2. Securitization transactions can be very costly to an issuer, because such transactions are relatively new and (so far) less amenable to standardization. Fees for obtaining investment banking expertise, legal services and credit rating can be very high, and preparation times very long in undertaking a future flow securitization deal.本文来自辣.文,论-文·网原文请找腾讯324,9114
3. However, such transactions can be structured to mitigate sovereign risk so that a developing country borrower can access longer-term financing at lower interest rates than unsecured bonds. Typically such benefits of lower interest rates or longer maturity far outweigh the high fixed costs of undertaking future flow securitization,especially during a crisis.
4. The size of future receivables of developing countries that are suitable for securitization is much larger than (more than ten times) the current level of issuance at under $10 billion annually. Of these receivables, a large part comes from outside Latin America, especially from countries in Eastern Europe and Central Asia that are rich in fuel and mineral exports. Countries in the Middle-East have large oil receivables. In South Asia, the potential for securitization lies in remittances, credit card vouchers, and telephone receivables.
5. A major constraint to the growth of future flow transactions arises from the paucity of good collateral in developing countries.Oil is an example of a good collateral for several reasons:
论文范文http://www.chuibin.com/ a) the stock of oil in a country is more or less well-known; b) this is a highly ‘liquid’asset with well-developed global markets, c) it is usually of gre importance to a nation’s economy and, therefore, its exports are less vulnerable to government interference. Finally, crude oil may be a better collateral than refined petroleum because the former cannot be easily diverted to foreign importers (obligors) not included in the securitized structure.In comparison, agricultural commodities tend to be more difficult to securitize, although the number of such deals has risen rapidly in recent years.
6. The paucity of good collateral is also reflected in the absence of high-quality public and private issuers in developing countries. Securitization deals tend to be complex and involve high preparation costs and long lead-times.The lack of legal clarity on bankruptcy procedures in many developing countries adds further complexity to these deals. In some cases, policy makers are simply not familiar with this mechanism.Many issuers are constrained by the burden of full disclosure of information in a timely fashion. Others worry about whether the use of future flow secured bonds will taint their creditworthiness.
7. Public policy to facilitate future flow-backed securitizations should focus on removing these constraints. Transaction costs may be reduced through expansion of the scale of these deals by planning a series of deals by the same issuer (the so-called master trust arrangement). Establishment and use of indigenous credit rating agencies to obtain domestic credit rating can also reduce transaction costs, although care has to be taken in mapping local rating scales to international scales.Certain segments of this asset class!asuch as securitization of oil receivables!amay be amenable to standardizati and a cookie-cutter approach. Clarification of bankruptcy laws will be helpful for all financial deals including securitization. Also, educating policy makers and potential issuers would help promote this asset class.
8. However, future flow securitization increases the level of inflexible debt of an issuer at the micro level, and of the nation at the macro level.Although the current level of future flow debt is nowhere near the danger level in any country, such debt combined with debt from other preferred creditors can reduce the flexibility and the ability to service the non-preferred debt.
上一页 [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] 下一页
应收账款证券化英文文献和翻译 第3页下载如图片无法显示或论文不完整，请联系qq752018766
