structuring-risk-retention-compliance
Designs risk retention structures meeting US and EU requirements with vertical, horizontal, and L-shaped retention options. Use when structuring risk retention, analyzing sponsor retention alternatives, or ensuring regulatory compliance.
Best use case
structuring-risk-retention-compliance is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Designs risk retention structures meeting US and EU requirements with vertical, horizontal, and L-shaped retention options. Use when structuring risk retention, analyzing sponsor retention alternatives, or ensuring regulatory compliance.
Teams using structuring-risk-retention-compliance should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/structuring-risk-retention-compliance/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How structuring-risk-retention-compliance Compares
| Feature / Agent | structuring-risk-retention-compliance | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Designs risk retention structures meeting US and EU requirements with vertical, horizontal, and L-shaped retention options. Use when structuring risk retention, analyzing sponsor retention alternatives, or ensuring regulatory compliance.
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
SKILL.md Source
# Structuring Risk Retention Compliance Designs risk retention structures meeting US and EU requirements with vertical, horizontal, and L-shaped retention options. ## When To Use - Structuring a new securitization (CLO, RMBS, CMBS, ABS, CRE-CLO) and selecting the retention form - Evaluating whether a sponsor, originator, or majority-owned affiliate qualifies as the retaining party - Comparing US Regulation RR (17 CFR Part 246) retention options against EU Securitisation Regulation (EU 2017/2402, Articles 6-8) requirements - Assessing whether an exemption applies (e.g., Qualified Residential Mortgages, qualifying CRE loans, ABCP conduit exemptions) - Reviewing an existing retention structure for ongoing compliance after portfolio changes or refinancing ## Inputs To Gather - **Transaction type**: CLO, RMBS, CMBS, consumer ABS, ABCP, or other; open-market vs. balance-sheet - **Jurisdictional scope**: US-only, EU-only, or dual-compliance (cross-border placement) - **Sponsor / originator identity**: Entity holding the retention interest; ownership chain to confirm majority-owned affiliate status if applicable - **Capital structure**: Tranche sizes, credit enhancement levels, par amount of the securitized pool - **Asset pool characteristics**: Asset class, weighted-average credit quality, delinquency/default data, QRM/QCRE eligibility indicators - **Retention preference**: Vertical (pro-rata slice), horizontal (first-loss piece), L-shaped (combination), or originator retention under EU rules - **Hedging and transfer restrictions**: Any planned hedging of credit risk on retained positions; transfer timing constraints - **Fair value data**: Third-party or model-based fair value of the horizontal residual interest at closing [VERIFY] ## Workflow 1. **Classify the transaction and identify the applicable rule set** - Determine whether US Reg RR, EU Securitisation Regulation, or both apply based on investor base and placement jurisdiction - Identify the "securitizer" (US) or "originator/sponsor/original lender" (EU) responsible for retention - Confirm the retaining entity satisfies the definition — trace ownership for majority-owned affiliates [VERIFY] 2. **Calculate the minimum retention amount** - **US Reg RR**: 5% of the aggregate fair value of all ABS interests issued, calculated at closing - **EU Article 6**: 5% material net economic interest, measured on an ongoing basis (not just at closing) - For dual-compliance deals, compute both and apply the more restrictive measurement methodology 3. **Select and structure the retention form** - **Vertical strip (US Option A / EU Article 6(3)(a))**: Retain not less than 5% of each class of ABS interests issued. Simplest to implement; retainer bears losses proportionally across the capital structure - **Horizontal residual interest (US Option B / EU Article 6(3)(d))**: Retain a first-loss position equal to at least 5% of fair value. Concentrates risk; requires fair value determination of the residual [VERIFY fair value methodology] - **L-shaped (US Option C)**: Combination of vertical and horizontal where the sum of the two components equals or exceeds 5%. Provides flexibility to calibrate first-loss exposure versus pro-rata risk - **EU originator retention (Article 6(3)(c))**: Randomly selected exposures retained on originator balance sheet — not available under US rules; relevant for ABCP and trade-receivable deals - **Seller's interest (US revolving pool option / EU Article 6(3)(e))**: Originator retains the seller's interest in a revolving master trust. Applicable to credit card and auto-loan securitizations 4. **Evaluate exemptions and safe harbors** - QRM exemption (US): If 100% of pool assets are Qualified Residential Mortgages, full exemption from retention [VERIFY QRM criteria against current CFPB/OCC definition] - Qualifying CRE loan exemption (US): Reduced or eliminated retention for loans meeting LTV, DSCR, and amortization thresholds - ABCP conduit exemption (US): Available if the conduit sponsor provides full liquidity support - EU exemptions: STS (Simple, Transparent, and Standardised) designation does not eliminate the 5% requirement but may alter disclosure obligations [VERIFY STS eligibility under current EBA technical standards] 5. **Document hedging and transfer restrictions** - US: The retaining party may not hedge or transfer the credit risk of the retained interest for the life of the transaction (with narrow exceptions for interest rate and currency hedging) - EU: Similar prohibition — no credit risk mitigation, short selling, or hedging of the retained interest. Ongoing compliance monitoring required - Flag any proposed hedge overlay for legal review to confirm it does not constitute impermissible credit risk transfer 6. **Address ongoing compliance monitoring** - EU requires continuous maintenance of the net economic interest — not merely at closing. Build a periodic recalculation mechanism for amortizing or revolving pools - US is generally a closing-date test, but any transfer or restructuring of the retained interest triggers re-evaluation - Confirm disclosure obligations to investors: US Rule 17g-5 / Reg AB II requirements; EU Article 7 transparency templates ## Output Produce a **Risk Retention Compliance Memo** containing: - **Retention structure summary**: Form selected (vertical / horizontal / L-shaped / other), retaining entity, and calculated retention amount with supporting math - **Regulatory basis**: Specific statutory and regulatory citations (Reg RR section, EU Securitisation Regulation article) - **Exemption analysis**: Whether any exemption applies, with criteria-by-criteria confirmation or shortfall identification - **Hedging and transfer restriction schedule**: Permitted and prohibited actions for the retaining party over the life of the deal - **Ongoing compliance obligations**: Monitoring cadence, recalculation triggers, and disclosure requirements - **Risk factors / open items**: Any unresolved questions marked [VERIFY], assumptions requiring sponsor confirmation, or items requiring external counsel sign-off ## Quality Checks - Retention percentage calculation cross-checked against both the par-based and fair-value-based methodologies where applicable - Retaining entity eligibility verified through ownership chain analysis — not assumed from deal documents alone - Dual-compliance deals confirm the structure satisfies both US and EU requirements simultaneously, not just the home jurisdiction - All exemption claims supported by asset-level data or portfolio-level certifications, not summary representations - Hedging restriction analysis reviewed against the specific retained interest (not the sponsor's broader portfolio) - Every jurisdiction-dependent or regulation-dependent assertion tagged with [VERIFY] where the applicable rule may have been amended after the model's knowledge cutoff