Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/179 of 25 September 2017 amending Regulation (EU) No 1233/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the application of certain guidelines in the field of officially supported export credits

When security in the form of a repayment guarantee from an entity is provided for the total amount at risk (i.e. principal and interest), the applicable Country Risk Classification and Buyer Risk Category may be that of the guarantor when the following criteria are met:

• — The guarantee covers the entire duration of the credit.

• — The guarantee is irrevocable, unconditional and available on-demand.

• — The guarantee is legally valid and capable of being enforced in the guarantor country's jurisdiction.

• — The guarantor is creditworthy in relation to the size of the guaranteed debt.

• — The guarantor is subject to the monetary control and transfer regulations of the country in which it is located.

For classified Multilateral or Regional Institutions acting as guarantors, the following criteria apply:

• — The guarantee covers the entire duration of the credit.

• — The guarantee is irrevocable, unconditional and available on-demand.

• — The guarantor is legally committed for the total amount of the credit.

• — The repayments are made directly to the creditor.

If the guarantor is a subsidiary/parent of the guaranteed entity, Participants shall, on a case-by-case basis, determine whether: (1) in consideration of the relationship between the subsidiary/parent and the degree of legal commitment of the parent, the subsidiary/parent is legally and financially independent and could fulfil its payment obligations; (2) the subsidiary/parent could be affected by local events/regulations or sovereign intervention; and (3) the Head Office would in the event of a default regard itself as being liable.

Case 2: Guarantee Limited in Amount

When security in the form of a repayment guarantee from an entity is provided for a limited amount at risk (i.e. principal and interest), the applicable Country Risk Classification and Buyer Risk Category may be that of the guarantor for the portion of the credit subject to the guarantee, providing that all other criteria listed under Case 1 are met.

For the unguaranteed portion, the applicable Country Risk Classification and Buyer Risk Category is that of the obligor.

Classification of Multilateral or Regional Institutions

Multilateral and regional institutions shall be eligible for classification if the institution is generally exempt from the monetary control and transfer regulations of the country in which it is located. Such institutions shall be classified in Country Risk Categories 0 through 7 on a case-by-case basis according to an assessment of the risk of each on its own merits and in consideration of whether:

• — the institution has statutory and financial independence,

• — all of the institution's assets are immune from nationalisation or confiscation,

• — the institution has full freedom of transfer and conversion of funds,

• — the institution is not subject to government intervention in the country where it is located,

• — the institution has tax immunity, and

• — there is an obligation of all its Member countries to supply additional capital to meet the institution's obligations.

The assessment should also take into consideration the historical payment record in situations of country credit risks default either in the country where it is located or in an obligor's country; and any other factors which may be deemed appropriate in the assessment process.

The list of classified multilateral and regional institutions is not closed and a Participant may nominate an institution for review according to the above-listed considerations. The classifications of multilateral and regional institutions shall be made public by the Participants.

‘ANNEX XII

BUYER RISK CATEGORIES QUALITATIVE DESCRIPTIONS

Better than Sovereign (SOV+)

This is an exceptional classification. The entity achieving such a classification is one with an exceptionally strong credit profile which could be expected to fulfil its payment obligations during a period of sovereign debt distress or even default. International Credit Rating Agencies issue regular reports listing Corporate and Counterparty Ratings that exceed the Sovereign's Foreign Currency Rating. Except when the risk sovereign has been identified through the Sovereign Risk Assessment Methodology as being significantly higher than country risk, Participants proposing that an entity be classified as better than sovereign shall reference such better than sovereign ratings in support of their recommendation. In order to be classified as better than its host sovereign, an entity would be expected to display several or normally a majority of the following characteristics or equivalents:

• — A strong credit profile,

• — substantial foreign exchange earnings relative to its currency debt burden,

• — production facilities and cash generation ability from subsidiaries or operations offshore, especially those domiciled in highly rated sovereigns, i.e. multinational enterprises,

• — a foreign owner or a strategic partner which could be relied on as a source of financial support in the absence of a formal guarantee,

• — a history of preferential treatment of the entity by the sovereign, including exemption from transfer and convertibility constraints and surrender requirements for export proceeds, and favourable tax treatment,

• — committed credit lines from highly rated international banks, especially credit lines without a material adverse change (MAC) clause which enable banks to withdraw committed facilities in the event of a sovereign crisis or other risk events, and

• — assets held offshore, especially liquid assets, often as a result of rules allowing exporters to trap and maintain cash balances offshore that are available for debt service.

Normally the SOV+ buyer risk category is not applicable to:

• — Publicly owned entities and utilities, sub-sovereigns as line ministries, regional governments, etc.,

• — financial institutions domiciled in the sovereign's jurisdiction, and

• — entities primarily selling to the domestic market in local currency.

Sovereign (SOV)

Sovereign obligors/guarantors are entities that are explicitly legally mandated to enter into a debt payment obligation on the behalf of the Sovereign State, typically Ministry of Finance or Central bank [^ntr43-L_2018037EN.01010501-E0001]. A risk designated as sovereign is one where:

• — the obligor/guarantor is legally mandated to enter into a debt payment obligation on behalf of the Sovereign and thereby commits the full faith and credit of the sovereign, and

• — in the event of rescheduling of sovereign risk, the debt in question would be included in the rescheduling and payment obligations acquired by the sovereign by virtue of the rescheduling.

Equivalent to the Sovereign (CC0): Exceptionally Good Credit Quality

The “equivalent to sovereign” category embraces two basic types of obligors/guarantors:

• — Public entities where due diligence reveals that either the buyer has the implicit full faith and credit/support of the sovereign or that the likelihood of sovereign liquidity and solvency support is very high, both in relation to recovery prospects as well as default risk. Non-sovereign public entities equivalent to the sovereign would also include companies owned by the government with a monopoly or near monopoly on operations in a sector (e.g. power, oil, gas).

• — Corporate entities with an exceptionally strong credit profile, displaying features in terms of both default and recovery prospects which indicate that the risk could be seen as being equivalent to sovereign. Candidates could include strong blue chip corporates or very important banks for which the likelihood of sovereign liquidity and solvency support is high.

Exceptionally good credit quality implies that the risk of payment interruption is expected to be negligible and that the entity has an exceptionally strong capacity for repayment and this capacity is not likely to be affected by foreseeable events. The credit quality is typically manifested in a combination of some, if not all, of the following characteristics of the entity's business and financial profile:

• — exceptionally good to very good cash and income generation

• — exceptionally good to very good liquidity levels

• — exceptionally low to very low leverage

• — excellent to very strong business profile with proven and very strong management abilities

The entity is also characterised by a high quality of financial and ownership disclosure, unless there is a very high likelihood of support from a parent (or sovereign) with a buyer risk classification that is equal to or better than what corresponds to this buyer risk category.

Depending on the classification of the country in which the obligor/guarantor is domiciled, it is likely that an obligor/guarantor classified in buyer risk category CC0 would be rated between AAA (Country Category 1) and B (Country Category 7) by accredited CRAs.

Very Good Credit Quality (CC1)

The risk of payment interruption is expected to be low or very low. The obligor/guarantor has a very strong capacity for repayment and this capacity is not likely to be affected by foreseeable events. The obligor/guarantor has a limited or very limited susceptibility to adverse effects of changes in circumstances and economic conditions. The credit quality is typically manifested in a combination of some, if not all, of the following characteristics of the business and financial profile:

• — very good to good cash and income generation

• — very good to good liquidity levels

• — very low to low leverage

• — very strong business profile with proven management abilities

The entity is also characterised by a high quality of financial and ownership disclosure, unless there is a very high likelihood of support from a parent (or sovereign) with a buyer risk classification that is equal to or better than what corresponds to this buyer risk category.

Depending on the classification of the country in which the obligor/guarantor is domiciled, it is likely that an obligor/guarantor classified in buyer risk category CC1 would be rated between AAA (Country Category 1) and B (Country Category 7) by accredited CRAs.

Good to Moderately Good Credit Quality, Above Average (CC2)

The risk of payment interruption is expected to be low. The obligor/guarantor has a good to moderately good capacity for repayment and this capacity is not likely to be affected by foreseeable events. The obligor/guarantor has a limited susceptibility to adverse effects of changes in circumstances and economic conditions. The credit quality is typically manifested in a combination of some, if not all, of the following characteristics of the business and financial profile:

• — good to moderately good cash and income generation

• — good to moderately good liquidity levels

• — low to moderately low leverage

• — moderately strong business profile with proven management abilities

The entity is also characterised by a high quality of financial and ownership disclosure, unless there is a very high likelihood of support from a parent (or sovereign) with a buyer risk classification that is equal to or better than what corresponds to this buyer risk category.

Depending on the classification of the country in which the obligor/guarantor is domiciled, it is likely that an obligor/guarantor classified in buyer risk category CC2 would be rated between A+ (Country Category 1) and B- or worse (Country Category 7) by accredited CRAs.

Moderate Credit Quality, Average (CC3)

The risk of payment interruption is expected to be moderate or moderately low. The obligor/guarantor has a moderate or moderately good capacity for repayment. There is a possibility of credit risk developing as the obligor/guarantor faces major ongoing uncertainties or exposure to adverse business, financial or economic conditions which could lead to inadequate capacity to meet timely payments. However, business or financial alternatives may be available to allow financial commitments to be met. The credit quality is typically manifested in a combination of some, if not all, of the following characteristics of the business and financial profile.

• — moderately good to moderate cash and income generation

• — moderately good to moderate liquidity levels

• — moderately low to moderate leverage

• — moderate business profile with proven management abilities

The entity is also characterised by an adequate quality of financial and ownership disclosure, unless there is a very high likelihood of support from a parent (or sovereign) with a buyer risk classification that is equal to or better than what corresponds to this buyer risk category.

Depending on the classification of the country in which the obligor/guarantor is domiciled, it is likely that an obligor/guarantor classified in buyer risk category CC3 would be rated between BBB+ (Country Category 1) and B- or worse (Country Category 6) by accredited CRAs.

Moderately Weak Credit Quality, Below Average (CC4)

The risk of payment interruption is expected to be moderately weak. The obligor/guarantor has a moderate to moderately weak capacity for repayment. There is a possibility of credit risk developing as the obligor/guarantor faces major ongoing uncertainties or exposure to adverse business, financial or economic conditions which could lead to inadequate capacity to meet timely payments. However, business or financial alternatives may be available to allow financial commitments to be met. The credit quality is typically manifested in a combination of some, if not all, of the following characteristics of the business and financial profile:

• — moderate to moderately weak cash and income generation

• — moderate to moderately weak liquidity levels

• — moderate to moderately high leverage

• — moderately weak business profile with limited track record of management abilities

The entity is also characterised by an adequate quality of financial and ownership disclosure, unless there is a very high likelihood of support from a parent (or sovereign) with a buyer risk classification that is equal to or better than what corresponds to this buyer risk category.

Depending on the classification of the country in which the obligor/guarantor is domiciled, it is likely that an obligor/guarantor classified in buyer risk category CC4 would be rated between BB+ (Country Category 1) and B- or worse (Country Category 5) by accredited CRAs.

Weak Credit Quality (CC5)

The risk of payment interruption is expected to be high to very high. The obligor/guarantor has a moderately weak to weak capacity for repayment. The obligor/guarantor currently has the capacity to meet repayments but a limited margin of safety remains. However, there is a likelihood of developing payment problems as the capacity for continued payment is contingent upon a sustained, favourable business and economic environment. Adverse business, financial, or economic conditions will likely impair capacity or willingness to repay. The credit quality is typically manifested in a combination of some, if not all, of the following characteristics of the business and financial profile:

• — moderately weak to weak to very weak cash and income generation

• — moderately weak to weak liquidity levels

• — moderately high to high leverage

• — weak business profile with limited or no track record of management abilities

The entity is also characterised by a poor quality of financial and ownership disclosure, unless there is a very high likelihood of support from a parent (or sovereign) with a buyer risk classification that is equal to or better than what corresponds to this buyer risk category.

Depending on the classification of the country in which the obligor/guarantor is domiciled, it is likely that an obligor/guarantor classified in buyer risk category CC5 would be rated between BB- (Country Category 1) and B- or worse (Country Category 4) by accredited CRAs.

‘ANNEX XIII

CRITERIA AND CONDITIONS GOVERNING THE APPLICATION OF COUNTRY RISK MITIGATION TECHNIQUES AND BUYER RISK CREDIT ENHANCEMENTS

PURPOSE

This Annex provides detail on the use of country risk mitigation techniques listed in Article 30(a) of the Arrangement and the buyer risk credit enhancements listed in Article 31(a) of the Arrangement; this includes the criteria, conditions and specific circumstances which apply to their use as well as the impact on the MPRs.

COUNTRY RISK MITIGATION TECHNIQUES

1. Offshore Future Flow Structure Combined with Offshore Escrow Account

Definition:

A written document, such as a deed or a release or trustee arrangement, sealed and delivered to a third party, i.e. a person not party to the instrument, to be held by such third party until the fulfilment of certain conditions and then to be delivered by him to the other party to take effect. If the following criteria are satisfied subject to consideration of the additional factors listed, this technique can reduce or eliminate the transfer risks, mainly in the higher risk country categories.

Criteria:

• — The escrow account is related to a foreign exchange-earning project and the flows into the escrow account are generated by the project itself and/or by other offshore export receivables.

• — The escrow account is held offshore, i.e. located outside of the country of the project where there are very limited, transfer or other country risks (i.e. in a High Income OECD country or High Income Euro Area country).

• — The escrow account is located in a first class bank which is not directly or indirectly controlled by interests of the obligor or by the country of the obligor.

• — The funding of the account is secured through long-term or other appropriate contracts.

• — The combination of the sources of revenues (i.e. generated by the project itself and/or the other sources) of the obligor flowing through the account are in hard currency and can reasonably be expected to be collectively sufficient for the service of the debt for the entire duration of the credit, and come from one or more creditworthy foreign customers located in better risk countries than the country in which the project is located (i.e. normally High Income OECD countries or High Income Euro Area countries).

• — The obligor irrevocably instructs the foreign customers to pay directly into the account (i.e. the payments are not forwarded through an account controlled by the obligor or through its country).

• — The funds which have to be kept within the account are equal to at least six months of debt service. Where flexible repayment terms are being applied under a project finance structure, an amount equivalent to the actual six months debt service under such flexible terms are to be kept within the account; this amount may vary over time depending on the debt service profile.

• — The obligor has restricted access to the account (i.e. only after payment of the debt service under the credit).

• — The revenues deposited in the account are assigned to the lender as direct beneficiary, for the entire life of the credit.

• — The opening of the account has received all the necessary legal authorisations from the local and any other appropriate authorities.

• — The escrow account and contractual arrangements may not be conditional and/or revocable and/or limited in duration.

Additional Factors to be taken into Consideration:

The technique applies subject to a case-by-case consideration of the above characteristics and, inter alia, with regard to:

• — the country, the obligor (i.e. either public or private), the sector, the vulnerability in relation to the commodities or services involved, including their availability for the entire duration of the credit, the customers,

• — the legal structures, e.g. whether the mechanism is sufficiently immune against the influence of the obligor or its country,

• — the degree to which the technique remains subject to government interference, renewal or withdrawal,

• — whether the account would be sufficiently protected against project-related risks,

• — the amount which will flow into the account and the mechanism for the continuation of appropriate provision,

• — the situation with regard to the Paris Club (e.g. possible exemption),

• — the possible impact of country risks other than the transfer risk,

• — the protection against the risks of the country where the account is located,

• — the contracts with the customers, including their nature and duration, and

• — the global amount of the expected foreign earnings in relation to the total amount of the credit.

Impact on the MPR

The application of this country risk mitigation technique may result in a one category improvement in the applicable country risk classification for the transaction, except for transactions in Country Risk Category 1.

2. Local Currency Financing

Definition:

Contract and financing negotiated in convertible and available local, other than hard, currencies and financed locally that eliminates or mitigates the transfer risk. The primary debt obligation in local currency would, in principle, not be affected by the occurrence of the first two country credit risks.

Criteria:

• — The ECA liability and claims payment or the payment to the Direct Lender are expressed/made throughout in local currency.

• — The ECA is normally not exposed to the transfer risk.

• — In the normal course of events, there will be no requirement for local currency deposits to be converted into hard currency.

• — The borrower's repayment in his own currency and in his own country is a valid discharge of the loan obligation.

• — If a borrower's income is in local currency the borrower is protected against adverse exchange rate movements.

• — Transfer regulations in the borrower's country should not affect the borrower's repayment obligations, which would remain in local currency.

Additional Factors to be taken into Consideration:

The technique applies on a selective basis in respect of convertible and transferable currencies, where the underlying economy is sound. The Participant ECA should be in a position to meet its obligations to pay claims expressed in its own currency in the event that the local currency becomes either “non-transferable” or “non-convertible” after the ECA takes on liability. (A Direct Lender would however carry this exposure.)

Impact on the MPR

The application of this risk mitigation technique may result in a discount of no more than 20 % to the country credit risk portion of the MPR (i.e. a local currency factor [LCF] with a value of no more than 0,2).

BUYER RISK CREDIT ENHANCEMENTS

The following table provides definitions of the buyer risk credit enhancements that may be applied, along with their maximum impact on the applicable MPRs through the CEF in the MPR formula.

Credit Enhancement	Definition	Maximum CEF (Country Risk Category 1-7)	Maximum CEF (Market Benchmark)
Assignment of Contract Proceeds or Receivables	In the event a borrower has contracts with strong off-takers, whether offshore or local, a legally enforceable assignment of the contract provides rights to enforce the borrower's contracts and/or make decisions under major contracts in the place of the borrower after a default under the loan. A direct agreement with a third party in a transaction (a local government agency in a mining or energy transaction) allows Lenders to approach a government to seek remedies for expropriation or other violation of contractual obligations related to the transaction. An existing company operating in a difficult market or sector may have receivables related to the sale of production with a company or companies located in a more stable environment. Receivables would generally be in a hard currency but may not be the subject of a specific contractual relationship. Assignment of these receivables could provide asset security in the accounts of the Borrower, giving the Lender a preferential treatment in the cash flow generated by the Borrower.	0,10	N/A
Asset Based Security	Control of an asset shown by: (1) mortgage on very mobile and valuable piece of property and (2) property that has entire value in itself. An asset based security is one that can be reacquired with relative ease such as a locomotive, medical equipment or construction equipment. In valuing such a security, the ECA should take into consideration the legal ease of recovery. In other words, there is more value when the security interest in the asset is perfected under an established legal regime and less value where the legal ability to recover the asset is questionable. The precise value of an asset-based security is set by the market, with the relevant “market” being deeper than a local market because the asset can be moved to another jurisdiction. NOTE: The application of an asset based security credit enhancement applies to the buyer risk, where the asset based security is held internally within the country in which the transaction is domiciled.	0,25	0,15
Fixed Asset Security	A fixed asset security is most typically component equipment which may be constrained by its physicality such as turbine or manufacturing machinery integrated into an assembly line. The intent and value of the fixed asset security is to provide the ECA with more leverage over the use of the asset in recouping losses in the event of default. The value of a fixed asset security varies dependent on economic, legal, market and other factors.	0,15	0,10
Escrow Account	Escrow accounts involve debt service reserve accounts held as security for the lenders or other forms of cash receivable accounts held as security for the lenders by a party not controlled or sharing common ownership with the buyer/obligor. The escrowed amount must be deposited or escrowed in advance. The value of such security is nearly always 100 % of the nominal amount in such cash accounts. Permits greater control over use of cash, ensures that debt is serviced before discretionary spending. NOTE: The application of an escrow account credit enhancement applies to the buyer risk, where the escrow account is held internally within the country in which the transaction is domiciled. Cash security significantly diminishes the risk of default for the covered instalments.	escrowed amount as % of credit up to a maximum of 0,10	escrowed amount as % of credit up to a maximum of 0,10

‘ANNEX XIV

CHECKLIST OF DEVELOPMENTAL QUALITY

CHECKLIST OF DEVELOPMENTAL QUALITY OF AID-FINANCED PROJECTS

A number of criteria have been developed in recent years by the DAC to ensure that projects in developing countries that are financed totally or in part by Official Development Assistance (ODA) contribute to development. They are essentially contained in the:

• — DAC Principles for Project Appraisal, 1988,

• — DAC Guiding Principles for Associated Financing and Tied and Partially Untied Official Development Assistance, 1987, and

• — Good Procurement Practices for Official Development Assistance, 1986.

CONSISTENCY OF THE PROJECT WITH THE RECIPIENT COUNTRY'S OVERALL INVESTMENT PRIORITIES (PROJECT SELECTION)

Is the project part of investment and public expenditure programmes already approved by the central financial and planning authorities of the recipient country?

(Specify policy document mentioning the project, e.g. public investment programme of the recipient country.)

Is the project being co-financed with an international development finance institution?

Does evidence exist that the project has been considered and rejected by an international development finance institution or another DAC Member on grounds of low developmental priority?

In the case of a private sector project, has it been approved by the government of the recipient country?

Is the project covered by an intergovernmental agreement providing for a broader range of aid activities by the donor in the recipient country?

PROJECT PREPARATION AND APPRAISAL

Has the project been prepared, designed and appraised against a set of standards and criteria broadly consistent with the DAC Principles for Project Appraisal (PPA)? Relevant principles concern project appraisal under:

• (a) Economic aspects (paragraphs 30 to 38 PPA).

• (b) Technical aspects (paragraph 22 PPA).

• (c) Financial aspects (paragraphs 23 to 29 PPA).

In the case of a revenue producing project, particularly if it is producing for a competitive market, has the concessionary element of the aid financing been passed on to the end-user of the funds? (paragraph 25 PPA).

• (a) Institutional assessment (paragraphs 40 to 44 PPA).

• (b) Social and distributional analysis (paragraphs 47 to 57 PPA).

• (c) Environmental assessment (paragraphs 55 to 57 PPA).

PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES

What procurement mode will be used among the following? (For definitions, see Principles listed in Good Procurement Practices for ODA).

• (a) International competitive bidding (Procurement Principle III and its Annex 2: Minimum conditions for effective international competitive bidding).

• (b) National competitive bidding (Procurement Principle IV).

• (c) Informal competition or direct negotiations (Procurement Principles V A or B).

Is it envisaged to check price and quality of supplies (paragraph 63 PPA)?

‘ANNEX XV

LIST OF DEFINITIONS

For the purpose of the Arrangement:

(a) Commitment: any statement, in whatever form, whereby the willingness or intention to provide official support is communicated to the recipient country, the buyer, the borrower, the exporter or the financial institution.

(b) Common Line: an understanding between the Participants to agree, for a given transaction or in special circumstances, on specific financial terms and conditions for official support. The rules of an agreed Common Line supersede the rules of the Arrangement only for the transaction or in the circumstances specified in the Common Line.

(c) Concessionality Level of Tied Aid: in the case of grants the concessionality level is 100 %. In the case of loans, the concessionality level is the difference between the nominal value of the loan and the discounted present value of the future debt service payments to be made by the borrower. This difference is expressed as a percentage of the nominal value of the loan.

(d) Decommissioning: closing down or dismantling of a nuclear power plant.

(e) Export Contract Value: the total amount to be paid by or on behalf of the purchaser for goods and/or services exported, i.e. excluding local costs as defined hereafter; in the case of a lease, it excludes the portion of the lease payment that is equivalent to interest.

(f) Final Commitment: for an export credit transaction (either in the form of a single transaction or a line of credit), a final commitment exists when the Participant commits to precise and complete financial terms and conditions, either through a reciprocal agreement or by a unilateral act.

(g) Initial Fuel Load: the initial fuel load shall consist of no more than the initially installed nuclear core plus two subsequent reloads, together consisting of up to two-thirds of a nuclear core.

(h) Interest Rate Support: an arrangement between a government and banks or other financial institutions which allows the provision of fixed rate export finance at or above the CIRR.

(i) Line of Credit: a framework, in whatever form, for export credits that covers a series of transactions which may or may not be linked to a specific project.

(j) Local Costs: expenditure for goods and services in the buyer's country that are necessary either for executing the exporter's contract or for completing the project of which the exporter's contract forms a part. These exclude commission payable to the exporter's agent in the buying country.

(k) Market Benchmark Transaction: transaction involving ultimate obligors/guarantors in Category 0 countries, High Income OECD countries and High Income Euro Area countries.

(l) Minimum Actuarial Premium: is the annualised average default rate (derived from cumulative default rates published by the main Accredited CRAs) for a given rating and total term (WAL of the whole transaction) adjusted by an assumed loss given default and a costs loading factor as per agreed conventions by the Participants.

(m) Name Specific Bond or CDS: a Name Specific Bond or CDS is limited to those market benchmark instruments that belong to the exact identical obligor/guarantor as in the transaction being supported.

(n) Pure Cover: official support provided by or on behalf of a government by way of export credit guarantee or insurance only, i.e. which does not benefit from official financing support.

(o) Related Entity: Related Entity references are benchmark instruments of a related borrower rather than the exact identical borrower in the supported transaction. In the case where the obligor has no quoted bonds or CDSs, and there exists within the obligor's organisational structure a parent, subsidiary or sister company with Name Specific Bonds or CDSs outstanding in the market, then with regard to Article 24(c), those Name Specific Bonds or CDSs may be used as if they had been issued by the obligor itself if:

• (1) The parent, subsidiary, or sister company has the same issuer CRA rating as the obligor/guarantor; or

• (2) All of the following criteria are met:

• (i) The Participant's internal rating of the obligor/guarantor corresponds with the CRA rating of the related entity.

• (ii) The obligor/guarantor is the main operating company of the parent/holding, being a key and integral part of the group's business.

• (iii) The CRA rating is based on the core business of the group.

• (iv) The obligor/guarantor provides a significant part of the group's earnings by providing either some of the group's core products/services to core clients or it owns and operates a major portion of the parent's assets.

• (v) The sale of the obligor/guarantor from the group is very hard to conceive, and the disposal would significantly alter the overall shape of the group.

• (vi) A default of the obligor/guarantor would constitute a huge reputational risk to the group, damage its franchise and could threaten its viability.

• (vii) A high level of management and operational integration exists where capital and funding is typically provided by the parent company or a finance subsidiary via intercompany loans and where parent support is unquestioned.

(p) Repayment Term: the period beginning at the starting point of credit, as defined in this Annex, and ending on the contractual date of the final repayment of principal.

(q) Starting Point of Credit:

• (1) Parts or components (intermediate goods) including related services: in the case of parts or components, the starting point of credit is not later than the actual date of acceptance of the goods or the weighted mean date of acceptance of the goods (including services, if applicable) by the buyer or, for services, the date of the submission of the invoices to the client or acceptance of services by the client.

• (2) Quasi-capital goods, including related services — machinery or equipment, generally of relatively low unit value, intended to be used in an industrial process or for productive or commercial use: in the case of quasi-capital goods, the starting point of credit is not later than the actual date of acceptance of the goods or the weighted mean date of acceptance of the goods by the buyer or, if the exporter has responsibilities for commissioning, then the latest starting point is at commissioning, or for services, the date of the submission of the invoices to the client or acceptance of the service by the client. In the case of a contract for the supply of services where the supplier has responsibility for commissioning, the latest starting point is commissioning.

• (3) Capital goods and project services — machinery or equipment of high value intended to be used in an industrial process or for productive or commercial use:

• — In the case of a contract for the sale of capital goods consisting of individual items usable in themselves, the latest starting point is the actual date when the buyer takes physical possession of the goods, or the weighted mean date when the buyer takes physical possession of the goods.

• — In the case of a contract for the sale of capital equipment for complete plant or factories where the supplier has no responsibility for commissioning, the latest starting point is the date at which the buyer is to take physical possession of the entire equipment (excluding spare parts) supplied under the contract.

• — If the exporter has responsibility for commissioning, the latest starting point is at commissioning.

• — For services, the latest starting point of credit is the date of the submission of the invoices to the client or acceptance of service by the client. In the case of a contract for the supply of services where the supplier has responsibility for commissioning, the latest starting point is commissioning.

• (4) Complete plants or factories — complete productive units of high value requiring the use of capital goods:

• — In the case of a contract for the sale of capital equipment for complete plant or factories where the supplier has no responsibility for commissioning, the latest starting point of credit is the date when the buyer takes physical possession of the entire equipment (excluding spare parts) supplied under the contract.

• — In case of construction contracts where the contractor has no responsibility for commissioning, the latest starting point is the date when construction has been completed.

• — In the case of any contract where the supplier or contractor has a contractual responsibility for commissioning, the latest starting point is the date when he has completed installation or construction and preliminary tests to ensure it is ready for operation. This applies whether or not it is handed over to the buyer at that time in accordance with the terms of the contract and irrespective of any continuing commitment which the supplier or contractor may have, e.g. for guaranteeing its effective functioning or training local personnel.

• — Where the contract involves the separate execution of individual parts of a project, the date of the latest starting point is the date of the starting point for each separate part, or the mean date of those starting points, or, where the supplier has a contract, not for the whole project but for an essential part of it, the starting point may be that appropriate to the project as a whole.

• — For services, the latest starting point of credit is the date of the submission of the invoices to the client or the acceptance of service by the client. In the case of a contract for the supply of services where the supplier has responsibility for commissioning, the latest starting point is commissioning.

(r) Tied Aid: aid which is in effect (in law or in fact) tied to the procurement of goods and/or services from the donor country and/or a restricted number of countries; it includes loans, grants or associated financing packages with a concessionality level greater than zero percent.

This definition applies whether the “tying” is by formal agreement or by any form of informal understanding between the recipient and the donor country, or whether a package includes components from the forms set out in Article 34 of the Arrangement that are not freely and fully available to finance procurement from the recipient country, substantially all other developing countries and from the Participants, or if it involves practices that the DAC or the Participants consider equivalent to such tying.

(s) Untied Aid: aid which includes loans or grants whose proceeds are fully and freely available to finance procurement from any country.

(t) Weighted Average Life of the Repayment Period: the time that it takes to retire one-half of the principal of a credit. This is calculated as the sum of time (in years) between the starting point of credit and each principal repayment weighted by the portion of principal repaid at each repayment date.

’

[^ntr1-L_2018037EN.01000302-E0001]: As defined in Article 5 of the OECD Convention.

[^ntr2-L_2018037EN.01000302-E0002]: Defined by the World Bank on an annual basis according to per capita GNI.

[^ntr3-L_2018037EN.01000302-E0003]: The status of a country in terms of: (1) whether it is a High Income country (as defined by the World Bank on an annual basis according to per capita GNI), (2) membership in the OECD and (3) whether it is part of the Euro Area is reviewed on an annual basis. The designation of a country under Article 25(c) as a High Income OECD country or a High Income Euro Area country as well as the removal of such designation will only come into effect after the country's income classification (High Income or otherwise) has remained unchanged for two consecutive years. A change in a country's designation as a High Income OECD country or a High Income Euro Area country as well as the removal of such designation related to a change in OECD membership or being part of the Euro Area will come into effect immediately at the time of the annual review of countries' status.

[^ntr4-L_2018037EN.01000302-E0004]: To qualify as an asset-backed transaction, there must be a first priority security interest on the asset being financed; and, in the case of a lease structure, assignment and/or a first priority security interest in connection with the lease payments.

[^ntr5-L_2018037EN.01000302-E0005]: To qualify as a project finance transaction, the transaction must meet the Basic Criteria set forth in Appendix 1 to Annex VII of the Arrangement.

[^ntr6-L_2018037EN.01000302-E0006]: Notwithstanding this threshold, for transactions in Market Benchmark countries using terms and conditions provided under Annex V (rail) or Annex VII (project finance), the relevant minimum commercial loan participation rules applicable under those Annexes shall apply.

[^ntr7-L_2018037EN.01000302-E0007]: This portion of the 25 % criterion may be met where the non-cash payment portion of a transaction involving a single bank receiving ECA cover includes an uncovered portion of at least 25 %. Such transactions must meet all of the other criteria of subparagraph 1, including the pari passu provisions of this tiret.

[^ntr8-L_2018037EN.01000302-E0008]: Where the obligor/guarantor is rated by more than one Accredited CRA, the CRA rating is the best available foreign currency rating on a senior unsecured basis for the obligor (or guarantor). The Secretariat shall compile and maintain a list of such accredited CRAs.

[^ntr9-L_2018037EN.01000302-E0009]: In the event that a relevant Name-Specific market pricing entity is not rated by an Accredited CRA, then the resulting market pricing shall be considered to be below the corresponding TCMB rate and be subject to prior notification in accordance with Article 48.

[^ntr10-L_2018037EN.01000302-E0010]: The premium rates charged for transactions with a third party guarantee provided by an obligor in a High Income OECD country or a High Income Euro Area country are subject to the requirements set out in Article 24(c).

[^ntr11-L_2018037EN.01000302-E0011]: In the case of a third party guarantee, the applicable country risk classification and buyer risk category must be related to the same entity, i.e. either the obligor or the guarantor.

[^ntr12-L_2018037EN.01000302-E0012]: For administrative purposes, some countries that are eligible to be classified into one of the eight Country Risk Categories may not be classified if they do not generally receive officially supported export credits. For such non-classified countries, Participants are free to apply the country risk classification which they deem appropriate.

[^ntr13-L_2018037EN.01000302-E0013]: Rules related to the classification of buyers should be understood to stipulate the most favourable classification that can be applied, e.g. a sovereign buyer may be classified in a less favourable buyer risk classification.

[^ntr14-L_2018037EN.01000302-E0014]: The MPRs associated with the Better than Sovereign (SOV+) buyer risk category are 10 % lower than the MPRs associated with the Sovereign (CC0) buyer risk category.

[^ntr15-L_2018037EN.01000302-E0015]: Where the non-sovereign borrower is rated by more than one accredited CRA, notification is only required where the buyer risk rating is more favourable than the most favourable of the CRA ratings.

[^ntr16-L_2018037EN.01000302-E0016]: With respect to buyer risk, classified multilateral and regional institutions shall be classified in Buyer Risk Category SOV/CC0.

[^ntr17-L_2018037EN.01000302-E0017]: Based on the annual review by the World Bank of its country classification, a per capita Gross National Income (GNI) threshold will be used for the purpose of tied aid eligibility; such threshold is available on the OECD website (http://www.oecd.org/trade/xcred/country-classification.htm).

[^ntr18-L_2018037EN.01003201-E0001]: However, in cases where the buyer of the switchyard is the same as the buyer of the power plant and the contract is concluded in relation to the original switchyard for that power plant, the terms and conditions for the original switchyard shall not be more generous than those for the nuclear power plant.

[^ntr19-L_2018037EN.01003201-E0002]: Article 1(a)(1) refers.

[^ntr20-L_2018037EN.01003201-E0003]: Articles 1(a)(2) to (4) refer.

[^ntr21-L_2018037EN.01004801-E0001]: An explanation shall be provided where the proposed risk-rating of a buyer/borrower exceeds the risk rating of the host sovereign.

[^ntr22-L_2018037EN.01004801-E0002]: For transactions with an export contract value of less than USD 5 million, a Participant not wishing to follow the risk classification procedure set out in Articles 6 to 8 of this Appendix shall apply the risk classification “8” for the buyer/borrower which is the subject of the transaction and shall notify the transaction in accordance with Article 24(a) of this Sector Understanding.

[^ntr23-L_2018037EN.01004801-E0003]: For transactions with an export contract value of less than USD 5 million, a five working-day period shall apply.

[^ntr24-L_2018037EN.01004801-E0004]: Together with information regarding any involvement (provided with due respect for confidentiality duties).

[^ntr25-L_2018037EN.01006001-E0001]: Together with information regarding any involvement (provided with due respect for confidentiality duties).

[^ntr26-L_2018037EN.01006001-E0002]: For the purposes of this questionnaire the “State” is the country that is being proposed for addition to the Cape Town Convention List under Appendix II, Section 2 II of the ASU. Where appropriate, these questions shall also be answered in respect of the laws of the particular “territorial unit” of the State in which the relevant operator of an aircraft (or other relevant body as set out in Article 37(b) Appendix II) is located and “national law” shall be read as including a reference to the relevant local law.

[^ntr27-L_2018037EN.01006001-E0003]: For the purposes of this questionnaire, “national law” refers to all national legislation of a State, including but not limited to, the Constitution and its Amendments, any federal, state and district law or regulation.

[^ntr28-L_2018037EN.01006001-E0004]: For example, that (i) treaties prevail over other law as a matter of constitutional or similar framework law in State X, or (ii) legislation is required in State X, and has been enacted expressly setting out the priority of the Cape Town Treaty and/or superseding such other law, or (iii) the Cape Town Treaty or its implementing legislation is (a) more specific than other law (lex specialis derogat legi generali), and/or (b) later in time than such other law (lex posterior derogat legi priori), and as a result of (a) and/or (b) prevails over such other law.

[^ntr29-L_2018037EN.01006001-E0005]: For example, is there any reason why the rights and remedies granted to creditors under the Convention, including those granted under the QDs, would not (a) be recognised as being effective or (b) be sufficient by themselves, to enable such rights and remedies to be validly exercised in the State?

[^ntr30-L_2018037EN.01006001-E0006]: An example of an administrative action for the purposes of this question might be the failure by the State to put in place any procedures or resources to give effect to a provision of the Convention or a Qualifying Declaration. Another example would be the failure by a State to put in place proper procedures in its aircraft registry for recording IDERAs.

[^ntr31-L_2018037EN.01006001-E0007]: Please include in your analysis any precedent/decision relating to the recognition of rights of creditors, including ECAs, when relevant.

[^ntr*1-L_2018037EN.01006501-E0001]: Indicate the number of USD 300 million multiples in excess of USD 2 000 million.

[^ntr32-L_2018037EN.01007401-E0001]: It is understood that the 2012 Recommendation applies equally to projects that are not eligible for these financial terms and conditions.

[^ntr33-L_2018037EN.01007401-E0002]: The maximum repayment term for jack-up rigs used in the installation of wind turbines shall be 12 years.

[^ntr34-L_2018037EN.01007501-E0001]: In the case of a plant fuelled by natural gas, significantly lower carbon intensity is expected to be achieved.

[^ntr35-L_2018037EN.01007501-E0002]: Boiler (or steam generator) energy conversion efficiency = (Net heat exported by the steam/heat or calorific value (LHV) provided by the fuel) (× 100 %).

[^ntr36-L_2018037EN.01007501-E0003]: Gasifier efficiency = (Calorific value of gas per kg of fuel used/average net calorific value (LHV) of 1 kg of fuel) (× 100 %).

[^ntr37-L_2018037EN.01007501-E0004]: IPCC Fourth Assessment Report: Climate Change 2007, http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg3/en/ch4s4-3-5.html

[^ntr38-L_2018037EN.01007501-E0005]: The total system efficiency (ηo) of a CHP system is the sum of the net useful power output (WE) and net useful thermal outputs (ΣQTH) divided by the total fuel input (QFUEL), as shown below:

Image omitted; see official source

[^ntr39-L_2018037EN.01008501-E0001]: Where eligible for official support, an additional two years repayment term is allowed for project finance transactions consistent with paragraph (d) below, subject to the maximum repayment terms in Article 2 of Annex VII.

[^ntr40-L_2018037EN.01008501-E0002]: To help address energy poverty, ten year export credit support may be provided in all countries where the National Electrification Rate (as per the most current IEA World Energy Outlook Electricity Access database) is reported as 90 % or below at the time the relevant completed application for export credit is received.

[^ntr41-L_2018037EN.01008501-E0003]: Export credit support may be provided in non-IDA-eligible countries for geographically isolated locations, where, (1) the alternatives analysis referred to in Article 4(b)(1) of this Sector Understanding deems that less carbon-intensive alternatives are not viable and (2) the physical/geographic and existing grid features (including inability to connect to a larger grid) justify the proposed project's efficiency category as the best available technology. In cases where the project is not located on a physical island, the interested Participant shall seek the consent of all Participants through the use of a Common Line procedure in accordance with Articles 58 to 63 of the Arrangement.

[^ntr42-L_2018037EN.01008901-E0001]:

• (a) The financial terms and conditions set out in Articles 2 and 3(d) shall apply to transactions for which a final commitment is issued on or before 31 December 2017.

• (b) After 31 December 2017, the financial terms and conditions set out in Articles 2 and 3(d) shall be discontinued unless the Participants agree otherwise.

• (c) If discontinued, the provisions of Articles 2 and 3(d) will be replaced by the following:

Article 2 — The maximum repayment term is 14 years, except when official export credit support provided by the Participants comprises more than 35 % of the syndication for a project in a High Income OECD country, the maximum repayment term is 10 years.

Article 3 (d) — The weighted average life of the repayment period shall not exceed seven-and-a-quarter years, except when official export credit support provided by the Participants comprises more than 35 % of the syndication for a project in a High Income OECD country, the weighted average life of the repayment period shall not exceed five-and-a-quarter years.

[^ntr*2-L_2018037EN.01009201-E0001]: Indicate the number of SDR 40 million multiples in excess of SDR 280 million, e.g. SDR 410 million would be notified as Category XV + 3.

[^ntr43-L_2018037EN.01010501-E0001]: Most typically this would be a risk on the central bank or Ministry of Finance. For central government entities other than the finance ministry, due diligence shall be undertaken to affirm that the entity commits the full faith and credit of the sovereign.