Securitization AccountingTenth edition—January 2017
Contents01What’s new since the last edition?02Who has to consolidate the specialpurpose entity?0503Does my securitization meet thesale criteria under GAAP?2404How do securitizations fareunder IFRS?3405How about some examples?4906How do you determinegain or loss on sale?6207What should I know aboutmortagage servicing rights?690308What about the investors?7509How do I measure and reportfair value information?8510So where is the transparency?9311How will taxes impactmy transaction?10412How does securitizationimpact banks’ regulatory capital?11813What’s on the horizon?13214Appendix: Contacts137
01What’s new since the last edition?0102030405060708091011121314
Chapter 1: What’s new sincethe last edition?010203Clarity continues to forge ahead in the securitization marketSome more expansive updates in this edition includes a detailedSecuritization accounting will continue to evolve and we willand a “new” landscape is beginning to take shape. Although thediscussion related to:continue to provide a point a view about these changes andindustry continues to face unique challenges while navigatingthrough the new terrain, the importance and benefits of theoverall securitization process is beyond question.We continue to live in an exciting time for the securitizationindustry. The latest changes to consolidation guidance and someunique complexities in consolidation analysis anddeterminationplay a significant role in securitization and remain embeddedin its evolving foundation. Therefore, it is our pleasure to sharewith you this tenth edition of our Securitization Accountingbook. Our mission was always to provide a roadmap that coversaccounting, tax, and various regulatory changes impactingsecuritization and the overall markets. We feel that we met thisgoal once again with this new publication and, hopefully,you agree.We hope you find this edition enjoyable and useful (and easyto navigate). Fair value guidance of assets and liabilities, and somestructure around market questions related to inconsistencieswith typical fair value techniquesAs before, we remain strong in our belief that accounting willparticipate in valued dialogue with all market constituents. Regulatory changes and the interplay of such rules toaccounting principlesWhile we continue to cover up-to-date issues, the FinancialAccounting Standards Board and International AccountingStandard Board are hard at work with projects that may havea future impact on securitization. To that, we address someprojects that may result in market participants facing challengesfor the classification and measurements of financial instrumentsand impairment of financial assets.All the best.04050607080910111213144
02Who has to consolidate thespecial purpose entity?0102030405060708091011121314
Chapter 2: Who has to consolidate thespecial purpose entity?010203In accounting for securitizations, there are two baselineWhat accounting guidance applies?In February 2015, the Financial Accounting Standards Boardquestions to answer:For companies applying GAAP, the consolidation guidance is(FASB) issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2015-02,included in ASC 810, Consolidation—in particular, the variableAmendments to the Consolidation Guidance. While the ASU didinterest entity (VIE) subsections. Not all special purpose entitiesnot introduce any new models, its changes eliminated two of(SPEs) are VIEs, but generally, all securitization SPEs are VIEs. Athe existing models (FIN 46(R) and EITF 04-5), requiring all legalVIE does not usually issue equity instruments with voting rightsentities to be evaluated as either a VIE or a voting interest entity.(or other interests with similar rights) with the power to directFurther, under the ASU, the evaluation of whether a VIE shouldthe activities of the entity, and often the total equity investmentbe consolidated is still based on whether the reporting entity hasat risk is not sufficient to permit the entity to finance its activitiesboth (1) power and (2) potentially significant economics. Underwithout additional forms of credit enhancement or otherIFRSs, the primary source of guidance on determining when andfinancial support. If an entity does not issue voting or similarhow to prepare consolidated financial statements is IFRS 10,interests or if the equity investment is insufficient, that entity’sConsolidated Financial Statements, which contains a single, controlactivities probably are predetermined or decision-making abilitybased model for determining consolidation of a legal entity. Inis determined contractually. Because securitization entities areother words, IFRS 10 does not require an analysis of whethertypically insufficiently capitalized, with little or no true “equity” fora legal entity is a VIE or a voting interest entity, which addsaccounting purposes, and are rarely designed to have a votingcomplexity to the analysis under GAAP. Do I have to consolidate the special purpose entity(ies)involved? Have I sold the transferred assets for accounting purposes?Both US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP)and International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) requirea reporting entity, as part of the derecognition assessment,to consider whether the transfer includes a transfer to aconsolidated subsidiary. Therefore, logically, the first stepin determining whether sale accounting has occurred is todetermine if a securitization entity requires consolidation by thetransferor.Because many securitizations involve more than one transfer,and consolidated affiliates often prepare their own separatecompany financial statements, the consolidation and salequestions will often need to be considered more than oncefor a transaction. As one might expect, different answers maybe appropriate at different stages in the securitization or fordifferent financial reporting purposes, depending on the factsand circumstances.6equity class possessing the power to direct the activities of theentity, they are generally VIEs. The investments or other intereststhat will absorb portions of a VIE’s expected losses or receiveportions of its expected residual returns are called variableinterests.0405060708091011121314
Chapter 2: Who has to consolidate the special purpose entity?Who must consolidate the securitization entity?The first step in determining who should consolidate thesecuritization entity is identifying all the parties to the deal andidentifying which parties have a variable interest in the SPE.While there is no requirement for the transaction parties tocompare their accounting conclusions (but, theoretically, only010203one entity should conclude that it has control), each participantneeds to understand the various rights and obligations grantedto each party in order to conclude as to its own accounting for itsinterest in the SPE.The consolidation models under both GAAP and IFRS arelargely similar and are based on control. ASC 810 requiresidentifying “the primary beneficiary,” which is the party that has a“controlling financial interest” because it has both: (1) the powerto direct the activities of a VIE that most significantly impact theVIE’s economic performance, and (2) the obligation to absorblosses of the VIE or the right to receive benefits from the VIEthat could potentially be significant to the VIE. Under IFRS 10,an investor controls an entity if the investor has: (1) power overthe investee, (2) exposure, or rights, to variable returns from itsinvolvement with the investee, and (3) the ability to use its powerover the investee to affect the amount of the investor’s return.04050607080910111213147
Chapter 2: Who has to consolidate the special purpose entity?GAAP consolidation decision treeIFRS consolidation decision treeASC 810Do Ia have a variable interestbin the securitization entity?NoSecuritization entity isnot consolidated by meYesDo I have a power and significanteconomic exposure (through mydirect and indirect interest)?NoDo I share power with a related partyand does the related-party grouphave significant economic exposure?YesSecuritization entityis consolidated by meNoexposure, or rights, to variablereturns from involvement with theinvestee?Yes0203NoSecuritization entityis not consolidatedby meYesPerform related-partytiebreaker test.The parrty mostclosely associated withthe VIE consolidatesthe securitization entityability to use power over theinvestee to affect the amount ofreturns?NoYesNoThat single variableinterest holder in therealted-party groupconsolidates thesecuritization entitySecuritization entity isnot consolidated by mecontrollingfinancial interestc04050607YesI n addition to their own activities and variable interests, reporting entities must also consider the activities and variableinterests of both related parties and those parties deemed “de facto agents” in ASC 810.b Some servicing fee and decision-making arrangements may not constitute a variable interest in a VIE, as discussed laterin this chapter.apower over existing rights to directthe relevant activities?YesNoDoes the related-party group havepower and significant economicexposure and are substantially allof the activities of the VIE conductedon behalf of a single variableinterest holder?IFRS 10YesNoDo related parties under commoncontrol have power andsignificant exposure?01Do I have:cI controlSecuritization entityis consolidated by meI n addition to their own activities and variable interests, reporting entities must also consider the activities and variableinterests of both related parties and those parties deemed “de facto agents” in IFRS 10.080910111213148
Chapter 2: Who has to consolidate the special purpose entity?ASC 810 provides that only substantive terms, transactions,If a securitization entity must be consolidated, all of its assetsand arrangements, whether contractual or non-contractual,and liabilities (to third parties) are included in the consolidatedshall be considered. Judgment, based on consideration of allbalance sheet of the party that consolidates, not just theirfacts and circumstances, is needed to distinguish substantiveproportionate ownership share. Accounting equity in aterms, transactions, and arrangements from non-substantiveconsolidated securitization entity held by a third-party investorones. James L. Kroeker, the former Securities and Exchangeis shown as a non-controlling interest in the consolidatedCommission (SEC) chief accountant and current FASB vicefinancial statements. And it is important to remember thatchairman, told auditors and preparers “to remain vigilantall intercompany transactions, such as servicing or other feewhen evaluating the substance, or lack thereof, of elements ofarrangements between the securitization entity and the entitytransactions included to achieve specific accounting results”that consolidates, have to be eliminated in consolidation.for off-balance sheet transactions.1 While not as explicit, IFRS10 also states that only substantive rights over an investee areconsidered and provides examples of factors to consider indetermining whether a right is substantive (such as penalties or010203040506incentives that would deter a holder from exercising its rights).07Only one reporting entity is expected to control a securitization08entity. Although several deal participants could have variableinterests, typically only one would have the power to direct theactivities that most significantly impact the entity’s economicperformance. Further elaboration on interpreting what it takesto have variable interests that are potentially significant underGAAP and ability to affect returns through power under IFRS isprovided later in this chapter.091011121319 peech by James L. Kroeker Chief Accountant, Office of the Chief Accountant:SRemarks Before the 2009 AICPA National Conference on Current SEC and PCAOBDevelopments.14
Chapter 2: Who has to consolidate the special purpose entity?Step 1: Power—identifying the most important activitiesWhen analyzing who has the power to direct those activities,In securitizations, the economic performance of the entity isquestions that have to be answered include:generally most significantly impacted by the performance ofthe underlying assets. Sometimes, in structures like commercial Or do other parties, including related parties and entitiestenor of CP) will also significantly impact the performance of theunder common control, also have relevant rights andentity, but generally not most significantly. Some of the factorsresponsibilities? For example:that might impact the performance of the underlying assets–– Is there another party or other parties that direct othermight be beyond the direct control of any of the parties to theimportant activities of the trust? If so, which activities aresecuritization (like voluntary prepayments) and therefore don’tthe most important?impacts the performance of the underlying assets is typically themanagement by the servicer of the inevitable delinquencies anddefaults that occur; or, in a managed collateral loan obligation,the activities of the collateral manager in selecting, monitoring,same activities as me, but with a different portion of thetrust’s assets? Do I hold the power unilaterally?paper (CP) conduits, management of liabilities (e.g., selecting theenter into the power analysis. The activity that most significantly–– Is there another party or other parties that direct the–– Is there another party that has to consent to everyimportant decision?–– Is there another party that can direct me to take certainactions?–– Is there another party that can replace me without cause?and disposing of collateral assets. And, is my right to exercise power currently available orcontingent on some other event(s) occurring?Kick-out (removal) rightsGAAP and IFRS include similar concepts with respect tokick-out or removal rights, but they are framed in slightlydifferent contexts within each respective consolidation model.will and not upon a contingent event) held by a single party resultin the party performing the relevant activities not having powerbecause it could be removed from that role at the whim of theparty holding the removal right. A kick-out right would generallythe exercise of such right. Barriers to exercise include, but arenot limited to:SituationSee related guidance topic belowThe servicer can be replaced without cause by a single unrelated partyKick-out rights (GAAP)/ Principal-Agent (IFRS)All important servicing decisions require the consent of one or moreunrelated partiesParticipating rights and shared powerThe servicer services less than a majority of the assets inthe VIEMultiple parties having powerThe activities of the servicer are administrative in nature and there is aspecial servicerPower to direct contingent on other events02030405Substantive kick-out rights (i.e., those that can be exercised atbe considered substantive if there are no significant barriers toWhen might a servicer or collateral manager not have power?01 Conditions that make it unlikely they will be exercisable, forexample, conditions that narrowly limit the timing of theexercise. Financial penalties or operational barriers associated withreplacing the decision-maker that would act as a significantdisincentive for removal. The absence of an adequate number of qualified replacementdecision-makers or inadequate compensation to attract aqualified replacement.06070809101112131410
Chapter 2: Who has to consolidate the special purpose entity? Lack of a mechanism for the holder to exercise its kick-outIn many cases, the controlling classholder is the same as orright. For example, the right can be exercised only at anaffiliated with the special servicer, so this provision would notinvestor meeting, but meetings cannot be initiated by thehave an effect on the consolidation analysis in those situations.holder.If a vote of the holders of the subordinated class of the issuer’s The inability of the parties holding the rights to obtain theinformation necessary to exercise them.GAAP incorporates the concept of kick-out or removal rights aspart of the power determination. If a single participant (otherthan a related party) has the substantive right to unilaterallyremove the party that directs the entity’s most significantactivities, that right, in and of itself, may indicate that the holderof the kick-out right has power over the securitization entity, butonly if that right is substantive and can be exercised at will (i.e.,not solely upon an event of an objectively determinable breachsecurities was needed in order to replace the service provider,and there was more than one unrelated holder of thoseenough to conclude that the special servicer does not havepower and control. But if the controlling classholder were asingle party (say the primary servicer) that could remove thespecial servicer at will, then the special servicer would not bedeemed to have control because control lies with the singleparty that is the controlling classholder. However, replacement ofa special servicer only upon an objectively determinable breachof contract or insolvency is considered a protective right (whichwould not provide a party with power), not a participating right.IFRS raises the issue of kick-out rights or removal rights inParticipating rights and shared powerto a transaction or as an agent on behalf of others (as furtherdiscussed later in this chapter). If a single party is able to exercisethe kick-out right without cause, then that fact in isolation isindicative of the decision-maker being an agent and not havingUnder GAAP, participating rights are the ability to block actionsthrough which a reporting entity exercises the power to directthe activities of an entity that most significantly impact theentity’s economic performance. Protective rights are rightsdesigned to protect the interests of the party holding thosecontrol.rights without providing that party with control. IFRS does notSo how do these concepts apply to securitization structures? Itprotective rights and that such rights would not provide poweris common in commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS)to that party.transactions for a controlling classholder, which is defined inthe transaction documents as the party that holds the majorityof a subordinated class of the issuer’s securities, to be able toremove the special servicer in the transaction without cause.110203securities, then the kick-out right would not, in isolation, beof contract or insolvency by the service provider).the determination of whether a party is acting as a principal01define participating rights, but acknowledges the concept ofSo what does that mean? If a single participant can veto allimportant decisions made by the unrelated servicer, that right,if considered substantive, might cause the service provider to0405060708091011121314
Chapter 2: Who has to consolidate the special purpose entity?not have the “power,” and power would be shared betweensignificantly affects the economic performance of the entity.Determining whether the contingent event initiates the mostthe service provider and the participant holding the veto rightJudgment will be required based on an analysis of all of thesignificant activities of the entity or results in a change in power(unrelated parties). If, in addition to being able to veto servicerfacts and circumstances. This concept is consistent in bothwill be based on a number of factors, including:decisions, a single participant could direct the servicer on whatthe GAAP and IFRS consolidation models.actions to take on defaulted loans, the consolidation burdenmight shift to that single participant. It is unusual in securitizationtransactions for any single participant to have the ability to blockservicer actions, other than in certain limited cases, such aswhen a monoline insurer is paying out losses. This may cause ashift in power.The requirement to
accounting purposes, and are rarely designed to have a voting equity class possessing the power to direct the activities of the entity, they are generally VIEs. The investments or other interests that will absorb portions of a VIE’s expected losses or receive portions of its expected residual returns are called variable interests. In February 2015, the Financial Accounting Standards Board .
investment banks in securitization. Section 6 concludes. 2. Primary Roles in Asset Securitization The securitization process redistributes a bank's traditional role into several specialized functions (see the appendix for details on the evolution of asset securitization and for basic terminology). The exhibit highlights the key roles in the
XaaS Models: Our Offerings @DeloitteTMT As used in this document, "Deloitte" means Deloitte & Touche LLP, Deloitte Tax LLP, Deloitte Consulting LLP, and Deloitte Financial Advisory Services LLP. These entities are separate subsidiaries of Deloitte LLP. Deloitte & Touche LLP will be responsible for the services and the other subsidiaries
Deloitte & Touche South Africa is referred to throughout this report as Deloitte South Africa, and Deloitte Pan African Trust is referred to throughout this report as Deloitte Africa. Deloitte Africa holds practice rights to provide professional services using the Deloitte name which it extends to Deloitte entities within its territory,
FINANCIAL ACCOUNTING : MEANING, NATURE AND ROLE OF ACCOUNTING STRUCTURE 1.0 Objective 1.1 Introduction 1.2 Origin and Growth of Accounting 1.3 Meaning of Accounting 1.4 Distinction between Book-Keeping and Accounting 1.5 Distinction between Accounting and Accountancy 1.6 Nature of Accounting 1.7 Objectives of Accounting 1.8 Users of Accounting Information 1.9 Branches of Accounting 1.10 Role .
Following diagram will help in explaining the process of Securitization SPV or Trust Securitization Process Dig 1.Origination: A borrower approaches a bank/finance company/housing finance company for a loan. The company evaluates credit worthiness of the borrower and signs a contract s
Companies which buy out distressed assets are the other alternative that banks use to offload doubtful debt to ensure more focused and efficient resolution. 1.1 : Scheme of the Act The Securitization Act contains 41 sections in 6 Chapters and a Schedule. Chapter 1 contains 2 Sections dealing with the applicability of the Securitization
May 02, 2011 · Deloitte & Touche LLP Cleveland, Ohio 1 216 589 5717 email@example.com Theresa Cui . Engagement Consultant . Deloitte & Touche LLP . Cleveland, Ohio Cleveland, Ohio 1 216 589 5018 1 216 . firstname.lastname@example.org . Kathie Schwerdtfeger Advisory Principal Deloitte & Touche LLP . Austin, Texas 1 512 691 2333 . email@example.com .File Size: 720KB
Knabe, Andrea Consulting Deloitte Consulting LLP Chicago Kwan, Anne Consulting Deloitte Consulting LLP San Francisco . Miller, Christian L. Tax Deloitte Tax LLP Washington DC . Smith, Sandra Consulting Deloitte Consulting LLP Chicago Spangrud, Chad Audit & Assurance Deloitte & Touche LLP Costa Mesa Springs, Christanna R. Tax Deloitte Tax .