The Chairman of the Securities Market Commission (CMVM) said today that this entity had no reason to doubt the veracity of TAP’s statement detailing the reasons for Alexandra Reis’ departure.
“The CMVM had no reason to doubt the veracity of a statement made by a listed bond entity,” said Luís Laginha de Sousa, after a question from Chega’s deputy, Filipe Melo, who emphasized the “history of market conformity”. entity”.
It is a statement that TAP sent to the market regulator on February 4, 2022, saying that the former manager had resigned from her position, adding that she had decided to “close this chapter of her professional life” and to take on “new challenges”. “.
After the news that in December of the same year reported the compensation of half a million euros to Alexandra Reis, the airline, in a clarification, referred to the CMVM that the resignation presented by Alexandra Reis “found after a negotiation process initiated by TAP, in that sense that the termination of all existing contractual ties between Alexandra Reis and TAP be reached by agreement”.
“We must not forget that it is an entity with enumerated obligations, which has fulfilled all the obligations associated with these obligations, namely the payment of interest at the scheduled time,” he added.
According to the president of this entity, “from a point of view of protecting the interests of bondholders, the reading that existed in the CMVM was one that did not indicate any concern about the veracity of that statement and what might be the materiality associated with any aspect not reflected therein that could affect the company’s ability to service the debt it owes to bondholders”.
Deputy Filipe Melo, from Chega, asked the person in charge if he “always has a good faith belief” in the information sent by the issuers to the CMVM or if there was “any inoperability” of this entity.
In her opening speech, on the news reporting the departure of Alexandra Reis from TAP, Laginha de Sousa referred to the fact that “the termination of employment must be publicly publicized, as it was, but there would only be a requirement to pay compensation to disclose if the compensation was so high that it could significantly affect the formation of the prices of the bonds issued by the company”.
Laginha de Sousa pointed out that in December, given the news pointing to an exit context different from that in TAP’s February communication, “doubts arose” leading to the request for additional clarifications, with the CMVM the ” correction”. of the statement”.
“[A correção] made it possible to clarify that the termination came from the company and not from the administrator, contrary to what was suggested by reading the first communiqué, without any complaint, claim or even a request for information about the process by the holders of obligations to date,” he added.
Laginha de Sousa also explained that with TAP becoming a publicly traded company again in 2020, there are additional obligations beyond the oversight of that entity, such as the disclosure of an annual corporate governance report, detailing remuneration and benefits paid . to administrators.
In this case, he pointed out, the inspection falls under the responsibility of the Technical Unit Guidance and Supervision of Public Business (UTAM).
Asked by deputy Mariana Mortágua about the 2020 company report, which fails to report the payment of compensation to former executive president Antonoaldo Neves, CMVM’s president said there have already been interactions with UTAM.
A little later, deputy Bernardo Blanco, of the Liberal Initiative, asked Laginha de Sousa if he had preparatory meetings with the PS in February when he was in parliament for a hearing. The president replied that he had not had any meetings and that he even “made it a point” to go and check, believing that “there was such a question.”
“Since I took office I have seen all my notes in my notebook, I have been in contact with the Secretary of State for Finance right at the beginning of my mandate on a subject that has nothing to do with this, and I have spoken to the head twice of the cabinet of the finance minister, but also on perfectly lateral matters,” he said.
CMVM says the company is under no obligation to inform the market about privatization
Speaking to the delegates, the president of the CMVM said that TAP is not required to inform the market about the privatization process because it is a bond issuer and not a publicly traded company.
“In the event that there are obligations, there is no need to provide this information to the market, as it does not interfere with what is relevant” to investors, which is the value of the obligation and the ability to receive the obligation said Luis Laginha de Sousa.
The financial markets regulator responsible answered a question from deputy Bernardo Blanco, of the Liberal Initiative (IL), about TAP’s lack of communication about the privatization process, for which it had been called to advise a US consultant, who works at TAP for nine months, without a contract.
“The intention to proceed with such a process can remain secret within the company,” said the chairman of the CMVM.
Laginha de Sousa also said that “a different situation would arise if the company were listed and if the shares themselves were listed”, implying “a broader and stronger set of obligations in terms of communication to the market.
Already in response to Socialist deputy Fátima Fonseca, the official pointed out that the privatization process should be communicated when there is “a circumstance where it may have a material impact on the value of the liabilities and the ability of the entity to meet to meet its obligations to the bondholders”. “In this context, if it exists, if it exists […] then it needs to be communicated,” he said.
Source: DN
