Insights Past Issues

Investor interest in rated-debt feeder funds has grown since we first issued our Action Item concerning such funds in March 2019. We expect this interest to continue as the private credit market expands through the COVID-19 crisis.

On May 5, federal banking regulators adopted an interim final rule that neutralizes the liquidity coverage ratio impact for banks participating in the Federal Reserve’s Money Market Mutual Fund Liquidity Facility and the Paycheck Protection Program Liquidity Facility.

Earlier today the Federal Reserve announced it would establish six new funding facilities supported by Treasury funding authorized by Section 4003(b)(4) of the CARES Act.

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York has posted FAQa for the Commercial Paper Funding Facility described in our March 19 client alert, and amended as described in our March 24 client alert.

The Federal Reserve has established a webpage that provides links to a FAQ and other documents for the Money Market Fund Liquidity Facility described in earlier Chapman client alerts.

Yesterday the Federal Reserve announced it was temporarily removing Treasury securities and deposits at Federal Reserve Banks from the supplementary leverage ratio applicable to Category I-III bank holding companies or US intermediate holding companies of foreign banks.  

On March 23, the Federal Reserve announced the establishment of the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility to support the flow of credit to consumers and businesses. 

On March 23, the Federal Reserve issued further amendments to add negotiable certificates of deposit and all short-term municipal securities to the list of eligible collateral. 

On March 23, the Federal Reserve added municipal issuers and amended the pricing for the commercial paper funding facility announced on March 17 and issued other “program terms and conditions” posted on the website of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

This morning, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System announced sweeping actions to help the economy.

On March 18, the Federal Reserve announced a Money Market Fund Liquidity Facility to make loans to banks and certain affiliates secured by certain assets acquired from “prime” money market funds. Earlier today, the Federal Reserve issued amendments to the program.

On March 17, the Federal Reserve Board announced the establishment of two emergency funding facilities that closely mirror facilities established in 2008 during the last financial crisis in providing liquidity to both short and long term funding markets.

In a break from other recent circuit court decisions, the Fifth Circuit ruled that amounts due under a make-whole provision contained in a note purchase agreement constituted unmatured interest and were not permitted to be paid to a creditor under the Bankruptcy Code.

This article outlines the features of proposals to adjust the applicability of certain capital and liquidity tests and certain enhanced prudential standards for bank holding companies.

On August 22, the three federal banking agencies issued an interim final rule implementing the May 2018 banking law’s requirement that investment grade, liquid and readily marketable municipal obligations be treated as Level 2B “high quality liquid assets” under the liquidity coverage ratio rule.

On June 14, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System issued a final rule that establishes credit limits for single counterparties of US bank holding companies and foreign banking organizations with $250 billion or more in assets, and US intermediate holding companies of covered FBOs with $50 billion or more of consolidated assets.

On May 22, the House passed Senate bill S. 2155, which would amend certain Dodd-Frank provisions and, primarily for smaller banks and credit unions, provide additional regulatory relief. President Trump is expected to sign the bill, so that it will take effect as law.  

On May 14, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision issued two documents entitled “Criteria for Identifying Simple, Transparent and Comparable Short-Term Securitisations” and “Capital Treatment for Simple, Transparent and Comparable Short-Term Securitisations.” 

Today, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision issued two documents entitled “Criteria for Identifying Simple, Transparent and Comparable Short-Term Securitisations” and “Capital Treatment for Simple, Transparent and Comparable Short-Term Securitisations.”

The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit has affirmed the district court and the bankruptcy court’s determinations in MPM Silicones, LLC that Momentive’s senior noteholders are not entitled to recover any make-whole premium on account of the replacement of their notes.

On September 21, a Bankruptcy Court ruled that holders of notes issued pursuant to a Note Purchase Agreement entered into by a debtor’s operating subsidiary were entitled to what the court termed an ‘enormous’ make-whole payment, post-petition interest, and recovery of related fees and expenses.

On July 6, 2017, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision issued two consultative documents entitled “Criteria for Identifying Simple, Transparent and Comparable Short-Term Securitisations” and “Capital Treatment for Simple, Transparent and Comparable Short-Term Securitisations.” 

Keeping track of the regulatory developments affecting asset-backed commercial paper (“ABCP”) conduits and their sponsors is a daunting task. This updated desk reference reviews regulatory and legislative developments affecting the ABCP market.

On June 12, the Department of Treasury issued the first report in a series regarding regulation of the financial system. The report recommends that high-grade municipal bonds be categorized as Level 2B liquid assets instead of generally being excluded as HQLA currently.
 

On June 12, the Department of Treasury issued the first report in a series regarding regulation of the financial system in a manner consistent with Core Principles set forth in Executive Order 13772 signed by President Trump on February 3, 2017.

On April 19, the House Financial Services Committee posted a “discussion draft” of a revised version of the CHOICE Act. The discussion draft contains most of the provisions in last year’s bill with a number of important changes.

With Republicans retaining control of both chambers of Congress and Donald Trump elected President, the prospects for financial regulatory reform have changed. Many observers point to the Financial CHOICE Act as the best indication of Republican Congressional aspirations for such reform. 

In a decision that deals a potential blow to holdout noteholders in out-of-court restructurings, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit adopted a narrow interpretation of Section 316(b) of the Trust Indenture Act.

The Securities and Exchange Commission voted last Thursday to adopt changes to enhance liquidity risk management by open-end funds, including mutual funds and exchange-traded funds.

The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve adopted a final rule to include certain U.S. municipal securities as high-quality liquid assets for purposes of the liquidity coverage ratio rule to which large banks are subject.

Over the past several years, a number of public-private partnership transactions have been financed in the domestic and cross-border U.S. private placement market. Given the need for new infrastructure both domestically and abroad, we anticipate that the number of P3 transactions entering the U.S. private placement market will continue to rise over the coming years.

It is a basic principle in bankruptcy that a secured lender is entitled to receive interest and other charges arising post-petition to the extent the lender is over-secured. A recent decision challenges this principle in cases where the value of a lender’s collateral diminishes during the course of the bankruptcy case.

A recent decision issued by a federal district court in North Carolina challenges the familiar principle that in a borrower’s bankruptcy, the lender, if it is oversecured as of the bankruptcy filing date, is entitled to receive post-petition interest, attorneys’ fees and other charges arising post-petition to the extent of the value of its collateral.

The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking re-proposing a rule that would establish credit limits for single counterparties ofU.S. bank holding companies, foreign banking organizations, and U.S. intermediate holding companies of an FBO. 

On March 4, 2016 the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking re-proposing a rule that would establish credit limits for single counterparties ofU.S. bank holding companies, foreign banking organizations, and U.S. intermediate holding companies of an FBO, with $50 billion or more of consolidated assets. 

Retail bondholders recently filed two class action suits in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York challenging exchange offers under the Trust Indenture Act.

On February 16, 2016, the District Court for the District of Delaware affirmed the decision of the Delaware bankruptcy court in In re Energy Future Holdings Corp., that noteholders’ claims for make-whole premiums may be blocked by the automatic stay of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. 

To kick off the Memorial Day weekend, the Federal Reserve Board announced a proposal to include certain state and municipal general obligation bonds in the calculation of High Quality Liquid Assets, the numerator of the new Liquidity Coverage Ratio requirement to which large banks are subject. 

Out-of-court debt restructurings may face greater hurdles to success in light of two recent federal court decisions out of New York broadly expanding dissenting bondholders’ rights under the Trust Indenture Act.

In order to maintain the global private placement market as an attractive market for both issuers and investors, the American College of Investment Counsel undertook to update its Model Form Note Purchase Agreement last year and released its Transaction Process Management Committee Updated Model X Form No. 2, draft dated April 15, 2014.

In September 2014, the U.S. banking agencies adopted final rules implementing a liquidity coverage ratio requirement that will test a bank's ability to withstand "liquidity stress periods." In collaboration with the Structured Finance Industry Group (SFIG), Chapman attorneys authored a guide summarizing elements of the final rule that have the greatest impact on the securitization market. 

On September 3, 2014, the US banking agencies adopted final rules implementing a liquidity coverage ratio (LCR) requirement that will test a bank's ability to withstand liquidity stress periods. The specific objective of the LCR rules is to ensure that a bank has enough high quality liquid assets (referred to as HQLA) that can be immediately converted into cash to meet its liquidity needs for a 30-day stress period.

On October 24, 2013, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Board released a proposed rule that introduces a liquidity coverage ratio requirement that will test a bank's ability to withstand "liquidity stress periods." 

The US banking regulators have issued final Basel III-related capital rules.

On January 7, 2013, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (Committee) issued major revisions to the “liquidity coverage ratio” (LCR) it published in 2010.