IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cgd/wpaper/750.html

Comparability of Treatment: Where Do We Stand?

Author

Listed:
  • Andrew Powell

    (Center for Global Development
    Williams College)

Abstract

Inter-creditor issues have been blamed for protracted debt restructurings. A strict Comparability of Treatment (CoT) rule between all creditor groups has been suggested as a solution. This paper argues that the problem might be with the concept of CoT itself, and a strict CoT rule could actually make matters worse! Given diverse creditor preferences evidenced by a wide variety of debt contracts, an auction mechanism that elicits information and harnesses them to find an efficient allocation of new debt instruments would be more efficient than a simple CoT type rule. In addition, a strict CoT rule could have impacts on ex-ante debt structures, favoring costly debt dilution. Discussions on the enforcement of CoT would be better focused on how to avoid cementing the incentives for dilution into the foundations of the international financial architecture.

Suggested Citation

  • Andrew Powell, 2026. "Comparability of Treatment: Where Do We Stand?," Working Papers 750, Center for Global Development.
    • Handle: RePEc:cgd:wpaper:750
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cgdev.org/publication/comparability-treatment-where-do-we-stand?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cgd:wpaper:750. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Publications Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cgdevus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.