- The proposed regulatory moves follow the Amtek Auto fiasco and a growing number of loan defaults triggering downgrade or suspension of ratings without the same being properly communicated to investors.
- SEBI seeks to check the menace of \'rating shopping\' and a \'pick-and-choose\' approach in disclosing rating actions.
Markets regulator Sebi is set to tighten disclosure norms for rating agencies as well as the companies being rated, as it seeks to check the menace of 'rating shopping' and a 'pick-and-choose' approach in disclosing rating actions.
The proposed regulatory moves follow the Amtek Auto fiasco and a growing number of loan defaults triggering downgrade or suspension of ratings without the same being properly communicated to investors.
It has been felt that the disclosure norms need to be tightened to ensure that the Credit Rating Agencies (CRAs) avoid any conflict of interest while deciding and disclosing their rating actions, a senior official said.
Sebi is looking into complaints that the CRAs as also the companies being rated by them tend to adopt a 'pick-and-choose' approach in the disclosure of the rating actions while there are some gaps in disseminating the information in case of ratings being withdrawn or suspended.
SEBI takes charge:
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi), which has the mandate to regulate credit rating agencies in the country, is finalising a draft set of revised disclosure norms and the same will soon be presented before its Board, the official said.
Once approved by the Board, the draft norms will be put in public domain for comments from all concerned stakeholders and the final regulations will be framed after taking into account their suggestions, the official added.
The proposed draft norms also take into account the recommendations made by Sebi's International Advisory Board (IAB), which has also called for a relook of the prevalent mechanism of the functioning of CRAs.
The IAB, which advises Sebi on its policy action based on the relevant global experiences and emerging challenges, in its last meeting felt that the rating business involves dissemination of opinion for 'public good', but there are asymmetric processes being followed in this space.
As the 'independence and credibility' of CRAs assume great significance for the benefit of investors, the IAB observed that regulators globally are calling for reducing the reliance on rating agencies.
However, it has suggested against any direct involvement for Sebi or other regulatory authorities in the rating process of the agencies.
"What may be required for Sebi is to work towards improving rating processes, enhancing transparency and removing the conflict of interest," IAB said.
"The disclosures of ratings of an issuer by CRAs may also include the rating transition of the issuer in the past as a track record of the rated issuer and also to reflect on the consistency of ratings by the CRAs," IAB has told Sebi.
This will help the investors take an informed decision while the 'credibility risk' can keep the CRAs as also the concerned companies on their toes.
It has also suggested that in cases where CRAs fail to get the rating-related information from the companies being rated, the first step should be the suspension of the rating with the proper public disclosure of the reasons.
This could be followed up with the rating withdrawal when it becomes necessary, IAB has said.
It also wants the companies to disclose all ratings obtained by them even in the case of non-public issues so as to curtail the scope of 'rating shopping'. This will check the practice of the companies keeping under wraps the ratings that are not very favourable to them.