Reply #41: I think they've already found ways around it, and regulators will soon cave anyhow.

[girl gone mad]

From Barclays:

"The repeal was ostensibly intended to make rating agencies more accountable for the quality of the ratings they give, without causing the securitization process to seize. However, given the position of Moody’s, Fitch, and S&P, it appears that issuance of public securitizations is likely to grind to a halt in the near term. Consumer ABS has been the primary generator of new issue activity in the securitization market for the past 18 months, and we do not believe Congress was seeking to reverse those gains. We view the repeal of Section 436(G) as a temporary speedbump that will likely reduce issuance volume significantly for a while. Nevertheless, there are solutions, including a move by issuers to the private/144a market, where public filings with the SEC are not required (remove the filing requirement, and the rating agency liability is also removed). Alternatively, the SEC and the industry could proactively work together to alleviate the obvious unintended consequence of repealing Section 436(G). Although the former may take center stage initially, we believe the latter is a more viable long-term solution."

Not much to get hopes up over.