Stepping up supervision of credit rating agencies could help to eliminate their conflicts of interest, but obliging companies to “rotate” their use of them could actually reduce competition among agencies, argued experts at a public hearing held by the EU Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee on Monday and Tuesday.
Rapporteur Leonardo Domenici said that Parliament should focus on sovereign debt, and boosting competition, whilst leaving the door open to setting up a European regulatory agency for credit rating agencies (CRAs). The rules governing CRAs must be reformed, because these rules “had failed,” but this would “be a difficult and complex job,” he added.
Politically motivated?
Wolf Klinz, noted that the timing of publishing ratings appeared in some cases to be “politically motivated.”
“Politicians are tempted to impose new regulations to push CRAs to publish information their public would like,” warned Ivo Strejcek.
Conflicts of interest
The European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) “could conduct a broader investigation of CRAs’ conflicts of interest,” suggested Sven Giegold, who proposed setting up “public foundations” as a possible solution.
CRAs are acting “almost like regulators” in that they determine market conditions and “then they make profit” out it, said Miguel Portas.
“Unintended negative consequences” of mandatory rotation
The proposal to oblige companies to rotate their use of CRAs was of “no interest” said Jean-Paul Gauzès since “it is not going to increase competition.”.
Susan Launi, Senior Counsel at Fitch Ratings, the smallest of the three global agencies agreed that “the European Commmission proposal will bring less competition, less transparency and more reliance on ratings.”
Ms Launi observed that the mandatory rotation provision that could have the “unintended consequence” of reinforcing the duopoly of Moody’s and S&P. Moreover, “to meet the demands of the proposed rotation, issuers will most probably use two CRAs at a time,” contrary to the aim of having more opinions in the market, she added.
ESMA Executive Director Verena Ross also expressed concern that mandatory rotation could harm the quality of ratings, at least in the short term.
“Positive effects on CRA supervision”
Commenting on the proposed regulation, the third in a series since 2009, Ms Ross said “several proposed provisions would have a positive effect on CRA supervision,” namely the rules on disclosure, conflicts of interest, a harmonised rating scale and civil liability for infringements.
CRAs should “not be allowed to influence the entire system”
“No single opinion should ever be allowed to influence the entire system,” as all opinions are “subject to the possibility of error,” said General Secretary of Finance Watch Thierry Philipponnat.
Ratings should take the form of opinions, i.e. “a text giving arguments” and the use of letters, numbers and symbols, as is the case today, particularly for unsolicited ratings over sovereign debt, should be forbidden, he added.
Related stories:
« Next: Construction works in Gharb leads to removal of post box | Previous: Latest issue of Government stocks announced for February »