NAMA’s 6 degrees of separation

Of a Christmas Eve, no less, Brian Lenihan has issued the statutory definition of eligible assets for NAMA.  This raises the incidental point that it’s really not a good time for the media to take their eye of the ball, as the Department of Finance has also in effect admitted that performance-related “bonus” was part of the regular pay of top civil servants and so has scaled back the announced pay cuts for them since they won’t be getting their bonuses.  But anyway, the remarkable thing about the eligible asset definition is that it sets out a progressively looser set of criteria from property loans to security for such loans, to anyone involved in a partnership for such loans or securities and then –

credit facilities issued to, created for or otherwise provided to, directly or indirectly, a person who is or was at any time an associated debtor
of a debtor referred to in paragraph (a), whether by a participating institution to which the debtor is indebted or by another participating
institution;

In other words, it’s loans to people who might have in some way given loans to people involved in property.  Given how small a place Irish business is, it might have been simpler to define which loans are not eligible.  If NAMA is looking for a motto, it should be “It’s turtles all the way down“.

[Edit: also in the pre-Christmas NAMA rush -- the board and the discount rate]