Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (view source)

Revision as of 14:07, 7 July 2020

1,114 bytes removed ,  7 July 2020
no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 9: Line 9:


===[[Plan assets]]===
===[[Plan assets]]===
[[ERISA]] can get you in its clutches even if you aren't (knowingly) an [[ERISA]] plan.  
[[ERISA]] can get you in its clutches even if you aren’t (knowingly) an [[ERISA]] plan.  
===Investment vehicles===
===Investment vehicles===
''Be extra-specially warned: this is the untutored ramblings of a one who is not even a US attorney let alone an [[ERISA attorney]]''
''Be extra-specially warned: this is the untutored ramblings of a one who is not even a US attorney let alone an [[ERISA attorney]]''
Line 26: Line 26:
The credit/trading risk analysis would also be directed at the assets in the fund. There will be no recourse beyond them and [[I]] can’t see how the characterisation of the person contributing those assets in return for a structurally [[subordinated]] equity stake could make any difference, either in the UK or in the US.
The credit/trading risk analysis would also be directed at the assets in the fund. There will be no recourse beyond them and [[I]] can’t see how the characterisation of the person contributing those assets in return for a structurally [[subordinated]] equity stake could make any difference, either in the UK or in the US.


===={{tag|Netting}}====
{{erisa netting}}
Famously, ERISA plans tend to be set '''not''' to [[Netting|net]], and for the unholiest of reasons, courtesy of the phantasmagorical imagination of some wise [[mediocre lawyer|counsel]] at Cadwalader, upon whom the whole market relies.


This gentleman’s opinion is predicated on the risk that a court would interpret the {{tag|ERISA}} act as requiring the US [[Bankruptcy Code]] ''as it stood in 1971'' to be applied to the insolvency of an {{tag|ERISA}} plan, rather than as it stands at the time of insolvency. The reason that’s a problem is that the “[[safe harbor]]s” for closing out swaps in the [[Bankruptcy Code]] were only enacted in the 1980s.
This is the fear that prompts attorneys the world over to interpose “[[as amended from time to time]]” and phrases like it into their drafts. It is a frankly fantastical fear: Not only is it impossible to be certain, at this remove, exactly how the US Bankruptcy Code stood in 1971 much less how it might have been interpreted in those days, but many of the institutions and concepts it relies on will have since been abolished or materially changed.


{{sa}}
{{sa}}
Line 40: Line 36:
*[[Indicia of ownership]] where you have a non-US investment manager.
*[[Indicia of ownership]] where you have a non-US investment manager.
{{c2|US Securities Regulation|Insolvency}}
{{c2|US Securities Regulation|Insolvency}}
{{ref}}
Retrieved from "https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=Special:MobileDiff/33015...45736"

Navigation menu