Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Securitization Post-Enron

View through CrossRef
This article has two objectives: To explain the threats to securitization in the post-Enron economic and regulatory climate, and to explore, more normatively, whether the threats are justified. Because securitization uses special-purpose vehicles and facilitates off-balance sheet financing, it has been tainted by Enron's abuses, which relied heavily on special-purpose entities and off-balance sheet financing. There are, however, very fundamental differences between Enron's deals and securitization transactions. Securitization is normally used by companies to obtain lower-cost financing through removal of intermediaries between the company and the ultimate source of funds, the capital markets. This is markedly different from Enron's use of special-purpose vehicles for mere balance-sheet manipulation. Even where securitization is used to keep debt off a company's balance sheet, it unambiguously transfers risk from the company to third parties. Perhaps the most fundamental difference, however, turns on conflicts of interest. The complexities of the Enron deals, and perhaps of certain securitization transactions, make it difficult for corporate directors and shareholders under existing corporate-law procedures to knowledgeably approve the deals. In the face of complexity, they also must rely on the business judgment of the managers that structure the deals - a reliance that may be misplaced where, as in Enron, those managers have significant conflicts of interest. In contrast, management in securitization transactions have been free of material conflicts. The absence of material conflicts may well explain why actual securitization transactions have not raised any of the excesses found in Enron or other corporate scandals. The absence of excesses does not, however, mean that securitization is desirable. I therefore next examine whether securitization is efficient and fair, and conclude it is both. Securitization enables companies to obtain low-cost capital market financing, and provides liquidity for otherwise viable companies that need but cannot otherwise obtain financing. And it does this without prejudicing any third-parties, such as unsecured creditors. Moreover, the availability of securitization as a financing option actually facilitates bankruptcy rehabilitation policy.
Title: Securitization Post-Enron
Description:
This article has two objectives: To explain the threats to securitization in the post-Enron economic and regulatory climate, and to explore, more normatively, whether the threats are justified.
Because securitization uses special-purpose vehicles and facilitates off-balance sheet financing, it has been tainted by Enron's abuses, which relied heavily on special-purpose entities and off-balance sheet financing.
There are, however, very fundamental differences between Enron's deals and securitization transactions.
Securitization is normally used by companies to obtain lower-cost financing through removal of intermediaries between the company and the ultimate source of funds, the capital markets.
This is markedly different from Enron's use of special-purpose vehicles for mere balance-sheet manipulation.
Even where securitization is used to keep debt off a company's balance sheet, it unambiguously transfers risk from the company to third parties.
Perhaps the most fundamental difference, however, turns on conflicts of interest.
The complexities of the Enron deals, and perhaps of certain securitization transactions, make it difficult for corporate directors and shareholders under existing corporate-law procedures to knowledgeably approve the deals.
In the face of complexity, they also must rely on the business judgment of the managers that structure the deals - a reliance that may be misplaced where, as in Enron, those managers have significant conflicts of interest.
In contrast, management in securitization transactions have been free of material conflicts.
The absence of material conflicts may well explain why actual securitization transactions have not raised any of the excesses found in Enron or other corporate scandals.
The absence of excesses does not, however, mean that securitization is desirable.
I therefore next examine whether securitization is efficient and fair, and conclude it is both.
Securitization enables companies to obtain low-cost capital market financing, and provides liquidity for otherwise viable companies that need but cannot otherwise obtain financing.
And it does this without prejudicing any third-parties, such as unsecured creditors.
Moreover, the availability of securitization as a financing option actually facilitates bankruptcy rehabilitation policy.

Related Results

[RETRACTED] Keanu Reeves CBD Gummies v1
[RETRACTED] Keanu Reeves CBD Gummies v1
[RETRACTED]Keanu Reeves CBD Gummies ==❱❱ Huge Discounts:[HURRY UP ] Absolute Keanu Reeves CBD Gummies (Available)Order Online Only!! ❰❰= https://www.facebook.com/Keanu-Reeves-CBD-G...
A Primer on Securitization
A Primer on Securitization
A Primer on Securitization introduces readers to America's newest system of raising capital: what it is, how it operates, and what difference securitization makes. G...
Why do Moroccan banks securitize?
Why do Moroccan banks securitize?
PurposeThis paper analyzes the ex-ante determinants of asset securitization in Moroccan banks, providing a detailed exploration of factors influencing securitization in the Morocca...
The Jurisprudence of Enron: Professionalism as Interpretation
The Jurisprudence of Enron: Professionalism as Interpretation
Jurisprudence can seem like a formidably esoteric field, with conceptual arguments carried on at a high level of abstraction, seemingly remote from the concerns of practicing lawye...
The effect of securitization on US bank lending and monetary policy transmission
The effect of securitization on US bank lending and monetary policy transmission
Purpose– The purpose of this paper is to assess the effect of securitization on US bank lending and monetary policy transmission.Design/methodology/approach– The authors use a samp...
The Securitization and De-Securitization of Kurdish Societal Security in Turkey, Iraq, Iran, And Syria
The Securitization and De-Securitization of Kurdish Societal Security in Turkey, Iraq, Iran, And Syria
The four countries hosting Kurdish populations in the Middle East have mainly been politically centralized in character and sought to follow a homogeneous nation-state model throug...
Securitization and Insider Trading
Securitization and Insider Trading
ABSTRACT Securitizations are complex and opaque transactions. We hypothesize that bank insiders trade on private information about banks': (1) securitization-related...
Securitization outside of the West: conceptualizing the securitization–neo-patrimonialism nexus in Africa
Securitization outside of the West: conceptualizing the securitization–neo-patrimonialism nexus in Africa
Securitization is arguably the most successful theoretical framework to analyse security beyond the military confines with the nation state as the dominant actor within the interna...

Back to Top