• 24 Jun 2008 at 4:34 PM
  • Fed

The Fed Put In Loan Provisions

Federal Reserve And Loan Agreements.jpgCorporate loan agreements are being drafted to include an express provision allowing lenders to transfer their loans to the Federal Reserve, a loan expert tells DealBreaker. The Fed has been accepting a much broader range of collateral in exchange for short-term loans through what is known as Fed “repos.” In a repo, dealers bid on borrowing money versus various types of general collateral.
The new provisions seem to anticipate the possibility that banks might use corporate loans in repos, accessing cash from the Fed in exchange for the credits. In the past the assignment provisions of loan agreements that governed transfers typically did not expressly permit transfer to the Fed. Instead, they permitted assignment to others commercial banks, insurance companies, investment or mutual funds or other entity that is an “accredited investor” under securities laws. The new provision illustrates the ever more pervasive role the Fed has in the current credit markets.

Comments (11)

  1. Posted by guest | June 24, 2008 at 4:46 PM

    That’s one big ass CLO

  2. Posted by guest | June 24, 2008 at 4:52 PM

    Carney, what law firm(s) is doing this, what banks are demanding this, and what corporations are so bent up to refinance that they are allowing this in their credit agreement?

  3. Posted by guest | June 24, 2008 at 4:58 PM

    Out of curiosity, what is your source? Not because I dont believe you, but because this could be a huge liability.

  4. Posted by guest | June 24, 2008 at 5:07 PM

    4:46:
    or a true National Bank.

  5. Posted by John Carney | June 24, 2008 at 5:09 PM

    Obviously I can’t reveal the source. It’s someone involved in the loan business from at a large credit market investor.

  6. Posted by guest | June 24, 2008 at 5:20 PM

    I call bullshit. I’m in the process of amending and restating a credit agreement for my company. None of the 15 banks in our bank group has said bupkis about it.

  7. Posted by guest | June 24, 2008 at 5:37 PM

    @5:20 Agree with you that this is bullshit. Any borrower would be stupid to accept the provision and any bank would be stupid to put it in there because it would show how weak their capital situation is. But then again, I wouldn’t put it past Citi. Oh wait, are they even too big to fail anymore?

  8. Posted by guest | June 24, 2008 at 6:15 PM

    These provisions aren’t new. I have an ’06 credit agreement in front of me that has such a provision.

  9. Posted by guest | June 24, 2008 at 11:08 PM

    As long as rates, maturity etc stay the same and nothing is accelerated upon hand over to the FED – what’s the big deal?
    In fact, if I were the borrower, I’d suggest to put the language in. Ups the change to be able to buy the debt back later at a discount.
    What am I missing?
    Ari

  10. Posted by guest | June 25, 2008 at 5:46 AM

    I just love the idea of the Fed being used as a dumping ground for all sorts of loans that are not worth the paper they’re written on.
    Luv it!

  11. Posted by guest | June 25, 2008 at 9:26 AM

    @5:38 funny you mention Citi as I am in an amending/restatement of a CF, and they’re the lone pain-in-the-ass in the whole process.

Leave a comment

You can log in with your account or comment as a guest below.