82,893
edits
Template:Csa title transfer vs pledge: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
The {{{{{1}}}|Pledgor}} delivers the assets to the {{{{{1}}}|Secured Party}} to hold in [[custody]], subject to the [[security interest]], for the {{{{{1}}}|Pledgor}}. {{{{{1}}}|Secured Party}} holds the assets subject to a [[security interest]] securing its payment obligation under the related transaction. | The {{{{{1}}}|Pledgor}} delivers the assets to the {{{{{1}}}|Secured Party}} to hold in [[custody]], subject to the [[security interest]], for the {{{{{1}}}|Pledgor}}. {{{{{1}}}|Secured Party}} holds the assets subject to a [[security interest]] securing its payment obligation under the related transaction. | ||
There is a custody arrangement but only while {{{{{1}}}|Secured Party}} holds the security: Under the NY law CSAs, the {{{{{1}}}|Secured Party}} (by default) is entitled to sell the pledged asset absolutely, under a process known as “[[rehypothecation]]”. This, we believe, converts the {{ | There is a custody arrangement but only while {{{{{1}}}|Secured Party}} holds the security: Under the NY law CSAs, the {{{{{1}}}|Secured Party}} (by default) is entitled to sell the pledged asset absolutely, under a process known as “[[rehypothecation]]”. This, we believe, converts the {{sfca}} into a {{ttca}} — at least from the point of [[rehypothecation]]. If so, it makes you wonder why, you know, all the fuss with security interests. | ||
====“Transaction” or “Credit Support Document”?==== | ====“Transaction” or “Credit Support Document”?==== | ||