Consolidated Credits Act Advances Federal LIBOR Transition Solution – Finance and Banking


United States: Consolidated Credits Act Advances Federal LIBOR Transition Solution

To print this article, all you need to do is be registered or log in to Mondaq.com.

With the inclusion of the Adjustable Interest Rate Act (LIBOR) (the “LIBOR Act”) as Division U of HR 2471, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022 (the “Credits Act”) enacted by the United States House of Representatives on March 9, 2022 and in the Senate on March 10, 2022, the United States is poised to find a federal solution for legacy LIBOR-related contracts that contain inadequate fallback provisions, if any. Indeed, the final version of the legislation provides additional legal certainty regarding the use of non-SOFR benchmarks not included in the earlier version of the legislation passed by the US House of Representatives.

context

The search for a legislative solution to the problem of old contracts linked to the London InterBank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) which are impossible, or practically impossible, to modify and which lack fallback provisions implementing a replacement rate not linked to LIBOR or which do not translate to a fixed interest rate, began with the New York Legislature’s passage of Senate Bill S297B on March 24, 2021. Shortly thereafter, Alabama passed the LIBOR Discontinuation and Replacement Act of 2021 – a virtually identical bill on April 29, 2021. On December 8, 2021, the United States House of Representatives passed HR 4616, the Interest Rate Act (LIBOR) to provide a federal solution for LIBOR-linked contracts that need to move away from LIBOR but do not have the mechanisms to do so.1

On Feb. 28, 2022, Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT), along with U.S. Senate Banking Committee Chairman Sherrod Brown (D-OH), Ranking Member Pat Toomey (R-PA), and Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC), have announced that they plan to introduce their own LIBOR transition legislation. This legislation made a number of revisions that tightened the language of the House bill and proposed three substantive changes: new protections for banks that use non-SOFR credentials; broader coverage that includes any interbank offered rate, not just LIBOR; and tax provisions that confirm that amendments to a financial contract that implement the transition to a replacement benchmark for LIBOR, and nothing more, will not be treated as a sale, exchange or other disposition taxable property for the purposes of Section 1001 of the Internal Revenue Code.

While the federal legislation has made its way through the US Congress, seven states have now proposed or passed LIBOR transitional legislation, including New York, Alabama, Florida (House and Senate versions), Georgia, ‘Indiana, Nebraska and Tennessee. However, passage of the LIBOR Act will provide a federal solution to the LIBOR transition for legacy contracts, replace state legislation to date, and eliminate the need for additional state level legislation.

Version and status of the appropriations act

LIBOR, as incorporated into the Appropriations Act, differs from the original House version of the bill in several respects. The main differences are:

  1. Use of non-SOFR replacement benchmarks – Section 106 of the LIBOR Act includes the so-called Toomey Amendment, which limits the ability of banking regulators to take enforcement action against any bank that uses a benchmark of replacement other than SOFR in lending operations. The additional provision represents a legislative response to the concerns of various regulators regarding the adoption by regulated institutions of alternative replacement indices that are not based on SOFR, such as the Bloomberg Short Term Bank Yield Index, or BSBY. Under LIBOR, a banking regulator cannot take enforcement action against a bank that uses a benchmark rate other than SOFR “solely because that benchmark is not SOFR” . The bill sets out a number of criteria a bank should use to determine whether to use a non-SOFR benchmark rate, none of which directly address regulators’ concerns about using a benchmark rate that raises concerns of “inverted pyramid”, or which is not otherwise “robust.”

  2. Spread Adjustments for Consumer Loans – LIBOR Section 104(e)(2) includes language that changes the benchmark spread adjustments applicable to consumer loans during the one-year period commencing on LIBOR replacement date.

  3. Subsequent Federal Reserve Regulations – Section 110 of LIBOR requires the Federal Reserve Board to promulgate regulations to implement the provisions of the legislation within 180 days of the date of promulgation.

Also noteworthy is the fact that, apparently due to jurisdictional considerations, the proposed tax provision in the Senate legislation was ultimately deleted from the final legislation presented to the US Senate on March 8, 2022.2

As of now, the Appropriations Act has been sent to President Biden for signature, which is expected shortly.

Footnotes

1 See our blog post, The Adjustable Interest Rate Act of 2021 (LIBOR) Passes the US House of Representatives, December 9, 2021.

2 In the Senate, the Senate Finance Committee is responsible for any bill containing amendments to the Internal Tax Code. Therefore, had the tax provision not been removed, the bill would have been referred to the Senate Finance Committee rather than the Senate Banking Committee, on which its sponsor and co-sponsors sit.

Visit us at mayerbrown.com

Mayer Brown is a global provider of legal services comprised of law firms that are separate entities (the “Mayer Brown Firms”). The Mayer Brown firms are: Mayer Brown LLP and Mayer Brown Europe – Brussels LLP, two limited liability companies established in Illinois in the United States; Mayer Brown International LLP, a limited company incorporated in England and Wales (authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and registered in England and Wales under number OC 303359); Mayer Brown, a SELAS based in France; Mayer Brown JSM, a partnership of Hong Kong and its associated entities in Asia; and Tauil & Checker Advogados, a Brazilian legal partnership with which Mayer Brown is associated. “Mayer Brown” and the Mayer Brown logo are registered trademarks of Mayer Brown law firms in their respective jurisdictions.

© Copyright 2020. Mayer Brown Practices. All rights reserved.

This article by Mayer Brown provides information and commentary on interesting legal issues and developments. The foregoing is not a complete treatment of the subject matter covered and is not intended to provide legal advice. Readers should seek specific legal advice before taking any action regarding the matters discussed here.

POPULAR ARTICLES ON: Finance and Banking of the United States

What is a convertible note?

Shulman Rogers

“Debt or capital? That’s the question many early-stage founders face when raising capital. While SAFEs may be the instrument of choice for many start-ups today…