Short Reads

Financial sector remains on the antitrust radar: the report on loan syndication is out

Financial sector remains on the antitrust radar: the report on loan s

Financial sector remains on the antitrust radar: the report on loan syndication is out

02.05.2019 NL law

The European Commission recently published a report it had commissioned to examine the market dynamics and potential antitrust risks related to loan syndication. The report serves as guidance to the financial industry by identifying aspects of the market and syndication process which may raise competition concerns.

It also makes recommendations to safeguard competition in the loan syndication market. Companies offering this service should dust-off their compliance policies as enforcement action may be on its way.

Syndicated loans are loans issued to a single borrower by several lenders in a single loan facility agreement to share credit risk. A major driver behind syndicate formation is lenders' desire for portfolio diversification as a means to risk management.

The Report was commissioned in view of indications that the market may not be functioning optimally from a competition law perspective. The Report, drawn up by Europe Economics and Euclid Law, observes that the segments of the industry that were examined are generally not highly concentrated and that borrowers tend to be sophisticated in how they structure their processes for obtaining capital. However, it also identifies some market features that could lead to anti-competitive conduct. As the level of competition risks varies depending on the stage of the syndication process, the Report includes a stage-by-stage analysis of competition issues relating to each element of the syndicated loan process:

  1. Competitive bidding for appointment as mandated lead arranger: the Report identifies market sounding prior to banking group formation as an important competition risk because it may facilitate collusion.
  2. Post-mandate to loan agreement: discussions between the lending banks to agree on the terms of the loan should not raise competition risks unless they go beyond what is necessary to jointly provide the loan to the borrower. Moreover, lenders may have multiple interactions with other lenders for different transactions. This could in theory lead to coordination on future transactions.
  3. Provision of ancillary services as a condition of the loan: ancillary services, which do not directly relate to the syndicated loan, raise the risk of a borrower achieving a sub-optimal economic outcome.
  4. Use of debt advisors also involved in syndicated loans: being a debt advisor and a lender for the same loan/borrower may not benefit the borrower.
  5. Coordination by lenders on the sale of the loan on the secondary market: the features of the secondary market should generally limit any attempt by sellers to manipulate the price of debt. Additionally borrower restrictions (which are common on secondary trading) may limit the development and efficiency of the secondary market.
  6. Promotion of unbundled price competition: in the event of a default there is the risk that banks act in a coordinated manner.

Although the Report does not draw any legal conclusions, it serves as guidance to the financial industry by identifying different aspects of the market and syndication process which may raise competition concerns. It also provides safeguards to ensure competitive outcomes in the loan syndication market. For instance, lenders should implement enforceable protocols on information sharing to avoid unwarranted information exchange. The Commission is now to decide on next steps, such as further analysis of the sector (e.g. through a sector inquiry) or formal investigations into behaviour potentially infringing the competition rules.

 

This article was published in the Competition Law Newsletter of May 2019. Other articles in this newsletter:

Team

Related news

06.05.2021 EU law
Abuse of economic dependence: lessons drawn from the first judgments

Short Reads - On 22 August 2020, the ban on abuse of economic dependence was implemented in Belgium (Article IV.2/1 of the Code of Economic Law). Now that almost a year has passed and the first judgments have been rendered, we assess what first lessons can be drawn from these judgments. The rulings show that the ban is regularly relied upon in court and has lowered the hurdle for plaintiffs to make their case.

Read more

01.04.2021 NL law
Slovak Telekom: ECJ on essentials of the ‘essential facilities’ doctrine

Short Reads - Only dominant companies with a “genuinely tight grip” on the market can be forced to grant rivals access to their infrastructure. According to the ECJ’s rulings in Slovak Telekom and Deutsche Telekom, it is only in this scenario that the question of indispensability of the access for rivals comes into play. In the assessment of practices other than access refusal, indispensability may be indicative of a potential abuse of a dominant position, but is not a required condition.

Read more

01.04.2021 NL law
Pay-for-delay saga ends with nothing new; but pharma quest continues

Short Reads - On 25 March 2021, the ECJ ended the Lundbeck pay-for-delay saga by dismissing the appeals from Lundbeck and five generic manufacturers against a European Commission ‘pay-for-delay’ decision. Following its recent Paroxetine judgment, the ECJ found that Lundbeck’s process patents did not preclude generic companies being viewed as potential competitors, particularly since the patents did not represent an insurmountable barrier to entry. In addition, the patent settlement agreements constituted infringements "by object".

Read more