Cross-guarantees: Difference between revisions
From ACT Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
imported>Administrator (CSV import) |
imported>Doug Williamson m (Spacing) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
#Guarantees given by the participants in a notional pooling scheme to the bank providing the notional pooling service that they will honour any outstanding dues in the event of the failure of one of the members to fulfil its duties. | |||
#Similar guarantees given by companies within a group in relation to the financial obligations of other group companies. For example in relation to servicing and repaying loans. | |||
#Cross-guarantees may have tax implications and may be difficult to enforce on a cross-border basis. | |||
For example in relation to servicing and repaying loans. | |||
Cross-guarantees may have tax implications and may be difficult to enforce on a cross-border basis. | |||
== See also == | == See also == | ||
* [[Notional pooling]] | * [[Notional pooling]] | ||
* [[Upstream]] | * [[Upstream]] | ||
Revision as of 12:44, 5 August 2013
- Guarantees given by the participants in a notional pooling scheme to the bank providing the notional pooling service that they will honour any outstanding dues in the event of the failure of one of the members to fulfil its duties.
- Similar guarantees given by companies within a group in relation to the financial obligations of other group companies. For example in relation to servicing and repaying loans.
- Cross-guarantees may have tax implications and may be difficult to enforce on a cross-border basis.
