Answer-first summary for fast verification
Answer: Close-out netting; the ability to net would be affected by the fraudulent documentation
## Explanation **Close-out netting** is the most appropriate type of netting in this situation because: - Close-out netting occurs when one party defaults or when a contract is terminated - It allows for the netting of all outstanding obligations between the parties - In this case, the discovery of fraudulent documentation would likely trigger a termination event **The ability to net would be affected by the fraudulent documentation** because: - Fraudulent documentation could invalidate certain contracts or obligations - The clearinghouse would need to determine which obligations are legally enforceable - Some obligations might be excluded from netting if they are based on fraudulent documentation - This could reduce the effectiveness of the netting arrangement Close-out netting is specifically designed for situations where contracts are terminated due to default or other triggering events, making it suitable for this scenario involving fraudulent documentation.
Author: LeetQuiz .
Ultimate access to all questions.
By using a clearinghouse to handle the repo transactions between ABC and Repo Co., obligations owned between the two could have been netted once the fraudulent documentation was discovered. Which of the following is the most appropriate type of netting to use in this situation and what would be a likely additional impact from using it?
A
Close-out netting; the ability to net would be unaffected by the fraudulent documentation
B
Payment netting; the ability to net would be unaffected by the fraudulent documentation
C
Close-out netting; the ability to net would be affected by the fraudulent documentation
D
Payment netting; the ability to net would be affected by the fraudulent documentation
No comments yet.