Repo and Derivatives Portfolios Between Insolvency Law and Regulation

IF 0.6 3区 社会学 Q2 LAW American Bankruptcy Law Journal Pub Date : 2017-06-10 DOI:10.2139/ssrn.2984199
P. Paech
{"title":"Repo and Derivatives Portfolios Between Insolvency Law and Regulation","authors":"P. Paech","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2984199","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the general perception, financial institutions’ immense repo and derivatives portfolios are friends and foes alike: friends, because they provide for levels of market liquidity that would be unimaginable without them. Foes, because both types of transactions are somehow regarded as being unstable and volatile in their nature, potentially exacerbating and accelerating crisis situations. This tension is also reflected in the treatment of repos and derivatives in the event of a corporate crisis. Insolvency law and relevant regulation seem to support and protect repo and derivatives transactions, while at the same time imposing limits on them, trying to balance liquidity arguments with those relating to stability. This paper concludes that regulation is better placed than insolvency law to address systemic stability concerns, whereas relevant insolvency rules guarantee high levels of liquidity while they are ineffective in terms of stability. The paper will concentrate on EU and US law, complemented by international benchmarks. It expands on certain aspects first developed my earlier paper on insolvency safe harbours.","PeriodicalId":44862,"journal":{"name":"American Bankruptcy Law Journal","volume":"95 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Bankruptcy Law Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2984199","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the general perception, financial institutions’ immense repo and derivatives portfolios are friends and foes alike: friends, because they provide for levels of market liquidity that would be unimaginable without them. Foes, because both types of transactions are somehow regarded as being unstable and volatile in their nature, potentially exacerbating and accelerating crisis situations. This tension is also reflected in the treatment of repos and derivatives in the event of a corporate crisis. Insolvency law and relevant regulation seem to support and protect repo and derivatives transactions, while at the same time imposing limits on them, trying to balance liquidity arguments with those relating to stability. This paper concludes that regulation is better placed than insolvency law to address systemic stability concerns, whereas relevant insolvency rules guarantee high levels of liquidity while they are ineffective in terms of stability. The paper will concentrate on EU and US law, complemented by international benchmarks. It expands on certain aspects first developed my earlier paper on insolvency safe harbours.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
破产法与监管之间的回购和衍生品组合
人们普遍认为,金融机构庞大的回购和衍生品投资组合既是朋友,也是敌人:是朋友,因为它们提供了没有它们就无法想象的市场流动性水平。因为这两种类型的交易在某种程度上都被认为是不稳定和不稳定的,可能会加剧和加速危机局势。这种紧张关系也反映在企业危机时对回购和衍生品的处理上。破产法和相关法规似乎支持和保护回购和衍生品交易,同时对它们施加限制,试图在流动性争论与稳定性争论之间取得平衡。本文的结论是,在解决系统稳定性问题方面,监管比破产法更好,而相关的破产规则保证了高水平的流动性,但在稳定性方面却无效。该报告将以欧盟和美国法律为重点,辅以国际基准。它扩展了我之前关于破产安全港的论文中首先提出的某些方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
4
期刊最新文献
Steering Loan Modifications Post-Pandemic Passing the Parcel? Relationship Banking at the Onset of Financial Distress Treatment of Disputed Claims in Corporate Insolvency: Evolving Jurisprudence Paper Series VII - Arrangements and Compromise Government Activism in Bankruptcy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1