83,063
edits
Template:M summ 2002 ISDA 4: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "A hodge-podge of “state the bleeding obvious” rules, breach of some of which justifies (eventual) close-out as a “breach of agreement” — flagrantly breaking the law,...") Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
A hodge-podge of “state the bleeding obvious” rules, breach of some of which justifies (eventual) close-out as a “breach of agreement” — flagrantly breaking the law, carelessly losing one’s regulatory authorisations — and random tax provisions and indemnities, which by and large ''don’t'' justify close-out. | A hodge-podge of “state the bleeding obvious” rules, breach of some of which justifies (eventual) close-out as a “breach of agreement” — flagrantly breaking the law, carelessly losing one’s regulatory authorisations — and random tax provisions and indemnities, which by and large ''don’t'' justify close-out. | ||
'''Section {{isdaprov|4(a)}}''': {{specified information capsule|isdaprov}} | |||
'''Section {{isdaprov|4(b)}}''': {{isda 4(b) summ|isdaprov}} | |||
'''Section {{isdaprov|4(e)}}''': Basically, if there is any {{isdaprov|Stamp Tax}} imposed because of my existence or residence in a certain jurisdiction, whether imposed on me or you, I’ll pay it, unless it would have been imposed on you too. If we’re both in the same {{isdaprov|Stamp Tax Jurisdiction}}, the liability lies where it falls. | |||