
DOJ Probing for Collusion in CLO Market During Libor Transition
Antitrust prosecutors in New York have sent subpoenas to financial firms as they seek to determine whether investors with an equity stake in the $1.3 trillion CLO market illegally coordinated as the underlying buyout debt was repriced, said the people, who asked not to be identified discussing the confidential probe. The investigation was opened about a year-and-a-half ago, the people said.
A spokesperson for the Justice Department declined to comment.
In the last few months of 2022 and early 2023 — shortly before the final phaseout of Libor — a flurry of companies in the leveraged loan market rushed to switch the benchmarks on their debt. Often, they tried to exclude an adjustment that was meant to compensate investors for the fact that the Secured Overnight Financing Rate — the debt's new benchmark — consistently printed below Libor.
CLO managers, who repackage leveraged loans into bonds of varying risk and size, saw how some companies were about to reap benefits during that transition if that additional spread wasn't added, as it lowered the interest the companies paid. The most junior holders of the bonds they issued, also known as equity, stood to lose millions as they get paid last after every other investor in the bond has received their payments.
Communications between CLO equity holders near the transition deadline is part of what is being investigated by prosecutors, said the people familiar with the matter.
CLO equity investors were particularly exposed during the transition because their returns depend on the excess cash flows from underlying loans after higher-ranking CLO debt holders have been paid, and because of the significant leverage built into the structures. Smaller interest payments mean there's less left over for them to pocket.
Antitrust law bars competitors from colluding for economic gain. Because each CLO investor is a separate entity, it could potentially be illegal for them to agree with each other on the financial terms for an investment.
In criminal collusion or price-fixing cases, prosecutors must show evidence of an agreement, but don't need to provide proof of economic harm, potentially giving them an advantage if a case goes to trial. Still, if the government ultimately brings charges, it would need to convince a jury the actions came from collusion instead of firms reaching the same decision independently.
This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Time of India
18 minutes ago
- Time of India
‘Tell us the truth': Heated showdown erupts as House panel votes to subpoena DOJ for Epstein files - The Economic Times Video
A House committee voted to subpoena the Justice Department for documents related to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation. The motion, brought forward by Rep. Summer Lee (D-PA), was approved in an 8-2 vote, with three Republicans joining Democrats in support.


Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
'Don't mislead the public': House panel votes to subpoena Justice Dept for Jeffrey Epstein files
A House committee voted to subpoena the Justice Department for files related to the Jeffrey Epstein investigation. The motion, introduced by Rep. Summer Lee (D-PA), passed in an 8-2 vote, with three Republicans siding with Democrats. Show more Show less


News18
2 hours ago
- News18
Ghislaine Maxwell Reveals ‘100 Different People' Linked To Epstein Under Immunity Deal: Report
Last Updated: Ghislaine Maxwell answered questions about 100 people linked to Epstein during a two-day interrogation. Serving a 20-year sentence, she seeks clemency from President Trump. Ghislaine Maxwell's attorney for the disgraced socialite claimed that she answered questions from Justice Department officials about around '100 different people" connected to the late pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, following a two-day interrogation led by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, where she was granted limited immunity. According to David Oscar Markus, his client, currently serving a 20-year sentence after being convicted in Manhattan of federal sex trafficking and conspiracy charges in December 2021, was 'asked about every possible thing you could imagine – everything." 'This was the first opportunity she's ever been given to answer questions about what happened," Markus added. 'The truth will come out about what happened with Epstein, and she's the person who's answering those questions." Blanche had 'every single question" answered during the sitdown, Maxwell's attorney also said, with the British-born convict declining to plead the Fifth Amendment, the New York Post reported. 'If she lies, they could charge her with lying," Markus noted. A reporter countered, 'But didn't they charge her with lying?" referencing the two perjury counts that were later dropped by the prosecution after her conviction. 'No one is above the law — and no lead is off-limits," Blanche posted on X Tuesday in announcing he would speak with Maxwell, the NYP reported. Maxwell, 63, is currently appealing her conviction and sentence, leading some legal observers to speculate that her cooperation may be an attempt to secure clemency from President Trump. Her attorney described the commander in chief Friday as 'the ultimate dealmaker" and claimed his client had 'been treated unfairly for the past five years" and 'didn't get a fair trial." 'We hope he exercises that power in a right and just way," Markus added. Trump, after landing in Glasgow, Scotland, told reporters that 'I don't know anything about the conversation" between Blanche and Maxwell because 'I haven't really been following it." 'This is no time to be talking about pardons," the president added after saying hours earlier while leaving the White House, that 'I haven't thought" about the idea. According to ABC News, Maxwell reportedly initiated the sitdowns with the DOJ and answered questions for roughly nine hours. The limited immunity granted to Maxwell protected her from having her statements used against her in future criminal proceedings, sources told the outlet. Proffer immunity is typically granted to individuals prosecutors want cooperation from in a criminal case. The Department of Justice, in 2022, questioned Maxwell's credibility, stating in court documents that she demonstrated a 'significant pattern of dishonest conduct" and refused to accept responsibility for her crimes. As per court documents, the prior year revealed that prosecutors never seriously entertained the prospect of offering the woman dubbed 'Epstein's madam" a plea agreement after the financier was found dead in his Manhattan jail cell while awaiting his federal trial on Aug. 10, 2019. Markus noted that Epstein's attorneys had been informed that 'no potential co-conspirators would be prosecuted" as part of his talks with government lawyers following his July 2019 arrest on sex trafficking charges. 'I don't think President Trump knows that the Justice Department took the position that that promise should not be upheld," he claimed. Former Attorney General Pam Bondi hinted in a February Fox News interview that federal investigation files on Epstein, including an alleged 'client list" of powerful associates, would be disclosed – but the release never materialised. First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.