- Three Dairy Firms Apologize for China Milk Scandal
- Santander in Talks to Acquire Sovereign: Source
- World Holds Its Breath as Bank Bailouts Take Shape
- Asian Markets Regain Footing, But Investors Are Cautious
- 'Chihuahua' Bites Crowe, DiCaprio at Box Office
- GM Held Talks With Ford Before Turning to Chrysler
- Markets to Fall 20% More at Most: IMF Economist
- G.M. and Chrysler Explore Merger
- Stock Market Crisis: Nation's Mayors Sound Off
- Bowyer: Mark To Market Still Lives (Unfortunately)
- Mad Mail: Why Not Shut the Market Down?
- Lightning Round OT: AFLAC, Valero and More
- Lightning Round: Chesapeake, Corning, J&J and More
- Cramer: What’s the Worst-Case Scenario?
- Game Plan: The Crash of '87 Scenario
- Cramer’s Double Secret Borrow-Binge Plan
- Your First Move For Monday October 13th
- History In The Making
Text Size 
Credit rating agencies did not properly manage their conflicts of interests when assigning ratings to structured products such as mortgage-backed securities, a report by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission said on Tuesday.
Rating firms have policies and procedures designed to prevent them from being influenced to issue or maintain a top credit rating in order to win business for the firm.
However, the SEC found a number of instances where key credit agency analysts took part in fee discussions.
One rating agency allowed senior analytical managers to participate directly in fee discussions with issuers until early 2007 when it changed its policy, the SEC report said.
Another rating agency allowed its analytical managers to participate in internal discussions about what was appropriate for determining a fee for a certain product.
"Analysts appeared to be aware, when rating an issuer, of the rating agency's business interest in securing the rating of the deal," the report said without identifying the individuals or firms involved.
Print
Email
Del.icio.us
Digg It
Data is a real-time snapshot *Data is delayed at least 15 minutes