82,903
edits
Template:M summ 2002 ISDA Automatic Early Termination: Difference between revisions
Template:M summ 2002 ISDA Automatic Early Termination (view source)
Revision as of 11:29, 6 June 2023
, 6 June 2023no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
[[Automatic early termination]] (“{{tag|AET}}”) protects in jurisdictions (e.g., [[Germany]] and [[Switzerland]]) where certain bankruptcy events would allow a [[liquidator]] to “[[cherry-pick]]” those {{isdaprov|transaction}}s it wishes to honour (those which are [[in-the-money]] to the [[defaulting party]]) and avoid those where the {{isdaprov|defaulting party}} is [[out-of-the-money]]. | [[Automatic early termination]] (“{{tag|AET}}”) protects in jurisdictions (e.g., [[Germany]] and [[Switzerland]]) where certain bankruptcy events would allow a [[liquidator]] to “[[cherry-pick]]” those {{isdaprov|transaction}}s it wishes to honour (those which are [[in-the-money]] to the [[defaulting party]]) and avoid those where the {{isdaprov|defaulting party}} is [[out-of-the-money]]. | ||
It is only really useful: | |||
(1) to a regulated financial institution which | |||
(2) would incur a capital charge if it doesn’t have a [[netting opinion]]'', and | |||
(3) where it wouldn’t get that netting opinion for a particular counterparty without {{isdaprov|AET}} being switched on in its {{isdama}}. | |||
There are only few counterparty types where these conditions prevail: the German and Swiss corporates mentioned above, for example. There may be others, but not many, because AET is a good-old-days, regulators-really-are-dopey-if-they-fall-for-this kind of a tactic. I mean, ''really''? [[Deem]]ing your ISDA to have magically terminated, without anyone’s knowledge or action, the instant before that termination would become problematic as a result of your insolvency? Come ''on''. Is any sophisticated market really going to wear that? (No slight meant on Germany or Switzerland here: the “Teutonic” AET does not deliver netting where unequivocally it would otherwise be forbidden, but rather is buttress residual doubt about the effectiveness of netting during insolvency as a result of looseness in insolvency regulations that aren’t categorical that you ''can'' net. The view is generally it ''should'' be okay in insolvency, but there are just some freaky discretions which may make life awkward if used maliciously. This is not legal advice obviously.) | |||