Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Videos
  • Submit an article
  • More
    • About JSF
    • Editorial Board
    • Published Ahead of Print (PAP)
  • IPR Logo
  • About Us
  • Journals
  • Publish
  • Advertise
  • Videos
  • Webinars
  • More
    • Awards
    • Article Licensing
    • Academic Use
  • Follow IIJ on LinkedIn
  • Follow IIJ on Twitter

User menu

  • Sample our Content
  • Request a demo
  • Log in

Search

  • ADVANCED SEARCH: Discover more content by journal, author or time frame
The Journal of Structured Finance
  • IPR Logo
  • About Us
  • Journals
  • Publish
  • Advertise
  • Videos
  • Webinars
  • More
    • Awards
    • Article Licensing
    • Academic Use
  • Sample our Content
  • Request a demo
  • Log in
The Journal of Structured Finance

The Journal of Structured Finance

ADVANCED SEARCH: Discover more content by journal, author or time frame

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Videos
  • Submit an article
  • More
    • About JSF
    • Editorial Board
    • Published Ahead of Print (PAP)
  • Follow IIJ on LinkedIn
  • Follow IIJ on Twitter
Article

The Volcker Rule and Conflict-of-Interest Rulemaking:
Will Traditional Securitization Survive?

Kenneth Marin, Michael Mitchell, Timothy Mohan and Evan Siegert
The Journal of Structured Finance Spring 2012, 18 (1) 10-21; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3905/jsf.2012.18.1.010
Kenneth Marin
is a partner at Chapman and Cutler LLP in New York, NY.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: kmarin@chapman.com
Michael Mitchell
is a partner at Chapman and Cutler LLP in Washington, DC.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: mitchell@chapman.com
Timothy Mohan
is a partner at Chapman and Cutler LLP in Chicago, IL.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: mohan@chapman.com
Evan Siegert
is managing director and senior counsel at the American Securitization Forum in New York, NY.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: esiegert@americansecuritization.com
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF (Subscribers Only)
Loading

Click to login and read the full article.

Don’t have access? Click here to request a demo 
Alternatively, Call a member of the team to discuss membership options
US and Overseas: +1 646-931-9045
UK: 0207 139 1600

Abstract

While many reforms in Dodd–Frank are aimed at the securitization market, the proposed rules to implement Sections 619 and 621 may fundamentally limit traditional securitization practices that are vital to the consumer economy. Section 619 and the related proposed rule, otherwise known as the Volcker Rule, are intended to prohibit banks from engaging in proprietary trading and sponsoring, owning, or having certain relationships with hedge funds and private equity funds. Many securitizations are brought within the scope of the rule because they rely on the same exemptions from the Investment Company Act, namely Section 3(c)(1) or 3(c)(7), as do traditional hedge funds and private equity funds. However, there is ample evidence that the Volcker Rule is intended to address concerns that have nothing to do with the securitization markets, including the securitization exemption language in Dodd–Frank that explicitly states, “[n]othing in [the Volcker Rule] shall be construed to limit or restrict the ability of a banking entity … to sell or securitize loans.” For this reason, industry participants believe that Congress intended the Volcker Rule to fully exempt securitizations from its prohibitions. If a broad exclusion is not granted, other provisions of the rule must be modified to accommodate securitization, such as the “Super 23A” provisions that prohibit banking entities from engaging in certain “covered transactions” with securitization entities that are often integral to the securitization process.

Section 621 and the related proposed rule, otherwise known as the conflict-of-interest rule, prohibit certain persons who create and distribute an asset-backed security (ABS) from engaging in transactions within one year after the date of the first sale of the ABS that would result in certain material conflicts of interest. The purpose of this prohibition is to eliminate incentives for market participants to intentionally design ABS to fail or default. Although the proposed rule does provide exceptions to the prohibition for risk-mitigating hedging activities, liquidity commitments, and bona fide market making, it is critical that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) clarify which activities, including those inherent to the securitization process, would or would not be prohibited by the rule. Additionally, it remains to be seen the extent to which meaningful disclosure may be used as a tool to manage conflicts of interest that would otherwise be prohibited under the proposed rule. By revising the proposed Volcker Rule and conflict-of-interest rule to preserve traditional securitization activities, these rules can effectively achieve their intended goals without impeding the recovery of the securitization market.

  • © 2012 Pageant Media Ltd
View Full Text

Don’t have access? Click here to request a demo

Alternatively, Call a member of the team to discuss membership options

US and Overseas: +1 646-931-9045

UK: 0207 139 1600

Log in using your username and password

Forgot your user name or password?
PreviousNext
Back to top

Explore our content to discover more relevant research

  • By topic
  • Across journals
  • From the experts
  • Monthly highlights
  • Special collections

In this issue

The Journal of Structured Finance: 18 (1)
The Journal of Structured Finance
Vol. 18, Issue 1
Spring 2012
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on The Journal of Structured Finance.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
The Volcker Rule and Conflict-of-Interest Rulemaking: Will Traditional Securitization Survive?
(Your Name) has sent you a message from The Journal of Structured Finance
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the The Journal of Structured Finance web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
The Volcker Rule and Conflict-of-Interest Rulemaking:
Will Traditional Securitization Survive?
Kenneth Marin, Michael Mitchell, Timothy Mohan, Evan Siegert
The Journal of Structured Finance Apr 2012, 18 (1) 10-21; DOI: 10.3905/jsf.2012.18.1.010

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Save To My Folders
Share
The Volcker Rule and Conflict-of-Interest Rulemaking:
Will Traditional Securitization Survive?
Kenneth Marin, Michael Mitchell, Timothy Mohan, Evan Siegert
The Journal of Structured Finance Apr 2012, 18 (1) 10-21; DOI: 10.3905/jsf.2012.18.1.010
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Tweet Widget Facebook Like LinkedIn logo

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • SECTION 619: THE PROPOSED VOLCKER RULE
    • SECTION 621: THE PROPOSED CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST RULE
    • ENDNOTES
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF (Subscribers Only)
  • PDF (Subscribers Only)

Similar Articles

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Highlights from Structured Finance Association (SFA)
  • Highlights from Global Capital
  • Editor’s Letter
Show more Article
LONDON
One London Wall, London, EC2Y 5EA
United Kingdom
+44 207 139 1600
 
NEW YORK
41 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10010
USA
+1 646 931 9045
pm-research@pageantmedia.com
 

Stay Connected

  • Follow IIJ on LinkedIn
  • Follow IIJ on Twitter

MORE FROM PMR

  • Home
  • Awards
  • Investment Guides
  • Videos
  • About PMR

INFORMATION FOR

  • Academics
  • Agents
  • Authors
  • Content Usage Terms

GET INVOLVED

  • Advertise
  • Publish
  • Article Licensing
  • Contact Us
  • Subscribe Now
  • Log In
  • Update your profile
  • Give us your feedback

© 2021 Pageant Media Ltd | All Rights Reserved | ISSN: 1551-9783 | E-ISSN: 2374-1325

  • Site Map
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Cookies
  • Privacy Policy