The proposed regulatory moves follow the Amtek Auto fiasco and a growing number of loan defaults triggering downgrade or suspension of ratings without the same being properly communicated to investors.
It has been felt that the disclosure norms need to be tightened to ensure that the Credit Rating Agencies (CRAs) avoid any conflict of interest while deciding and disclosing their rating actions, a senior official said.
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi), which has the mandate to regulate credit rating agencies in the country, is finalising a draft set of revised disclosure norms and the same would be soon presented before its Board, the official said.
Once approved by the Board, the draft norms would be put in public domain for comments from all concerned stakeholders and the final regulations would be framed after taking into account their suggestions, the official added.
The IAB, which advises Sebi on its policy action based on the relevant global experiences and emerging challenges, in its last meeting felt that the the rating business involves dissemination of opinion for 'public good' but there are asymmetric processes being followed in this space.
As the 'independence and credibility' of CRAs assume great significance for the benefit of investors, the IAB observed that regulators globally are calling for reducing the reliance on rating agencies.
"What may be required for Sebi is to work towards improving rating processes, enhancing transparency and removing conflict of interest.
"The disclosures of ratings of an issuer by CRAs may also include the rating transition of the issuer in the past as a track record of the rated issuer and also to reflect on the consistency of ratings by the CRAs," IAB has told Sebi.
This would help the investors take an informed decision while the 'credibility risk' can keep the CRAs as also the concerned companies on their toes.
This could be followed up with the rating withdrawal when it becomes necessary, IAB has said.
It also wants the companies to disclose all ratings obtained by them even in case of non-public issues so as to curtail the scope of 'rating shopping'. This would check the practice of the companies keeping under wraps the ratings that are not very favourable to them.
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
