The banks didn’t want anything to do with oil. Wall Street has solved it with the 2008 mortgage strategy

Oil and gas producers in the United States are turning to the financial magic of Wall Street to fuel their acquisitions in a frenetic race for growth. To achieve this, they are packaging thousands of pots into investment vehicles and selling stakes to American investors, replicating the exact same model that has long been used for mortgages, auto loans and other sources of securitized income. Away from the spotlight, the number of these operations has grown rapidly in recent years. Industry experts consulted by Financial Times They estimate that the total amount of debt issued through this format already ranges between 20,000 and 30,000 million dollars. It is a fundamentally opaque market, where most transactions are closed privately. Historically, independent oil and gas producers financed its operations through loans reserve-based (RBL) and high-yield debt. However, the situation has changed drastically. Some commercial banks have reduced their exposure to the extractive sector to meet their sustainability strategies under environmental, social and governance (ESG) policies, or in response to public concern over climate change. Added to this is the fear of traditional investors of “stranded assets” and the general uncertainty about the long-term viability of the sector in the midst of the energy transition. In addition, rising interest rates have raised costs, making high-yield debt too expensive or inaccessible for many producers. To survive, companies They have found an alternative way: They transfer their mature wells, known as proven, developed and producing (PDP) reserves, to a newly created Special Purpose Entity (SPE). This entity operates independently and is structured to be “bankruptcy-remote”, ensuring that the transferred assets are completely separate from the balance sheet of the producing company and safe in the event of its bankruptcy. Attracting conservative money By isolating these high-quality assets, the bonds issued by the SPE manage to achieve an “investment grade” rating. This seal of quality attracts a new class of investors who would normally avoid oil risk: pension funds, insurance companies and large asset managers looking for structured financial products with stable returns. For the oil companies, business is great. The securitization allows them to obtain advance rates (advance rates) of between 55% and 75% of the value of the reserves, figures significantly higher than those available in traditional RBL loans. To convince credit rating agencies, the secret lies in diversification and insurance. On the one hand, thousands of assets are grouped together; for example, Raisa Energy closed an operation combining more than 3,000 wells operated by more than 50 companies in more than 20 counties. On the other hand, long-term hedges are contracted to protect investors from oil fluctuations, reaching up to 85% of the entity’s production for a period of five to seven years. The “time bomb” and the cracks in private credit But financial engineering sometimes hides structural cracks. Brandon Davis, founder of energy intelligence company AFE Leaks, describes in FT These price hedges act as a “ticking time bomb” in case other production costs increase. If the price of oil rises, the company’s income is capped because the difference goes to the hedging counterparty (usually a bank). However, if at the same time there is inflation in operating costs, such as field services or water treatment, the profit margin backing the bonds could be seriously eroded. The cracks in this engineering are not an isolated case in the energy sector, but a symptom of a greater malaise in the opaque world of private credit on Wall Street, where patience (and money) is beginning to run out. This risk is framed at a time of growing tension for the entire private credit ecosystem on Wall Street. Investors are starting to demand their money back. In Cliffwater’s $33 billion fund, clients requested to withdraw 14% of their capital in a single quarter, but the firm said it only I would pay around 50% of those requests, forcing the other half to wait. If the panic spreads, traditional banks will not escape unscathed either. Lending by US banks to non-depository financial institutions, which includes private credit, reached 1.2 trillion dollars in the middle of last year, almost tripling its share compared to a decade ago. Furthermore, as with oil wells, the securitization market as a whole is extremely sensitive to external regulatory or macroeconomic shocks. A clear example occurred recently in another sector: Mpower Financing had to postpone the sale of almost $250 million in bonds backed by loans to international students. The cause was investors’ fear of the new restrictive visa policies of the Donald Trump administration. If regulatory changes or geopolitical crises hit the energy sector unexpectedly, oil securitization could face a similar collapse in demand. The danger of forgetting the nature of the business Wall Street has packaged a high-risk industry into a tame-looking product, but geology and the global market are difficult to tame. “The trick has always been to convince the rating agencies that measures have been put in place to mitigate the risk,” warns Olivier Darmounieconomist specialized in credit markets at HEC Paris. “But that’s the inherent thing about oil and gas, it’s an inherently volatile business.” Darmouni points out the ultimate risk: “If something goes wrong, the main problem will be that oil and gas will run out of capital” if producers start defaulting on bond payments. As long as the money keeps flowing, the machine will not stop. But as Laura Parrott warnshead of private fixed income at Nuveen, the market is experiencing a lot of effervescence. In scenarios of such investment fever, he concludes, “people are going to be trapped.” Image | Photo by David Vives on Unsplash Xataka | Climate change is no longer profitable: WallStreet and large investors abandon green policies

There was a time when the Lottery Jackpot “took you away from work.” Today it barely takes away a part of the mortgage

Someone who already has gray hair still remembers that, thirty years ago, May you get the Christmas Fat Man It was practically the key to financial freedom. With the full prize of one tenth (about 30 million pesetas in the 90s) you could buy several houses, pay mortgages and even ensure the well-being of your family with that stroke of luck. Today, with a prize of 400,000 euros (328,000 euros after taxes), that story sounds very different. One of the main conditions is that, in the mid-nineties, the real estate market in Spain I played in another league. Buy an apartment…or several In cities like Madrid, a home of about 90 square meters could be found for less than 14 or 15 million pesetas, according to official statistics. That meant that Fatty Christmas allowed to buy two apartments medium-sized in a big city, or buy one, pay off the mortgage and a good pinch to maintain a good margin of liquidity. In those years, the award was not just help: it was a complete break from financial worries. As was often heard at the doors of lottery administrations while the winners uncorked bottles of champagne, it was a prize that “kept you off work.” Thirty years later, the prize is still striking in terms of numbers, but its real purchasing power has changed. El Gordo has been frozen at 400,000 euros per tenth for more than a decade, while the price of housing has followed an almost constant upward trajectory. In Madrid, the average house price It ranges between 5,500 and 5,758 euros per square meter, which implies that with the 328,000 euros net of the prize, you can barely purchase 60 or 70 square meters at an average price. In practice, this means that Gordo no longer even guarantees a standard floor in many neighborhoods of the capital. Barcelona offers a similar image. With average prices located at 3,084 euros per square meter, the Gordo de Navidad allows buy a modest home or a medium-sized apartment in peripheral areas, but it is far from the purchasing capacity it had in the nineties. The comparison leaves no room for doubt: where before the prize opened the door to buying an apartment in the city and a house on the beachtoday it is barely enough for one, and not necessarily in the best conditions. The contrast is softened slightly if the market is viewed from more affordable cities. In capitals like Zamora or Lugo, where average prices are between 980 and 1,300 euros per square meter, El Gordo continues to allow you to buy spacious homes or even more than a small property. However, even in these more affordable markets, the premium no longer equivalent to that massive asset leap that it represented three decades ago. The difference is not so much in the amount of the prize as in the uneven evolution of prices. This purchasing capacity is also explained by the general price context. He housing cost It was much more aligned with the average income of the population and access to property was not subject to the housing and demand pressure that characterizes the current market. El Gordo, in that scenario, functioned as a real wealth multiplier. A Gordo with more salary, but less power make a salary comparison helps to better understand this change of scale. In the 90s, the average annual salary in Spain was around 2 million pesetas (about 12,000 euros). In that context, the Gordo of 30 million pesetas was equivalent to approximately 15 times the annual salary of a worker medium, which reinforced its perception as an immediate economic transformation: decades of income concentrated in a single stroke of chance. Today, according to the latest data from the National Statistics Institute, the median salary annually in Spain is around 23,300 euros. With this reference, the current Gordo’s 328,000 euros is equivalent to just over 14 times the median annual salary. The proportion, curiously, is not that different from that of the nineties. The big difference appears when that salary multiple faces the price of housing (and all goods in general), which has grown much faster than income. That’s the key to change. Although the premium maintains a similar relationship with salaries, your ability to buy a home has deteriorated drastically. The real estate market has become decoupled from wage growth, and El Gordo, by remaining fixed, has been trapped in the middle of that gap. What was previously enough to buy two apartments today barely covers one, and in many cases forces them to continue getting into debt, although to a lesser extent. The social meaning of Gordo has changed. In the nineties it was synonymous with total economic independence. In 2025, it is still an extraordinary stroke of luck, but its role has shifted, no longer guaranteeing financial freedom, but financial relief. In Xataka | There is something even more difficult than winning the Lottery Jackpot: not making mistakes with the Treasury when collecting it Image | Flickr (srgpicker)

If you bought your house before 2013 and paid off the mortgage with its sale: The Treasury owes you money

If you bought your house before 2013 we have good news for you: now you will be able to recover up to 1,356 euros on your tax return thanks to an important change in the way in which the Treasury recognizes mortgage deductions. If you used the money from the sale of your home to pay what you mortgage pendingthis change in Treasury doctrine can directly affect you. The new resolution of the Central Economic-Administrative Court (TEAC) opens the door for thousands of taxpayers to review their statements from recent years and request returns that they couldn’t ask for before. An opportunity to save on rent. The Central Economic-Administrative Court (TEAC) has dictated a change of doctrine in a resolution in which he has clarified that, if you use part of the money from the sale of your house to pay off the remaining mortgage, you can also deduct that amount on your income tax return. This changes the way the Treasury saw things until now and may mean recover more money on your taxes. Previously, you could only deduct mortgage payments while you lived in the house and owned it. If you sold the home, you lost the deduction from the day of the sale, even if you used part of the money to pay off the mortgage. An example to understand it easily. The TEAC resolution has been based on the binding consultation of a taxpayer from Santa Cruz de Tenerife, so his case can serve as a practical example. This taxpayer sold his home in June 2018 and used 10,202 euros of the amount obtained from the sale to pay off the mortgage. At that time, the Treasury only allowed him to deduct the installments paid until May, the month before the sale of the home, because the cancellation payment for the same, although it is part of the investment in that home, was no longer counted because it was no longer his property. With the new TEAC criteria, this cancellation with the money from the sale can also be deducted and therefore the excess withholding in personal income tax that was not previously recognized can be recovered. This represents a real change for those who have sold their house and paid off their debt with the money from the sale, since their right to the deduction does not disappear the day they sell the house, but remains in force as long as they use that money to pay the cancellation of their mortgage. Conditions to access the deduction. As and as they remember in IberleyIn order to benefit from this deduction, a series of conditions must be met. The first condition is that the home had to be your habitual residence until the moment of selling it. The second condition is to have purchased that home before 2013 and to have applied the personal income tax deduction prior to its sale. The maximum base for calculating the deduction is 9,040 euros per year, and the Treasury allows you to deduct 15% of what you pay for the loan. That leaves a maximum deduction of 1,356 euros per year which, if you had not applied it after the sale of the home, you can now claim if applicable. Review of declarations from 2021. From Idealistic stand out that, although this deduction is only for those who bought before 2013, those taxpayers who have sold their home and canceled the mortgage since 2021 can review their returns to see if the personal income tax deduction was correctly applied, including that final cancellation amount. This means that there may be pending returns for those who did not claim it at the time and meet the requirements in the years between 2021 and 2024, as long as their term has not expired. In Xataka | Just in case Madrid had few problems with housing, now it adds one more: US millionaires investing in the city Image | Wikimedia Commons (Jordiferrer, Ruth Leong)

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.