Credit Support Provider
Content and comparisons
Summary
A Credit Support Provider is basically a guarantor: a third party who stands being the obligations of a counterparty to the ISDA Master Agreement. Usually this is someone providing an all obligations guarantee or a standby letter of credit, but on rare occasions — very rare, usually involving espievies — might be a third party directly posting credit support to the other party under a Credit Support Document. In any case it is not a direct counterparty to the ISDA Master Agreement itself, whether or not the CSA counts as a Credit Support Document.
Given that a 1995 CSA is not a Credit Support Document at all, but a Transaction under the ISDA Master Agreement, a party to it is obviously not a Credit Support Provider.
A 1994 NY CSA, on the other hand, is a Credit Support Document though. So should a Party to the ISDA Master Agreement, where there is a 1994 NY CSA, be described as a “Credit Support Provider"?
No, sayeth the User’s Guide to the 1994 NY CSA:
“Parties to an ISDA Master Agreement should not, however, be identified as Credit Support Providers with respect to the Annex, as such term is intended only to apply to third parties.”
the Users’ Guide to the 2002 ISDA is similarly emphatically vague:
“The meaning of “Credit Support Provider” ... should apply to any person or entity (other than either party) providing, or a party to, a Credit Support Document delivered on behalf of a particular party.”
This means that a New York Law CSA — which is not a Transaction under the ISDA architecture, remember, is a Credit Support Document, but the person providing Credit Support under it — is not a “Credit Support Provider”?
General discussion
Template:M gen 2002 ISDA Credit Support Provider
See also
References
Falling off your chair, aren’t you. This basically means a guarantor. It does not refer to the credit support annex though - the person providing that credit support is the counterparty itself. That would be a strange loop too far.