Working paper series / Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe-Universität, Institute for Law and Finance
Contingent convertible securities: from theory
to CRD IV
- 9.01 This chapter outlines the development of Contingent Convertible Securities (CoCos) for financial institutions from their theoretical origins to their current form under the European Union’s Fourth Capital Requirements Directive framework and its Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive and examines the effect the framework and the directive have had on their design and ability to fulfill the ends for which they were initially conceived. It examines this from two viewpoints: the policy goals CoCos are meant to achieve and the corporate law issues raised by the requirements of CRD IV. On the policy side we conclude that CRD IV and the RRD have significantly limited the amount of CoCos a financial institution is likely to issue, but expanded their possible forms by including write-down as well as convertible structures and narrowed the differences between them and pure regulatory bail-in structures, thus calling into question whether they are truly ‘going concern’ rather than ‘gone concern’ capital. On the company law side we conclude that a number of issues, in particular the limits on an authorization of management to issue CoCos and shares, the scope of the shareholders’ right of pre-emption, the concept of dilution and the distinction between contributions in cash and in kind merit closer attention than they appear to have received in the current discussion on CoCos.
A new conflict rule for securitization and other cross-border assignments : a potential threat from Europe
- One of the dangers of harmonisation and unification processes taking place within the framework of the EU is that they may result in the codification of the lowest common denominator. This is precisely what is threatening to happen in respect of assignment. Referring the transfer of receivables by way of assignment to the law of the assignor’s residence, as article 13 of the Proposal does, would be opting for the most conservative solution and would for many Member States be a step backward rather than forward. A conflict rule referring assignment to the law of the assignor's residence is too rigid to do justice to the dynamic nature of assignments in cross-border transactions and it is unjustly one-sided. It offers no real advantages when compared to other conflict rules; it even has serious disadvantages which make the conflict rule unsuitable for efficient assignment-based cross-border transactions. It is not unconceivable that this conflict rule would even be contrary to the fundamental freedoms of the ECTreaty. The Community legislators in particular should be careful not to needlessly adopt rules which create insurmountable obstacles for cross-border business where choice-of-law by the parties would perfectly do. Community legislation has a special responsibility to create a smooth legal environment for single market transactions.
The lender of last resort in the european single financial market
Garry J. Schinasi
Pedro Gustavo Teixeira
- The paper examines challenges in effectively implementing the lender-of-last-resort function in the EU single financial market. Briefly highlighted are features of the EU financial landscape that could increase EU systemic financial risk. Briefly described are the complexities of the EU’s financial-stability architecture for preventing and resolving financial problems, including lender-of-last-resort operations. The paper examines how the lender-of-last-resort function might materialize during a systemic financial disturbance affecting more than one EU Member State. The paper identifies challenges and possible ways of enhancing the effectiveness of the existing architecture.