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
Rating Action:

Moody's takes rating actions on 11 South African sub-sovereign issuers

07 Nov 2019

Johannesburg, November 07, 2019 -- Moody's Investors Service has today taken rating actions on 11 South African sub-sovereign issuers covering the following sectors: (1) Regional and local governments (RLGs) and (2) Government related issuers. Today's actions were prompted by Moody's decision to change the outlook on South Africa's Baa3 government bond rating to negative from stable. For details, please refer to the press release : https://www.moodys.com/research/--PR_412385.

Please click on this link http://www.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBC_205122 for the List of Affected Credit Ratings. This list is an integral part of this Press Release and identifies each affected issuer.

Moody's has taken the following actions on the sub-sovereign issuers:

• Changed the outlook to negative from stable for sub-sovereign issuers rated on par with the sovereign: City of Cape Town, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality, and City of Ekurhuleni; maintained the negative outlook for the City of Johannesburg.

• Maintained the stable outlooks for the following municipalities rated below the sovereign: City of Tshwane, Breede Valley Municipality, and City of Umhlathuze.

• Maintained the negative outlook on Mangaung Metropolitan Municipality, reflecting the issuer's idiosyncratic risk factors.

• Downgraded the global scale rating of the Municipality of Rustenburg to Ba3 from Ba2 and changed its outlook to negative from stable to reflect idiosyncratic pressure; all other RLGs' global scale long term and short term ratings were affirmed.

• Changed the outlook to negative from stable and affirmed ratings on two government related issuers (GRIs), the South African National Roads Agency Ag. Ltd (SANRAL) and East Rand Water Care Company (ERWAT).

• Affirmed all RLGs' Baseline Credit Assessments (BCAs), except the Municipality of Rustenburg, where its BCA was lowered to ba3 from ba2.

RATINGS RATIONALE

Please click on this link http://www.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBC_205122 for the List of Affected Credit Ratings. This list is an integral part of this Press Release and provides, for each of the credit ratings covered, Moody's disclosures on the following items:

* National Scale Ratings

RATIONALE FOR ISSUERS RATED ON PAR WITH THE SOVEREIGN

The change in outlook to negative from stable for the City of Cape Town and Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality mirrors the weakening of the sovereign credit profile. While acknowledging that these two municipalities are characterised by low debt levels and robust operating performances, Moody's views the centralised nature of the RLG sector in South Africa and the close financial linkages between national government and RLGs as limiting the ratings on sub-sovereign issuers to be at par with the sovereign bond rating. At the same time, Moody's affirmed the long term global scale and national scale issuer and debt ratings for Cape Town of Baa3, P-3/Aaa.za, P-1.za and long term global scale and national scale issuer rating for Nelson Mandela Metropolitan Municipality of Baa3/Aaa.za.

The negative outlook for the City of Johannesburg remains unchanged. Whilst some of the idiosyncratic risks that led Moody's to assigning a negative outlook receded over the past year -- in particular, 2019 unaudited financial statements show a significant increase in operating revenue, resulting in a substantial improvement in the city's liquidity position -- Johannesburg's rating is limited by the sovereign bond rating as other Baa3 rated sub-sovereigns. Moody's also affirmed the long term and short term issuer and debt rating of Baa3, P-3/Aa1.za, P-1.za for the City of Johannesburg.

The change in outlook to negative from stable on the City of Ekurhuleni mirrors the weakening of the sovereign credit profile while the rationale for downgrading the national scale ratings to Aa1.za from Aaa.za reflects the weakening in its operating performance and liquidity relative to other rated peers in the country. Ekurhuleni's cash and cash equivalents balance declined over the past two years. Moreover, its gross operating balance to operating revenue ratio further declined to 2.3% in fiscal 2019 from 3.9% in fiscal 2018. The affirmation of the short term and long term global scale issuer and debt ratings of Baa3, P-3 reflects the city's moderate debt levels and large and diversified economic base. Moody's also affirmed the short term national scale rating of P-1.za.

RATIONALE FOR ISSUERS RATED BELOW THE SOVEREIGN

--RLGs

The City of Tshwane, City of uMhlathuze and Breede Valley Municipality, which are rated one to two notches below the sovereign, are expected to display a greater tolerance to the weakening operating environment relative to their rating levels.

The affirmation of the ratings of the City of Tshwane's Ba1, NP long term and short term global scale with a stable outlook reflects Moody's view that the city will continue to record a further decline in debt levels, while maintaining moderate operating performance over the next three years. Moody's also affirmed the long term and short term national scale issuer ratings of Aa2.za/P-1.za.

The rationale for affirming City of uMhlathuze's Ba2 long term global scale issuer rating with a stable outlook reflects Moody's view that the city will maintain its good operating performance, despite the challenging operating environment. Moody's also affirmed the long term national scale issuer rating of A1.za.

The affirmation of Breede Valley Municipality's Ba2, NP long term and short term global scale rating with a stable outlook reflects the municipality's consistently declining debt levels and stable operating performance which is expected to continue over the next two to three years. Breede Valley's overall financial performance has been resilient over the past five years despite the deterioration in the operating environment. Moody's also affirmed the long term and short term national scale rating of A2.za, P-1.za.

The affirmation of Mangaung Metropolitan Municipality's B3, NP long term and short term global scale ratings with a negative outlook reflects the issuer's idiosyncratic risk factors. Mangaung's liquidity and financial performance remains constrained, according to 2019 unaudited financial statements. In 2019, Mangaung's cash and cash equivalents declined to ZAR128 million from ZAR289 million in fiscal 2018, further limiting the metro's ability to service its debt. The metro's operating performance also deteriorated further, posting a gross operating balance to operating ratio of -2.4% in fiscal 2019 from -1.4% in fiscal 2018. The municipality's challenges are exacerbated by weak governance and management practice. Moody's also affirmed the long term and short term national scale issuer ratings of B1.za, NP.za.

Moody's has downgraded the Municipality of Rustenburg's global scale rating to Ba3 from Ba2 and changed its outlook to negative from stable. The municipality's BCA was also lowered to ba3 from ba2. At the same time, Moody's downgraded the NSR to Baa1.za from A1.za. These actions reflect the municipality's significant weakening of operating performances and weaker liquidity profile relative to other rated peers. Rustenburg's financial performance significantly deteriorated according to 2019 unaudited financial statements, reflecting a strong increase in consumer debtors provision. The negative outlook reflects uncertainty on whether the municipality will improve its operating performance in line with its rated peers in the next two years.

--GRIs

The change in outlook to negative from stable on SANRAL reflects the close operational and financial linkages between the entity and the sovereign, which may have a direct negative impact on the agency's financial support in case of severe financial constraints from the support provider. Moody's also affirmed the long term and short term global scale and national scale issuer ratings of Ba2, NP/A1.za, P-1.za. SANRAL's ratings are derived from the application of Moody's approach to GRIs rated solely on support. SANRAL's operating and capital requirements are largely dependent on national government support, particularly for its Gauteng Freeway Improvement Project (GFIP) which has consistently experienced cash flow pressures due to low collections. The two notch rating difference from the support provider reflects uncertainty over whether the government would be willing to step in to support SANRAL's unguaranteed debt in the unlikely event that the government itself was approaching default, and over its capacity to do so in those circumstances given its heavy contingent liabilities in respect of the wider set of state-owned entities.

The negative outlook on ERWAT reflects the weakening of the credit profile of its support provider, the City of Ekurhuleni. Moody's also affirmed the long term global scale and national scale rating of Ba1/Aa3.za. ERWAT's ratings are derived from the application of Moody's approach to GRIs rated solely on support. The entity is 97% owned by the City of Ekurhuleni and derives 75% of its total revenue from service charges collected by the City of Ekurhuleni and transferred to the company. ERWAT's debt exposure benefits from explicit guarantees from Ekurhuleni. As at fiscal 2018, 91% of ERWAT's debt was guaranteed by its support provider. ERWAT's rating one notch below its support provider reflects the fact that Ekurhuleni has contingent liabilities on other entities and a small portion of ERWAT's debt is not guaranteed.

ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL AND GOVERNANCE CONSIDERATIONS -

--RLGs

Environmental considerations are material to South African RLGs' credit profiles. Water shortages are one of the most material environmental risks for the sector. South Africa is considered a water scarce country and drought is the most frequent environmental risk which has a direct impact on the sector's revenues. Revenues from water purchases account for 10% of revenues on average across the rated sector. Water supply risks are managed through partnerships between the central government Department for Water and Sanitation and respective municipalities, and some of the financial burden for implementing and maintaining diverse water sources will be borne by municipalities. Large municipalities (metros) have increased their focus on water-related infrastructure investment in their 2019-22 capital budgets. Northern Cape and Eastern Cape provinces have been declared disaster areas due to water shortage and they require funding from national government to alleviate the situation.

Social considerations are material to South African RLGs' credit profiles. South African RLGs face growing demographic-related spending pressures which are exacerbated by historical infrastructure backlogs and high levels of urbanization and population growth. National government transfers and municipal borrowing capacity are often not sufficient to meet ongoing requirements for the provision for basic services such as water, electricity and housing. As a result, it has become increasingly challenging for the municipalities to meet the required capital infrastructure spending. The country also faces a high unemployment rate, which directly impacts the ability of residents to pay for services, and increases the number of households that are entirely dependent on government transfers for basic services. In addition, South Africa has one of the highest inequality rates in the world and this also filters through to the local governments in the country, creating risks of ongoing service delivery protests as most poor communities are largely dependent on the national government for the provision of basic services such as water, electricity and housing.

Governance considerations are material to South African RLGs' credit profiles. The municipalities' governance and management practices are key credit differentiating factors. In South Africa, municipal financial operations are guided by various legislations, such as the Municipal Finance Management Act (MFMA). The national government, through the Treasury, has an oversight role. Data transparency is generally high, with all financial statements, along with medium-term budgets published on the websites of the municipalities and national treasury.

--GRIs

Environmental considerations are material to ERWAT's credit profile. ERWAT is 97% owned by the City of Ekurhuleni and is exposed to similar water shortages affecting its support provider. The vast majority of ERWAT's operating revenue is derived from the City of Ekurhuleni which could be affected in case of water shortages due to drought.

Environmental considerations are not material to SANRAL's credit profile.

SANRAL and ERWAT are exposed to some social risks, mainly related to the ability of users to pay toll roads and water services. Nevertheless, these risks have limited credit impact given the support coming from the central government in the case of SANRAL and the City of Ekurhuleni for ERWAT.

Governance risks are material to SANRAL's and ERWAT's credit profiles. The governance framework is intrinsically intertwined with their supporting governments, which exert strong oversight and ultimately take strategic decisions.

WHAT COULD CHANGE THE RATINGS UP/DOWN

Any further weakening of the South African sovereign credit profile would put downward pressure on the ratings of RLGs and government-related companies which carry negative outlooks. Additionally, any individual financial difficulties resulting in cash-flow pressures and consistently high or growing debt levels could lead to downward rating actions independent of sovereign rating movements.

Upward rating pressure is unlikely for the issuers carrying a negative outlook. However, if the sovereign rating is stabilised, Moody's would consider stabilising the outlook for both RLGs and government-related companies. Evidence of any given entity's ability to display comparatively stronger credit fundamentals and an ability to withstand the deterioration of the operating environment, especially the ones which carry a stable outlook, could also exert upward rating pressure.

The principal methodology used in rating Breede Valley, Municipality of, Cape Town, City of, Ekurhuleni, City of, Johannesburg, City of, Mangaung, Metropolitan Municipality, Nelson Mandela, Metropolitan Municipality, Rustenburg, Municipality of, Tshwane, City of and uMhlathuze, City of was Regional and Local Governments published in January 2018. The principal methodology used in rating East Rand Water Care Company and South African National Roads Ag. Ltd (The) was Government-Related Issuers published in June 2018. Please see the Rating Methodologies page on www.moodys.com for a copy of these methodologies.

Moody's National Scale Credit Ratings (NSRs) are intended as relative measures of creditworthiness among debt issues and issuers within a country, enabling market participants to better differentiate relative risks. NSRs differ from Moody's global scale credit ratings in that they are not globally comparable with the full universe of Moody's rated entities, but only with NSRs for other rated debt issues and issuers within the same country. NSRs are designated by a ".nn" country modifier signifying the relevant country, as in ".za" for South Africa. For further information on Moody's approach to national scale credit ratings, please refer to Moody's Credit rating Methodology published in May 2016 entitled "Mapping National Scale Ratings from Global Scale Ratings". While NSRs have no inherent absolute meaning in terms of default risk or expected loss, a historical probability of default consistent with a given NSR can be inferred from the GSR to which it maps back at that particular point in time. For information on the historical default rates associated with different global scale rating categories over different investment horizons, please see http://www.moodys.com/researchdocumentcontentpage.aspx?docid=PBC_1174796.

Glossary of Terms and Acronyms

Affirmation: An Affirmation is a public statement that the current Credit Rating assigned to an issuer or debt obligation, which is not currently under review, continues to be appropriately positioned.

Capital Expenditures or Capex: This includes gross expenditures for property, plant and equipment and intangible assets.

Confirmation: A Confirmation is a public statement that a previously announced review of a rating has been completed without a change to the rating.

Credit Rating: A Credit Rating is an opinion from Moody's Investors Service (MIS) regarding the creditworthiness of an entity, a debt or financial obligation, debt security, preferred share or other financial instrument, or of an issuer of such a debt or financial obligation, debt security, preferred share or other financial instrument, issued using an established and defined ranking system of rating categories.

Debt: Long term debt (including liability for capital leases) plus short term debt plus current portion of long term debt. May also be adjusted to include other long term obligations, such as leases and pensions.

Global Scale Long Term Credit Rating: Long-term ratings are assigned to issuers or obligations with an original maturity of one year or more and reflect both on the likelihood of a default on contractually promised payments and the expected financial loss suffered in the event of default.

Global Scale Ratings: Ratings assigned on Moody's global long-term and short-term rating scales are forward-looking opinions of the relative credit risks of financial obligations issued by non-financial corporates, financial institutions, structured finance vehicles, project finance vehicles, and public sector entities.

Global Scale Short Term Credit Rating: Short-term ratings are assigned to obligations with an original maturity of thirteen months or less and reflect the likelihood of a default on contractually promised payments.

Issuer: The term Issuer means any entity by which a Security has been issued, guaranteed, or by which the credit underlying a Security has been otherwise supported. The term Issuer also includes the corporate parent or majority-owned subsidiary of an Issuer.

Issuer Rating: Issuer Ratings are opinions of the ability of entities to honor senior unsecured financial counterparty obligations and contracts.

National Scale Long Term Rating: Moody's long-term National Scale Ratings (NSRs) are opinions of the relative creditworthiness of issuers and financial obligations within a particular country. NSRs are not designed to be compared among countries; rather, they address relative credit risk within a given country.

National Scale Short Term Rating: Moody's short-term NSRs are opinions of the ability of issuers in a given country, relative to other domestic issuers, to repay debt obligations that have an original maturity not exceeding one year. Short term NSRs in one country should not be compared with short-term NSRs in another country, or with Moody's global ratings.

Operating Revenue: For regional and local governments, this represents recurrent income such as taxes and central government transfers, used for government's core operations. For corporations, this represents income received from the sale of goods and services.

Outlook: An Outlook is an opinion regarding the likely direction of an issuer's rating over the medium term.

Rating Outlook: A Moody's rating outlook is an opinion regarding the likely rating direction over the medium term. Rating outlooks fall into four categories: Positive (POS), Negative (NEG), Stable (STA), and Developing (DEV). Outlooks may be assigned at the issuer level or at the rating level.

For further information on these definitions or on Moody's ratings symbols, please consult the Rating Symbols and Definitions document on www.moodys.com

REGULATORY DISCLOSURES

Please click on this link http://www.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBC_205122 for the List of Affected Credit Ratings. This list is an integral part of this Press Release and provides, for each of the credit ratings covered, Moody's disclosures on the following items:

• Person Approving the Credit Rating

The rating for 820596243, NSR LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Breede Valley, Municipality of was initially assigned on 27 May 2008 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 12 Jun 2017.

The rating for 820596243, NSR ST Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Breede Valley, Municipality of was initially assigned on 26 May 2015 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 12 Jun 2017.

The rating for 820595946, NSR LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Cape Town, City of was initially assigned on 18 Jan 2008 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 15 Mar 2019.

The rating for 820595946, NSR ST Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Cape Town, City of was initially assigned on 16 Jul 2010 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 15 Mar 2019.

The rating for ZAG000054982, NSR LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Cape Town, City of was initially assigned on 15 Jan 2009 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 15 Mar 2019.

The rating for ZAG000068719, NSR LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Cape Town, City of was initially assigned on 08 Apr 2009 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 15 Mar 2019.

The rating for ZAG000075995, NSR LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Cape Town, City of was initially assigned on 12 Mar 2010 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 15 Mar 2019.

The rating for 820960280 NSR LT Senior Unsecured MTN, ZAR of Cape Town, City of was initially assigned on 21 May 2008 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 15 Mar 2019.

The rating for 820595939, NSR LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 18 Jan 2008 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 12 Jun 2017.

The rating for 820595939, NSR ST Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 16 Jul 2010 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 12 Jun 2017.

The rating for ZAG000078916, NSR LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 16 Jul 2010 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 12 Jun 2017.

The rating for ZAG000127358, NSR LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 17 Jun 2015 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 12 Jun 2017.

The rating for ZAG000094848, NSR LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 24 Apr 2012 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 12 Jun 2017.

The rating for ZAG000105669, NSR LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 13 May 2013 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 12 Jun 2017.

The rating for ZAG000084526, NSR LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 07 Mar 2011 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 12 Jun 2017.

The rating for ZAG000145384, NSR LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 14 Jul 2017 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 14 Jul 2017.

The rating for ZAG000145194, NSR LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 04 Jul 2017 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 04 Jul 2017.

The rating for ZAG000115148, NSR LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 11 Apr 2014 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 12 Jun 2017.

The rating for 822158922, NSR LT Senior Unsecured MTN, ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 16 Jul 2010 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 12 Jun 2017.

The rating for 820595948, NSR LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Johannesburg, City of was initially assigned on 14 May 2008 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 24 Oct 2018.

The rating for 820595948, NSR ST Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Johannesburg, City of was initially assigned on 23 Mar 2012 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 24 Oct 2018.

The rating for ZAG000137571, NSR LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Johannesburg, City was initially assigned on 13 Jun 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 24 Oct 2018.

The rating for ZAG000054339, NSR LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Johannesburg, City was initially assigned on 27 May 2008 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 24 Oct 2018.

The rating for 820965396, NSR LT Senior Unsecured MTN, ZAR of Johannesburg, City of was initially assigned on 27 May 2008 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 24 Oct 2018.

The rating for 825092055, NSR LT Senior Unsecured MTN, ZAR of Johannesburg, City of was initially assigned on 13 June 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 24 Oct 2018.

The rating for 824341396, NSR LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Mangaung, Metropolitan Municipality, was initially assigned on 14 Apr 2015 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 06 Aug 2019

The rating for 824341396, NSR ST Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Mangaung, Metropolitan Municipality, was initially assigned on 14 Apr 2015 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 06 Aug 2019.

The rating for 820596002, NSR LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Nelson Mandela, Metropolitan Municipality, was initially assigned on 18 Jan 2008 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 28 Mar 2018.

The rating for 820970107, NSR LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Rustenburg, Municipality of, was initially assigned on 29 Sep 2008 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 12 Jun 2017.

The rating for 820595950, NSR LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Tshwane, City of, was initially assigned on 04 May 2009 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 05 Dec 2018.

The rating for 820595950, NSR ST Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Tshwane, City of, was initially assigned on 30 Nov 2010 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 05 Dec 2018.

The rating for 825431399, NSR LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of uMhlathuze, City of, was initially assigned on 18 Jul 2017 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 18 Jul 2017.

The rating for 822471425, NSR LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING, ZAR of East Rand Water Care Company was initially assigned on 11 May 2011 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 12 Jun 2017.

The rating for 820031729, NSR LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of South African National Roads Ag. Ltd (The) was initially assigned on 01 Feb 2007 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 30 Aug 2019.

The rating for 820031729, NSR ST Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of South African National Roads Ag. Ltd (The) was initially assigned on 01 Feb 2007 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 30 Aug 2019.

The rating for 820596243, LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Breede Valley, Municipality of was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 28 Mar 2018.

The rating for 820596243, ST Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Breede Valley, Municipality of was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 11 May 2016.

The rating for 820595946, LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Cape Town, City of was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 15 Mar 2019.

The rating for 820595946, ST Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Cape Town, City of was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 15 Mar 2019.

The rating for ZAG000054982, LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Cape Town, City of was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 15 Mar 2019.

The rating for ZAG000068719, LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Cape Town, City of was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 15 Mar 2019.

The rating for ZAG000075995, LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Cape Town, City of was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 15 Mar 2019.

The rating for 820960280 LT Senior Unsecured MTN, ZAR of Cape Town, City of was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 15 Mar 2019.

The rating for 820595939, LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 28 Mar 2018.

The rating for 820595939, ST Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 28 Mar 2018.

The rating for ZAG000078916, LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 28 Mar 2018.

The rating for ZAG000127358, LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 28 Mar 2018.

The rating for ZAG000094848, LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 28 Mar 2018.

The rating for ZAG000105669, LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 28 Mar 2018.

The rating for ZAG000084526, LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 28 Mar 2018.

The rating for ZAG000145384, LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 14 Jul 2017 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 28 Mar 2018.

The rating for ZAG000145194, LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 04 Jul 2017 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 28 Mar 2018.

The rating for ZAG000115148, LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 28 Mar 2018.

The rating for 822158922, LT Senior Unsecured MTN, ZAR of Ekurhuleni, City of was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 28 Mar 2018.

The rating for 820595948, LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Johannesburg, City of was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 24 Oct 2018.

The rating for 820595948, ST Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Johannesburg, City of was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 24 Oct 2018.

The rating for ZAG000137571, LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Johannesburg, City was initially assigned on 13 Jun 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 24 Oct 2018.

The rating for ZAG000054339, LT Senior Unsecured, BOND, ZAR of Johannesburg, City was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 24 Oct 2018.

The rating for 820965396, LT Senior Unsecured MTN, ZAR of Johannesburg, City of was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 24 Oct 2018.

The rating for 825092055, LT Senior Unsecured MTN, ZAR of Johannesburg, City of was initially assigned on 13 June 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 24 Oct 2018.

The rating for 824341396, LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Mangaung, Metropolitan Municipality, was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 06 Aug 2019.

The rating for 824341396, ST Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Mangaung, Metropolitan Municipality, was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 06 Aug 2019.

The rating for 820596002, LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Nelson Mandela, Metropolitan Municipality, was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 28 Mar 2018.

The rating for 820970107, LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Rustenburg, Municipality of, was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 28 Mar 2018.

The rating for 820595950, LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Tshwane, City of, was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 05 Dec 2018.

The rating for 820595950, ST Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of Tshwane, City of, was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 05 Dec 2018.

The rating for 825431399, LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of uMhlathuze, City of, was initially assigned on 18 Jul 2017 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 28 Mar 2018.

The rating for 822471425, LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING, ZAR of East Rand Water Care Company was initially assigned on 11 May 2016 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 28 Mar 2018.

The rating for 820031729, LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of South African National Roads Ag. Ltd (The) was initially assigned on 27 Aug 2009 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 30 Aug 2019.

The rating for 820031729, LT Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING of South African National Roads Ag. Ltd (The) was initially assigned on 27 Aug 2009 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 30 Aug 2019.

The rating for 820031729, ST Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING ZAR of South African National Roads Ag. Ltd (The) was initially assigned on 27 Aug 2009 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 30 Aug 2019.

The rating for 820031729, ST Issuer Rating, ISSUER RATING of South African National Roads Ag. Ltd (The) was initially assigned on 27 Aug 2009 and the last Credit Rating Action was taken on 30 Aug 2019.

Only credit rating actions issued by Moody's Investors Service South Africa (Pty) Ltd are considered for the purpose of this disclosure.

Please see the ratings tab on the issuer page on www.moodys.com for additional rating history details. 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.

For ratings issued on a program, series, category/class of debt or security this announcement provides certain regulatory disclosures in relation to each rating of a subsequently issued bond or note of the same series, category/class of debt, security 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 certain regulatory disclosures in relation to the credit rating action on the support provider and in relation to each particular credit rating action for securities that derive their credit ratings from the support provider's credit rating. For provisional ratings, this announcement provides certain 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.

For any affected securities or rated entities receiving direct credit support from the primary entity(ies) of this credit rating action, and whose ratings may change as a result of this credit rating action, the associated regulatory disclosures will be those of the guarantor entity. Exceptions to this approach exist for the following disclosures, if applicable to jurisdiction: Ancillary Services, Disclosure to rated entity, Disclosure from rated entity.

The ratings of Mangaung, Metropolitan Municipality and South African National Roads Ag. Ltd (The) were not initiated or not maintained at the request of the rated entities. Please refer to Moody's Policy for Designating and Assigning Unsolicited Credit Ratings available on its website www.moodys.com.

Moody's considers a rated entity or its agent(s) to be participating when it maintains an overall relationship with Moody's. On this basis, the rated entity or its agent(s) is considered to be a participating entity. The rated entity or its agent(s) generally provides Moody's with information for the purposes of its ratings process.

The main assumptions underlying the methodology used to determine the credit ratings for East Rand Water Care Company and South African National Roads Ag. Ltd (The) are:

1) Expected future trends for the relevant industry(ies) structure, competitive dynamics, supply & demand, regulatory environment, and technology are assumed to be predictive for the likelihood of default and expected loss.

2) Expectations for competitive/market position and management's capabilities and approach to business and financial risks are assumed to be predictive for the likelihood of default and expected loss.

3) Indicators for profitability, interest coverage, and asset quality are assumed to be predictive for the likelihood of default and expected loss, and the rating category criteria are believed to be appropriate.

4) Indicators for cash flow generation, leverage, and debt coverage are assumed to be predictive for the likelihood of default and expected loss, and the rating category criteria are believed to be appropriate.

5) Expectations for legal, regulatory, liquidity, and financial market risks, mergers/acquisitions and recapitalization events, integrity of financial reporting, corporate governance, and the likelihood and nature of support or weakening influence from a parent, affiliate, government or financial party are assumed to be predictive for the likelihood of default/expected loss.

The main assumptions underlying the methodology used to determine the credit ratings for Breede Valley, Municipality of, Cape Town, City of, Ekurhuleni, City of, Johannesburg, City of, Mangaung, Metropolitan Municipality, Nelson Mandela, Metropolitan Municipality, Rustenburg, Municipality of, Tshwane, City of and uMhlathuze, City of are:

1) Expected future economic trends and operating environment of the relevant sector are assumed to be predictive for the likelihood of default and expected loss.

2) Expectations for institutional framework and management's capabilities and approach to financial risks are assumed to be predictive for the likelihood of default and expected loss.

3) Indicators for financial position and performance are assumed to be predictive for the likelihood of default and expected loss, and the rating category criteria are believed to be appropriate.

4) Indicators for leverage and debt coverage are assumed to be predictive for the likelihood of default and expected loss, and the rating category criteria are believed to be appropriate.

5) Expectations for legal, regulatory, liquidity, and financial market risks, integrity and transparency of financial reporting, governance, financial performance of counterparties and the likelihood and nature of support by a government or financial party are assumed to be predictive for the likelihood of default/expected loss.

Information sources used to prepare the ratings are the following: parties involved in the rating, public information, and confidential and proprietary Moody's information.

Information types used to prepare the include the following: Financial data, Economic and demographic data, Public information, and Moody's information.

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. The information available and considered in determining the credit rating is of appropriate quality relative to that available for similar obligors, securities or money market instruments.

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 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.

The ratings have been disclosed to the rated entities prior to public dissemination.

Credit ratings are Moody's current opinions of the relative future credit risk of entities, credit commitments, or debt or debt-like securities rated by Moody's. 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. Credit ratings do not address any other risk, including but not limited to: market liquidity risk, market value risk, or price volatility. Credit ratings are not statements of current or historical fact. Credit ratings do not constitute investment or financial advice, and credit ratings are not recommendations to purchase, sell, or hold particular securities. Credit ratings do not comment on the suitability of an investment for any particular investor. Moody's issues its credit ratings with the expectation and understanding that each investor will make its own study and evaluation of each security that is under consideration for purchase, holding, or sale.

The volatility for the credit ratings for East Rand Water Care Company and South African National Roads Ag. Ltd (The) are:

1) An entity's competitive position is expected to be stable over the 18 -- 24 month rating horizon and generally will not lead to rating volatility. Unexpected changes in technology, regulation, market participants or consumer preferences that negatively (or positively) impact an entity's competitive position within its market, may lead to multiple notch ratings changes during the course of the ratings horizon.

2) Operating strategy effectiveness is typically evidenced by an entity's performance metrics over the medium to long term, typically beyond the rating horizon, and generally will not lead to rating volatility. Changes in performance metrics during the 18-24 month rating horizon will not generally lead to high degrees of rating volatility (more than 1 rating notch). Sustained improvement or deterioration in performance metrics beyond Moody's expectations could lead to multi notch rating changes.

3) Rating levels are highly sensitive to financial strategy. Material changes to financial strategy which increase or decrease financial risk and liquidity may change the entity's ability to weather financial and business cycles. A change in appetite for financial risk may lead to multi-notch downward rating changes. Changes in financial strategy which reduce risk are likely to lead to single notch upward rating changes during the rating horizon.

4) Rating levels can be sensitive to changes in assumptions about an entity's financial position. Metrics that measure financial position tend to vary within a range of expected levels during the course of an 18 -- 24 month rating horizon, and modest variances are not expected to lead to multi-notch rating changes. Large, unexpected changes to assumptions regarding financial position, including measures related to financial leverage, liquidity, and resources available to meet financial obligations, may trigger multi-notch rating changes over the ratings horizon.

5) Rating levels can be greatly impacted by changes in governance structure. Enterprise governance is expected to be stable during and beyond the rating horizon, and therefore not cause volatility in ratings. Material changes in governance, ownership structure, or support to or from other entities are likely to lead to multi notch rating changes.

The volatility for the credit ratings for Breede Valley, Municipality of, Cape Town, City of, Ekurhuleni, City of, Johannesburg, City of, Mangaung, Metropolitan Municipality, Nelson Mandela, Metropolitan Municipality, Rustenburg, Municipality of, Tshwane, City of and uMhlathuze, City of are:

1) Fundamental elements to economic performance are typically based on slow moving factors, such as demographic shifts or transformational changes to technology. Economic growth and wealth forms an important basis of the financial foundation of a government and is expected to remain stable over extended periods of time. Moderate, short-term swings in economic trends are not likely to lead to rating volatility. Unexpected/severe downgrades/shocks to economic trends are more likely to result in a higher degree of volatility to the downside or multi notch rating changes. Sustained improvements in economic trends may generally result in upward movement in ratings by one notch.

2) The institutional framework, which is established by a set of legislative acts, and management's capabilities and approach to financial risks tend to be stable over time. Changes to the institutional framework typically occur at a slow pace, providing ample time for an administration to adopt new policies and procedures to minimize the potential financial impacts. Jurisdictions where staff turnover is high may lead to greater volatility in the assessment of management's abilities. Sudden unpredictable changes can lead to institutional instability. Rating levels are sensitive to the authority's capability to formulate and implement cohesive policy. Material deterioration in the capability to effectively formulate and implement policy can lead to a multi-notch downgrade / downside rating pressure. Sustained improvements in the capability to effectively formulate and implement policy may generally result in upward movement in ratings by one notch.

3) Sustained positive / negative trends in financial position and performance, impacting a variety of financial indicators such as cash from operations and borrowing requirements, can lead to positive/negative ratings changes over the rating horizon. Changes in these financial indicators may lead to changes in debt burdens which impacts the probability of default. Short-term fluctuations, especially when not accompanied by a defining trend, would generally not impact the rating level itself and not necessarily lead to rating changes. Systemic changes in financial position and performance are more likely to result in a higher degree of volatility to the downside or multi notch rating changes. Sustained improvements in financial position and performance may generally result in upward movement in ratings by one notch.

4) Rating levels are sensitive to leverage and debt coverage metrics. Material increase in leverage ratios are more likely to lead to negative rating pressure while improvements in debt coverage are more likely to lead to positive rating pressure. Combined severe deterioration in debt burden and debt affordability are likely to lead to a multi-notch downgrade / downgrade rating pressure. Sustained improvements in these factors may generally lead to upward movement in ratings by one-notch.

5) A rapid deterioration in political stability, government and external liquidity position, or banking system health over a short period of time are usually associated with multi-notch downward rating moves. Sustained improvements in these factors may lead to upward rating movements, usually confined to one notch.

The sensitivity to assumptions for the credit ratings for East Rand Water Care Company and South African National Roads Ag. Ltd (The) are:

1) Moody's assumptions about the entity's competitive position within its business sector are presumed to remain stable over our rating horizon (18-24 months). Factors that can affect the entity's competitive position include changes in market share over time; disruptive pricing affecting either a) customer demand or b) the cost of supplying goods or services; new market entrants; barriers to entry of new competitors; or product substitution. If Moody's assumptions of competitive position are inaccurate, and the entity experiences forces which are expected to lead to sustained improvement or degradation in competitive position for the longer term, this may cause ratings to move upwards or downwards, depending on the speed of change and the entity's ability to react to the change. Examples include changes in energy or commodity prices, reduced demand for a facility do to a change in service level, or less demand for an enterprise due to slowing economic conditions. Examples include a spike in the price of a commodity that a power plant relies on to generate its power or the loss of connecting passenger service at a hub airport.

2) Moody's assumes that an entity's business profile, which incorporates its operating strategy, will evolve slowly, and is therefore unlikely to lead to rating changes over the 18 -- 24 month rating horizon. Business profile captures fundamental differences between entities in the same sector. An entity's overall business profile incorporates expectations of volatility in revenue and earnings; the perceived strength of the entity's position in its market; and characteristics of its product offering, such as differentiation with competitive offerings and proven adoption by customers. Operating strategy encompasses decisions regarding the entity's supply chain and distribution channels; decisions regarding outsourcing production versus operating production facilities; directing growth capital towards acquisitions rather than internal development; or divesting a stable but mature business for one which is believed to offer greater future growth at the cost of higher near-term investment. Ratings are sensitive to differences in business profile. For example, higher levels of product, segment or geographic diversification are generally a positive factor which is likely to reduce volatility in sales and earnings. The entity's degree of vertical integration has mixed considerations for ratings; vertical integration provides greater control over sourcing and distribution, but also creates a higher level of fixed costs which may be a burden during periods of cyclical declines. An entity's business profile will change slowly, generally due to strategic decisions which are executed in the long term, and therefore will rarely be the source of short term rating changes. If there is an unexpected change in business profile, such as a decision to add or divest business segments or enter new markets within a short period of time, it could result in rating changes of one or more notches to reflect the new view of risk and opportunities over the rating horizon.

3) Moody's ratings include assumptions about financial strategy and financial policy over the next 18 -- 24 months. Assumptions include management's appetite for debt incurrence and financial leverage; planning for debt maturities; management's decisions regarding deployment of capital; and deployment of profits (shareholder returns vs. investment in the business). Examples of changes to financial policy may be in the form of a shift in dividend policy; a change in how to finance seasonal working capital or manage timing of payables; or decisions of how much cash to hold in reserves to soften the impact of business cycles. Financial strategy is generally stable over the rating horizon. Unanticipated changes to a company's financial strategy, which may be accompanied by significant changes in financial leverage or capitalization, may lead to rating changes of one or more notches upwards or downwards.

4) Moody's assumptions about the entity's governance structure within its market(s) are generally stable over our rating horizon (18-24 months). Factors affecting governance include changes in ownership or control of the entity's operational and strategic decision making; support provided to, or received from, other corporate or government entities; the strength and independence of management; and participation in mergers, acquisitions or divestitures. Changes to an entity's governance are rare but could result in multi-notch rating changes as it could positively or negatively impact the entity's future operating strategy and financial position. Governance changes are common at the time of a sale or leveraged buy-out of a company, due to a change in financial policies which are expected to be adopted by the new owners. For example, expectations are that a sale to a financial buyer will be accompanied by financial policies which are associated with a higher risk profile. These types of transactions generally result in ratings being lowered by multiple notches at the time of the transaction. Conversely, a sale to a buyer (either company or investor) or an initial public offering of stock is associated with more benign financial policies, and may lead to an upgrade of one or more notches at the time of the sale.

5) Moody's ratings include assumptions about this entity's financial position, as measured by financial metrics, over the next 18 -- 24 months. Assumptions include the entity's anticipated earnings levels, operating expenses, interest rates paid on debt, and cash flow generation, all of which contribute to an entity's financial metrics. These measures may be impacted by unanticipated expenses, changes to interest rate levels, tax changes or business decisions that change expenditure or capital levels. Modest changes to financial metrics over short periods are typical within most companies and industries. Ratings are not generally sensitive to modest changes in financial metrics which are due to expected business cycles or economic cycles and which are not seen as affecting an entity's long term viability or business profile. However, expectations that an entity's financial metrics are likely to change meaningfully (either positively or negatively) for a longer term could lead to rating changes of one or more notches upwards or downwards. Examples that are common among all industries include one-time debt-funded share buybacks of significant size, which increase debt and cause leverage ratios to remain at higher levels than previously expected into the future. Rating downgrades of one or more notches are common in response to these scenarios.

The sensitivity to assumptions for the credit ratings for Breede Valley, Municipality of, Cape Town, City of, Ekurhuleni, City of, Johannesburg, City of, Mangaung, Metropolitan Municipality, Nelson Mandela, Metropolitan Municipality, Rustenburg, Municipality of, Tshwane, City of and uMhlathuze, City of are:

1) Moody's expects economic factors and the operating environment to remain stable over a 12-18 month horizon. Ratings are sensitive to significant changes in assumptions of the future economic trends and the operating environment over an extended period of time. If economic trends are significantly weaker over a sustained period of time, ratings could face a one-notch downgrade. For example, a temporary recession followed by a return to typical growth levels would likely not result in a rating downgrade, but a permanent decline in a key sector of the economy resulting in a material decline in GDP per capita could result in a downgrade.

2) Moody's expects the institutional framework within which local and regional governments operate to be stable over the rating horizon. Changes in the institutional framework tend to be infrequent and modified on a slow pace. Ratings are sensitive to changes to these assumptions. For example, a constitutional change that allows for greater flexibility of revenue generation would result in a ratings upgrade. The sensitivity of the rating change would be relative to the change in the institutional framework.

3) Moody's assumes a local or regional government's financial position and performance metrics are stable over the 12-18 month horizon. The rating is weakly sensitive to short-term changes in these assumptions and more sensitive to changes in the multi-year trend. For example, a single year surplus matched with a moderate increase in revenue growth may not result in a rating change, while a significant deficit matched by a significant decrease in revenue, with multiple years of smaller deficits planned, could result in a multi-notch downgrade. A change in an entity's fiscal target could also result in a ratings change. For example, a focus on lower revenue growth, which threatens the recurrent achievement of balanced budgets, could result in a single notch downgrade.

4) Moody's expects assumptions for leverage and debt coverage to be stable over a 12-18 month horizon. Metrics that measure leverage and debt coverage tend to vary within a narrow range of expected levels during a 12-18 month period and modest variances are not expected to lead to multi-notch rating changes. Significant changes to these levels could result in multi-notch ratings. For example, a doubling of an entity's leverage within a 12 month span could result in a one or more notch downgrade. If actual results are materially different from assumptions, this could also result in multi-notch rating changes. For example, an entity's change in debt policy which results in a material decrease in debt coverage, as opposed to an assumption of stable debt coverage, could result in a one or more notch downgrade relative to the size of the change from assumptions.

5) Moody's assumes that the legal, regulatory and financial market risks are stable over the medium-term. Rating levels are sensitive to rapid changes in these factors. If these elements are strengthened and/or enforcement is increased, this could result in a one-notch upgrade. For example, if courts increase the enforcement of legal provisions in contracts, thereby increasing bondholder protection, this would be seen as a strengthening of the legal and regulatory framework, and may result in a one or more notch upgrade. If financial market risks deteriorate, such as a change in a Central Bank's policy towards foreign exchange markets, for example the fixing of the exchange rate to an artificially low level compared to market fundamentals, this could result in a one or more notch downgrade.

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

Moody's credit ratings are opinions of the relative credit risk of financial obligations translating into an ordinal ranking of issuers and financial obligations across asset classes and geographies. As such, no absolute probability of default nor expected loss given default is assigned to each individual credit rating. Please refer to the following link for an index of Moody's default studies. https://www.moodys.com/Pages/GuideToDefaultResearch.aspx

Please see Moody's Rating Symbols and Definitions on the Ratings Definitions page on www.moodys.com for further information on the time horizon in which a credit rating action may be expected after a review or outlook action took place.

I hereby attest, as a person with responsibility for these Credit Rating Actions, that to the best of my knowledge, based on (i) my participation in the rating committee that determined to take these Credit Rating Actions, (ii) any materials I have reviewed in connection with the rating committee, and (iii) the attestations I have received from other members of the rating committee:

1) No part of these Credit Rating Actions were influenced by any other business activities of Moody's Corporation- i.e., this Credit Rating Action was not affected by the existence of, or potential for, other business relationships between Moody's Investors Service or its affiliates and the Rated Entity or its affiliates, or the non-existence of any such relationships;

2) These Credit Rating Actions were based solely on the merits of the obligor(s), security(ies) or instrument(s) being rated; and

3) These Credit Rating Actions were an independent evaluation of the credit risk of the obligor(s), security(ies), or instrument(s) assessed in these Credit Rating Actions and is subject to the potential limitations of the Credit Ratings disclosed with these Credit Rating Actions.

Mauro Crisafulli, Associate Managing Director

Regulatory disclosures contained in this press release apply to the credit rating and, if applicable, the related rating outlook or rating review.

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.

Please see the ratings tab on the issuer/entity page on www.moodys.com for additional regulatory disclosures for each credit rating.

Daniel Mazibuko
Associate Lead Analyst
Sub-Sovereign Group
Moody's Investors Service South Africa (Pty) Ltd.
The Forum
2 Maude Street
2196 Sandton
Johannesburg
South Africa
JOURNALISTS: 44 20 7772 5456
Client Service: 44 20 7772 5454

David Rubinoff
MD - Sub Sovereigns
Sub-Sovereign Group
JOURNALISTS: 44 20 7772 5456
Client Service: 44 20 7772 5454

Releasing Office:
Moody's Investors Service South Africa (Pty) Ltd.
The Forum
2 Maude Street
2196 Sandton
Johannesburg
South Africa
JOURNALISTS: 44 20 7772 5456
Client Service: 44 20 7772 5454

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