Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
|
| (4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| {{isdaanat|Credit Support Document }} | | {{isdamanual|Credit Support Document}} |
| Being the document by which {{isdaprov|Credit Support}} is provided by a {{isdaprov|Credit Support Provider}}.
| |
| ===The {{csa}} is ''not'' a Credit Support Document...===
| |
| Note that a {{tag|CSA}} is '''not''' a {{isdaprov|Credit Support Document}}, and you should not list it as one in {{isdaprov|Part 4}} of the {{isdaprov|Schedule}}, however satisfying it might be to do so. I mean it sounds like one, right? But no: the counterparty cannot be its own {{isdaprov|Credit Support Provider}}. The {{csa}} is, rather, a {{isdaprov|Transaction}} under the {{isdama}}. This is rather important to the whole issue of [[close-out netting]]. Deep [[ISDA lore]].
| |
| | |
| ===... But the {{nycsa}} ''is'' a Credit Support Document===
| |
| Because it is a {{sfca}} arrangement and not a {{ttca}}, transfer of credit support under a {{nycsa}} does not change the net liabilities between the parties, the {{nycsa}} (and its regulatory VM successor, the {{nyvmcsa}} is a {{isdaprov|Credit Support Document}} and not a transaction under the {{isdama}}. Fun, huh?
| |
| | |
| ===[[Guarantees]] under the {{isdama}}: why {{isdaprov|Transaction}}-specific {{isdaprov|guarantee}}s don't work===
| |
| {{isdaguaranteewarning}}
| |
| {{ref}}
| |