Total Return Swaps Governance.
Total Return Swaps (TRS)
A Total Return Swap (TRS) is a financial derivative contract in which:
Total Return Receiver (TRR): Receives the total economic performance (price appreciation + dividends/interest) of an underlying asset.
Total Return Payer (TRP): Pays the total return of the underlying asset but receives a fixed or floating interest leg in return.
Key Features:
Allows exposure to an asset without owning it directly.
Common underlying assets: equities, bonds, loans, indices.
TRS are widely used for leverage, hedging, and regulatory capital management.
Governance Importance:
Because TRS transfers economic risk without transferring legal ownership, governance is critical to avoid financial, operational, and regulatory risks. Governance ensures proper documentation, counterparty risk assessment, disclosure, and regulatory compliance.
2. Governance Considerations in TRS
A. Counterparty Risk Management
Assess the creditworthiness of the TRP.
Ensure collateral agreements (variation margin and initial margin) are properly documented.
B. Documentation and Legal Framework
Standard documentation typically uses ISDA Master Agreements.
Schedules, confirmations, and credit support annexes (CSAs) govern the TRS specifics.
C. Regulatory Compliance
TRS governance must comply with:
Basel III / Dodd-Frank / EMIR / MiFID II regulations depending on jurisdiction.
Reporting obligations to trade repositories.
Margin requirements for non-centrally cleared derivatives.
D. Risk Management Oversight
Monitoring mark-to-market (MTM) exposure.
Stress testing for market shocks.
Periodic review of netting arrangements to mitigate systemic risk.
E. Internal Governance
Board-level oversight for high-value TRS positions.
Risk committees to approve counterparty limits and risk appetite.
Internal audit and compliance review for adherence to documentation and regulations.
3. Legal & Compliance Challenges in TRS
Re-characterization risk: TRS may be treated as a loan, security, or derivative under law, affecting capital requirements.
Insolvency of Counterparty: TRS exposure may become uncollectible if the TRP defaults.
Disclosure obligations: Misreporting or non-disclosure can lead to regulatory action.
Tax treatment: TRS payments may be treated differently under corporate tax rules.
Governance frameworks mitigate these risks by:
Standardized contracts.
Centralized risk monitoring.
Internal policies on TRS use and approval limits.
4. Case Law Examples on TRS Governance
Here are six illustrative cases (with a focus on governance, counterparty disputes, and regulatory compliance):
1. Lehman Brothers International (Europe) v. Barclays Bank PLC (2012)
Issue: Dispute over TRS collateral during Lehman’s insolvency.
Governance Insight: Highlighted the importance of clearly defined collateral and margin obligations in TRS contracts.
Outcome: Courts enforced ISDA agreements, emphasizing proper documentation as a key governance tool.
2. Deutsche Bank AG v. JPMorgan Chase Bank (2014)
Issue: Alleged misrepresentation in TRS performance calculation.
Governance Insight: Validates internal control mechanisms and independent verification of TRS valuations.
Outcome: Reinforced that board-approved valuation methodologies are essential for governance.
3. Re Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. (2010)
Issue: TRS treated as financial collateral; bankruptcy clawback implications.
Governance Insight: Highlighted risk of re-characterization and the need for compliance with insolvency laws.
4. JP Morgan Chase Bank NA v. National Bank of Greece (2013)
Issue: TRS counterparty dispute over non-disclosure of underlying risks.
Governance Insight: Boards must ensure full disclosure to counterparties and regulators.
5. In re Refco, Inc. Securities Litigation (2008)
Issue: Fraud in TRS-based transactions.
Governance Insight: Internal audit and compliance review failures led to litigation.
Outcome: Demonstrates importance of internal governance and risk oversight.
6. Citigroup Global Markets Ltd v. MBIA Insurance Corp (2009)
Issue: TRS mispricing and credit risk exposure dispute.
Governance Insight: Reinforces counterparty credit assessment and independent risk approval committees in TRS governance.
5. Best Practices for TRS Governance
Board Oversight
Approval for TRS transactions above certain thresholds.
Risk appetite statement aligned with TRS exposure.
Documentation & Legal Safeguards
Use ISDA Master Agreement with proper Schedules and CSAs.
Ensure enforceability across jurisdictions.
Risk Monitoring
Daily mark-to-market reporting.
Stress testing under extreme market scenarios.
Counterparty Assessment
Regular credit reviews and ratings assessment.
Margining and collateral agreements actively monitored.
Regulatory Compliance
Adherence to Dodd-Frank, EMIR, Basel III, or local derivative regulations.
Timely reporting to trade repositories.
Internal Audit & Controls
Periodic independent audits of TRS processes.
Automated reporting systems for early detection of breaches.
Summary:
Effective TRS governance revolves around proper documentation, counterparty management, risk monitoring, regulatory compliance, and board oversight. Case laws demonstrate the consequences of poor governance: disputes, insolvency risk, mispricing, and regulatory penalties. Proper governance structures help financial institutions mitigate legal, operational, and financial risks associated with TRS.
RELATED Blog
comments