On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

New Developments in Securitization 2017

Released on: Dec. 20, 2017
Running Time: 06:30:21

The securitization market continues to develop and innovate, while also being subject to new regulations. Traditional asset-backed securities (ABS) markets, including auto securitizations, commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) and credit card receivables continue with steady issuance volumes. New markets, such as marketplace lending, continue to be developed. Other markets, such as private-label residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS), continue to struggle. Significant new regulatory developments have occurred in certain areas.

You will receive an intensive and comprehensive introduction and update on what legislative and regulatory actions and initiatives are underway, and what market responses can be expected.

Lecture Topics [Total time 00:06:45]
Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.


  • Opening Remarks and Introduction* [00:10:35]
    Frank Polverino
  • Securitization: Recent Developments in Structured Finance [01:01:33]
    Katherine W. Hsu, Richard Johns, Frank Polverino
  • Market Update: Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities [01:01:03]
    R.J. Carlson, Stephen S. Kudenholdt, Amy Williams
  • Credit Risk Retention [01:09:27]
    Lee Askenazi, Ellen L. Marks, Sean Solis, Paul R. St. Lawrence, Ian W. Sterling
  • CFPB Roundup: Recent CFPB Actions of Importance to the Securitization Market [01:01:44]
    Chris DiAngelo
  • Consumer and Other Securitization Markets [01:06:02]
    Sophie Cuthbertson, Andrew M. Faulkner, Stuart M. Litwin
  • Esoteric Asset Securitization [00:59:57]
    Jamie D. Kocis, Ryan D. McNaughton, Michael L. Urschel

The purchase price of this Web Program includes the following articles from the Course Handbook available online:


  • COMPLETE COURSE HANDBOOK
  • Information for Form ABS-EE Filings, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (November 3, 2016)
    Katherine W. Hsu
  • Federal Register, Vol. 79, No. 185, Part II; U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 17 CFR Parts 229, 230, 232, et al., Asset-Backed Securities Disclosure and Registration; Final Rule (September 24, 2014)
    Katherine W. Hsu
  • Federal Register, Vol. 79, No. 247, Part II; U.S. Department of the Treasury, 12 CFR Part 43; U.S. Federal Reserve System, 12 CFR Part 244; U.S. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 12 CFR Part 373; U.S. Federal Housing Finance Agency, 12 CFR Part 1234; U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, 17 CFR Part 246; U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 24 CFR Part 267, Credit Risk Retention; Rule (December 24, 2014)
    Katherine W. Hsu
  • Uncle Freddie, Aunt Fannie and Grandma Ginnie: An Update on Agency MBS
    Amy McDaniel Williams
  • Fact Sheet: Potential Enhancement to Fannie Mae’s Connecticut Avenue Securities (CAS) Program and Corresponding Update to Our Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS) Prospectus and Trust Agreement (June 6, 2017)
    Amy McDaniel Williams
  • Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, Memorandum, Discussion of Selected Legal Considerations for Fannie Mae MBS Under Proposed CRT REMIC Structure (August 29, 2017)
    Amy McDaniel Williams
  • William Cejudo, Clifford Chance US LLP, Memorandum, Tax Analysis of Proposed CAS REMIC Structure (August 29, 2017)
    Amy McDaniel Williams
  • Application of US Risk Retention Requirements to Structured Finance Transactions
    Lee Askenazi
  • Considerations Under the U.S. Risk Retention Rules for Non-U.S. Issuers (October 5, 2017)
    Ellen L. Marks
  • CFPB Issues Rule to Ban Companies From Using Arbitration Clauses to Deny Groups of People Their Day in Court, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (July 10, 2017)
    Chris DiAngelo
  • CFPB Takes Action Against Aequitas Capital Management for Aiding Corinthian Colleges’ Predatory Lending Scheme, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (August 17, 2017)
    Chris DiAngelo
  • H.R. 898, Credit Score Competition Act of 2017, 115th Cong. (2017)
    Chris DiAngelo
  • Structured Finance Industry Group, Letter to United States House of Representatives Re: H.R. 898 Credit Score Competition Act of 2017
    Chris DiAngelo
  • In the Matter of Experian Holdings, Inc., Experian Information Solutions, Inc., and ConsumerInfo.com, Inc., dba Experian Consumer Services, File No. 2017-CFPB-0012, Consent Order, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (Mar. 23, 2017)
    Chris DiAngelo
  • Securitization and Recent Actions of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (PowerPoint slides)
    Chris DiAngelo
  • Credit Card Securitization
    Andrew M. Faulkner
  • Securitization of Equipment and Auto Leases
    Stuart M. Litwin
  • Overview of Dodd-Frank Legislative Reform Proposals (October 2017) (PowerPoint slides)
    Sophie K. Cuthbertson
  • New Developments in Securitization 2017: Recent Developments in Esoteric Assets (September 15, 2017)
    Ryan D. McNaughton, Jamie D. Kocis, Michael L. Urschel

Presentation Material


  • Grandma Ginnie, Uncle Freddie and Aunt Fannie
    Amy Williams
  • Securitization and Recent Actions of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)
    Chris DiAngelo
  • Non-Mortgage Securitization Markets
    Sophie Cuthbertson, Andrew M. Faulkner, Stuart M. Litwin
  • New Developments in Esoteric Asset Securitization
    Jamie D. Kocis, Ryan D. McNaughton, Michael L. Urschel
Chairperson(s)
Frank Polverino ~ Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP
Speaker(s)
Lee Askenazi ~ Clifford Chance US LLP
R.J. Carlson ~ Sidley Austin LLP
Sophie K. Cuthbertson ~ Cadwalader Wickersham & Taft LLP
Chris DiAngelo ~ Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP
Andrew M. Faulkner ~ Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP
Katherine W. Hsu ~ Chief, Office of Structured Finance, U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
Richard Johns ~ Executive Director, Structured Finance Industry Group
Jamie D. Kocis ~ Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP
Stephen S. Kudenholdt ~ Dentons US LLP
Stuart M. Litwin ~ Mayer Brown LLP
Ellen L. Marks ~ Latham & Watkins LLP
Ryan D. McNaughton ~ Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
Sean M. Solis ~ Milbank Tweed Hadley & McCloy LLP
Paul R. St. Lawrence ~ Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP
Ian W. Sterling ~ Executive Director & Assistant General Counsel, JP Morgan Chase & Co.
Michael L. Urschel ~ King & Spalding
Amy Williams ~ Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP
General credit information about this format appears below. For credit information specific to this program, please choose your jurisdiction(s) in the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page.

PLI’s live and on-demand webcasts are single-user license products intended for an individual registrant only. Credit will be issued only to the individual registered.


U.S. MCLE States

Alabama:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

Alaska:  All PLI products can fulfill Alaska’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Arizona:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “interactive CLE” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via interactive CLE programs.

Arkansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for Arkansas CLE credit.

California:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “participatory” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via participatory programs.

Colorado:  All PLI products can fulfill Colorado’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Connecticut: Effective January 1, 2017, all PLI products can fulfill Connecticut’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Delaware:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “eCLE” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of eCLE per reporting period, no more than 6 of which may be audio-only.

Florida:  All PLI products can fulfill Florida’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Georgia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “in-house” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 in-house credits per reporting period.

Hawaii:  All PLI products can fulfill Hawaii’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Idaho:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Illinois:  All PLI products can fulfill Illinois' CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Indiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance education” credit. Attorneys are limited to 9 credits of distance education per reporting period.

Iowa:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “unmoderated” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of unmoderated programs per reporting period.

Kansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “prerecorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of prerecorded programs per reporting period.

Kentucky:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-live” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 non-live credits per reporting period.

Louisiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Maine:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5.5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Minnesota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 on-demand credits per reporting period.

Mississippi:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Missouri:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Montana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Nebraska:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “computer-based learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of computer-based learning per reporting period.

Nevada:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via self-study programs.

New Hampshire:  All PLI products can fulfill New Hampshire’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

New Jersey:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternative verifiable learning formats” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of alternative verifiable learning formats per reporting period.

New Mexico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New York

Experienced Attorneys:  All PLI products can fulfill New York’s CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Newly Admitted Attorneys:  PLI’s transitional on-demand web programs can be used to fulfill the requirements for New York newly admitted attorneys. Only professional practice and law practice management credits may be earned via transitional on-demand web programs. Ethics and skills credits may not be earned via on-demand web programs.

North Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

North Dakota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Ohio:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Oklahoma:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online, on-demand programs per reporting period.

Oregon:  All PLI products can fulfill Oregon’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Pennsylvania:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Puerto Rico:  All PLI products can fulfill Puerto Rico’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Rhode Island:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “video replay” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 video replay credits per reporting period.

South Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternatively delivered” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of alternatively delivered programs per reporting period.

Tennessee:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Texas:  All PLI products can fulfill Texas’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Utah:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Vermont:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 10 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Virgin Islands:  All PLI products can fulfill the Virgin Islands’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “pre-recorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of pre-recorded programs per reporting period.

Washington:  All PLI products can fulfill Washington’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

West Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of online instruction per reporting period.

Wisconsin:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “repeated, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of repeated, on-demand programs per reporting period. No ethics credits can be earned via on-demand web programs.

Wyoming:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.


CPD Jurisdictions

British Columbia (CPD-BC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not eligible for CPD-BC credit unless viewed with at least one other attorney or an articled student. In this case, the credit must be recorded as a “study group.”

Ontario (CPD-ON):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “recorded” credit. If viewed without a colleague, attorneys are limited to 6 credits of recorded programs per year. If viewed with at least one colleague, there is no limit to the number of credits that can be earned via recorded programs.

Quebec (CPD-QC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill Quebec’s CPD requirements.

Hong Kong (CPD-HK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CPD-HK credit.

United Kingdom (CPD-UK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill the United Kingdom’s CPD requirements.

Australia (CPD-AUS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Australia’s CPD requirements. Credit limits for on-demand web programs vary according to jurisdiction. Please refer to your jurisdiction’s CPD information page for specifics.

Alberta (CPD-ALBERTA):  All PLI products can fulfill Alberta’s CPD requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Dubai (CLPD-DUBAI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill CLPD credit requirements.


Other Credit Types

CPE Credit (NASBA):  Select on-demand web programs qualify as the “QAS Self-Study” delivery method. Please check the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page to verify CPE credit availability.

IRS Continuing Education (IRS-CE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill IRS-CE requirements. To request IRS-CE credit, please notify PLI at plicredits@pli.edu of your request and include your Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN).

Certified Fraud Examiner CPE:  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Certified Fraud Examiner CPE requirements. To request CPE credit or find out which programs offer CPE, please contact PLI at plicredits@pli.edu.

IAPP Continuing Privacy Credit (CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Privacy CPE credit requirements.

HR Recertification (HRCI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill HR credit requirements.

SHRM Recertification (SHRM):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as "self-paced" credit. SHRM professionals are limited to 30 credits of self-paced programs per recertification period.

Compliance Certification Board (CCB):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Candidates are limited to 10 self-study credits per 12-month period, and certification holders are limited to 20 self-study credits per 2-year renewal period.

Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists Certification (CAMS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CAMS credit.

New York State Social Worker Continuing Education (SW CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for SW CPE credit.

American Bankers Association Professional Certification (ABA):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill ABA credit requirements.

Certified Financial Planners (CFP):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CFP credit.

 

Related Items

Live Programs  Live Programs

New Developments in Securitization 2019 (New York, NY) Nov. 20, 2019
New Developments in Securitization 2018 (New York, NY) Dec. 12, 2018

Handbook  Course Handbook Archive

New Developments in Securitization 2018  
New Developments in Securitization 2017 Frank Polverino, Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP
 
Share
Email
“I really enjoyed the panel on esoteric asset securitization. Great speakers.”
-Tonya Rodgers, Holland & Knight LLP


  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2018 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2018 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.