Market abuse and Provision of information: Difference between pages

From ACT Wiki
(Difference between pages)
Jump to navigationJump to search
imported>Doug Williamson
(Generalise first definition.)
 
imported>Doug Williamson
(Added internal explanation of Chinese walls)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
Market abuse includes any misuse of confidential or non public information so as to attempt to gain a trading advantage.  
A provision of information covenant requires the borrower to provide information to enable the lender to monitor the borrower’s credit risk.  


Such information routinely includes copies of published financial information and circulars to shareholders. It is unlikely that treasurers will see any problem with this.


Market abuse also encompasses:
# Insider dealing.
# Improper disclosure.
# Manipulating transactions.
# Manipulating devices.
# Misleading dissemination.


Ideally from a corporate borrower's perspective, the borrower would only provide published information, but weaker credits are unlikely to be able to negotiate this. Generally the level of information required increases as the credit quality of the borrower falls, and can include budgets, forecasts and management accounts.


For example trading in a company's shares whilst in the possession of inside information that a profits warning was about to be announced would be insider trading and therefore market abuse.
Problems may arise when the borrower is a quoted company and the information sought is unpublished and therefore possibly price sensitive, especially if the lender is a universal bank conducting both lending and share dealing activities. Even though most banks will have internal 'Chinese walls' (barriers designed to prevent transfer of confidential information between departments), treasurers may wish to obtain additional confidentiality undertakings bearing in mind regulatory requirements imposing a ‘continuing obligation’ of the avoidance of a false market.




====Legislation====
Where non-bank lenders are involved in bank type lending arrangements, this issue of confidentiality becomes more extreme. While banks have established procedures for keeping information separate from different areas, non-banks do not have this sophistication. One solution is to restrict information to certain lenders to only published data and indeed some presentations are managed in two parts to deal with this.


Legislation exists in most financial markets to specify the detail of what is prohibited as market abuse and within the EU this was covered by the Market Abuse Directive (Directive 2003/6/EC).


The Market Abuse Directive (MAD) was revised and replaced by MAD II which widens its scope to include new markets and instruments.
== See also ==
 
* [[Covenant]]
The Market Abuse Regulation (MAR) and the Criminal Sanctions for Market Abuse (CSMAD) form the legislative proposals which make up MAD II.
* [[Financial covenant]]
 
* [[Negative pledge]]
 
* [[Non-financial covenant]]
MAD II came into force across the EU in 2014.
 
 
MAD II is due to become law across the EU during 2016.
 
 
==See also==
* [[Insider dealing]]
 
 
===Other links===
 
[https://www.esma.europa.eu/system/files/Dir_03_6.pdf Directive 2003/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 January 2003]  
 
[http://www.treasurers.org/node/3244 ACT briefing note: The New Market Abuse and Disclosure Regime in the UK - A Guide for Listed Companies; 2005]
 
[http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32014R0596 MAR]
 
[http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32014L0057 CSMAD]

Revision as of 15:40, 1 August 2015

A provision of information covenant requires the borrower to provide information to enable the lender to monitor the borrower’s credit risk.

Such information routinely includes copies of published financial information and circulars to shareholders. It is unlikely that treasurers will see any problem with this.


Ideally from a corporate borrower's perspective, the borrower would only provide published information, but weaker credits are unlikely to be able to negotiate this. Generally the level of information required increases as the credit quality of the borrower falls, and can include budgets, forecasts and management accounts.

Problems may arise when the borrower is a quoted company and the information sought is unpublished and therefore possibly price sensitive, especially if the lender is a universal bank conducting both lending and share dealing activities. Even though most banks will have internal 'Chinese walls' (barriers designed to prevent transfer of confidential information between departments), treasurers may wish to obtain additional confidentiality undertakings bearing in mind regulatory requirements imposing a ‘continuing obligation’ of the avoidance of a false market.


Where non-bank lenders are involved in bank type lending arrangements, this issue of confidentiality becomes more extreme. While banks have established procedures for keeping information separate from different areas, non-banks do not have this sophistication. One solution is to restrict information to certain lenders to only published data and indeed some presentations are managed in two parts to deal with this.


See also