United Kingdom

Author: | Published: 22 Jun 2004
Email a friend

To include more than one recipient, please seperate each email address with a semi-colon ';'

After the recent changes to UK insolvency law, the latter part of 2003 and early 2004 have seen a number of material developments at the EU level that will have an impact on structured finance transactions documented under English law. There have also been some relevant changes to UK tax law.

EU Prospectus Directive

The Prospectus Directive came into force on 31 December 2003 and EU member states have until 1 July 2005 to implement it. Its stated purpose is to allow companies to access the European capital markets in a more efficient manner, while endeavouring to protect investors across Europe by providing for uniform levels of disclosure. The overhaul of the current regime has important implications for issuers of debt and equity securities, including issuers of securities in structured finance transactions. In some important respects, the Prospectus Directive already affects issuers of securities.

Key provisions
The key requirement of the Directive is that (subject to certain exemptions) an issuer of securities will be required to publish a prospectus prepared in compliance with the Prospectus Directive and approved by the competent authority of its home member state if it offers securities to the public in the EU or its securities are admitted to trading on a regulated market in the EU (this would cover listing on an EU stock exchange).

In addition (subject, again, to certain exemptions) issuers whose securities are admitted to trading on a regulated market in the EU will be obliged to provide the competent authority of their home member state with a document containing or referring to all information that the issuer has published or made available to the public over the preceding 12 months in member states and in non-EU countries in compliance with its obligations under EU or other securities laws.

Offers to the public
The definition contained in the Prospectus Directive of what constitutes an offer of securities to the public is wide (defined as consisting of a "communication ... presenting sufficient information on the terms of the offer and the securities to be offered so as to enable an investor to decide to purchase or subscribe for securities") but most offerings of securities in structured finance transactions should be able to be structured so as to fall within one of the exemptions. The principal exemptions that are relevant in the context of structured finance transactions are for offers of securities to qualified investors or to less than 100 people per member state (other than qualified investors) and offers of securities with a minimum total consideration per investor or per specified denomination of €50,000. Qualified investors are broadly defined under the Prospectus Directive as regulated entities, national and regional governments, central banks, international organizations, large corporates, collective investment schemes and pension funds.

Admission to trading
The second case in which the production of a prospectus is required is where securities are to be admitted to trading on a regulated market. It is likely that it is principally this second case that will catch offerings of securities in structured finance transactions.

Home member state
Under the Prospectus Directive the power to approve a prospectus lies with the competent authority of the home member state. Member states also have a number of discretions under the Prospectus Directive (and under the Transparency Directive). Hence the determination or choice of the home member state has significant implications.

The definition of home member state in the Prospectus Directive is complex and its interpretation has been subject to some debate. In some, but not all, circumstances the home member state is a matter of choice, whether the issuer is incorporated within or outside the EU.

For public offers or admissions to trading of all non-equity securities with denominations of at least €1,000 or its near equivalent in another currency, the offeror or the person seeking admission will be free to select as its home member state, on an issue-by-issue basis, the member state where the securities are offered to the public or to be admitted to trading.

For public offers or admission to trading of equity securities or of non-equity securities with a denomination of less than €1,000, essentially the home member state will be (in the case of an EU issuer) the member state where the issuer has its registered office or (in the case or a non-EU issuer) the member state where such securities are first offered to the public or admitted to trading by the issuer after the date of entry into force of the Prospectus Directive (December 31 2003). Issuers are then tied to that member state for all future public offers or admissions to trading of such securities.

In the context of issues of securities in structured finance transactions, the minimum €1,000 denomination requirement should be easy to achieve. However, whether certain types of securities are treated as non-equity or equity securities is a more difficult analysis and there may be some structured finance transactions in which the ability to choose the home member state may be restricted.

Arrangers of structured finance transactions need to be aware of the implications of being tied to a particular home member state in the context of a particular transaction or a particular issuer of securities.

Factors to take into account are:

  • Eligibility requirements and continuing obligations: although member states will not be permitted to require disclosure over and above what is provided for in connection with the Prospectus Directive, the Prospectus Directive permits the competent authority of a home member state to impose other requirements in the context of admission to trading of securities, for example, more stringent eligibility requirements and more onerous continuing obligations.
  • Financial information: under the Transparency Directive, the home member state will be entitled to impose more stringent requirements than those prescribed by the Directive.
  • Practical matters: the competent authorities of particular member states may be easier or more difficult to deal with at a practical level and operational and practical issues may have a bearing on the choice of home member state. Factors to consider include the relevant competent authority's language, its familiarity with structured products generally and its review and approval process.

Content of prospectuses
In relation to the content of prospectuses, the Prospectus Directive provides for a so-called building-block approach, under which the detailed contents requirements for prospectuses are set out in a matrix of schedules and additional building blocks contained in an EU Regulation implementing the Prospectus Directive. This Regulation will be directly applicable in the member states from July 1 2005 without the need for domestic implementing legislation. Hence, the contents requirements for prospectuses laid down by the Regulation will not be subject to the imposition of addtional requirements by particular member states and so will be the same throughout the EU. It remains to be seen, however, whether the Regulation will be subject to different interpretations at a practical level by different competent authorities.

The idea behind the building-block approach is that an issuer must combine several building blocks to draft its prospectus. The combination will depend principally on the type of securities. In a number of cases the required combination will be obvious. However, there are conceivably a number of different types of asset-backed securities for which the combination is not necessarily clear-cut. Where the securities have features completely different from the securities catered for in the Regulation, the relevant competent authority will be free to decide what information is required in the prospectus after consultation with the issuer. Generally, however, reduced disclosure requirements will apply in the case of prospectuses for debt securities with a minimum denomination of at least €50,000 or equivalent in other currencies (wholesale debt securities). In particular, issuers of such securities will not be required to produce a summary of the prospectus. Nor will they be required to fill the annual disclosure statements mentioned above.

Financial disclosure
The financial disclosure requirements of the Prospectus Directive and the Regulation have been the subject of a considerable amount of comment and debate. The Regulation requires the prospectus for a structured finance transaction to contain historical financial information covering the latest two financial years where, since the date of incorporation or establishment of the issuer, the issuer has commenced operations and financial statements have been made up. If the issuer has been operating for less than a year (which will be the case for newly incorporated vehicle companies) the historical financial information will be required to cover that period. It is not clear what the implications are for certain issuers that may not be required to prepare accounts at all (for example Cayman Islands special purpose vehicles (SPVs)) and will not have made up financial statements.

In the case of an EU issuer, the general principal is that historical financial information included in the prospectus must be prepared in accordance with International Accounting Standards (IAS) or, if not applicable (as IAS is only compulsory for consolidated accounts of listed companies), in accordance with the national accounting standards of the member state in which the issuer is incorporated.

In the case of a non-EU issuer, the historical financial information will need to be prepared in accordance with IAS or in accordance with the equivalent national accounting standards of the country where the issuer is incorporated. The Commission has not addressed the question of what constitutes equivalence for these purposes. If the relevant national accounting standards are not equivalent to IAS, the financial information included in the prospectus will be required to be restated in accordance with IAS, unless the prospectus relates only to securities with a minimum denomination of at least €50,000 or equivalent in other currencies, in which case the prospectus will be required to include a prominent statement that the financial information has not been prepared in accordance with IAS and a narrative describing the differences between IAS and the accounting principles adopted by the issuer.

The applicability of the financial disclosure requirements to issuers of securities in structured finance transactions that constitute equity securities (for example, preference shares) has not yet been determined but the more onerous requirements applicable to equity securities may apply.

EU Transparency Directive

On March 30 2004, the European Parliament approved a draft of the Transparency Directive, which is intended to be implemented at the member state level in 2005 or 2006.

The proposed Transparency Directive sets out ongoing disclosure requirements for issuers of debt securities (including securities issued in structured finance transactions) after these securities have been admitted to trading on an EU regulated market. The provisions do not distinguish between EU and non-EU issuers, and an issuer that has already listed debt securities before the Transparency Directive is implemented will be subject to its provisions unless it qualifies for an exemption.

Issuers of EU listed debt securities will be required to produce annual and half-yearly reports including consolidated financial statements prepared in accordance with IAS. The competent authority of a non-EU issuer's home member state may exempt that issuer from these provisions if the law of the third country where the issuer is incorporated imposes equivalent requirements. (Although it not yet clear what equivalence means for these purposes, the concept of equivalence is apparently intended to be applied consistently under the Prospectus Directive and the Transparency Directive.) The requirement to file periodic financial reports will not apply to issuers who have only issued debt securities with a minimum denomination of at least €50,000 or equivalent in other currencies that are admitted to trading on an EU regulated market.

Issuers of listed securities in structured finance transactions that constitute equity securities may be subject to the full financial reporting requirements that will apply to listed shares under the Transparency Directive.

Implications for existing transactions

There are no grandfathering provisions in the Prospectus Directive or the Transparency Directive. An issuer of securities that are already listed on an EU exchange will be subject to the ongoing reporting requirements of the two Directives, unless an exemption is applicable.

In relation to issuers with existing note issuance programmes that are listed on an EU exchange, any new issue of securities under the programme that are intended to be listed on the exchange will require the revision of the prospectus for the programme to the extent that the existing prospectus does not comply with the requirements of the Prospectus Directive and the Regulation.

Matters for arrangers and issuers to consider now

Now that the Prospectus Directive and the implementing Regulations are in force, and in the run up to the implementation of the Prospectus Directive at the member state level and the finalization of the Transparency Directive, arrangers of structured finance transactions should be aware of the following matters and plan accordingly:

  • Arrangers should consider the requirements of particular member states as they develop in relation to the Prospectus Directive in terms of choosing a home member state for the issuing vehicles in particular transactions. We expect that the UK, Ireland and Luxembourg will continue to be the jurisdictions of choice for listing asset-backed securities in the EU.
  • Arrangers should consider setting the minimum denomination of any asset-backed securities in excess of the €50,000 threshold for wholesale debt securities to be able to choose the home member state for issues of listed securities on a deal-by-deal-basis, to ensure that the reduced disclosure requirements for wholesale debt securities will be applicable to any prospectus that has to be prepared, to avoid the necessity to restate financial information in accordance with IAS (for non-EU issuers) and to avoid the necessity for the issuer to file an annual disclosure statement under the Prospectus Directive and periodic reports under the Transparency Directive.
  • Arrangers may also wish to consider, in the case of non-EU issuing vehicles, listing the securities on a non-EU exchange (for example, the Cayman Islands, Bermuda or Jersey stock exchanges) in order to avoid the ongoing financial reporting requirements of the Transparency Directive.
  • Arrangers of note issuance programmes should consider whether existing programmes will have to be updated before issuing a further series of notes once the Prospectus Directive has been implemented at the member state level. Arrangers may wish to consider changing the terms of programmes to ensure that the minimum denomination of notes that may be issued under them is greater than €50,000, for the reasons outlined above, or moving the listing of programmes to another member state or outside the EU altogether, depending on the requirements of the relevant home member state.

Financial Collateral Arrangements (No 2) Regulations 2003

On 26 December 2003, the Financial Collateral Arrangements (No 2) Regulations 2003 came into force, implementing the EU Financial Collateral Arrangements Directive of 2002.

The Financial Collateral Regulations affect the validity and enforcement of certain charges that are over cash or financial instruments in collateral arrangements and are intended to facilitate the use of such arrangements. In this context, collateral arrangements are agreements or arrangements the purpose of which is to secure or otherwise cover the relevant financial obligations owed to the collateral-taker and would therefore cover, for example, standard collateral arrangements such as the ISDA English law Credit Support Deed and Credit Support Annex. Clearly, structured finance transactions containing credit support arrangements under English law (such as collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) or certain repackaging structures) are covered by the Financial Collateral Regulations.

The main implications are as follows:

  • It will no longer be necessary to register charges over cash (for example in blocked deposit accounts) or over financial instruments such as bonds and other similar items under the UK Companies Act.
  • Certain UK insolvency law, provisions that would otherwise apply to collateral arrangements (for example, the power to disclaim onerous property) have been disapplied.
  • Closeout netting provisions in collateral arrangements are to take effect in accordance with their terms, notwithstanding that a collateral provider or collateral taker under the relevant arrangement is subject to winding-up proceedings or reorganization measures.
  • A collateral-provider may create a security interest under which it is provided for the collateral-taker to use and dispose of any collateral advanced under the collateral arrangement.
  • Where a legal or equitable mortgage is the security interest created or arising under the relevant collateral arrangement, there is no requirement to apply to a court to appropriate collateral.
  • Where collateral provided is in the form of book-entry securities held through one or more intermediaries, the domestic law of the jurisdiction in which the relevant account is maintained determines issues such as the requirements for perfecting the collateral arrangement, the transfer or passing of control or possession of book-entry securities under such arrangement and whether a person's title to or interest in book-entry securities is overridden by, or subordinate to, a competing title or interest.

UK tax legislation changes

One of the policy objectives underlying the UK government's 2004 Budget is to clamp down on abusive mass-marketed tax avoidance schemes. New rules are being introduced, increasing the level of disclosure of financial products set up for UK tax avoidance purposes and requiring promoters of such schemes to disclose them to the Inland Revenue in advance of their implementation. Similarly, a number of technical loopholes have been closed in the increasingly complex rules governing taxation of derivatives and debt relationships.

Not so much desired policy but forced reaction are behind the recent changes to the UK's transfer pricing rules. Various recent European judgments prohibit tax discrimination between EU member states. The UK tax rules requiring connected party transactions (such as intra-group loans and guarantees) to be at arms' length rates/prices now apply to UK transactions as well as cross-border transactions.

Lastly, even where tax rules are static, moving market practice can still collide with them. With an ever-increasing range of complex structured products being issued with increasing regularity, the existing minefield of UK tax legislation is becoming progressively more difficult to navigate safely. Most structured products are issued out of non-UK vehicles, which helps steer clear of many of the issues. However, the past year has witnessed a growing minority trend of issuing structured products out of the UK, giving rise to potential stamp duty costs on their issue or transfer and restrictions on the tax-deductibility of their interest.

Market developments

In this section, we examine some of the recent market developments relevant to structured finance transactions.

Synthetic CDOs

One of the most remarkable trends in the international capital markets in recent years has been the explosive growth in structured credit products that combine the features of capital markets instruments with derivatives.

The asset class that has come to dominate this segment of the market is the synthetic CDO. A synthetic CDO is an issue of debt obligations structured so that the investor is exposed to the credit risk of a portfolio of underlying assets by virtue of a credit derivative (usually one or a number of credit default swaps (CDSs)) entered into by the issuer of the obligations. In a synthetic CDO, the credit portfolio is typically made up of corporate and/or sovereign bonds, but it may also consist in whole or in part of loans (a synthetic CLO) or asset-backed securities, which may be other CDOs (known as a CDO squared or synthetic resecuritization). Increasingly, synthetic CDOs have been structured so as to separate out the various tranches or layers of credit risk otherwise comprised in a multiple tranche CDO into packages that can be sold separately to investors. Single-tranche synthetic CDOs (known as correlation trades) now account for most synthetic CDO issuance. For the investor the advantage of a single-tranche deal is control and flexibility and for the arranger it is the ability to sell a particular piece of a capital structure to a particular customer without having to find purchasers for the rest of the structure. Single-tranche deals are particularly well suited to issuance under note issuance programmes and the speed, economy and flexibility of programme issuance are a powerful incentive to arrangers in structuring these deals.

Initially, when synthetic CDOs first started to be brought to the market in Europe, these transactions were used as risk transfer mechanisms to reduce balance sheet capital requirements for financial institutions. Over time the predominant goal has evolved from balance sheet risk transfer to arbitrage. In arbitrage transactions, the underlying credits are specifically selected for the transaction and do not necessarily reside on the balance sheet of the originator. They are chosen for the spread at which they are trading versus their rating.

Over the past year credit spreads have tightened considerably with the result that arbitrage opportunities have lessened. The result of this trend has been that arrangers of synthetic CDO transactions have been considering other types of transactions that have the potential of delivering greater yield to investors than would otherwise be the case in the current market environment. In particular, arrangers have been exploring new asset classes and structural innovations.

  • Asset classes: There has been a considerable growth in interest in synthetic CDOs referenced to portfolios of asset-backed securities and high-yield debt securities.
  • Structural innovations: Among the structural features that have become more common in the current market environment are the following:
    • The use of cash diversion features (borrowed from cashflow deals) in synthetic deals. For example, performance triggers that divert cash to a reserve account that provides extra subordination for the mezzanine tranches.
    • Contingent coupons or step-up coupons.
    • The use of equity default swaps (where a payout is triggered by the fall in an entity's share price below a certain level) and constant maturity technology (where the premiums payable under the relevant swap reset based on the mark-to-market value of the swap).

Fund-linked notes

The last quarter of 2003 and the first few months of 2004 have seen an increasing interest in fund-linked notes. Fund-linked notes are typically issued pursuant to structured medium-term note programmes by financial institutions, which may or may not hedge the fund-linked notes by actually purchasing the shares/units in the relevant fund, or pursuant repackaging programmes by SPVs, which will purchase the shares/units in the relevant fund.

Typically, fund-linked notes issued by financial institutions will provide that, on redemption, investors will receive an amount calculated by reference to the increase in the net asset value (NAV) of the relevant fund over the term of the fund-linked notes. In many cases, there is also a principal protection element to the redemption payment, although this can also be achieved by a so-called knock-out feature, whereby the notes will be redeemed if the NAV of the fund drops below a certain value.

Issues of fund-linked notes by SPVs are generally pass-through structures, pursuant to which the investor receives amounts that the SPVs receives from the underlying fund. Again, there may be a principal protection feature, for example, provided either through a swap or alternatively through the purchase by the SPV of highly rated Eurobonds (often zero coupon).

Issues associated with fund-linked notes are:

  • Place of incorporation: Consideration should be given to establishing the SPV in a jurisdiction that is tax efficient, but it is also important that the SPV be able to issue fund-linked notes without being treated as a fund itself or as the promoter of a fund under the laws of that jurisdiction. In addition, certain jurisdictions may not allow offers to the public to be made in relation to notes linked to certain types of fund.
  • Listing: The rules applying to the listing of fund-linked notes on various stock exchanges in the EU differ and so care must be taken to ensure that it is possible to obtain a listing. This is particularly the case where the underlying fund is not listed (which may prevent a listing of the fund-linked notes in the UK and Ireland). For the Luxembourg Stock Exchange, generally the criterion for listing a fund-linked note is that the regulator of the underlying fund has been recognized by the Commission de Surveillance du Secteur Financier (CSSF). Whilst the CSSF has recognized regulatory authorities in the EU member states, Switzerland, the US and Canada (among others), the regulatory authorities in some other jurisdictions, such as the Cayman Islands, have not been recognized. These issues are critical if a listing of the notes is required, either as a result of regulatory or other restrictions on investors that limit their ability to buy unlisted notes or so that the issuing SPV can pay interest free of withholding tax (for example, Irish SPVs usually take advantage of the Irish quoted Eurobond exemption to the requirement to withhold tax under Irish law).
  • Prospective investors: Fund-linked notes may be targeted at retail investors, which raises certain issues (some of which are examined below) that arrangers and their advisers should be aware of.

New classes of investors

There has been a considerable increase in interest by arrangers in offering structured products to retail investors and high net worth individuals. The desire of arrangers to market an ever-increasing range of sophisticated financial products to an increasingly wide universe of potential investors has been accompanied by an increasing awareness of the attendant risks of a legal, regulatory and reputational nature. While many of these risks can be effectively managed, careful consideration should be given to them when marketing products which until recently have been the exclusive domain of institutional investors.

Among the structures adopted by arrangers in marketing structured credit products to investors other than institutional investors is the use of a distributor intermediary. Typically, the distributor intermediary will be a financial institution with particular knowledge or coverage of the jurisdictions in which the relevant securities are being offered. It will purchase the securities from the arranger and then sell the securities to the targeted investors in the relevant jurisdiction. In such a structure, there is no direct contractual relationship between the arranger and the ultimate investors.

Issues for arrangers to consider when adopting a distributor intermediary approach are as follows:

  • the relevant foreign law issues (including prospectus content and registration requirements).
  • the appropriate disclosure levels in the prospectus, including risk disclosure and disclaimers.
  • the status and financial viability of the distributor intermediary.
  • the contractual arrangements between the arranger and the distributor intermediary. In particular the arranger should consider appropriate representations and warranties from the distributor intermediary as well as indemnification of the arranger against any liability arising from the activities of the distributor intermediary in connection with the offering.

Author biography

Michael Dodson

Simmons &Simmons

Michael Dodson is an assistant in the capital markets group of the financial markets department of Simmons & Simmons. He has acted on a wide range of equity and debt capital markets and structured finance transactions and in particular has focused on CDOs and repackaging. Michael's recent experience includes advising Barclays in relation to the Lambda synthetic CLO (the first CLO of UK small and medium enterprise loans) and CSFB on the recent Cheyne Correlation CDO.

Michael was educated at Queens' College, Cambridge. He qualified as a solicitor in England in 1996, and in Hong Kong in 1997, where he spent three years working in the capital markets group of the Hong Kong office of Simmons & Simmons.



Simmons & Simmons
Citypoint, 1 Ropemaker Street
London
EC2Y 9SS
Tel: +44 20 7628 2020
Fax: +44 20 7628 2070

Upcoming events

  • 22feb

    Asia M&A Forum

    Island Shangri-La Hotel, Hong Kong February February 22-23 2012

Web seminars

Proposed US offering reforms
March 8, 2012
4.00 pm GMT