RBI published the draft framework for securitization of standard assets and the draft comprehensive framework for sale of loan exposures. Through these revisions, the aim is to develop a strong and robust securitization market in India, while incentivizing simpler securitization structures. The revised guidelines attempt to align the regulatory framework with the Basel guidelines on securitization that have come into force effective January 01, 2018. The revisions also take into account the recommendations of the Committee on Development of Housing Finance Securitization Market in India and the Task Force on the Development of Secondary Market for Corporate Loans, which were set up by RBI in May 2019. Comments on draft frameworks and responses to discussion questions are requested to be submitted by June 30, 2020.
A key recommendation of both the Committee as well as the Task Force was to separate the regulatory guideline for direct assignment transactions from the securitization guideline and treat it as a sale of loan exposure. RBI examined this recommendation and considered the public response received, which led to the decision to (apart from reviewing the securitization guidelines) comprehensively revisit the guidelines for sale of loan exposures, including standard as well as stressed exposures. The comprehensive guidelines harmonize the extant guidelines on sale of loan exposures and make them consistent with the changed resolution paradigm in the form of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 and the Prudential Framework for Resolution of Stressed Assets issued in circular dated June 07, 2019. The draft frameworks are applicable to scheduled commercial banks (excluding regional rural banks), all India financial institutions (NABARD, NHB, EXIM Bank, and SIDBI), and all non-banking financial companies, including the housing finance companies.
The salient features of the draft securitization guidelines, in comparison with the existing guidelines, are as follows:
- Only transactions that result in multiple tranches of securities being issued, reflecting different credit risks, will be treated as securitization transactions and accordingly covered under these guidelines.
- In line with the Basel III guidelines, two capital measurement approaches have been proposed: Securitization External Ratings Based Approach (SEC-ERBA) and Securitization Standardized Approach (SEC-SA).
- A special case of securitization, called simple, transparent, and comparable (STC) securitizations, has been prescribed with clearly defined criteria and preferential capital treatment.
- The definition of securitization has been modified to allow single asset securitizations. Securitization of exposures purchased from other lenders has been allowed.
- Carve outs have been provided for Residential Mortgage Backed Securities (RMBS) in prescriptions regarding minimum holding period, minimum retention requirement, and reset of credit enhancements.
- A quantitative test for significant transfer of credit risk has been prescribed for de-recognition for the purpose of capital requirements, independent of the accounting de-recognition
The salient features of the draft framework for sale of loan exposures, in comparison with the existing guidelines, are as follows:
- Sale of standard assets may be by an assignment, a novation, or a loan participation contract (either funded participation or risk participation) whereas the sale of stressed assets may be by an assignment or a novation.
- Direct assignment transactions shall be subsumed as a special case of these guidelines.
- Requirement of minimum retention requirement for sale of loans has been done away with.
- The price discovery process has been deregulated to be as per the lenders’ policy.
- Stressed assets may be sold to any entity that is permitted to take on loan exposures by its statutory or regulatory framework.
- Some of the existing conditions for sale of non-performing assets have been rationalized.
Comment Due Date: June 30, 2020
Keywords: Asia pacific, India, Banking, Securitization, Loan Exposures, Basel, Standardized Approach, Credit Risk, STC Securitization, SEC-ERBA, SEC-SA, Regulatory Capital, RBI
Previous ArticleFIN-FSA Announces Availability of Workbooks for FINREP Reporting
In a letter addressed to the industry, the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) set out an updated schedule of policy priorities for the banking, insurance, and superannuation industries.
The European Commission (EC) adopted a comprehensive review package of Solvency II rules in the European Union.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) issued Versions 1.0 of the "Earnings" and "Regulatory Reporting" booklets of the Comptroller's Handbook.
The European Central Bank (ECB) published results of its economy-wide climate stress test, which aimed to assess the resilience of non-financial corporates and euro area banks to climate risks.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) published a report on the use of digital platforms in the banking and payments sector in European Union.
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) published updates on the policy measures that were announced in context of the ongoing pandemic.
The International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA), along with several other associations, submitted a joint response to the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) consultation on preliminary proposals for the prudential treatment of cryptoasset exposures.
BIS published the September issue of the Quarterly Review, which contains special features that analyze the rapid rise in equity funding for financial technology firms, the effectiveness of policy measures in response to pandemic, and the evolution of international banking.
The Basel Committee for Banking Supervision (BCBS) met in September 2021 and reviewed climate-related financial risks, discussed impact of digitalization, and welcomed efforts by the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation to develop a common set of sustainability reporting standards
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) issued a Cease and Desist Order against MUFG Union Bank for deficiencies in technology and operational risk governance.