Moodys.com
Close
Please Note
We brought you to this page based on your search query. If this isn't what you are looking for, you can continue to Search Results for ""
The maximum number of items you can export is 3,000. Please reduce your list by using the filtering tool to the left.
Close
Close
Email Research
Recipient email addresses will not be used in mailing lists or redistributed.
Recipient's
Email

Use semicolon to separate each address, limit to 20 addresses.
Enter the
characters you see
Close
Email Research
Thank you for your interest in sharing Moody's Research. You have reached the daily limit of Research email sharings.
Close
Thank you!
You have successfully sent the research.
Please note: some research requires a paid subscription in order to access.
Already a customer?
LOG IN
Don't want to see this again?
REGISTER
OR
Accept our Terms of Use to continue to Moodys.com:

PLEASE READ AND SCROLL DOWN!

By clicking “I AGREE” [at the end of this document], you indicate that you understand and intend these terms and conditions to be the legal equivalent of a signed, written contract and equally binding, and that you accept such terms and conditions as a condition of viewing any and all Moody’s inform​ation that becomes accessible to you [after clicking “I AGREE”] (the “Information”).   References herein to “Moody’s” include Moody’s Corporation, Inc. and each of its subsidiaries and affiliates.

Terms of One-Time Website Use

1.            Unless you have entered into an express written contract with Moody’s to the contrary, you agree that you have no right to use the Information in a commercial or public setting and no right to copy it, save it, print it, sell it, or publish or distribute any portion of it in any form.               

2.            You acknowledge and agree that Moody’s credit ratings: (i) are current opinions of the future relative creditworthiness of securities and address no other risk; and (ii) are not statements of current or historical fact or recommendations to purchase, hold or sell particular securities.  Moody’s credit ratings and publications are not intended for retail investors, and it would be reckless and inappropriate for retail investors to use Moody’s credit ratings and publications when making an investment decision.  No warranty, express or implied, as the accuracy, timeliness, completeness, merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose of any Moody’s credit rating is given or made by Moody’s in any form whatsoever.          

3.            To the extent permitted by law, Moody’s and its directors, officers, employees, representatives, licensors and suppliers disclaim liability for: (i) any indirect, special, consequential, or incidental losses or damages whatsoever arising from or in connection with use of the Information; and (ii) any direct or compensatory damages caused to any person or entity, including but not limited to by any negligence (but excluding fraud or any other type of liability that by law cannot be excluded) on the part of Moody’s or any of its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors or suppliers, arising from or in connection with use of the Information.

4.            You agree to read [and be bound by] the more detailed disclosures regarding Moody’s ratings and the limitations of Moody’s liability included in the Information.     

5.            You agree that any disputes relating to this agreement or your use of the Information, whether sounding in contract, tort, statute or otherwise, shall be governed by the laws of the State of New York and shall be subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the State of New York located in the City and County of New York, Borough of Manhattan.​​​

I AGREE
Related Issuers
Azusa Redevel. Agcy. Merged Proj. Area, CA
Burbank Public Financing Authority, CA
Burbank Redevelopment Agency, CA
Campbell Redevelopment Agency, CA
Cathedral City Public Financing Authority, CA
Coalinga Redevelopment Agency, CA
Dixon Redevelopment Agency, CA
Fontana Public Financing Authority, CA
Healdsburg Community Redevelopment Agency, CA
Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency, CA
Hesperia Public Financing Authority, CA
Industry Public Facilities Authority, CA
Inglewood Redevelopment Agency, CA
Lompoc Public Financing Authority, CA
Long Beach Bond Finance Authority, CA
Los Angeles Community Redevel. Fin. Auth., CA
Novato Redevelopment Agency, CA
Orange County Development Agency, CA
Palm Desert Financing Authority, CA
Palmdale Community Redevelopment Agency, CA
Pomona Public Financing Authority, CA
Richmond Joint Powers Financing Authority, CA
Ripon Redevelopment Agency, CA
Riverside Cnty Desert Comm Redevel Proj Area
Riverside Cnty I-215 Corr. Redevel. Proj Area
Riverside Cnty. Redevel. Project Area No. 1
Riverside County Public Financing Auth., CA
San Diego Public Facilities Fin. Auth., CA
San Francisco Redevelopment Financing Auth.
San Marcos Public Facilities Authority, CA
San Mateo Redevelopment Agency, CA
San Pablo Joint Powers Financing Auth., CA
San Rafael Redevelopment Agency, CA
Sand City Redevelopment Agency, CA
Seaside Redevelopment Agency, CA
Sierra Madre Financing Authority, CA
Sonoma Community Development Agency, CA
South El Monte Improvement District, CA
South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency, CA
Southern California Logistics Airport Auth.
Stanislaus-Ceres Redevelopment Commission, CA
Succ. Agcy. to Santee Comm. Dev. Comm., CA
Successor Agcy Santa Monica Red. Agency, CA
Successor Agcy to Menlo Park Com Dev Agcy, CA
Successor Agcy to Petaluma Comm Dev Comm, CA
Successor Agcy to the Orange Cove Red.Agcy.CA
Successor Agcy to the Santa Ana Comm. RDA, CA
Successor Agcy to the Santa Cruz Co. RDA, CA
Successor Agcy to Union City Comm RDA, CA
Successor Agency Industry Urban Dev.Agcy, CA
Successor Agency to Atwater Redevel. Agcy, CA
Successor Agency to Buena Park Comm RDA, CA
Successor Agency to Los Angeles Comm. RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Alameda Cnty RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Bakersfield RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Belmont RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Carson RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Chino RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Claremont RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Colton RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Glendale RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Indian Wells RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the La Habra RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Lemoore RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Los Banos RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Oakland RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Oakley RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Oceanside CDC, CA
Successor Agency to the Port Hueneme RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Rancho Mirage RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Ridgecrest RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Riverside Co. RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Roseville RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the San Diego RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the San Francisco RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the San Jose RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the San Pablo Red.Agcy, CA
Successor Agency to the Santa Barbara RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Santa Rosa RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Soledad RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Sunnyvale RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Torrance RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Watsonville RDA, CA
Successor Agency to the Westminster RDA, CA
Successor Agency to Walnut Creek RDA, CA
Successor Agy to Fount.Vall.AgyforCommDev, CA
Successor Agy to the Huntington Beach RDA, CA
Suisun Redevelopment Agency, CA
Tracy Community Dev Agency, CA
Vacaville Public Financing Authority, CA
West Hollywood Community Dev. Commis., CA
Rating Action:

Moody's downgrades to Ba1 all California TABs rated Baa3 or above, reflecting sharply increased uncertainty of continued, timely cash-flow for debt service payments; all TAB ratings remain on review for possible withdrawal due to insufficient information

14 Jun 2012

Approximately $11.6 billion of debt affected

New York, June 14, 2012 -- Moody's Investors Service has downgraded to Ba1 all California tax allocation bonds that were rated Baa3 or higher. All of our California tax allocation bond ratings remain on review for possible withdrawal. This continued review reflects the likelihood that insufficient information will be available to evaluate the relative probability of default due to the new cash flow pattern established in the redevelopment dissolution law (AB 1x 26). The new cash distribution procedure effectively eliminates bond indentures' flow of funds, and it is clearly subject to differing procedural interpretations. These differing interpretations can, without warning, give rise to the potential for debt service defaults that did not exist prior to the passage of this law. Absent administrative or legislative correction of this weakness in the law's terms, Moody's will likely withdraw its ratings on California tax allocation bonds.

RATING RATIONALE

The downgrades for the bonds rated Baa3 and higher primarily reflect the heightened cash flow risks arising from the implementation of state legislation dissolving all redevelopment agencies. This legislation effectively altered the flow of funds to be used to pay bondholders.

Even with strong credit fundamentals and intact legal security, timely debt service payments on California tax allocation bonds cannot currently be assured. This uncertainty primarily arises from the potential for legal and political disputes on the correct procedure for distributing cash according to the redevelopment agency dissolution law, AB 1x 26. This risk was recently highlighted by a dispute (discussed below) between the City of San Jose's Successor Agency and Santa Clara County that, according to a public notice filed by the City of San Jose, threatens timely payment of debt service in August despite sufficient tax increment revenues derived from the legal pledge to bondholders.

The downgrade also reflects the absence of a robust mechanism within the dissolution law itself to resolve such disputes and the evolution of the California Department of Finance's guidelines on distributing tax increment revenues. While the law has a reallocation procedure in the event of a shortfall that results solely from the new cash distribution procedure, the process for resolving disputed calculations and varying legal interpretations is not sufficiently detailed or prescribed so as to provide assurances of full or timely bond payments. The resolution of such issues may be left up to the courts if the state does not pass additional "cleanup" legislation. The current state guidance to county auditor-controllers to withhold property tax distributions in the absence of a state approved payment schedule also injects an element of payment timing uncertainty that did not exist prior to the dissolution law's adoption.

While the implementation of the law has given rise to new cash flow risks, Moody's believes the law is clear that fundamental legal security for tax allocation bonds is intended to be preserved. Therefore, we would expect that any defaults stemming solely from the new law's cash distribution procedure would likely over time be corrected. We believe that after a default, recovery would likely be at or close to 100%.

All ratings remain on review for possible withdrawal due to the potential that insufficient information will be available on a continuing, long-term basis with which to determine the relative probability of cash flow disputes leading to defaults.

STRENGTHS

- Successor agencies, which replaced the dissolved redevelopment agencies, remain explicitly obligated to honor existing bond contracts, with recognition of legally pledged revenue streams, debt service reserve funding requirements, and other performance requirements in existing bond documents.

- County auditor-controllers have generally indicated a very strong willingness and ability to comply with the new revenue allocation requirements on a sufficiently timely basis to allow successor agencies to meet existing debt service payment obligations.

- In the long-run, existing contract law should protect bondholder's interests, minimizing losses that might result solely from new procedural requirements in the redevelopment dissolution law.

CHALLENGES

- While the legislature's intent to honor existing obligations is clearly stated in the law, the mechanics of the new law do not provide sufficient clarity on process to realize this intent.

- The law creates significant uncertainty with respect to timing and mechanics of cash flows, which in our view effectively trumps the strength of the legal security and debt service coverage of bonds.

- The law establishes an initial allocation of property tax revenues that conflicts with existing bond documents, and the effectiveness of the resolution process on a timely basis is uncertain.

- The timeframe for property tax disbursements is more restricted than it had been previously, potentially resulting in mismatched receipt and disbursement schedules over the course of a year.

- The new law's audit requirements and sheer complexity have resulted in unexpected payment delays. These will require legal and/or administrative clarification.

WHAT COULD MAKE THE RATINGS GO UP

- Implementation of the legislation in a manner that clearly preserves timely debt service payment and enables compliance with bond documents

- Legislative or judicial clarification that compliance with bond documents takes precedence over other, apparently conflicting aspects of the legislation

WHAT COULD MAKE THE RATINGS GO DOWN

- Continued implementation of the legislation in a way that does not clearly preserve timely debt service payment

- Continued legal uncertainty and conflict between the law's requirements and strict compliance with existing bond documents

- Judicial determination that compliance with bond documents is subordinate to, or to be balanced against, other objectives of the legislation

The principal methodology used in this rating was Moody's Analytic Approach To Rating California Tax Allocation Bonds published in December 2003. Please see the Credit Policy page on www.moodys.com for a copy of this methodology.

REGULATORY DISCLOSURES

The Global Scale Credit Ratings on this press release that are issued by one of Moody's affiliates outside the EU are endorsed by Moody's Investors Service Ltd., One Canada Square, Canary Wharf, London E 14 5FA, UK, in accordance with Art.4 paragraph 3 of the Regulation (EC) No 1060/2009 on Credit Rating Agencies. Further information on the EU endorsement status and on the Moody's office that has issued a particular Credit Rating is available on www.moodys.com.

For ratings issued on a program, series or category/class of debt, this announcement provides relevant regulatory disclosures in relation to each rating of a subsequently issued bond or note of the same series or category/class of debt or pursuant to a program for which the ratings are derived exclusively from existing ratings in accordance with Moody's rating practices. For ratings issued on a support provider, this announcement provides relevant regulatory disclosures in relation to the rating action on the support provider and in relation to each particular rating action for securities that derive their credit ratings from the support provider's credit rating. For provisional ratings, this announcement provides relevant regulatory disclosures in relation to the provisional rating assigned, and in relation to a definitive rating that may be assigned subsequent to the final issuance of the debt, in each case where the transaction structure and terms have not changed prior to the assignment of the definitive rating in a manner that would have affected the rating. For further information please see the ratings tab on the issuer/entity page for the respective issuer on www.moodys.com.

Information sources used to prepare the rating are the following: public information.

Moody's considers the quality of information available on the rated entity, obligation or credit satisfactory for the purposes of issuing a rating.

Moody's adopts all necessary measures so that the information it uses in assigning a rating is of sufficient quality and from sources Moody's considers to be reliable including, when appropriate, independent third-party sources. However, Moody's is not an auditor and cannot in every instance independently verify or validate information received in the rating process.

Please see the ratings disclosure page on www.moodys.com for general disclosure on potential conflicts of interests.

Please see the ratings disclosure page on www.moodys.com for information on (A) MCO's major shareholders (above 5%) and for (B) further information regarding certain affiliations that may exist between directors of MCO and rated entities as well as (C) the names of entities that hold ratings from MIS that have also publicly reported to the SEC an ownership interest in MCO of more than 5%. A member of the board of directors of this rated entity may also be a member of the board of directors of a shareholder of Moody's Corporation; however, Moody's has not independently verified this matter.

Please see Moody's Rating Symbols and Definitions on the Rating Process page on www.moodys.com for further information on the meaning of each rating category and the definition of default and recovery.

Please see ratings tab on the issuer/entity page on www.moodys.com for the last rating action and the rating history.

The date on which some ratings were first released goes back to a time before Moody's ratings were fully digitized and accurate data may not be available. Consequently, Moody's provides a date that it believes is the most reliable and accurate based on the information that is available to it. Please see the ratings disclosure page on our website www.moodys.com for further information.

Please see www.moodys.com for any updates on changes to the lead rating analyst and to the Moody's legal entity that has issued the rating.

Eric Hoffmann
Senior Vice President
Public Finance Group
Moody's Investors Service
Public Finance Regional Office
One Front Street, Suite 1900
San Francisco, CA 94111
U.S.A
JOURNALISTS: 212-553-0376
SUBSCRIBERS: 212-553-1653

Kevork Khrimian
Vice President - Senior Analyst
Public Finance Group
JOURNALISTS: 212-553-0376
SUBSCRIBERS: 212-553-1653

Releasing Office:
Moody's Investors Service, Inc.
250 Greenwich Street
New York, NY 10007
U.S.A.
JOURNALISTS: 212-553-0376
SUBSCRIBERS: 212-553-1653

Moody's downgrades to Ba1 all California TABs rated Baa3 or above, reflecting sharply increased uncertainty of continued, timely cash-flow for debt service payments; all TAB ratings remain on review for possible withdrawal due to insufficient information
No Related Data.
© 2019 Moody’s Corporation, Moody’s Investors Service, Inc., Moody’s Analytics, Inc. and/or their licensors and affiliates (collectively, “MOODY’S”). All rights reserved.

CREDIT RATINGS ISSUED BY MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE, INC. AND ITS RATINGS AFFILIATES (“MIS”) ARE MOODY’S CURRENT OPINIONS OF THE RELATIVE FUTURE CREDIT RISK OF ENTITIES, CREDIT COMMITMENTS, OR DEBT OR DEBT-LIKE SECURITIES, AND MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS MAY INCLUDE MOODY’S CURRENT OPINIONS OF THE RELATIVE FUTURE CREDIT RISK OF ENTITIES, CREDIT COMMITMENTS, OR DEBT OR DEBT-LIKE SECURITIES. MOODY’S DEFINES CREDIT RISK AS THE RISK THAT AN ENTITY MAY NOT MEET ITS CONTRACTUAL FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS AS THEY COME DUE AND ANY ESTIMATED FINANCIAL LOSS IN THE EVENT OF DEFAULT OR IMPAIRMENT. SEE MOODY’S RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS PUBLICATION FOR INFORMATION ON THE TYPES OF CONTRACTUAL FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS ADDRESSED BY MOODY’S RATINGS. CREDIT RATINGS DO NOT ADDRESS ANY OTHER RISK, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: LIQUIDITY RISK, MARKET VALUE RISK, OR PRICE VOLATILITY. CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY’S OPINIONS INCLUDED IN MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT STATEMENTS OF CURRENT OR HISTORICAL FACT. MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS MAY ALSO INCLUDE QUANTITATIVE MODEL-BASED ESTIMATES OF CREDIT RISK AND RELATED OPINIONS OR COMMENTARY PUBLISHED BY MOODY’S ANALYTICS, INC. CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS DO NOT CONSTITUTE OR PROVIDE INVESTMENT OR FINANCIAL ADVICE, AND CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT AND DO NOT PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS TO PURCHASE, SELL, OR HOLD PARTICULAR SECURITIES. NEITHER CREDIT RATINGS NOR MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS COMMENT ON THE SUITABILITY OF AN INVESTMENT FOR ANY PARTICULAR INVESTOR. MOODY’S ISSUES ITS CREDIT RATINGS AND PUBLISHES MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS WITH THE EXPECTATION AND UNDERSTANDING THAT EACH INVESTOR WILL, WITH DUE CARE, MAKE ITS OWN STUDY AND EVALUATION OF EACH SECURITY THAT IS UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR PURCHASE, HOLDING, OR SALE.

MOODY’S CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT INTENDED FOR USE BY RETAIL INVESTORS AND IT WOULD BE RECKLESS AND INAPPROPRIATE FOR RETAIL INVESTORS TO USE MOODY’S CREDIT RATINGS OR MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS WHEN MAKING AN INVESTMENT DECISION. IF IN DOUBT YOU SHOULD CONTACT YOUR FINANCIAL OR OTHER PROFESSIONAL ADVISER.

ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS PROTECTED BY LAW, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, COPYRIGHT LAW, AND NONE OF SUCH INFORMATION MAY BE COPIED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED, REPACKAGED, FURTHER TRANSMITTED, TRANSFERRED, DISSEMINATED, REDISTRIBUTED OR RESOLD, OR STORED FOR SUBSEQUENT USE FOR ANY SUCH PURPOSE, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN ANY FORM OR MANNER OR BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER, BY ANY PERSON WITHOUT MOODY’S PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT.

CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT INTENDED FOR USE BY ANY PERSON AS A BENCHMARK AS THAT TERM IS DEFINED FOR REGULATORY PURPOSES AND MUST NOT BE USED IN ANY WAY THAT COULD RESULT IN THEM BEING CONSIDERED A BENCHMARK.

All information contained herein is obtained by MOODY’S from sources believed by it to be accurate and reliable. Because of the possibility of human or mechanical error as well as other factors, however, all information contained herein is provided “AS IS” without warranty of any kind. MOODY'S adopts all necessary measures so that the information it uses in assigning a credit rating is of sufficient quality and from sources MOODY'S considers to be reliable including, when appropriate, independent third-party sources. However, MOODY’S is not an auditor and cannot in every instance independently verify or validate information received in the rating process or in preparing the Moody’s publications.

To the extent permitted by law, MOODY’S and its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors and suppliers disclaim liability to any person or entity for any indirect, special, consequential, or incidental losses or damages whatsoever arising from or in connection with the information contained herein or the use of or inability to use any such information, even if MOODY’S or any of its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors or suppliers is advised in advance of the possibility of such losses or damages, including but not limited to: (a) any loss of present or prospective profits or (b) any loss or damage arising where the relevant financial instrument is not the subject of a particular credit rating assigned by MOODY’S.

To the extent permitted by law, MOODY’S and its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors and suppliers disclaim liability for any direct or compensatory losses or damages caused to any person or entity, including but not limited to by any negligence (but excluding fraud, willful misconduct or any other type of liability that, for the avoidance of doubt, by law cannot be excluded) on the part of, or any contingency within or beyond the control of, MOODY’S or any of its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors or suppliers, arising from or in connection with the information contained herein or the use of or inability to use any such information.

NO WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AS TO THE ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE OF ANY CREDIT RATING OR OTHER OPINION OR INFORMATION IS GIVEN OR MADE BY MOODY’S IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER.

Moody’s Investors Service, Inc., a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of Moody’s Corporation (“MCO”), hereby discloses that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and municipal bonds, debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. have, prior to assignment of any rating, agreed to pay to Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. for ratings opinions and services rendered by it fees ranging from $1,000 to approximately $2,700,000. MCO and MIS also maintain policies and procedures to address the independence of MIS’s ratings and rating processes. Information regarding certain affiliations that may exist between directors of MCO and rated entities, and between entities who hold ratings from MIS and have also publicly reported to the SEC an ownership interest in MCO of more than 5%, is posted annually at www.moodys.com under the heading “Investor Relations — Corporate Governance — Director and Shareholder Affiliation Policy.”

Additional terms for Australia only: Any publication into Australia of this document is pursuant to the Australian Financial Services License of MOODY’S affiliate, Moody’s Investors Service Pty Limited ABN 61 003 399 657AFSL 336969 and/or Moody’s Analytics Australia Pty Ltd ABN 94 105 136 972 AFSL 383569 (as applicable). This document is intended to be provided only to “wholesale clients” within the meaning of section 761G of the Corporations Act 2001. By continuing to access this document from within Australia, you represent to MOODY’S that you are, or are accessing the document as a representative of, a “wholesale client” and that neither you nor the entity you represent will directly or indirectly disseminate this document or its contents to “retail clients” within the meaning of section 761G of the Corporations Act 2001. MOODY’S credit rating is an opinion as to the creditworthiness of a debt obligation of the issuer, not on the equity securities of the issuer or any form of security that is available to retail investors.

Additional terms for Japan only: Moody's Japan K.K. (“MJKK”) is a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of Moody's Group Japan G.K., which is wholly-owned by Moody’s Overseas Holdings Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of MCO. Moody’s SF Japan K.K. (“MSFJ”) is a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of MJKK. MSFJ is not a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization (“NRSRO”). Therefore, credit ratings assigned by MSFJ are Non-NRSRO Credit Ratings. Non-NRSRO Credit Ratings are assigned by an entity that is not a NRSRO and, consequently, the rated obligation will not qualify for certain types of treatment under U.S. laws. MJKK and MSFJ are credit rating agencies registered with the Japan Financial Services Agency and their registration numbers are FSA Commissioner (Ratings) No. 2 and 3 respectively.

MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) hereby disclose that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and municipal bonds, debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) have, prior to assignment of any rating, agreed to pay to MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) for ratings opinions and services rendered by it fees ranging from JPY125,000 to approximately JPY250,000,000.

MJKK and MSFJ also maintain policies and procedures to address Japanese regulatory requirements.

​​​​
Moodys.com