82,853
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
===={{tag|ERISA netting}}==== | ===={{tag|ERISA netting}}==== | ||
Famously, ERISA plans tend to be set '''not''' to [[Netting|net]], and for the unholiest of reasons, courtesy | Famously, ERISA plans tend to be set '''not''' to [[Netting|net]], and for the unholiest of reasons, courtesy of the opinions committee of a leading [[U.S. law firm]] which prudence counsels it would be wiser not to name<ref>Definitely not Cadwalader, obviously.</ref>, but upon whom the whole market relies. | ||
This | This firm cannot bring itself to rule out the risk that, when resolving an insolvent [[ERISA plan]], a court would interpret {{tag|ERISA}} as incorporating the US [[Bankruptcy Code]] ''as it stood in 1971'' to the insolvency of the plan, rather than the Code ''as it stands at the time of insolvency''. That’s a problem, because the “[[safe harbor]]s” one relies upon for safely [[Close out|closing out]] swaps were only put into the [[Bankruptcy Code]] in the 1980s.<ref>Being WHEN SWAPS WERE INVENTED. See [[swap history]].</ref> So, no netting against [[ERISA plan]]s. Just in case. | ||
Let me break that down: | Let me break that down: |