Move to risk free rates

Even before the FCA announcement, the financial services industries in the major international finance centres began work on new near risk free reference rates, known as RFRs, which are expected to replace IBORs in the majority of transactions.

RFRs are backward-looking rates calculated by reference to historical transaction data, are less susceptible to manipulation and reflect actual market funding costs.  Despite the obvious benefits of benchmarking against RFRs, the move away from IBORs to RFRs presents a number of issues, chief among them that they are not economically equivalent.

As a result, the amendments required to existing documentation to implement the change of benchmark are not trivial.

Practical challenges and where Appleby can help

From a practical and operational perspective, IBORs are forward-looking rates that are ascertained at the beginning of an interest period giving certainty both to lenders and borrowers.  RFRs on the other hand are backward-looking and could result in borrowers not knowing how much interest they are required to pay until it is due.  RFRs are also overnight rates rather than term rates quoted for a range of maturities (for example, three and six months).  In most scenarios it would be impractical to calculate interest on financial products using a rate that varies daily and the introduction of compounded backward looking term rates, such as compounded SONIA, should be of assistance here.

As we have seen it is not simply a case of all markets and jurisdictions transferring from LIBOR to a new favoured rate.  Financial firms will need to carefully navigate not only how they wish to approach new business but also how they transition their existing portfolio of contracts and agreements away from LIBOR.

Litigation risk

With no single replacement to LIBOR available, financial firms risk opening themselves to complaints or legal action if they do not select and recommend the “correct” replacement option in any given circumstance.  In a retail banking setting, if the change in rate results in an improved outcome for the financial firm, it could be accused of profiteering at the expense of its customer.

Operational challenges

Even if all parties to a contract agree on how to transition away from LIBOR, renegotiating such large numbers of contracts at the same time across a financial firm’s customer base is likely to be costly, administratively burdensome and complicated.  Financial firms will also face a serious communication challenge engaging with their retail customers.

A number of financial institutions and market participants are looking to Fintech solutions to assist with this exercise.  A range of data aggregation and AI based systems are available which connect into the vast amount of financial data already stored in structured, accessible format as well using optical character recognition and natural language processing to review thousands of contracts for key terms, LIBOR exposures and exit options.  These systems can quickly model the adoption of new benchmarks on a per contract or contract type basis and can offer a quick, scalable and cost effective solution to help mitigate risk.

Regardless of the systems used, transitioning away from LIBOR is likely to create considerable operational, reputational and legal risk.

The Appleby team

The Corporate, Technology and Innovation and Dispute Resolution teams at Appleby have a wide ranging experience in advising leading financial institutions on large reform projects, new product offerings, supplier contracts, regulatory compliance and litigation risk, including the impact of benchmark changes.  We are also able to deploy AI Solutions for large scale due diligence solutions.

If you would like to discuss any of the issues raised, please reach out to one of our experts below.

Key Contacts

James Gaudin

Managing Partner: Jersey

T +44 (0)1534 818 337
E Email James

Jared Dann

Group Partner: Jersey

T +44 (0)1534 818 313
E Email Jared

Paul Worsnop

Senior Associate: Jersey

T +44 (0)1534 818 225
E Email Paul

Gemma Whale

Senior Associate: Jersey

T +44 (0) 1534 818 163
E Email Gemma

Share
Twitter LinkedIn Email Save as PDF
More Publications
5 Jan 2022 |

Trustee Knowledge Series: Advanced Paper Six: Overview of protectors 'ad serviendum ac protegendum”

Appleby Private Client & Trust Partner David Dorgan has authored and distributed a series of Tru...

25 Nov 2021 |

Regulatory Approach to ESG across the Crown Dependencies

New requirements may require investment products to display a label reflecting their sustainability ...

24 Nov 2021 |

'Jersey's Relationship with India: Political, Commercial and Cultural Connections'

Jersey First for Finance has recently published a guide entitled ‘Jersey’s relationship with Ind...

18 Nov 2021 |

Trustee Knowledge Series: Advanced Paper Five - Trusts with Reserved Powers

Appleby Private Client & Trust Partner David Dorgan has authored and distributed a series of Tru...

11 Oct 2021 |

Trustee Knowledge Series: Advanced Paper Four: The proper law and place of administration of trusts and courts with exclusive jurisdiction

Over the next twelve months, Appleby Private Client & Trust Partner David Dorgan will author and...

7 Oct 2021 |

Jersey: an evolving global platform: Jersey First for Finance 2021

This article, taken from Jersey ~ First for Finance ‒ Celebrating 60 Years of Finance 1961-2021 wa...

4 Oct 2021 |

Navigating the Jersey M&A landscape (2 of 3)

This is the second of a series of three articles, each dealing with topics to be considered when buy...

Contributors: Andrew Weaver
22 Sep 2021 |

Minute Writing Training

Trustees are under a statutory duty to keep accurate records of their trusteeship, but what does tha...

15 Sep 2021 |

Navigating the Jersey M&A landscape

This is the first of a series of three articles, each dealing with topics to be considered when buyi...

Contributors: Andrew Weaver
2 Sep 2021 |

Duties of Trustees

The relationship of trustees to beneficiaries is viewed as fiduciary, meaning there are certain equi...