Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The Interface Between the Securitization Act of 2004 and the Financial Rehabilitation and Insolvency Act of 2010

The Interface Between the Securitization Act of 2004 and the Financial Rehabilitation and... AbstractThe interface between securitization law and insolvency law is the central legal concern in designing securitization transactions. The complex structure of these transactions under the Securitization Act of 2004 should be understood within a specific legal context: the possible bankruptcy, insolvency, or liquidation of the “originator” (i.e. the entity requiring securitization financing), which may jeopardize the claims of asset-backed security investors. It is a solution to the risk that security holders with claim to specific assets may end up being subordinated to the interest of preferred creditors and ranked pari passu with, or even lower than, unsecured creditors in a rehabilitation or liquidation proceeding. Under present law, this risk may arise through the “substantive consolidation” and “clawback” provisions of the Financial Rehabilitation and Insolvency Act (FRIA) of 2010. This risk is mitigated through the creation of a bankruptcy remote vehicle and true sale of receivables, and it is the lawyer’s principal role in the securitization process to isolate or ring-fence assets beyond the reach of creditors, and making them an exclusive claim of investors. How this works in theory and practice is the subject of this paper. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Legal Studies de Gruyter

The Interface Between the Securitization Act of 2004 and the Financial Rehabilitation and Insolvency Act of 2010

Journal of Legal Studies , Volume 22 (36): 14 – Dec 1, 2018

Loading next page...
 
/lp/de-gruyter/the-interface-between-the-securitization-act-of-2004-and-the-financial-hXCwSMLOQY
Publisher
de Gruyter
Copyright
© 2018 Russell Stanley Q. Geronimo et al., published by Sciendo
eISSN
2392-7054
DOI
10.1515/jles-2018-0009
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

AbstractThe interface between securitization law and insolvency law is the central legal concern in designing securitization transactions. The complex structure of these transactions under the Securitization Act of 2004 should be understood within a specific legal context: the possible bankruptcy, insolvency, or liquidation of the “originator” (i.e. the entity requiring securitization financing), which may jeopardize the claims of asset-backed security investors. It is a solution to the risk that security holders with claim to specific assets may end up being subordinated to the interest of preferred creditors and ranked pari passu with, or even lower than, unsecured creditors in a rehabilitation or liquidation proceeding. Under present law, this risk may arise through the “substantive consolidation” and “clawback” provisions of the Financial Rehabilitation and Insolvency Act (FRIA) of 2010. This risk is mitigated through the creation of a bankruptcy remote vehicle and true sale of receivables, and it is the lawyer’s principal role in the securitization process to isolate or ring-fence assets beyond the reach of creditors, and making them an exclusive claim of investors. How this works in theory and practice is the subject of this paper.

Journal

Journal of Legal Studiesde Gruyter

Published: Dec 1, 2018

There are no references for this article.