MuniLand

Assured should seek a new credit rating

Moody’s released it’s long awaited opinion of Assured Guaranty’s creditworthiness on January 17th. Moody’s analysts were not feeling good about the subsidiary that insures the bonds of municipalities. They pushed the rating down three notches from Aa3 to A2. The Bond Buyer noted that “fundamental challenges inherent in the business model make a return to the Aa rating level unlikely.” Zap and you are dead.

In the municipal bond insurance space, firms make money by insuring (or wrapping) bonds of communities or public entities that have lower credit ratings. This saves money for the entity issuing the bonds because it has a lower cost of borrowing and the insurer is guaranteeing that they will repay investors if the bonds default. It also benefits the investors who know that they will be made whole if the issuer cannot make payments on their bonds.

However, when a bond insurer’s rating is lowered, that means the pool of bonds it can insure shrinks because many new bonds have higher credit ratings. Assured now has a lower credit rating than most bonds being brought to market.

Bond insurance has been fading since 2005 when 57 percent of new municipal bonds were insured. In 2012 only 3.5 percent of newly issued bonds – or about $13 billion in new debt -  were insured. Muni insurer names that were once the gold standard, Ambac, MBIA and FSA, have either gone bankrupt, been absorbed or are struggling with a junk credit rating. Assured is the last muniland bond insurer standing and it’s unclear how they can continue to write new business.

Assured was obviously upset at Moody’s for knocking down its credit rating (and business model) three notches, and it responded with an eight-page defense of its business and capital adequacy. Insurers are a bit of a black box. For example, Assured has had substantial swings in the fair values of credit default swaps and there are likely other mysteries on its balance sheet that Moody’s parsed through. Here is a bit from Assured’s rebuttal to Moody’s:

Watching Harrisburg crash and burn

We are now watching Harrisburg crash and burn. The busted Pennsylvania capital of 49,000 is crushed by $463 million in city debt and an additional $282 million in debt for the public school system. The state senator representing the area, Jeff Piccola, used his power last June to pass state legislation (Act 47 amendments) that shackled Harrisburg with accepting a receiver appointed by the governor and barred the city from filing bankruptcy until June 30, 2012.

Adhering to the Act 47 requirement that the mayor work with the city council to approve a fiscal recovery plan, Mayor Thompson fought a months-long war that resulted in her plan being rejected three times and the governor’s appointment of a receiver, David Unkovic. After the Dauphin County court approved Unkovic last November, he tried to help the city balance the budget, sell assets and negotiate with bondholders. Amid all that action, a subset of the city council, against the mayor’s wishes, filed a Chapter 9 municipal bankruptcy petition that was ultimately rejected by a federal judge as a result of Senator Piccola’s Act 47 legislation.

Harrisburg’s biggest albatross is its responsibility for the debt of the Harrisburg incinerator – a monstrosity of design and a debacle of public financing. The responsibility for this debt first lies with the city and then with Dauphin County and bond insurer Assured Guaranty.

  • # Editors & Key Contributors