Berlin Hyp AG. Exhibit 1 Scorecard ratios of Berlin Hyp. 0.4% 0% Profitability: Net Income/ Tangible Assets

Transcription

1 CREDIT OPINION 11 September 217 Berlin Hyp AG Update following upgrade of deposit rating to Aa2 Update Summary rating rationale We assign Aa2/P-1 deposit ratings and A1 senior unsecured debt ratings to Berlin Hyp AG (Berlin Hyp), with a stable outlook. Furthermore, we assign a Baseline Credit Assessment (BCA), an a3 Adjusted BCA and a Aa2(cr)/P-1(cr) Counterparty Risk (CR) Assessment. RATINGS Berlin Hyp AG Domicile Germany Long Term Debt A1 Type Senior Unsecured Dom Curr Outlook Stable Long Term Deposit Aa2 Type LT Bank Deposits - Fgn Curr Outlook Stable Please see the ratings section at the end of this report for more information. The ratings and outlook shown reflect information as of the publication date. Berlin Hyp's ratings reflect (1) the bank's BCA; (2) its a3 Adjusted BCA, incorporating four notches of rating uplift, with incorporates both parental support from Erwerbsgesellschaft der S-Finanzgruppe mbh & Co. KG (SEG), as well as very high cross-sector support from Sparkassen-Finanzgruppe (S-Group, Aa2 stable, a21); (3) the results of our Advanced Loss Given Failure (LGF) analysis, which provides three notches of uplift for deposits and one notch for senior debt from Berlin Hyp's Adjusted BCA; and (4) our assumptions of moderate government support, resulting in one-notch of rating uplift. The BCA reflects Berlin Hyp's (1) adequate risk-adjusted capitalisation, (2) improved asset quality, and (3) adequate profitability. However, the BCA is constrained by the bank's (1) high, but improving, leverage; (2) extremely high concentrations in commercial real estate (CRE) lending, reflected in a monoliner adjustment; and (3) high reliance on confidence-sensitive market funding and elevated asset encumbrance. Exhibit 1 Scorecard ratios of Berlin Hyp Contacts Berlin Hyp (BCA: ) Goetz Thurm, CFA VP-Senior Analyst goetz.thurm@moodys.com Carola Schuler Managing Director Banking carola.schuler@moodys.com 6% 14% 5% Solvency Factors 12% 4% 1% 8% 3% 6% 2% 4% 2% 2.3% 13.5% Asset Risk: Problem Loans/ Gross Loans Capital: Tangible Common Equity/Risk-Weighted Assets Solvency Factors (LHS) Americas Asia Pacific Japan EMEA % 51.6% 24.1% Funding Structure: Market Funds/ Tangible Banking Assets Liquid Resources: Liquid Banking Assets/Tangible Banking Assets % Source: Moody's Investors Service CLIENT SERVICES.4% % Profitability: Net Income/ Tangible Assets Liquidity Factors (RHS) Liquidity Factors Alexander Hendricks, CFA Associate Managing Director - Banking alexander.hendricks@moodys.com Median -rated banks 16%

2 Credit strengths» Improved capitalisation, providing an increased risk buffer» Adequate risk-adjusted profitability and efficiency» Strong contractual links within the SEG group Credit challenges» Good asset quality, with extremely high risk concentrations in CRE, exposing the bank to tail risks from dislocations in CRE markets» High business model-induced leverage and adequate regulatory capital adequacy levels Rating outlook The outlook on Berlin Hyp's debt and deposit ratings is stable, reflecting our expectations (1) that the combined credit profiles of Berlin Hyp and its sister company Landesbank Berlin AG (LBB, Aa2 stable/a1 stable, baa22), as reflected in the consolidated accounts of both banks' ultimate parent SEG, will stay broadly stable over the rating outlook horizon; and (2) that the liability structure of SEG will stay stable, which forms the basis for our Advanced LGF analysis, reflecting our assumption of a common resolution perimeter for Berlin Hyp and LBB. Factors that could lead to an upgrade An upgrade of Berlin Hyp's ratings will be subject to an uplift of its BCA and a3 Adjusted BCA, in combination with an improvement in the overall creditworthiness of S-Group. In addition, an upgrade of the bank's senior debt rating could be driven by an improved result from our Advanced LGF analysis, which takes into account the severity of loss faced by the different liability classes in resolution at the level of SEG. Upward pressure on Berlin Hyp's BCA could develop as a result of (1) an improvement in the bank's leverage ratio, particularly through higher capitalisation levels generated via a further reserve build-up; (2) at least stable or improving earnings; or (3) a reduction in short-term interbank funding, resulting in a more balanced liability maturity profile. However, an upgrade of Berlin Hyp's BCA would only result in an upgrade of its Adjusted BCA if the combined credit profiles of Berlin Hyp and LBB, as reflected in the consolidated accounts of SEG, improve (providing parental support), and if the creditworthiness of S-Group improves (providing cross-sector support). Upward pressure on the senior unsecured debt rating could develop if sufficient amounts of subordinated or senior unsecured debt were to be issued by Berlin Hyp or LBB, or both, which would provide an additional buffer for senior debt at the consolidated level of SEG. Factors that could lead to a downgrade A downgrade of Berlin debt and deposit ratings will be subject to a lowering of its a3 Adjusted BCA. In addition, changes in SEG's liability structure, resulting in higher loss-given-failure in resolution and, therefore, fewer notches of rating uplift derived from our Advanced LGF analysis, could negatively affect the ratings. Downward rating pressure on Berlin Hyp's a3 Adjusted BCA could develop from a significant weakening in Berlin Hyp's and LBB's financial fundamentals to the extent that the combined credit strength of SEG is adversely affected, particularly if higher asset risks at both banks deplete the group's capital resources. A mild deterioration in both entities' credit profiles could be offset by additional cross-sector support. Furthermore, lower creditworthiness of S-Group or a lowering of our very high sector support assumptions, although unlikely, could trigger downward rating pressure. Furthermore, a revision of the currently applicable profit and loss transfer agreements, as part of a reorganisation of SEG, could potentially lead to a reassessment of our parental support assumptions, prompting downward pressure on Berlin Hyp's Adjusted BCA. This publication does not announce a credit rating action. For any credit ratings referenced in this publication, please see the ratings tab on the issuer/entity page on for the most updated credit rating action information and rating history September 217

3 However, in such a scenario, we would also have to reassess our assumption of a common resolution perimeter for Berlin Hyp and LBB, which could result in more LGF uplift for Berlin Hyp's long-term debt if we applied a standalone resolution perimeter. Key Indicators Exhibit 2 Berlin Hyp AG (Consolidated Financials) [1] Total Assets (EUR billion) Total Assets (USD billion) Tangible Common Equity (EUR billion) Tangible Common Equity (USD billion) Problem Loans / Gross Loans (%) Tangible Common Equity / Risk Weighted Assets (%) Problem Loans / (Tangible Common Equity + Loan Loss Reserve) (%) Net Interest Margin (%) PPI / Average RWA (%) Net Income / Tangible Assets (%) Cost / Income Ratio (%) Market Funds / Tangible Banking Assets (%) Liquid Banking Assets / Tangible Banking Assets (%) Gross Loans / Due to Customers (%) CAGR/Avg [1] All figures and ratios are adjusted using Moody's standard adjustments [2] Basel III - fully-loaded or transitional phase-in; LOCAL GAAP [3] Basel II; LOCAL GAAP [4] May include rounding differences due to scale of reported amounts [5] Compound Annual Growth Rate (%) based on time period presented for the latest accounting regime [6] Simple average of periods presented for the latest accounting regime. [7] Simple average of Basel III periods presented Source: Moody's Financial Metrics Detailed rating considerations Berlin Hyp benefits from close contractual links within the SEG group In January 215, Berlin Hyp was spun off from LBB and set up as a sister company of LBB under the SEG umbrella. Berlin Hyp now focuses on international and national CRE activities outside of Berlin, while LBB remains responsible for most local CRE lending in the Berlin-Brandenburg region. Despite this operational separation, both Berlin Hyp and LBB remain closely tied via a profit and loss transfer agreement set up between each bank and Landesbank Berlin Holding AG (LBBH), a holding entity fully owned by SEG. The profit and loss transfer agreement implies that losses at Berlin Hyp would have to be offset by LBBH, thereby enabling Berlin Hyp to benefit from the stronger standalone credit profile of its sister company LBB, which would effectively have to cover the losses. This potential parental support is reflected in our Adjusted BCA. High business model-induced leverage and adequate regulatory capital adequacy levels Although we consider the bank's risk-adjusted capitalisation to be adequate under the current framework, Berlin Hyp's absolute capitalisation (measured as tangible common equity as a percentage of tangible assets, which stood at 4.1% as of year-end 216) compared with its higher-risk and concentrated business model is a rating factor constraining its capital score. Berlin Hyp's Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) and total capital ratios stood at 13.5% and 17.5%, respectively, as of year-end 216, up from 13.3% and 17.4% as of year-end 215. The marginal improvement in capitalisation levels reflected an increase in risk-weighted assets by 4.9% in 216, which was more than offset by an increase in CET1 and total capital of 6.9% and 5.4%, respectively. The bank's regulatory leverage ratio stood at 3.9% as of year-end 216, up from 3.5% as of year-end 215. In addition, a stress analysis of Berlin Hyp's asset exposures and earnings reveals the potential for significant losses under an adverse scenario. Finally, changes to the Basel capital adequacy framework could materially affect capitalisation levels in the coming years. These factors and the bank's undisclosed 34f reserves, which provide additional loss-absorbing capacity, are reflected in the downward adjustment of the Capital score by one notch to a September 217

4 We expect Berlin Hyp to somewhat strengthen its internal capital retention, based on some profit retention under reserves and despite the profit and loss transfer agreement with LBBH. While this arrangement limits profit retention, the potential for coverage of losses under an adverse scenario represents an offsetting factor, subject to LBBH's financial capacity. Good asset quality with extremely high risk concentrations in real estate Berlin Hyp is highly leveraged in real-estate activities, and this segment includes large single-borrower exposures relating to its CRE lending activities, a key rating restraint, reflected in the assigned Asset Risk score. We believe that asset quality has reached a peak, given below-average problem loans/gross loans ratio of 1.9% as of year-end 216, and we expect the bank's annual cost of risk to normalise at slightly higher levels. Berlin Hyp's nonperforming loans amounted to 376 million as of year-end 216, reflecting a fraction of its historical peak levels dating back to the late 199s when the bank experienced a crisis due to an eastern German property bubble after Germany's reunification. One of the key drivers of the reduction in nonperforming loans was the bank's effective workout management of legacy loans. In 216, the bank reported 51 million in loan-loss provisions (including undisclosed 34f reserves under local GAAP) and made provisions for general banking risks of 5 million (also known as disclosed 34g reserves under local GAAP). As of year-end 216, the bank reported 18.1 billion residential and CRE loans (against 1.1 billion in CET1), which represent 69% of the balance sheet and are the bank's main asset-quality drivers. Berlin Hyp does not disclose a detailed portfolio split, but its mortgage cover pool consisted of residential real-estate assets (23%), offices (36%), retail (23%), industrial buildings (1%) and other buildings used for commercial purposes (17%) as of year-end 216. The pool was largely focused on Germany (72%), with the remainder allocated in France, Belgium, Poland, the UK, the Czech Republic and the Netherlands, a key driver for the assigned Strong+ Weighted Macro Profile. In addition to its real-estate business, the bank held 1.2 billion low-margin public sector loans as of year-end 216, which are no longer in line with Berlin Hyp's strategy and have been significantly reduced from 8. billion as of year-end 28. The bank's exposure to European periphery countries is low, with 23 million of Spanish sovereign bonds (Baa2 stable3) held as of year-end 216. Although Berlin Hyp is focused on the German market, the bank's assigned Strong+ Macro Profile is one notch below that of Germany at Very Strong-, reflecting the issuer's EU activities in a less benign growth environment. The bank benefits from operating in an environment with very high economic, institutional and government financial strength, and very low susceptibility to event risk. Operating conditions for the German banking system are, however, constrained by high fragmentation in an over-saturated market, low fee income generation and intensifying competition for the domestic business. Enstablished covered bond franchise, complemented by sector funding access Around 52% of Berlin Hyp's 26.4 billion total assets are funded through covered bonds and the remainder through senior unsecured debt, interbank loans and repos, with lower intra-group funding after the reorganisation. As of year-end 216, the bank's funding consisted of around 13.7 billion covered bonds, with the mix gradually shifting to mortgage-covered bonds (79%) as Berlin Hyp retreats from the lower-margin public finance business. The secured funding base is complemented with senior unsecured bond issues of which German savings banks typically purchase roughly 5%. To reflect the bank's strong covered bond franchise, we provide one notch of uplift to the historical Funding Structure score. In addition, we view the closer integration of Berlin Hyp into the German savings bank sector, as well as its access to less confidencesensitive sector funding, as a stabilising factor for the bank's wholesale-driven refinancing profile, reflected in a further two-notch upward adjustment of the historical Funding Structure score, resulting in an assigned score of ba3. Berlin Hyp's funding diversification resulted in a reduction in its historically large share of short-term secured and unsecured interbank liabilities compared with those of its closest peers. In connection with the secured interbank funds, 1.7 billion securities were pledged for repo transactions as of year-end 216, lower than the 3. billion as of year-end 215. In addition, the bank secured funds through open market operations with central banks of 1. billion as of year-end 216 compared with.5 billion as of year-end 215. The adjustment of liquid assets for asset encumbrance is reflected in the assigned Liquid Resources score September 217

5 Adequate risk-adjusted profitability and efficiency We consider Berlin Hyp's profitability to be adequate for its chosen business, indicated by its capacity to create risk buffers on its own (34g/f reserves), although profit transfers to and directed by the parent LBBH could limit its ability to do so. In 216, the bank's net interest income increased 15% from a year earlier because Berlin Hyp was able to reduce its refinancing costs by 4%, while its interest income only declined 18% during the period. In March 216, Berlin Hyp was able to issue a 5 million Pfandbrief with a negative yield (-.16%, three-year tenor), the first time that the German covered bond market entered negative-yield territory. Net commission income also advanced in 216, rising 38% on increasing new lending volumes, while other income declined by more than half and costs rose marginally by 4%. Reported net income before contributions to the fund for general banking risks (34g) thus accelerated 1% to 123 million in 216 from 112 million in 215, which is overstated in comparison with other banks, though, given that Berlin Hyp pays its domestic taxes at the level of its parent company LBBH. While we probably are at the trough of the credit cycle and provisioning needs will likely increase again in the coming years, we nonetheless forecast that Berlin Hyp's earnings will remain sustainably above the levels we have seen in the years prior to 214. This improved earnings picture is reflected in our assigned Profitability score of (in line with the historical score). Monoliner adjustment To reflect the risks stemming from Berlin Hyp's CRE monoliner business model, we also apply a one-notch negative Qualitative Adjustment for Business Diversification in our scorecard, which leads to a BCA. Notching considerations Affiliate support Berlin Hyp benefits from parental support from SEG, given that losses at the bank would have to be offset by LBBH, due to the profit and loss transfer agreement in place. In addition, Berlin Hyp can rely on cross-sector support from S-Group. Both parental and crosssector support materially reduce the probability of default, as they would be available to stabilise Berlin Hyp, and not just compensate for losses in resolution. We continue to consider the readiness of the sector to support its core members to be very high. This particularly applies to Berlin Hyp, given its 1% indirect ownership by the sector's savings banks. Combined cross-sector and parental support provides four notches of rating uplift from the bank's BCA, resulting in an Adjusted BCA of a3. LGF analysis Berlin Hyp is subject to the EU Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive (BRRD), which we consider to be an operational resolution regime. We, therefore, apply our Advanced LGF analysis, where we consider the risks faced by the different debt and deposit classes across the liability structure in resolution (the analysis is performed at the level of SEG, the consolidating entity of the group's key subsidiaries Berlin Hyp and LBB). We assume residual tangible common equity of 3% and losses post-failure of 8% of tangible banking assets, a 25% run-off in junior wholesale deposits and a 5% run-off in preferred deposits. These ratios are in line with our standard assumptions. In addition, we assume that only a very small percentage (1%) of the deposit base can actually be considered junior and qualify as bail-in-able under the BRRD. In line with the new German insolvency legislation, which effectively subordinated senior unsecured bonds and notes to deposits in resolution since January 217, we base our calculation on the assumption that deposits are preferred to plain vanilla senior unsecured bonds. For deposits and senior-senior unsecured debt, our LGF analysis indicates an extremely low loss-given-failure, leading to a three-notch uplift from the bank's a3 Adjusted BCA. For senior unsecured debt, our LGF analysis indicates a low loss-given-failure, leading to a one-notch uplift from the bank's Adjusted BCA September 217

6 For subordinated debt, our LGF analysis indicates a high loss-given-failure, leading to a positioning of one notch below the bank's Adjusted BCA. Government support Following the introduction of the BRRD, we have lowered our expectations about the degree of support the government might provide to a bank in Germany in the event of need. Owing to its size on a consolidated basis, we consider S-Group as systemically relevant and, therefore, attribute a moderate probability of German government support for all members of the sector, in line with support assumptions for other systemically relevant banking groups in Europe. We, therefore, still include one notch of government support uplift in the senior debt and deposit ratings of S-Group member banks that are incorporated in Germany, including Berlin Hyp. For junior securities, we continue to believe that the likelihood for government support is low and these ratings do not include any related uplift. About Moody's Bank Scorecard Our scorecard is designed to capture, express and explain in summary form our Rating Committee's judgement. When read in conjunction with our research, a fulsome presentation of our judgement is expressed. As a result, the output of our scorecard may materially differ from that suggested by raw data alone (though it has been calibrated to avoid the frequent need for strong divergence). The scorecard output and the individual scores are discussed in rating committees and may be adjusted up or down to reflect conditions specific to each rated entity September 217

7 Rating Methodology and Scorecard Factors Exhibit 3 Berlin Hyp AG Macro Factors Weighted Macro Profile Strong + Factor 1% Historic Macro Ratio Adjusted Score Credit Trend Assigned Score Key driver #1 Key driver #2 Solvency Asset Risk Problem Loans / Gross Loans 2.3% a2 Sector concentration Single name concentration Capital TCE / RWA 13.5% a2 a3 Nominal leverage Expected trend Profitability Net Income / Tangible Assets.4% Earnings quality Expected trend ba3 Extent of market funding reliance Market funding quality Asset encumbrance Combined Solvency Score Liquidity Funding Structure Market Funds / Tangible Banking Assets 51.6% b3 Liquid Resources Liquid Banking Assets / Tangible Banking Assets 24.1% baa1 Combined Liquidity Score Financial Profile Business Diversification Opacity and Complexity Corporate Behavior Total Qualitative Adjustments Sovereign or Affiliate constraint: Scorecard Calculated BCA range Assigned BCA Affiliate Support notching Adjusted BCA a3 ba3 baa2 ba2 baa Aaa baa3-ba2 4 a3 Balance Sheet is not applicable September 217

8 Debt class Counterparty Risk Assessment Deposits Senior senior unsecured bank debt Senior unsecured bank debt Dated subordinated bank debt Instrument class Counterparty Risk Assessment Deposits Senior senior unsecured bank debt Senior unsecured bank debt Dated subordinated bank debt De Jure waterfall De Facto waterfall Notching LGF Assigned Additional Preliminary LGF notching Rating Instrument Sub- Instrument SubDe Jure De Facto Notching Guidance notching Assessment volume + ordination volume + ordination vs. subordination subordination Adjusted BCA aa3 (cr) aa aa a baa1 Loss Given Failure notching Additional Preliminary Rating Assessment Notching aa3 (cr) aa3 aa3 a2 baa1 Government Support notching Local Currency Rating Aa2 (cr) Aa2 Aa2 A1 (P)Baa1 Foreign Currency Rating -Aa Source: Moody's Financial Metrics Ratings Exhibit 4 Category BERLIN HYP AG Outlook Bank Deposits Baseline Credit Assessment Adjusted Baseline Credit Assessment Counterparty Risk Assessment Senior Unsecured -Dom Curr Subordinate MTN -Dom Curr Moody's Rating Stable Aa2/P-1 a3 Aa2(cr)/P-1(cr) A1 (P)Baa1 Source: Moody's Investors Service 8 11 September 217

9 Endnotes 1 The ratings shown are S-Group's corporate family rating and outlook, and its BCA 2 The ratings shown are Landesbank Berlin's long-term deposit rating and outlook, its senior unsecured rating and outlook, and its BCA 3 The rating shown is the Government of Spain's issuer rating and outlook 9 11 September 217

10 217 Moody s Corporation, Moody s Investors Service, Inc., Moody s Analytics, Inc. and/or their licensors and affiliates (collectively, MOODY S ). All rights reserved. CREDIT RATINGS ISSUED BY, INC. AND ITS RATINGS AFFILIATES ( MIS ) ARE MOODY S CURRENT OPINIONS OF THE RELATIVE FUTURE CREDIT RISK OF ENTITIES, CREDIT COMMITMENTS, OR DEBT OR DEBT-LIKE SECURITIES, AND MOODY S PUBLICATIONS MAY INCLUDE MOODY S CURRENT OPINIONS OF THE RELATIVE FUTURE CREDIT RISK OF ENTITIES, CREDIT COMMITMENTS, OR DEBT OR DEBT-LIKE SECURITIES. MOODY S DEFINES CREDIT RISK AS THE RISK THAT AN ENTITY MAY NOT MEET ITS CONTRACTUAL, FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS AS THEY COME DUE AND ANY ESTIMATED FINANCIAL LOSS IN THE EVENT OF DEFAULT. CREDIT RATINGS DO NOT ADDRESS ANY OTHER RISK, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: LIQUIDITY RISK, MARKET VALUE RISK, OR PRICE VOLATILITY. CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY S OPINIONS INCLUDED IN MOODY S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT STATEMENTS OF CURRENT OR HISTORICAL FACT. MOODY S PUBLICATIONS MAY ALSO INCLUDE QUANTITATIVE MODEL-BASED ESTIMATES OF CREDIT RISK AND RELATED OPINIONS OR COMMENTARY PUBLISHED BY MOODY S ANALYTICS, INC. CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY S PUBLICATIONS DO NOT CONSTITUTE OR PROVIDE INVESTMENT OR FINANCIAL ADVICE, AND CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT AND DO NOT PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS TO PURCHASE, SELL, OR HOLD PARTICULAR SECURITIES. NEITHER CREDIT RATINGS NOR MOODY S PUBLICATIONS COMMENT ON THE SUITABILITY OF AN INVESTMENT FOR ANY PARTICULAR INVESTOR. MOODY S ISSUES ITS CREDIT RATINGS AND PUBLISHES MOODY S PUBLICATIONS WITH THE EXPECTATION AND UNDERSTANDING THAT EACH INVESTOR WILL, WITH DUE CARE, MAKE ITS OWN STUDY AND EVALUATION OF EACH SECURITY THAT IS UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR PURCHASE, HOLDING, OR SALE. MOODY S CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT INTENDED FOR USE BY RETAIL INVESTORS AND IT WOULD BE RECKLESS AND INAPPROPRIATE FOR RETAIL INVESTORS TO USE MOODY S CREDIT RATINGS OR MOODY S PUBLICATIONS WHEN MAKING AN INVESTMENT DECISION. IF IN DOUBT YOU SHOULD CONTACT YOUR FINANCIAL OR OTHER PROFESSIONAL ADVISER. ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS PROTECTED BY LAW, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, COPYRIGHT LAW, AND NONE OF SUCH INFORMATION MAY BE COPIED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED, REPACKAGED, FURTHER TRANSMITTED, TRANSFERRED, DISSEMINATED, REDISTRIBUTED OR RESOLD, OR STORED FOR SUBSEQUENT USE FOR ANY SUCH PURPOSE, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN ANY FORM OR MANNER OR BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER, BY ANY PERSON WITHOUT MOODY S PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT. All information contained herein is obtained by MOODY S from sources believed by it to be accurate and reliable. Because of the possibility of human or mechanical error as well as other factors, however, all information contained herein is provided AS IS without warranty of any kind. MOODY'S adopts all necessary measures so that the information it uses in assigning a credit rating is of sufficient quality and from sources MOODY'S considers to be reliable including, when appropriate, independent third-party sources. However, MOODY S is not an auditor and cannot in every instance independently verify or validate information received in the rating process or in preparing the Moody s publications. To the extent permitted by law, MOODY S and its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors and suppliers disclaim liability to any person or entity for any indirect, special, consequential, or incidental losses or damages whatsoever arising from or in connection with the information contained herein or the use of or inability to use any such information, even if MOODY S or any of its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors or suppliers is advised in advance of the possibility of such losses or damages, including but not limited to: (a) any loss of present or prospective profits or (b) any loss or damage arising where the relevant financial instrument is not the subject of a particular credit rating assigned by MOODY S. To the extent permitted by law, MOODY S and its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors and suppliers disclaim liability for any direct or compensatory losses or damages caused to any person or entity, including but not limited to by any negligence (but excluding fraud, willful misconduct or any other type of liability that, for the avoidance of doubt, by law cannot be excluded) on the part of, or any contingency within or beyond the control of, MOODY S or any of its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors or suppliers, arising from or in connection with the information contained herein or the use of or inability to use any such information. NO WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AS TO THE ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE OF ANY SUCH RATING OR OTHER OPINION OR INFORMATION IS GIVEN OR MADE BY MOODY S IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER. Moody s Investors Service, Inc., a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of Moody s Corporation ( MCO ), hereby discloses that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and municipal bonds, debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by Moody s Investors Service, Inc. have, prior to assignment of any rating, agreed to pay to Moody s Investors Service, Inc. for appraisal and rating services rendered by it fees ranging from $1,5 to approximately $2,5,. MCO and MIS also maintain policies and procedures to address the independence of MIS s ratings and rating processes. Information regarding certain affiliations that may exist between directors of MCO and rated entities, and between entities who hold ratings from MIS and have also publicly reported to the SEC an ownership interest in MCO of more than 5%, is posted annually at under the heading Investor Relations Corporate Governance Director and Shareholder Affiliation Policy. Additional terms for Australia only: Any publication into Australia of this document is pursuant to the Australian Financial Services License of MOODY S affiliate, Moody s Investors Service Pty Limited ABN AFSL and/or Moody s Analytics Australia Pty Ltd ABN AFSL (as applicable). This document is intended to be provided only to wholesale clients within the meaning of section 761G of the Corporations Act 21. By continuing to access this document from within Australia, you represent to MOODY S that you are, or are accessing the document as a representative of, a wholesale client and that neither you nor the entity you represent will directly or indirectly disseminate this document or its contents to retail clients within the meaning of section 761G of the Corporations Act 21. MOODY S credit rating is an opinion as to the creditworthiness of a debt obligation of the issuer, not on the equity securities of the issuer or any form of security that is available to retail investors. It would be reckless and inappropriate for retail investors to use MOODY S credit ratings or publications when making an investment decision. If in doubt you should contact your financial or other professional adviser. Additional terms for Japan only: Moody's Japan K.K. ( MJKK ) is a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of Moody's Group Japan G.K., which is wholly-owned by Moody s Overseas Holdings Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of MCO. Moody s SF Japan K.K. ( MSFJ ) is a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of MJKK. MSFJ is not a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization ( NRSRO ). Therefore, credit ratings assigned by MSFJ are Non-NRSRO Credit Ratings. Non-NRSRO Credit Ratings are assigned by an entity that is not a NRSRO and, consequently, the rated obligation will not qualify for certain types of treatment under U.S. laws. MJKK and MSFJ are credit rating agencies registered with the Japan Financial Services Agency and their registration numbers are FSA Commissioner (Ratings) No. 2 and 3 respectively. MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) hereby disclose that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and municipal bonds, debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) have, prior to assignment of any rating, agreed to pay to MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) for appraisal and rating services rendered by it fees ranging from JPY2, to approximately JPY35,,. MJKK and MSFJ also maintain policies and procedures to address Japanese regulatory requirements. REPORT NUMBER 1 11 September

11 CLIENT SERVICES 11 Americas Asia Pacific Japan EMEA September 217