1. For more information on these precedents, please see the “RFR Reference Bonds and Bilateral Loans List” published by the Credit Market Association on July 21, 2020. 2. The concept document of 13 July 2020, the project of the Daily Simple SOFR or the Daily Compounded SOFR (Compound the Balance) Concept Document and other LSTA forms of SOFR credit contracts are available here. 3. www.lma.eu.com/libor/documents. 4. See ARRC`s recommendations for a more robust return language for the new LIBOR syndication appropriations of June 30, 2020. 5. www.newyorkfed.org/medialibrary/ Microsites/arrc/files/2020/ARRC_SOFR_Synd_Loan_Conventions.pdf.

6. See updates to hard cable recommendations in Note 23. 7. 8. See the draft simple SOFR credit contract on note 34. 9. See, in general, the SOFR agreement on trade union credits on pages 4 and 5. 10. See the project of a simple SOFR credit contract on note 43. 11.

See draft credit contract SOFR simple, No. 2.18. 18 Whether the provisions on breach and profit protection are still included in credit documents is obviously a commercial issue. What happens to these provisions in 2021 is likely to be affected by the relative bargaining power of lenders and borrowers at the time. The Dodd-Frank Act generally came into force on July 22, 2010, although many specific provisions contain deferred action deadlines and others require regulatory implementation through a legislative process that, in many cases, has not even begun. While the Basel III text was published on 16 December 2010, its effect will not be fully known until it is transposed into national laws and regulations and several observation periods and transitional arrangements come to an end in the coming years. The question of whether the rules and regulations transposing the Dodd-Frank and Basel III acts would constitute a change in the law under the income protection provisions has therefore been the subject of much discussion. In the second of the two articles on profit protection clauses, James Farn looks at the practical effect of the increased cost clause in a promised loan contract. In short, discussions to date on the development and implementation of SOFR and its variants have generally not reflected the borrowers` views. The loan contracts awarded to SOFR or one of its variants will reflect a number of mechanical and other changes that will reflect the replacement of LIBOR.

All parties will carefully consider these provisions and, when lenders include broken financing or interest provisions in the proposed documentation, borrowers may object.18 Credit facilities generally provide that borrowers can borrow at either a libor-based interest rate or an interest rate based on the base rate or adjusted base rate. This is generally defined as the most important of (a) the US premium rate, (b) the federal funds rate plus 50 basis points and (c) a variant of LIBOR (one month`s libor, as expected each day) plus 100 basis points. The LIBOR axis of this definition is a recent addition that reflects the anomalous situation of the 2008 financial crisis, where a LIBOR loan was likely to have a lower interest rate than a loan at the base rate (for which the spread would generally be 100 basis points lower than the spread for LIBOR loans).