Securitization Risk Management Guideline

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Securitization Risk Management Guideline DRAFT SECURITIZATION RISK MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE April 2009 Securitization Risk Management Guideline 1 Autorité des marchés financiers April 2009March 2019 Mois et année DRAFT DRAFT SECURITIZATION RISK MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE Initial publication: April 2009 Updated: March 2019 Securitization Risk Management Guideline 2 Autorité des marchés financiers April 2009March 2019 DRAFT TABLE OF CONTENTS Preamble ............................................................................................................. 4 Scope ............................................................................................................. 6 Coming into effect and updating ............................................................................. 7 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 8 1. Securitization risk management ....................................................................... 8 1.1 Securitization risk management .................................................................. 8 2. Risk management related to classic and synthetic securitizations ............. 12 2.1 Securitization process management ......................................................... 12 2.2 Scenario analyses and stress tests ........................................................... 19 3. Process of developing criteria for simple, transparent and comparable (STC) securitizations .................................................................................................. 20 3.1 Eligibility criteria for long-term STC securitizations .................................... 21 3.2 Eligibility criteria for short-term STC securitizations ................................... 32 4. Supervision of sound and prudent management practices .......................... 45 Appendix 1 Possible securitization roles assumed by financial institutions .. 47 Securitization Risk Management Guideline 3 Autorité des marchés financiers April 2009March 2019 DRAFT Preamble The Autorité des marchés financiers (“AMF") establishes guidelines”) has established this guideline setting out its expectations with respect to financial institutions’ legal requirement to follow sound and prudent management practices. These guidelinesThis guideline therefore covercovers the execution, interpretation and application of this requirement. In setting out its expectations, the AMF favours a principles-based approach rather than a specific rules-based approach. As such, the guidelines provide financial institutions with the necessary latitude to determine the requisite strategies, policies and procedures for the implementation of such management principles and to apply sound practices based on the nature, size and complexity of their activities as well as their risk profile. In this respect, a guideline illustrates how to comply with the principles set out therein. AMF Note: The AMF considers governance, integrated risk management and compliance (GRC) as the foundation stones for sound and prudent management of financial institutions and, consequently, as the basis for the prudential framework provided by the AMF. This guideline is part of this approach and sets out the AMF'sAMF’s expectations regarding the sound and prudent securitization risk management practices. Introduction Securitization is a technique used by financial institutions in particular to manage supplemental cash flows. This technique, which consists in transforming generally illiquid assets into securities that can be traded in the capital markets (asset-backed securities (ABS)), necessitates a relatively detailed execution process involving multiple parties. Appendix 1 explains the concept of securitization, the roles a financial institution may assume as part of a securitization, and the risks arising from securitization. Appendix 2 presents a securitization process diagram. An English-French glossary of securitization terms is provided in Appendix 3. Securitization exposes a financial institution to several risks, including credit, market, liquidity, operational and legal risk. In view of these numerous risks, securitization can be highly complex. Inadequate management or a misunderstanding of securitization may therefore threaten an institution's strength and, ultimately, tarnish its reputation. The core principles and guidance published by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision ("Basel Committee") clearly explain the need for financial institutions to manage their risks in a sound manner. Regulators are encouraged to provide financial institutions with the framework to do so. The AMF supports the principles and guidance published by the Basel Committee that foster sound and prudent management practices. Pursuant to the authority1 conferred upon it under the Act respecting financial services cooperatives ("FSCA"), the AMF is 1 An Act respecting financial services cooperatives, R.S.Q. c. C-67.3, s. 565. Securitization Risk Management Guideline 4 Autorité des marchés financiers April 2009March 2019 DRAFT issuing this guideline to explicitly inform financial services cooperatives of its expectations regarding securitization risk management. This guideline sets out the principles of securitization risk governance and the practices for managing these risks. The AMF expects effective governance to underpin the management of securitization risks. To that end, financial institutions should implement an adequate risk management framework and a risk-adjusted, performance-based compensation system. The AMF also expects financial institutions to adopt sound and prudent securitization risk management practices throughout the securitization process. Securitization Risk Management Guideline 5 Autorité des marchés financiers April 2009March 2019 DRAFT Scope This Securitization Risk Management Guideline is intended for financial services cooperatives, which are governed by the FSCA. More specifically, it applies to financial services cooperatives that are members of a federation, to a federation, to a financial services cooperative that acts as treasurer of a group, as well as to a subsidiary of a federation that acts as manager of the assets of a group.2insurers of persons3 (life and health), damage insurers, portfolio management companies controlled by an insurer, as well as trust and savings companies, which are governed by the following Acts: • An Act respecting insurance, CQLR, c. A-32; • An Act respecting financial services cooperatives, CQLR, c. 67.3; • An Act respecting trust companies and savings companies, CQLR, c. S-29.01. This guideline applies to financial institutions operating independently as well as to financial institutions operating as members of a financial group.4 In the case of financial services cooperatives and mutual insurance associations5 that are members of a federation, the standards or policies adopted by the federationSecuritization risk management standards or policies adopted by a federation for its members should be consistent with—and even converge on—the principles of sound and prudent management prescribed by law and detailed in this guideline. The generic terms "“financial institution"” and "“institution"” refer to all financial entities covered by the scope of this guideline.6 2 For purposes of this guideline, a "group" is formed by a federation, its member credit unions and a security fund, as well as any other legal person or partnership controlled by one of the credit unions or by the federation (Act respecting financial services cooperatives, R.S.Q. c. C-67.3, s. 3). 3 Like the financial institutions that were already subject to the guideline before March 31, 2019, the AMF expects the newly-reporting financial institutions to modulate the implementation of the principles according to the importance of the Securitization activities within their institution. 4 For purposes of this guideline, “financial group” refers to any group of legal persons composed of a parent company (financial institution or holding company) and legal persons affiliated therewith. 5 Mutual insurance associations are damage insurers governed by the scope of this guideline. 6 The provisions of this guideline apply to any securitization, whether or not it is already regulated under a framework, such as the securitization of mortgages insured under the National Housing Act, R.S.C. (1985), chapter N-11. Securitization Risk Management Guideline 6 Autorité des marchés financiers April 2009March 2019 DRAFT Coming into effect and updating This securitization risk management guideline will come into effect as ofThe Securitization Risk Management Guideline has been effective since April 1, 2009. With respect to the legal requirement of institutions to follow sound and prudent management practices, the AMF expects each institution to developadopt the principles of this guideline by developing strategies, policies and procedures based on its nature, size, complexity and risk profile, to ensure the adoption of the principles underlying this guideline by and that they have implemented them since April 1, 2011. Where an institution has already implemented such a framework, the AMF may verify whether it enables the institution to satisfy the requirements prescribed by law. In order to reflect the evolution of sound and prudent management principles established by international bodies and in order to be consistent with the guidelines on governance and integrated risk management, the Securitization Risk Management Guideline has been revised as of March
Recommended publications
  • Analysis of Securitized Asset Liquidity June 2017 an He and Bruce Mizrach1
    Analysis of Securitized Asset Liquidity June 2017 An He and Bruce Mizrach1 1. Introduction This research note extends our prior analysis2 of corporate bond liquidity to the structured products markets. We analyze data from the TRACE3 system, which began collecting secondary market trading activity on structured products in 2011. We explore two general categories of structured products: (1) real estate securities, including mortgage-backed securities in residential housing (MBS) and commercial building (CMBS), collateralized mortgage products (CMO) and to-be-announced forward mortgages (TBA); and (2) asset-backed securities (ABS) in credit cards, autos, student loans and other miscellaneous categories. Consistent with others,4 we find that the new issue market for securitized assets decreased sharply after the financial crisis and has not yet rebounded to pre-crisis levels. Issuance is below 2007 levels in CMBS, CMOs and ABS. MBS issuance had recovered by 2012 but has declined over the last four years. By contrast, 2016 issuance in the corporate bond market was at a record high for the fifth consecutive year, exceeding $1.5 trillion. Consistent with the new issue volume decline, the median age of securities being traded in non-agency CMO are more than ten years old. In student loans, the average security is over seven years old. Over the last four years, secondary market trading volumes in CMOs and TBA are down from 14 to 27%. Overall ABS volumes are down 16%. Student loan and other miscellaneous ABS declines balance increases in automobiles and credit cards. By contrast, daily trading volume in the most active corporate bonds is up nearly 28%.
    [Show full text]
  • Asset Securitization
    L-Sec Comptroller of the Currency Administrator of National Banks Asset Securitization Comptroller’s Handbook November 1997 L Liquidity and Funds Management Asset Securitization Table of Contents Introduction 1 Background 1 Definition 2 A Brief History 2 Market Evolution 3 Benefits of Securitization 4 Securitization Process 6 Basic Structures of Asset-Backed Securities 6 Parties to the Transaction 7 Structuring the Transaction 12 Segregating the Assets 13 Creating Securitization Vehicles 15 Providing Credit Enhancement 19 Issuing Interests in the Asset Pool 23 The Mechanics of Cash Flow 25 Cash Flow Allocations 25 Risk Management 30 Impact of Securitization on Bank Issuers 30 Process Management 30 Risks and Controls 33 Reputation Risk 34 Strategic Risk 35 Credit Risk 37 Transaction Risk 43 Liquidity Risk 47 Compliance Risk 49 Other Issues 49 Risk-Based Capital 56 Comptroller’s Handbook i Asset Securitization Examination Objectives 61 Examination Procedures 62 Overview 62 Management Oversight 64 Risk Management 68 Management Information Systems 71 Accounting and Risk-Based Capital 73 Functions 77 Originations 77 Servicing 80 Other Roles 83 Overall Conclusions 86 References 89 ii Asset Securitization Introduction Background Asset securitization is helping to shape the future of traditional commercial banking. By using the securities markets to fund portions of the loan portfolio, banks can allocate capital more efficiently, access diverse and cost- effective funding sources, and better manage business risks. But securitization markets offer challenges as well as opportunity. Indeed, the successes of nonbank securitizers are forcing banks to adopt some of their practices. Competition from commercial paper underwriters and captive finance companies has taken a toll on banks’ market share and profitability in the prime credit and consumer loan businesses.
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing Securities Lending Risk-Return Performance in a Portfolio Context
    Asset-Based Lending Assessing Securities Lending Risk-Return Performance in a Portfolio Context by Ben Atkins and Glenn Horner hile many institutional investors embrace paying a rebate rate on this cash collateral.1 Demand securities lending as an attractive tool to to borrow securities usually causes the rebate rate to enhance portfolio returns, others remain wary. fall below the risk-free rate (the line). For some secu- WMany perceive securities lending to be an eso- rities, this spread is quite substantial; the demand teric distraction—a tool limited by risky, immaterial spread represents the “specialness” of a security to returns. State Street addresses the latter view by borrowers. Some lenders are content with the grounding investors’ performance analysis on risk- demand spread; they simply invest the cash collateral adjusted returns. The data lead to two key conclu- in Treasury repo. Most lenders, however, seek addi- sions for investment managers and plan sponsors: tional returns by investing the collateral in high-qual- 1. Although securities lending returns are relative- ity money market instruments (collateral reinvest- ly small, superior risk-adjusted performance ment).2 In this way, they capture reinvestment highlights its value. returns by assuming a limited degree of credit and 2. Managers may optimize their lending program through a broader framework that integrates the Figure 1 risk-return performance of the underlying Disaggregation of Securities Lending Returns investments. Increasingly, investors focus on minimizing Reinvestment return “frictional” losses due to management fees, commis- sions, and inefficient trading. A well-structured lend- Reinvestment spread ing program represents an attractive tool to offset Risk-free rate some of these losses.
    [Show full text]
  • Asset Pricing with Liquidity Risk∗
    Asset Pricing with Liquidity Risk∗ Viral V. Acharyay and Lasse Heje Pedersenz First Version: July 10, 2000 Current Version: September 24, 2004 Abstract This paper solves explicitly an equilibrium asset pricing model with liq- uidity risk — the risk arising from unpredictable changes in liquidity over time. In our liquidity-adjusted capital asset pricing model, a security's re- quired return depends on its expected liquidity as well as on the covariances of its own return and liquidity with market return and market liquidity. In addition, the model shows how a negative shock to a security's liquidity, if it is persistent, results in low contemporaneous returns and high predicted future returns. The model provides a simple, unified framework for under- standing the various channels through which liquidity risk may affect asset prices. Our empirical results shed light on the total and relative economic significance of these channels. ∗We are grateful for conversations with Andrew Ang, Joseph Chen, Sergei Davydenko, Fran- cisco Gomes, Joel Hasbrouck, Andrew Jackson, Tim Johnson, Martin Lettau, Anthony Lynch, Stefan Nagel, Lubos Pastor, Tano Santos, Dimitri Vayanos, Luis Viceira, Jeff Wurgler, and semi- nar participants at London Business School, London School of Economics, New York University, the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) Summer Institute 2002, the Five Star Confer- ence 2002, Western Finance Association Meetings 2003, and the Texas Finance Festival 2004. We are especially indebted to Yakov Amihud and to an anonymous referee for help and many valuable suggestions. All errors remain our own. yAcharya is at London Business School and is a Research Affiliate of the Centre for Eco- nomic Policy Research (CEPR).
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding and Managing Risk in Public Investing
    CDIAC/CMTA Advanced Public Funds Investing Workshop Session Three: Understanding and Managing Risk in Public Investing Presented by: Sarah Meacham, Managing Director January 15, 2020 PFM Asset 601 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 4500 Management LLC Los Angeles, CA 90017 www.pfm.com 213.489.4075 © PFM 1 TYPES OF FIXED INCOME INVESTMENT RISK Inflation Interest rate Topics Liquidity Reinvestment Credit HOW TO MANAGE AND MITIGATE RISK Investment policy development Diversification Discipline to long-term strategy Performance measurement © PFM 2 “Risk is inherent throughout the investment process. There is investment risk associated with any investment activity and opportunity risk related to inactivity.” ~Local Agency Investment Guidelines, CDIAC January 1, 2019 © PFM 3 Types of Fixed Income Investment Risk © PFM 4 Types of Fixed Income Investment Risk Inflation Risk Liquidity Risk Credit Risk Loss of purchasing Inability to sell portfolio Risk of default or power over time as a holdings at a competitive decline in security value result of inflation price due to issuer’s financial strength Reinvestment Risk Interest Rate Risk The risk that a security’s Variability of return/price cash flow will be related to changes in reinvested at a lower interest rates rate of return © PFM 5 Inflation Risk © PFM 6 Inflation (Purchasing Power) Risk Loss of purchasing power over time as a result of inflation Real interest rate is after inflation; nominal is before inflation • Real = nominal – inflation • Nominal = real + inflation • Inflation = nominal
    [Show full text]
  • Liquidity Risk Management
    BASEL III FRAMEWORK Liquidity Risk Management Rules and Guidelines November 2018 Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................................................................... 2 LIST OF ACRONYMS ......................................................................................................................................... 4 PART I – LIQUIDITY RISK MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK ............................................................... 5 1. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................ 5 2. SCOPE OF APPLICATION ...................................................................................................................................... 5 3. STATEMENT OF OBJECTIVES ................................................................................................................................ 5 4. ONGOING LIQUIDITY MANAGEMENT ................................................................................................................... 5 5. MEASURING AND MONITORING LIQUIDITY REQUIREMENTS ............................................................................. 7 6. MANAGING MARKET ACCESS .............................................................................................................................. 9 7. CONTINGENCY PLANNING ...................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • IBOR to RFR Transition
    Changing the world’s most important number IBOR to RFR transition March 2021 home.kpmg/in 2 Foreword For more than three decades, London Interbank all 35 LIBOR settings at once, giving firms a Offered Rate (‘LIBOR’) has been integrated in clear set of deadlines across all currencies and financial markets, serving as the benchmark tenors. FCA issued that all seven tenors for for borrowings, loans and derivative contracts. both euro and Swiss franc LIBOR, overnight, LIBOR has hence been called the ‘world’s one-week, two-month and 12-month sterling most important number’ as it is hardwired LIBOR, spot next, one-week, two-month and in all financial activities, such as treasury, 12-month yen LIBOR and one-week and two- risk management, accounting including month U.S. dollar LIBOR will permanently hedge accounting, valuation and commercial cease immediately after 31 December 2021. contracts. Following the global financial crisis, Overnight and 12-month U.S. dollar LIBOR regulators discovered that the banks entrusted settings publication will cease immediately after to set the rates underpinning hundreds of 30 June 2023. trillions of dollars of financial assets had been In response, the regulators and market manipulating them to their advantage, raising participants across the globe have been questions about the future sustainability of developing new benchmarks to replace Libor LIBOR. Regulators globally have signaled clearly by the end of 2021. With 31 December 2021, that institutions should transition away from in plain sight, and FCA announcement on the Interbank Offered Rate (IBOR) to alternative LIBOR cessation, preparation for the transition overnight risk-free rates (RFRs).
    [Show full text]
  • Knowledge Work on Securitization in the People's Republic of China
    ADB EAST ASIA WORKING PAPER SERIES ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City 1550 Metro Manila, Philippines www.adb.org People’s Republic of China Resident Mission 17th Floor, China World Tower (Guomao III) 1 Jian Guo Men Wai Avenue Chaoyang District, Beijing 100004 People’s Republic of China www.adb.org/prc ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK cn.adb.org EARD Working Paper Series Knowledge Work on Securitization in the People’s Republic of China Bruce Gaitskell and Jurgen Conrad Bruce Gaitskell is a staff consultant at the Asian Development Bank. No. 3 | July 2016 Jurgen Conrad is head of economics unit of the People’s Republic of China Resident Mission, Asian Development Bank. ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK Asian Development Bank 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City 1550 Metro Manila, Philippines www.adb.org © 2016 by Asian Development Bank July 2016 Publication Stock No. WPS168307-2 The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) or its Board of Governors or the governments they represent. ADB does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this publication and accepts no responsibility for any consequence of their use. By making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area, or by using the term “country” in this document, ADB does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area. Note: In this publication, “$” refers to US dollars. The EARD Working Paper Series is a forum for stimulating discussion and eliciting feedback on ongoing and recently completed research and policy studies undertaken by the East Asia Department of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) staff, consultants, or resource persons.
    [Show full text]
  • Risk-Based Capital Rules
    Financial Institution Letter FIL-69-2008 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation July 29, 2008 550 17th Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20429-9990 RISK-BASED CAPITAL RULES Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Risk-Based Capital Standards: Standardized Framework Summary: The federal bank and thrift regulatory agencies have jointly issued the attached Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPR) and are seeking comment on the domestic application of the Basel II standardized framework for all domestic banks, bank holding companies, and savings associations that are not subject to the Basel II advanced approaches rule. The FDIC will accept comments on the NPR through October 27, 2008. Distribution: FDIC-Supervised Banks (Commercial and Savings) Highlights: Suggested Routing: Chief Executive Officer In the attached NPR, the agencies propose to Chief Financial Officer implement a new optional framework for calculating Chief Accounting Officer risk-based capital based on the Basel II Standardized Related Topics: Approach to credit risk and the Basel II Basic Risk-Based Capital Rules Indicator Approach to operational risk. The proposal 12 CFR Part 325 would: Basel II Attachment: • Expand the use of credit ratings for • “Key Aspects of the Proposed Rule on Risk- determining risk weights, Based Capital Guidelines: Capital Adequacy Guidelines; Standardized Framework” • Base risk weights for residential mortgages • Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Risk-Based on loan-to-value ratios, Capital Guidelines; Capital Adequacy Guidelines; Standardized Framework • Expand the types of financial collateral and guarantees available to banks to offset credit Contact: risk, Nancy Hunt, Senior Policy Analyst, at [email protected] or (202) 898-6643 • Offer more risk-sensitive approaches for Ryan D.
    [Show full text]
  • Property/Liability Insurance Risk Management and Securitization
    PROPERTY/LIABILITY INSURANCE RISK MANAGEMENT AND SECURITIZATION Biography Trent R. Vaughn, FCAS, MAAA, is Vice President of Actuarial/Pricing at GRE Insurance Group in Keene, NH. Mr. Vaughn is a 1990 graduate of Central College in Pella, Iowa. He is also the author of a recent Proceedings paper and has been a member of the CAS Examination Committee since 1996. Acknowledgments The author would like to thank an anonymous reviewer from the CAS Continuing Education Committee for his or her helpful comments. PROPERTY/LIABILITY INSURANCE RISK MANAGEMENT AND SECURITIZATION Abstract This paper presents a comprehensive framework for property/liability insurance risk management and securitization. Section 2 presents a rationale for P/L insurance risk management. Sections 3 through 6 describe and evaluate the four categories of P/L insurance risk management techniques: (1) maintaining internal capital within the organization, (2) managing asset risk, (3) managing underwriting risk, and (4) managing the covariance between asset and liability returns. Securitization is specifically discussed as a potential method of managing underwriting risk. Lastly, Section 7 outlines four key guidelines for cost- effective risk management. 1. INTRODUCTION In recent years, the property-liability insurance industry has witnessed intense competition from alternative risk management techniques, such as large deductibles and retentions, risk retention groups, and captive insurance companies. Moreover, the next decade promises to bring additional competition from new players in the P/L insurance industry, including commercial banks and securities firms. In order to survive in this competitive new landscape, P/L insurers must manage total risk in a cost-efficient manner. This paper provides a rationale for P/L insurance risk management, then describes four categories of risk management techniques utilized by insurers.
    [Show full text]
  • Diversification and Discussion of Risk
    Diversification and Discussion of Risk Conference of the County Investment Academy San Antonio June 2019 PFIA 2256.008c Requires Training in: • Investment Diversification 2 Capital Market Theory 12.0% 10.0% 8.0% E( r) 6.0% P* * 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% Std. Dev. 3 Capital Market Theory • Points along the upper half of the curve represent the best risk/return diversified portfolios of risky assets • The straight line represents portfolios obtained by investing in the “optimal risky portfolio” (P*) and either lending or leveraging at the “risk‐free” rate. • Points on the line below the curve represent “lending” and points above represent “leveraging” (note increased “risk” as measured by standard deviation of returns!) 4 So in theory….. Key result? An undiversified portfolio yields inferior return for the level of risk! The same, or higher, return could be attained at a lower level of risk with a diversified portfolio. If you are not diversified, you are taking more risk than you can expect to be compensated for! 5 Diversification and Correlation of Returns Correlation, which measures the degree of “co‐ movement”, ranges from ‐1 to +1. When the correlation between returns is less than 1 there are diversification benefits—the risk of portfolio is less than the average of the risks of the individual assets. Which pair of stock returns is more correlated? Chevron, Exxon Chevron, Delta Airlines 6 International Diversification Correlations vs S&P 500: China 0.62 Korea 0.53 Japan 0.73 Germany 0.74 UK 0.73 Brazil 0.29 Chile 0.38 Monthly returns vs corresponding MSCI indexes (US dollar returns) 5 years ended April 2019 Source: FactSet 7 Global Market Capitalization Latin Canada 1% UK 3% Other 5% 1% Japan 8% Asia ex Japan 13% U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Risk Section 2070.1
    Legal Risk Section 2070.1 An institution’s trading and capital-markets will prove unenforceable. Many trading activi- activities can lead to significant legal risks. ties, such as securities trading, commonly take Failure to correctly document transactions can place without a signed agreement, as each indi- result in legal disputes with counterparties over vidual transaction generally settles within a very the terms of the agreement. Even if adequately short time after the trade. The trade confirma- documented, agreements may prove to be unen- tions generally provide sufficient documentation forceable if the counterparty does not have the for these transactions, which settle in accor- authority to enter into the transaction or if the dance with market conventions. Other trading terms of the agreement are not in accordance activities involving longer-term, more complex with applicable law. Alternatively, the agree- transactions may necessitate more comprehen- ment may be challenged on the grounds that the sive and detailed documentation. Such documen- transaction is not suitable for the counterparty, tation ensures that the institution and its coun- given its level of financial sophistication, finan- terparty agree on the terms applicable to the cial condition, or investment objectives, or on transaction. In addition, documentation satisfies the grounds that the risks of the transaction were other legal requirements, such as the ‘‘statutes of not accurately and completely disclosed to the frauds’’ that may apply in many jurisdictions. investor. Statutes of frauds generally require signed, writ- As part of sound risk management, institu- ten agreements for certain classes of contracts, tions should take steps to guard themselves such as agreements with a duration of more than against legal risk.
    [Show full text]