyers, but high-efficiency HVAC, until recently, building owners who sought a more energy-efficient building and energy-efficient needed to obtain non-traditional financing and perform energy retrofits sepa- rate from a traditional mortgage. The following market analysis examines the façade upgrades will current landscape for building owners and lenders seeking to integrate energy elevate your investment, efficiency and utility savings into building assessments and retrofit plans, and increase the overall to utilize the data to enhance traditional loans. The analysis was performed by the Institute for Market Transformation (IMT) and Lawrence Berkeley National value, and the costs will Laboratory (LBNL), with funding from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). be rolled directly into It examines real properties that successfully utilize existing programs to help your mortgage. This building owners account for energy efficiency during mortgage underwriting, and offers guidelines for the mortgage lending community and building hypothetical may not be owners on how to roll energy efficiency retrofits into traditional mortgages in far from reality soon. an effective and seamless manner. TAKING THE FIRST STEP WITH BUILDING ASSESSMENTS According to the Mortgage Bankers Association, in 2016, lenders closed $491 billion in mortgage loans.2 Despite the many benefits energy efficiency and sustainability yield for the real estate market, energy performance is frequently a distant afterthought when it comes to traditional mortgages. The industry still does not effectively incorporate energy efficiency into most commercial, multifamily, and residential loans. However, this new analysis indicates market leaders are closer than ever to marrying the two while simultaneously reducing property default risks. Currently, only a small number of organized and/or subsidized programs exist to help building owners account for energy efficiency during mortgage underwriting. Fannie Mae runs some of the most well-known green financing programs in the multifamily sector. The Small Business Association (SBA), and smaller community development financial institutions (CDFIs), such as the Community Preservation Corporation (CPC), also run successful initiatives aimed at removing the upfront cost burden of energy efficiency retrofits and rolling them into building acquisition or loan refinancing. The drive to incorporate energy efficiency into the core of property financ- ing, that is—at the mortgage level, can and should be steered by the lending community. This analysis finds that while building owners, architects, technical assessors, and project managers frequently request a building assessment, also known as a property condition assessment (PCA) or a physical needs assess- ment (PNA), prior to acquisition or refinancing, the assessments rarely include FINANCING ENERGY EFFICIENCY THROUGH MORTGAGE LOANS the energy performance characteristics of the building. If efficiency is considered, the results are not used to inform the final loan proceeds. A crucial way for stakeholders to integrate energy efficiency at the mortgage level is to incorporate it as a core component of building assessments. Building owners and lend- ers should seek PCAs that account for energy performance, introduce energy efficiency retrofits during the underwriting process, and actively engage organizations already underwriting energy efficiency. By taking this step, lenders have a unique opportunity to increase mortgage loan portfolios, reduce property default risk, and provide a needed service to building owners. Property owners stand to save on operating costs, increase their net operating income (NOI), and be able to market their green, high-performance building to prospective tenants. THE CURRENT MARKET Energy efficiency and traditional mortgage loans are rarely part of the same dialogue. A host of energy efficiency financing options exist for commercial building owners, including property assessed clean energy (PACE), CDFI offerings, utility incentive In leaving energy programs, energy service companies (ESCOs), and a variety of smaller loan programs. efficiency out Through the Better Buildings Initiative, DOE has made a concentrated effort in recent years to incorporate financing discussions into the broader building efficiency dialogue. of property And there is no shortage of multinational banks offering traditional mortgage loans for assessments commercial, multifamily, and residential properties. The inherent missing link in the mort- and mortgage gage market is consideration of energy efficiency in the mortgage underwriting process. In leaving energy efficiency out of property assessments and mortgage underwriting, underwriting, lenders are missing the opportunity to grow their loan portfolios, reduce risk of default,3 lenders are and lower environmental impact. missing the A 2016 survey conducted by IMT with support from DOE suggested that there is a high level of interest among lenders to include energy efficiency in PCAs. As a follow-up opportunity to this scoping study, and to learn what market leaders are saying about energy effi- to grow their ciency financing, IMT and LBNL asked over 70 companies and individuals if they, or their loan portfolios, company, took energy efficiency into consideration during a PCA, and if they used that information to augment the permissible loan amount. Put simply, we wanted to know if reduce risk of the industry was using energy audits to inform mortgage financing decisions. default, and lower Among those contacted were real estate companies, multinational banks, small environmental banks, green banks, architecture firms, appraisers, and CDFIs. Out of the 73 institutions contacted, only five indicated that they use a building’s energy performance to inform impact. loan value. Those companies or institutions that reported considering energy efficiency at the financing or underwriting level did so only as part of a larger national program or product. Notable existing programs or lending institutions include the following: Fannie Mae Green Rewards, Community Preservation Corporation (CPC), and the Small Business Association’s (SBA) CDC/504 Loan. Each of these programs are profiled in this analysis. While the majority of institutions we contacted do not actively consider energy efficiency during their financing or PCA processes, a notable few expressed intention to update their practices in medium-term corporate planning. Some forward-think - ing real estate corporations are beginning to integrate energy efficiency into their business practices and encourage building owners and tenants to do the same by going back to their lenders with data on expected savings. When further examined, the analysis indicates owners are looking to non-traditional loans to finance energy efficiency projects, and likewise traditional lenders are leaving energy efficiency to third-party institutions. A reduced default risk and higher loan proceeds are two of the multiple opportuni- ties available when lenders take energy efficiency into consideration. The current market offerings leave owner savings on the table, detract from possible loan portfolios, and 2 lead to inefficient buildings. This market failure can be attributed to a lack of synchrony between owners and lenders as well as an overall misunderstanding of energy efficiency financing opportunities. THE TRIED AND TESTED MULTIFAMILY MODEL: FANNIE MAE GREEN REWARDS Perhaps the best known energy and water efficiency financing option available to multi- family communities is the Green Rewards program run by Fannie Mae, one of the leading financial institutions in the U.S. Throughout the first quarter of 2017, Fannie Mae created a $9 billion loan portfolio. Within this portfolio, multifamily properties that target a 20 percent or higher reduction in annual energy or water use are eligible to receive a lower interest rate, increased loan proceeds, and an energy audit. This translates into utility savings for both tenants who pay their own bills, and building owners who pay the mort- gage and/or portions of tenant utility costs. The loans are issued to the market as “Green Mortgage Backed Securities,” creating a new investment vehicle for environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investors. Given a steady increase in program participation over the last two years, these numbers indicate an upward trajectory in multifamily property owners’ awareness of energy efficiency and a growing desire to capitalize on its benefits. Securing a Fannie Mae Green Rewards loan is not complicated, but it does require coordination between multiple actors. Below are two properties that have undergone ASHRAE Level 2 audits as the initial step in their goals to receive financing via the Fannie Mae Green Rewards program.4 Both of these properties entered into multi-million dollar loans financed by Fannie Mae. Table 1 outlines each building’s profile and energy con- sumption prior to completing any energy conservation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Underwriting, Mortgage Lending, and House Prices: 1996-2008
    June 2009 Underwriting, Mortgage Lending, and House Prices: 1996-2008 James A. Wilcox University of California, Berkeley Abstract: Lowering of underwriting standards may have contributed much to the unprecedented recent rise and subsequent fall of mortgage volumes and house prices. Conventional data don’t satisfactorily measure aggregate underwriting standards over the past decade: The easing and then tightening of underwriting, inside and especially outside of banks, was likely much more extensive than they indicate. Given mortgage market developments since the mid 1990s, the method of principal components produces a superior indicator of mortgage underwriting standards. We show that the resulting indicator better fits the variation over time in the laxity and tightness of underwriting. Based on a VAR, we then show how conditions affected underwriting standards. The results also show that our new indicator of underwriting helps account for the behavior of mortgage volumes, house prices, and GDP during the recent boom in mortgage and housing markets. Keywords: Underwriting, standards, mortgages, house prices, LTV. 1 I. Introduction Underwriting standards for residential mortgages (henceforth: underwriting) are now generally regarded as having been unusually lax during the middle of the 2000s. Underwriting then tightened up again during the financial crisis that began in 2007. The laxity of underwriting and its ensuing tightness since the middle of the 1990s likely contributed considerably to the unprecedented rise and subsequent fall of mortgage volumes and house prices. Conventional data do not satisfactorily measure aggregate underwriting over the past decade: Easing of underwriting, inside and especially outside of banks, was likely much more extensive than they indicate.
    [Show full text]
  • Minimum Property Standards for One- and Two- Family Dwellings
    Part 1 Minimum Property Standards for One- and Two- Family Dwellings Part 1 of a Study of the HUD Minimum Property Standards for One- and Two- Family Dwellings and Technical Suitability of Products Programs Prepared for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Policy Development and Research by the National Institute of Building Sciences March 2003 Acknowledgments The principal investigator for this study was William Brenner of the National Institute of Building Sciences. Background research was performed by Building Technology Inc. and Steven Spector. The Institute is grateful for the help and guidance of William Freeborne and David Engel of HUD’s Affordable Housing Research and Technology Division; Elizabeth Cocke, Rick Mendlen, Vincent Tang, and Jason McJury of HUD’s Office of Manufactured Housing Programs; and retired HUD employees Mark Holman, Robert Fuller, Sam Hakopian, and Leslie Breden. The Institute thanks the following reviewers for their thoughtful comments and insights: Liza Bowles, Newport Partners LLC; Ron Burton, BOMA International; David Conover; Rosemarie Geier Grant, State Farm Insurance Companies; Paul Heilstedt, BOCA International; Ron Nickson, National Multi Housing Council; Ed Sutton, National Association of Home Builders; and Gene Zeller, City of Long Beach, California. The National Institute of Building Sciences appreciates the opportunity to study these long-standing HUD programs and hopes the findings and recommendations herein will be helpful in addressing the needs the programs have traditionally served. Disclaimer The study’s findings are solely those of the National Institute of Building Sciences and do not reflect the views of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, the study’s participants, or its reviewers.
    [Show full text]
  • Residential Real Estate Lending, Comptroller's Handbook
    Comptroller’s Handbook A-RRE Safety and Soundness Capital Asset Sensitivity to Other Adequacy Quality Management Earnings Liquidity Market Risk Activities (C) (A) (M) (E) (L) (S) (O) Residential Real Estate Lending June 2015 RESCINDED Updated June 16, 2016, for This document and any attachments are Credit Underwriting Assessment System replaced by version 1.2 of the booklet of the Updated January 6, 2017, for same title published January 2017 Nonaccrual Status Office of the Comptroller of the Currency Washington, DC 20219 Contents Introduction ..............................................................................................................................1 Overview ....................................................................................................................... 1 Mortgage Products .................................................................................................. 3 Home Equity Loan and Line of Credit Products .................................................... 5 Subprime Mortgage ................................................................................................ 7 Reverse Mortgage Loans ...................................................................................... 10 Investor-Owned RRE ............................................................................................ 12 Manufactured Housing.......................................................................................... 12 Affordable Housing .............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • EBRD Mortgage Loan Minimum Standards Manual
    EBRD Mortgage Loan Minimum Standards Manual Updated June 2011 TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..II INTRODUCTION .. .3 1........... LENDING CRITERIA (MS 01) ..4 2............MORTGAGE DOCUMENTATION (MS 02) ..13 3........... MORTGAGE PROCESS AND BUSINESS OPERATIONS (MS 03) ...17 4...........PROPERTY VALUATION (MS 04) ..21 5.......... PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND LEGAL ENVIRONMENT (MS 05) .26 6.......... INSURANCE (MS 06) .29 7.......... CREDIT AND RISK MANAGEMENT STANDARDS (MS 07) 33 8..........DISCLOSURES (MS 08) .42 9..............BASEL II AND III REQUIREMENTS (MS09) .43 10. SECURITY REQUIREMENTS. ......................................................................................50 11. .......MANAGEMENT INFORMATION, IT & ACCOUNT MANAGEMENT (MS 11) ...52 APPENDICES A1. LOAN APPLICATION FORM A2. LOAN APPROVAL OFFER LETTER A3. UNDERSTANDING SECURITISATION A4. INVESTOR / RATING AGENCY SAMPLE REPORT RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITY A5. INVESTOR / RATING AGENCY SAMPLE REPORT COVERED MORTGAGE BOND A6. BIBLIOGRAPHY A7. GLOSSARY A8. LIST OF MINIMUM STANDARDS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This EBRD Mortgage Loan Minimum Standards Manual (the Mortgage Manual ) was originally written on behalf of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) in 2004 by advisors working for Bank of Ireland International Advisory Services. It was updated in 2007. In June 2011, ShoreBank International Ltd. (SBI) updated further the Manual, which was funded by the EBRD - Financial Institutions Business Group. The 2011 List of Minimum Standards ( LMS ) provides guidance for those lending institutions that will receive mortgage financing from EBRD. This was produced based on the EBRD Minimum Standards and Best Practice July 2007 outlined in the Mortgage Loan Minimum Standards Manual. In addition to supporting the primary market, the application of these guidelines should also ensure that the mortgage loans will meet requirements for the possible future issuance of Mortgage Bond ( MB ) or Mortgage- Backed Securities ( MBS ).
    [Show full text]
  • The Subprime Mortgage Crisis: Underwriting Standards, Loan Modifications and Securitization∗
    The Subprime Mortgage Crisis: Underwriting Standards, Loan Modifications and Securitization∗ Laurence Wilse-Samsony February 2010 Abstract This is a survey of some literature on things that have been going on in housing mainly. Because it’s interesting. I highlight some aspects of the bubble, then some causes of the crash. I add some notes on the mortgage finance industry, and a little bit about the role of securitization in the crisis, and in posing hurdles for resolving the crisis. Those familiar with this area will be familiar with what I write about. Those not might find better surveys elsewhere. So you’ve been warned. Keywords: housing; securitization; subprime. ∗Notes on institutional detail written for personal edification. Thanks to Patrick Bolton for helpful and kind comments. [email protected] 2 1. Introduction This paper is a survey of some of the literature on the subprime mortgage crisis. I focus on two aspects of the debate around securitization. First, I consider securitization as a possible mechanism for a decline in underwriting standards. Second, I review some evidence about its role in inhibiting the restructuring of loans through modification. These aspects are related, since creating a more rigid debt structure can facilitate bet- ter risk management and permit the greater extension of credit. However, it can also result in inefficiencies, through externalities on non-contracting parties. This might justify intervention ex post (Bolton and Rosenthal, 2002 [7]). I then consider some of the recent government modification programs and their problems. A concluding sec- tion tentatively suggests topics for research. We begin by outlining the shape of the non-prime mortgage market by way of back- ground, tracing its rapid expansion from the mid-1990s, but in particular its rapid de- velopment since the turn of the century.
    [Show full text]
  • USDA Underwriting Guidelines
    Underwriting Guidelines (USDA Loans) Underwriting Guidelines (USDA Loans) Mortgage Lending Division Version 4.7 – 06/23/21 DOCUMENT OVERVIEW Purpose The following document describes the responsibilities and requirements of the Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC (CMS) Mortgage Lending Division USDA Certified Underwriter when reviewing and underwriting United States Department of Agriculture Office of Rural Development (USDA) mortgage loan applications. Table of Document Overview ......................................................................................................... 2 Contents USDA Underwriting ........................................................................................................ 11 Overview ................................................................................................................. 11 USDA Loan Programs and Compliance ....................................................................... 11 Overview ................................................................................................................. 11 USDA Guarantee Program ........................................................................................ 11 Overview ................................................................................................................. 11 Property Eligibility ................................................................................................... 11 USDA Loan Eligibility ...................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • FDIC QUARTERLY 51 2019 • Volume 1 3 • Number 4
    TRENDS IN MORTGAGE ORIGINATION AND SERVICING: Nonbanks in the Post-Crisis Period Introduction The mortgage market changed notably after the collapse of the U.S. housing market in 2007 and the financial crisis that followed. A substantive share of mortgage origination and servicing, and some of the risk associated with these activities, migrated outside of the bank- ing system. Some risk remains with banks or could be transmitted to banks through other channels, including bank lending to nonbank mortgage lenders and servicers.1 Changing mortgage market dynamics and new risks and uncertainties warrant investigation of poten- tial implications for systemic risk. This article covers trends in the volume of 1–4 family mortgages outstanding, migration of mortgages between market participants, and the drivers of these shifts. Next, the article discusses trends in residential mortgage origination and servicing from 2000 to early 2019 and discusses the landscape of the mortgage industry, key characteristics of nonbank origi- nators and servicers, and the potential risks posed by nonbanks. Last, the article contem- plates the implications that the migration of mortgage activities to nonbanks may have for banks and the financial system. Trends in the Volume of and Mortgage originators and servicers have long competed for market share through innova- Competition for 1–4 Family tions in capital markets, customer service, and funding and business structures, and in Home Mortgage Loans applying technology to make processes more efficient and cost-effective. The composition and the concentration of the dominant market participants have varied with developments in regulation, government intervention and guarantees, primary and secondary mortgage markets, securitization, technological innovation, dynamics in housing markets, financial markets, and the broader economy.
    [Show full text]
  • Thematic Review on Mortgage Underwriting and Origination Practices Peer Review Report
    Thematic Review on Mortgage Underwriting and Origination Practices Peer Review Report 17 March 2011 Table of Contents Foreword .................................................................................................................................... 1 Executive Summary ................................................................................................................... 2 1. Introduction....................................................................................................................... 6 2. Regulatory and supervisory framework............................................................................ 9 2.1 Types of mortgage originators ............................................................................... 9 2.2 Consumer protection features related to residential mortgage loans ................... 10 2.3 Coordination and consistency of underwriting practices and oversight .............. 13 2.4 Policy reforms currently underway...................................................................... 14 3. Mortgage underwriting standards and practices ............................................................. 17 3.1 Effective verification of income and financial information................................. 17 3.2 Reasonable debt service coverage........................................................................ 19 3.3 Realistic qualifying mortgage payments.............................................................. 20 3.4 Appropriate loan-to-value ratios.........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Residential Real Estate Lending, Comptroller's Handbook
    Comptroller’s Handbook A-RRE Safety and Soundness Capital Asset Sensitivity to Other Adequacy Quality Management Earnings Liquidity Market Risk Activities (C) (A) (M) (E) (L) (S) (O) Residential Real Estate Version 1.0, June 2015 Version 1.1, June 16, 2016 Version 1.2, January 6, 2017 Office of the Comptroller of the Currency Washington, DC 20219 Version 1.2 Contents Introduction ..............................................................................................................................1 Overview ....................................................................................................................... 1 Mortgage Products .................................................................................................. 3 Home Equity Loan and Line of Credit Products .................................................... 5 Subprime Mortgage ................................................................................................ 7 Reverse Mortgage Loans ...................................................................................... 10 Investor-Owned RRE ............................................................................................ 12 Manufactured Housing.......................................................................................... 12 Affordable Housing .............................................................................................. 13 RRE Activities and Functions ..................................................................................... 15 RRE Loan
    [Show full text]
  • Subprime Lending
    5 SUBPRIME LENDING CONTENTS Mortgage securitization: “This stuff is so complicated how is anybody going to know?” .............................................................................. Greater access to lending: “A business where we can make some money”............. Subprime lenders in turmoil: “Adverse market conditions”.................................. The regulators: “Oh, I see” ................................................................................... In the early s, subprime lenders such as Household Finance Corp. and thrifts such as Long Beach Savings and Loan made home equity loans, often second mort- gages, to borrowers who had yet to establish credit histories or had troubled financial histories, sometimes reflecting setbacks such as unemployment, divorce, medical emergencies, and the like. Banks might have been unwilling to lend to these borrow- ers, but a subprime lender would if the borrower paid a higher interest rate to offset the extra risk. “No one can debate the need for legitimate non-prime (subprime) lending products,” Gail Burks, president of the Nevada Fair Housing Center, Inc., tes- tified to the FCIC. Interest rates on subprime mortgages, with substantial collateral—the house— weren’t as high as those for car loans, and were much less than credit cards. The ad- vantages of a mortgage over other forms of debt were solidified in with the Tax Reform Act, which barred deducting interest payments on consumer loans but kept the deduction for mortgage interest payments. In the s and into the early s,
    [Show full text]
  • Community Mortgage Residential Mortgage Program & Underwriting
    Community Mortgage Residential Mortgage Program & Underwriting Guidelines Community Mortgage Residential Mortgage Program & Underwriting Guidelines June 11, 2021 Community Mortgage Underwriting Guidelines Updated 06/11/2021 Community Mortgage Residential Mortgage Program & Underwriting Guidelines Community Mortgage Underwriting Guidelines Updated 06/11/2021 Community Mortgage Residential Mortgage Program & Underwriting Guidelines Table of Contents I. Loan Program Mission II. Community Development Financial Institution (“CDFI”) Overview A. CDFI Certification B. CDFI Exemption III. Community Mortgage Residential Mortgage Program Overview IV. Community Mortgage Loan Terms V. Community Mortgage Program Eligibility & Credit Guidelines A. Eligible Transactions B. Eligibility Grids C. Borrower Eligibility D. Property / Occupancy Eligibility E. Vesting Eligibility F. Appraisal Eligibility G. Credit Eligibility H. Verification of Asset Eligibility I. Homeowner Education VI. Appendix A. Appraisal Policy Community Mortgage Underwriting Guidelines Updated 06/11/2021 Community Mortgage Residential Mortgage Program & Underwriting Guidelines I. Loan Program Mission Empowering the dreams of diverse homeowners and underserved communities by providing non-traditional access to prime capital for underbanked borrowers and communities. II. Community Development Financial Institution (“CDFI”) Overview A. CDFI Certification Notice of Certification dated April 20, 2018, Certification Number 171CE014651 issued by the U.S. Department of Treasury certifying The Change Company, LLC and Change Home Mortgage, each as a CDFI as defined in 12 C.F.R. 1805.104. B. CDFI Exemption Under Applicable Law, a loan originated by a CDFI is exempt from the Ability-to-Repay (“ATR”) requirements set forth in Section 1411 of the Dodd-Frank Act and Regulation Z. So long as originator is certified as a CDFI when it originates the loan, the exemption to ATR is effective and unconditional.
    [Show full text]
  • The Real Estate Law Review
    The Real Estate Law Review Second Edition Editor David Waterfield Law Business Research The Real Estate Law Review Reproduced with permission from Law Business Research Ltd. This article was first published in The Real Estate Law Review, 2nd edition (published in April 2013 – editor David Waterfield). For further information please email [email protected] The Real Estate Law Review Second Edition Editor David Waterfield Law Business Research Ltd THE LAW REVIews THE MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS REVIew THE RESTRUCTURING REVIew THE PRIVate COmpetITION ENFORCEMENT REVIew THE DISPUTE RESOLUTION REVIew THE EMPLOYMENT Law REVIew THE PUBLIC COmpetITION ENFORCEMENT REVIew THE BANKING REGUlatION REVIew THE INTERNatIONAL ARBItratION REVIew THE MERGER CONTROL REVIew THE TECHNOLOGY, MEDIA AND TELECOMMUNICatIONS REVIew THE INward INVESTMENT AND INTERNatIONAL TAXatION REVIew THE CORPOrate GOVERNANCE REVIew THE CORPOrate IMMIGratION REVIew THE INTERNatIONAL INVESTIGatIONS REVIew THE PROJECts AND CONSTRUCTION REVIew THE INTERNatIONAL CAPItal MARKets REVIew THE REAL Estate Law REVIew THE PRIVate EQUITY REVIew THE ENERGY REGUlatION AND MARKets REVIew THE INTELLECTUAL PROpertY REVIew THE ASSET MANAGEMENT REVIew THE PRIVATE WEALTH AND PRIVATE CLIENT REVIEW THE MINING law REVIew THE EXECUTIVE REMUNeratION REVIew THE ANTi-BRIBERY AND ANTi-CORRUPTION REVIew THE Cartels AND LENIENCY REVIew THE TAX DISPUTES AND LITIGatION REVIew THE LIFE SCIENCES law REVIew www.TheLawReviews.co.uk PUBLISHER Gideon Roberton BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT MANAGERS Adam Sargent, Nick Barette MARKETING MANAGERS Katherine Jablonowska, Thomas Lee, James Spearing PUBLISHING ASSIstaNT Lucy Brewer PRODUCTION COORDINATOR Lydia Gerges HEAD OF EDITORIAL PRODUCTION Adam Myers PRODUCTION EDITOR Robbie Kelly SUBEDITOR Jonathan Allen EDITOR-in-CHIEF Callum Campbell MANAGING DIRECTOR Richard Davey Published in the United Kingdom by Law Business Research Ltd, London 87 Lancaster Road, London, W11 1QQ, UK © 2013 Law Business Research Ltd www.TheLawReviews.co.uk No photocopying: copyright licences do not apply.
    [Show full text]