SEC says rating agencies failed to manage conflicts of interest
Reports suggest the SEC will condemn rating agencies for cutting corners to rate profitable subprime-infested structured products
NEW YORK – Credit rating agencies rushed through ratings for in-demand complex structured products, while failing to effectively divide their analysis from the business side, according to Christopher Cox, chairman of US regulator the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
Speaking in a television interview on Bloomberg Television on Monday, Cox revealed the direction of the findings from the SEC probe on rating agency conduct that will be released next week. Government investigators have spent months sifting through millions of pages of internal records and e-mails related to the ratings of subprime mortgage-related securities.
“The public will see that there have been significant problems. There have been instances in which there were people both pitching the business, debating the fees and were involved in the analytical side,” said Cox.
Cox said ratings analysts were deluged with requests that were highly profitable to the agencies and their clients, and “the volume of work taxed the staff in ways that caused them to cut corners, that caused them to deviate from their models”.
The comments follow SEC proposals last month for new rules for rating agencies, and come only days after European commissioner for the internal market Charlie McCreevy commented they would face regulation in the European Union.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Risk management
As supplier risk grows, banks check their third-party guest lists
Dora forces rethink of KRI and RAF frameworks amid reappraisal of what constitutes a key counterparty
Dora flood pitches banks against vendors
Firms ask vendors for late addendums sometimes unrelated to resiliency, requiring renegotiation
Quant Finance Master’s Guide 2025
Risk.net’s guide to the world’s leading quant master’s programmes, with the top 25 schools ranked
Regionals built first-line defences pre-CrowdStrike
In-business risk teams vary in size and reporting lines, but outage fears are a constant
Op risk data: Santander in car crash of motor-finance fail
Also: Macquarie fined for fake metals trade flaws, Metro makes AML misses, and Invesco red-faced over greenwashing. Data by ORX News
Public enemy number one: the threat to information security
Nearly half of domestic and regional banks report risk appetite breaches amid heightened sense of insecurity
Credit risk transfer, with a derivatives twist
Dealers angle to revive market that enables them to offload counterparty exposures, freeing up capital
Op Risk Benchmarking 2024: the banks
As threats grow and regulators bore down, focus shifts to the first line