Exchanges - CSA Provision
1995 ISDA Credit Support Annex (English Law)
Paragraph 3(c) in a Nutshell™ Use at your own risk, campers!
Full text of Paragraph 3(c)
|
Content and comparisons
A counterparty who has posted one form of 1995 CSA and can ask the 1995 CSA to switch it for something else. The 1995 CSA doesn’t have to, but derivatives counterparties being the reasonable commercial fellows they are — and their operations teams being no-nonsense pragmatists they are — they will generally allow this as part of the normal ebb and flow of collateral operations. Probably less of a thing now 2016 VM CSAs tend to be cash only and base currency cash at that, but the possibility remains, and as, to our enduring regreet, we know, ISDA’s crack drafting squad™ is not usually one to let unexplored possibilities go undocumented.
Note here the 1995 CSA can ask for an exchange, but the 1995 CSA is not obliged to accept it. This is a fundamental provision of “title transfer”: once the 1995 CSA is delivered under a title-transfer 1995 CSA, the 1995 CSA owns it absolutely. It only has to return 1995 CSA. This is a special, legal ninja[1] use of the word “equivalent”. It means “fungible”; exactly the same as ~; not “broadly similar to ~”.
This is important also from a pricing (and operational) perspective: otherwise the 1995 CSA would have a “worst-of” option and would be entitled to continually switch into the "cheapest to deliver" of the 1995 CSA. Needless to say, the increased collateral flows would also increase the operational burden.
1995 CSAs: Contrast this with 1995 CSA, where a 1995 CSA has the option to deliver the cheapest of the 1995 CSA specified in the 1995 CSA.
1995 CSAs: A 1995 CSA does have a (limited) option in terms of selecting the 1995 CSA should there be a requirement to return posted credit support: it can select the cheapest to deliver of all the 1995 CSA that has been posted to it which currently comprises its 1995 CSA.