Template:Isda Credit Support Document premium: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 5: Line 5:
{{pjchotlink|Guarantees and why Transaction-specific guarantees under ISDA don’t work}}<li>{{pjchotlink|What is the actual difference? Does it matter?}} What happens if you ''do'' designate a CSA as a Credit Support Document when you should not have, or when you ''don’t'' designate as a Credit Support Document a credit support arrangement when you ''should'' have?
{{pjchotlink|Guarantees and why Transaction-specific guarantees under ISDA don’t work}}<li>{{pjchotlink|What is the actual difference? Does it matter?}} What happens if you ''do'' designate a CSA as a Credit Support Document when you should not have, or when you ''don’t'' designate as a Credit Support Document a credit support arrangement when you ''should'' have?
</ol>
</ol>
''So'' much ninjery.}}
''So'' much ninjery.

Revision as of 13:31, 28 August 2024

Don’t confuse a Credit Default Deed with a Credit Support Document

  • An English law CSA is not a Credit Support Document...
  • But a New York law CSA is a Credit Support Document... — AND SERIOUSLY HOW CAN THEY BE DIFFERENT? Is the ’squad just doing this to annoy everyone?
  • And an English law Credit Support Deed? That’s a Credit Support Document too? — Hang on, does the English Law Credit Support Deed have a different “Credit Support Document” status to an English Law Credit Support Annex? WHAT?! It does?
  • Guarantees and why Transaction-specific guarantees under ISDA don’t work
  • What is the actual difference? Does it matter? What happens if you do designate a CSA as a Credit Support Document when you should not have, or when you don’t designate as a Credit Support Document a credit support arrangement when you should have?

    So much ninjery.