SEC Chair Gensler Issues Statement on Final Rule Prohibiting Conflicts of Interest in Securitizations
* * *
Today, the Commission adopted a rule to prohibit certain market participants in the asset-backed securities (ABS) market from taking positions against the products they help bring to market. I am pleased to support this rule as it fulfills
In the aftermath of the financial crisis,
In essence,
As directed by
Further, as required by Section 621, the final rule provides exceptions for risk-mitigating hedging activities, bona fide market making, and certain liquidity commitments. Through these congressionally mandated exceptions, the rule allows these market activities while targeting the conflicts that
We benefitted from public input on these matters, and today's adoption includes a number of modifications from the proposing release. I will mention three examples.
First, the final rule includes a more specific definition of a conflicted transaction than that which was proposed. Under the final rule, a conflicted transaction entails directly shorting the ABS, entering into a credit default swap that references the underlying assets, or something economically equivalent to either of those activities. These conflicted transactions represent ways of taking a position against the ABS that a securitization participant helps bring to market.
Second, the final rule makes clear that generalized hedging, such as an interest rate or currency hedge, is not a conflicted transaction.
Third, the final rule revises the proposed exception for risk-mitigating hedging to permit, subject to certain conditions, the use of risk management tools.
In addition, in response to comments from private mortgage insurers regarding whether the final rule would apply to their issuance of mortgage insurance linked notes (MILNs), the adopting release makes clear that MILNs do not meet the definition of an ABS or synthetic ABS for the purposes of the final rule.
Taken together, the final rule will help address conflicts of interest arising when securitization participants take positions against ABS investors' interests. Such a rule benefits investors and issuers alike.
I'd like to thank the members of the
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
* * *
Footnotes:
[1] See United States Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations,
[2] The rule defines securitization participants as underwriters, sponsors, initial purchasers, and placement agents of asset-backed securities (including synthetic asset-backed securities), as well as certain affiliates and subsidiaries of such entities.
[3] As further detailed in the adopting release, a "conflicted transaction" is defined in final Rule 192(a)(3) as transactions with respect to which there is a substantial likelihood that a reasonable investor would consider the transaction important to the investor's investment decision, including a decision whether to retain the ABS.
* * *
Original text here: https://www.sec.gov/news/statement/gensler-statement-securitizations-112723


Commentary: Health insurance premiums dropped? Not so fast
MGT Insurance Achieves Rapid Growth, Sustained Profitability and A- Rating from AM Best Following Launch
Advisor News
- Wealth planning vs. estate planning: Honoring your client’s wishes
- What to discuss during the first retirement planning meeting
- Inflation, competing priorities and uncertainty erode retirement security
- As health premiums rise, 1 in 8 workers cut retirement savings
- CT governor’s candidates claims: What’s true, and what’s misleading
More Advisor NewsAnnuity News
- National Life Group expands annuity portfolio
- AM Best to Join Life/Annuity Insurance-Focused Panel Discussion at Capitol Forum Event
- USAA Earns No. 1 Ranking in JD Power Individual Annuity Study for the Third Consecutive Year
- How flexible annuities fit today’s retirement portfolios
- Foresters Financial appoints Tom Ross as chief distribution officer for U.S. annuity sales
More Annuity NewsHealth/Employee Benefits News
- As WA open enrollment begins, far fewer than expected have lost coverage
- Pennsylvania Health Plans Must Cover Colon Cancer Screening at 45
- In Miami-Dade court, health insurer fights an order to cover $48,500 cancer drug
- Fed judge blocks Medicaid work requirement rule
- Health insurers leave millions unpaid for mental health crisis care in California
More Health/Employee Benefits NewsLife Insurance News
- AM Best Affirms Credit Ratings of Insignia Life S.A. de C.V.
- FINANCIAL FRAUD
- Security Benefit Announces Planned Dividend Rate Reset for Series B Preferred Stock
- Palmetto Heritage and Atlantic Coast Life Announce Discussions Regarding Potential Acquisition
- Jury finds insurance company acted in bad faith, awards Nebraska woman $11.3M
More Life Insurance News