Any number of banks in the United States have been courting, in a desultory sort of way, the covered bond. The Street has been scratching its head for many years trying to determine whether a U.S. covered bond could be done and, if so, whether it would be good. Congressman Garrett, who certainly can’t be faulted for lack of effort, has repeatedly introduced covered bond legislation, the most recent one of which was captioned the United States Covered Bond Act of 2011. As those with nothing better to do than follow the covered bond sausage-making know, an effective U.S. covered bond market really does require enabling legislation, which we do not have for a number of reasons, including the unremittant hostility of the FDIC.Continue Reading As Covered Bond Markets Retreat

Senators Kaye Hagan and Bob Corker’s co-sponsorship of Chuck Schumer and Mike Crappo (who says we all can’t get along) filed “The United States Covered Bond Act of 2011.” I almost think this bill gets support because no one can figure out a compelling reason to be for or against it, so why not show a little whiff of bi-partisanship? The new bill broadly tracks the bill that Congressman Garrett introduced into the House earlier this year, HR-940. We’ve written about this before (it is getting to be quite a list, see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and even as a Golden Turkey), and, I gotta say, my views have not materially changed. This remains an answer to a question no one has. Please, someone, tell me why this is important and useful!? Continue Reading Covered Bonds Redux

With Thanksgiving approaching and the holiday season in full swing, we here at Crunched Credit would like to present our annual “Golden Turkeys”.

The Golden Turkey for the Most Confounding Regulation: The Premium Capture Reserve Account

Back in March, the credit risk retention NPR was released. Perhaps the most unexpected (and unwelcomed) part of the rule was the Premium Capture Cash Reserve Account (PCCRA).  The PCCRA provisions actually say that issuers may not profit from securitizations or recoup costs up front. The NPR says that a securitizer who monetizes either an IO or earns a premium on the sale of P&I bonds has to put that money aside to serve as a first loss reserve for any losses on the mortgage loans for the life of the deal–on top of the 5% risk retention requirement. Neither a PCCRA nor a reasonable facsimile thereof was contemplated in the Dodd-Frank Act. Needless to say, PCCRA has generally not gone over very well: Confound it!!

The Golden Turkey for the Best Self-Inflicted Wound: The “Bad Boys”

And by “bad boys”, we mean those who have violated the “bad boy” recourse carve-outs in their loan documents. Although most commercial real estate loans are non-recourse (i.e. the lender can only look to the value of the property securing the loan to settle the borrower’s obligations if there is a default under the loan), most contain certain “bad boy” carve-outs (for example, the borrower filing for bankruptcy or misappropriating funds) from the non-recourse nature of the loan, permitting the lender, in certain circumstances, to look to the borrower (as well as the guarantor) to satisfy the borrower’s obligations. Some borrowers, victims of the great recession, have opted to file for bankruptcy in an attempt to stop the bleeding and dam the "bad boys". Oops. Lenders confronted by misbehaving borrowers have enforced the “bad boy” provisions, and, shockingly, the lenders have been successful! The New York Supreme Court has, on 2 separate occasions in March and July, upheld the “bad boy” provisions. While putting the borrower into bankruptcy may seem like a good solution, if doing so will violate the “bad boy” recourse provisions, it will make a bad situation worse.Continue Reading COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE 2011 RECAP: AND THE (ANNUAL) GOLDEN TURKEY AWARD GOES TO….

It looks like our recap on covered bonds came not a moment too soon. Representatives Scott Garrett (R-NJ) and Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) teamed up this week to co-sponsor the bipartisan H.R. 940 (pdf), the United States Covered Bond Act of 2011. The new bill is much in keeping with the recently distributed discussion draft (examined in a recent Dechert OnPoint (pdf)). Currently, it is in committee before both the House Committees on Financial Services and on Ways and Means.Continue Reading Covered Bond Update: Rolling the Boulder up the Hill?

Recently, while visiting my in-laws, I took a break from college basketball and the Daytona 500 and caught up on the latest developments in the quest for covered bond legislation in the United States.  Not surprisingly, I quickly found that the quest for covered bond legislation is, well, still a quest.

We have discussed the possibility of covered bond legislation numerous times on this blog (see here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).  As you may recall, 2010 ushered in optimism for proponents of covered bond legislation, as both the House and Senate at least entertained the possibility.  Representative Scott Garrett (R-NJ), who has long been a strong proponent, led the charge in the 111th Congress pushing a bill out of the House Financial Services Committee and in front of the full House for consideration.  The Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee even went so far as to hold a hearing on the topic.  Despite the attention, the elections and then other distractions took priority, and a lame-duck session came and went without further movement on the topic.  However, the bells ringing in the new year also rung in a new round of this fight, as all interested parties are gearing up for yet another attempt to pass this legislation.Continue Reading Covered Bond Update: Inching Closer?

Covered bond legislation is once again a hot topic on Capitol Hill. Representative Scott Garrett (R-NJ) co-sponsored the latest iteration of his proposed legislation (United States Covered Bond Act of 2010 or H.R. 5823 (pdf)) along with Representatives Kanjorski (D-NJ) and Bachus (R-AL). The House Financial Services Committee recently voted in favor of reporting H.R. 5823 to the full House of Representatives for consideration, which hopefully will be taken up for a vote this fall shortly after the August recess.Continue Reading Covered Bonds Anyone?

The push for covered bond legislation – left on the cutting room floor when Fin Reg. was finalized during a marathon session last week (or should I say finalized subject to Senator Scott Brown’s continuing review) – is coming under renewed discussion by Congress (led by Representative Scott Garret) and the FDIC.

The FDIC balked at the proposal that was to be included in the Dodd-Frank bill because of concerns about the effect of certain collateralization requirements on failed banks’ balance-sheets. Covered bond terms can require issuers to replace weakening collateral upon the occurrence of certain triggers; in a receivership scenario, this re-collateralization requirement would force the FDIC to re-deploy quality assets to serve as bond collateral and shift the risk of loss of declining collateral from bondholders to the government. The FDIC hates when that happens.Continue Reading FDIC and Congress Renew Covered Bonds Discussion

Notwithstanding our optimism, it appears that there was not enough support from the Senate side of the reconciliation committee to include the proposed covered bond amendment in the final financial reform bill approved by the reconciliation committee.  However, the support received by the House and some members of the Senate committee indicates that covered

Earlier this week, Representative Scott Garrett (R-NJ) introduced an amendment to the proposed financial reform legislation that will establish a regulatory framework for a covered bond market in the United States.  The House side of the reconciliation committee quickly passed the measure – the Senate side is now considering it.  This development is welcomed news to a banking industry that has craved a covered bond market for some time now.  For our part, we’ve been examining covered bond structures since the advent of the credit crises as our clients continued to try to devise a workable structure, so we’re very excited by this development. 

Covered bonds, which have been part of the European financing vernacular for over 200 years, function as a cross between an unsecured corporate bond and an asset-backed security.  Typically, a financial institution will issue a direct-recourse bond which is also secured by a specified pool of assets that remain on the financial institution’s balance sheet.  These are attractive to investors for many reasons, most important of which is that the investor has recourse to a specified pool of assets in the event the financial institution becomes insolvent, unlike typical unsecured corporate bonds that depend solely on the issuer’s credit.Continue Reading Reconciliation Update: Covered Bonds