Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
China recently launched two offerings of asset backed securities ('ABS') in its interbank market after several years of preparation and planning. On Dec. 9, 2005, China Construction Bank ('CCB') issued 2.9 billion yuan ($360 million) of debt securities in China's first residential mortgage-backed securitization, and on Dec. 12, 2005, China Development Bank ('CDB') issued 4.2 billion yuan ($500 million) of debt securities backed by unsecured loans from the telecommunications, energy, utility, and transportation industries. To facilitate ABS offerings, China's regulatory agencies have promulgated rules to govern ABS issuances, including the Administrative Rules for Pilot Securitization of Credit Assets, promulgated by the People's Bank of China ('PBOC') and China Banking Regulatory Commission ('CBRC') on April 20, 2005, the Rules for the Information Disclosure of Asset-Backed Securities, promulgated by the PBOC on June 13, 2005, and Rules for Regulating Financial Institution's Securitization, promulgated by the CBRC on Dec. 1, 2005.
Despite China's significant progress in creating a legal framework for securitization, traditional securitization still faces numerous legal and operational obstacles in China. Significant restrictions on the transfer of financial assets remain. Certain fundamental bankruptcy issues relating to substantive consolidation and true sale remain to be addressed. The process to foreclose upon and liquidate collateral in mortgage-backed securitizations is not securitization-friendly. Borrowers must be notified before a mortgage can be assigned to a trust. Requiring a bank to sell its loans to a third-party special purpose vehicle ('SPV') is a fundamental requirement for a securitization to occur, but under Chinese business practices, doing so may compromise a bank's customer relationships.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
This article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.
The parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.
When we consider how the use of AI affects legal PR and communications, we have to look at it as an industrywide global phenomenon. A recent online conference provided an overview of the latest AI trends in public relations, and specifically, the impact of AI on communications. Here are some of the key points and takeaways from several of the speakers, who provided current best practices, tips, concerns and case studies.