Friday, April 15, 2016

Bleeding Banks


Things (Banks) are falling apart, centre cannot hold. The December,15 quarter banks’ results are out and picture has turned gloomy. Public Sector Banks are generally in red, a bold red. Bank of Baroda (3342 cr), Bank of India (1506 cr), UCO Bank (1497 cr),  Indian Overseas bank (1425 cr), Punjab National Bank (857 cr pre tax loss), Central Bank of India (837 cr), Dena Bank (663 cr),  Oriental Bank of Commerce (425 cr), Allahabad Bank (486 cr), , Corporation Bank (383 cr), Syndicate Bank (120 cr)- all December, 15 quarter  loses. State Bank of India's profits fell 62% to Rs 1115 cr. Banks which were in profit a quarter before, have started bleeding.
As per Bloomberg data, the market capitalization of  all 20 nationalized banks is less than Kotak Mahendra Bank. Whereas, market cap of 20 nationalized banks  plus SBI is approximately equal to the market cap of HDFC Bank. What can be eked out whether state owned banks do not have the caliber or the zeal or the will to run the banks.
It is not that position has deteriorated suddenly. In the competitive world, the real picture remains hidden from all the stake holders: depositors, investors and the regulator. United Bank of India, in 2014, boldly tried to be transparent and it’s the then CMD had to lose her job. Now when other PSU banks are finding it difficult to show faces, United Bank is giggling with profits of Rs 17 crore in its coffers.
Of course, the slowdown is world over and banking stocks are getting a beat but not up to the level being witnessed recently with PSU Banks in India. The reasons may be varied. Reserve Bank has advised banks to clean up their balance sheets by March, 2017 and to proceed in this direction, RBI has embarked upon Asset Quality Review of the banks. Till now, the units which were not performing well due to slow down in the economy and/or other factors, their accounts were still being managed, sometimes not with the hope that they will turn around but to save them being declared non-performing. Once declared NPA, bank ceases to earn income over the account but also have to make higher provisions.  The balance sheets of banks, by and large, did not project the true picture. Now Reserve Bank says before we switch over to BASEL III, banks balance sheet is required to be clean and fully provisioned.
RBI Governor Raghuram Rajan,while explaining at the CII Conference as to why the pain in banking sector now is good, said, “For the loans that are of concern, the banks are attempting to regularize the loans that can be put back on track, and are classifying those that cannot for deeper surgery - and taking provisions in according with the degree of stress in the loans. They will also make provisions for loans that have weaknesses. Our intent is to have clean and fully provisioned bank balance sheets by March 2017”.

Recovery efforts under the DRT and SARFAESI proving to be ineffective, RBI in recent past released guidelines for  additional steps  to address the issues of NPAs;-
1.     Early Recognition of Financial Distress, Prompt Steps for Resolution and Fair Recovery for Lenders: Framework for Revitalising Distress Assets in the Economy.
2.     Creation of a Central Repository of Information on Large Credits (CRILC).
3.     Formation of Joint Lenders' Forum (JLF), Corrective Action Plan (CAP), and sale of assets.
4.     Flexible Structuring of long Term Project Loans to Infrastructure and Core Industries.
5.     Willful Default/ Non-Cooperative Borrowers: to practically close the windows for credit facilities from financial institutions to this class of borrowers.
6.     Strategic Debt Restructuring:  to bring change in the management in case of operational / managerial inefficiency of existing promoters.
7.     Government is also coming up with the amended Bankruptcy Law.

All said and done, the mute question is why the private banks are comfortable, though feeling heat of the surroundings, but the state owned banks are bleeding. Whether time has come to assimilate the age old adage that "government is to govern and not to do business". P. J. Nayak Committee, to Review Governance of Boards of Banks in India, suggested;-
1.     Scrapping and removal of Bank Nationalization Acts, SBI Act and SBI (Subsidiary Banks) - because these acts require government to keep its shareholding above 50%.
2.     Government should transfer its shares of PSBs to Bank Investment Company (BIC), with functional autonomy.
3.     Conversion of PSBs into companies as per Companies Act.
4.     Appointment of CEOs, Directors and top executives of PSBs would be the responsibility of the Bank Boards Bureau.
The government has accepted almost all major recommendations of the Committee except bringing down government stake below 51%. Seeing the present scenario of the health of public sector banks, government may review its decision and accept the recommendations of P.J.Nayak Committee in toto.
However, we should also understand that present position of banks is due to higher provisioning on account of likely loses. If the loses do not materialise, banks will write back provisions to profits. As such, after the balance sheets of banks are cleaned and fully provisioned, we may expect PSU banks on winning edge once the economy starts turning around. Whatever recovery and sale proceeds of securities of these non performing assets are received, these will straight away go into the profits of these banks. With private universal banks, small banks and payment banks in the fray, PSU banks should be there to keep balance in the mixed Indian economy. Of course, PSU banks will learn from their past mistakes and improve upon. With healthy  competition, a sound financial system will emerge and India will stand on firm footing.
Tilak Gulati,  Assistant General Manager, UCO Bank. 
Email:    itstrgulati@gmail.com
Twitter: @tilakgulati


Gyan Sangam- in Retrospect

Two day 'Gyan Sangam – A Retreat for Banks’ at SBI academy 'Gurukul', Gurgaon is over. Finance Minister Mr Arun Jaitley has hinted that government is going to set up an expert group to look into consolidation of public sector banks, as the country needs stronger banks rather than large number of banks.   Ramnath Pradeep, former chairman of Corporation Bank has suggested, “SBI, BoI and BoB should be merged to be among the largest banks in the world. The second step is merger of Canara Bank, Indian Bank, BoM, IOB and UBI to form the second largest bank. PNB, Vijaya Bank, Andhra Bank and IDBI can be merged to form the third largest. Allahabad Bank, Central Bank, Corporation Bank and P&S Bank should be the fourth largest. OBC, Syndicate Bank, UCO Bank and Dena Bank can become the fifth".

PSBs have since long adopted the concept of specialised branches to cater to the needs of large corporate borrowers and  mid corporate/SME sector. Ramnath Pradeep's suggestions are in this direction for the post consolidation era.  The expert committee on public sector banks consolidation should ponder over the innovative structure of banks. Having 20, or in its place, five nationalised banks will not serve the purpose if they do the same type of business, selling similar products and competing among themselves.

Let there be specialised banks: large banks for projects and infrastructure financing and having overseas presence; small and medium enterprise (SME) banks to meet the needs of the SME sector, thus aiding Make in India; retail banks that concentrate on the retail and priority sectors, tax collection and miscellaneous functions such as financial inclusion and subsidy distribution. Let the consolidation be based on the core strength of banks, existing and proposed, and their jurisdiction clearly demarcated.

As per RBI data, major portion of NPAs are from big corporates rather than the priority sector or retail advances. When banks  already have the specialised branches, then why the corporate loans are defaulting. Reasons may be varied, but banks have diluted the demarcated areas allowing small loans in large corporate branches and corporate loans in small branches, just not to let any business go away. Government should learn from past mistakes of banks and remain strict in the areas of operations.

The capital requirement of these banks should be stipulated. As the large banks would be competing with those around the world, their capital requirement should be according to Basel norms. SME banks would mainly work within India, so their capital requirement could be less than that of the large banks. Retail banks' capital requirement would be the least, as their operations would be local, and they would have government guarantee.

The government has promised to infuse fresh capital of Rs 25,000 crore into public sector banks this year (Rs 70,000 crore by 2019). Instead of giving this capital proportionately, let it be bifurcated into developmental capital and survival capital. The bigger chunk should be allotted as developmental capital and given to large banks and SME banks. Retail banks should be given only survival capital. This way the government would not have to shell out a large amount of funds and yet the social responsibility of public sector banks would be met.

To tide over the NPA problem, suggestions from different corners have emerged.   One is the creation of an India Revival Fund in line with the US Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) of 2008 under which US government, says Sunil Kanoria, vice-chairman, Srei Infrastructure Finance Limited, "bought stressed assets of US$426.4 billion, which helped financial sector to recover quickly. In 2014, TARP sold all its investment for $441.7 billion, thereby ending the programme without making any loss". On the similar lines in India, there are talks of forming a bad bank that will take over the non-performing assets of banks. For that, the government has to provide Rs 4 lakh crore, the estimated amount of NPAs as on March 31. This figure will rise till March 2017, the last date for cleaning up the balance sheets of banks. Making arrangements for such a proposition does not seem realistic.

The other suggestion is to permit standstill period of five years under Strategic Debt Restructuring (SDR). Reserve Bank has observed that in many cases of restructuring of accounts, borrower companies are not able to come out of stress due to operational/managerial inefficiencies despite substantial sacrifices made by the lending banks. In such cases, change of ownership is the preferred option. With a view to provide banks with enhanced capabilities to initiate change of ownership in accounts which fail to achieve the projected viability milestones, banks have been provided a new tool of ‘Strategic Debt Restructuring (SDR)’. Under SDR, lending banks convert debt into equity to become major shareholders in the borrower entity, then search for new promoters and divest the entire equity to new promoters. This entire process is required to be completed within a period of eighteen months. However, certain section of people wants this period to increase to five years.

 Banks are incurring losses due to higher provisioning on sick advances. This time they have somehow got by, as they have operating profits and margins on capital funds to fall back on. In the next quarter, operating profits would drop on account of increase in NPAs, causing some banks to register operating losses. The burden of entire provisions will then be upon capital funds. With the squeezing of capital, the scope of further lending will be reduced. Even if the government provides capital, that will get absorbed in provisions. The only alternative left is recovery, that too at the earliest, to keep funds rotating and the business of banks growing. The accounts identified under SDR are deadwood; giving them a five-year standstill period will lead to the death of banks.



The survival of public sector banks (PSB) depends on increasing income and reducing cost. In the present situation of an economic downturn, avenues for income enhancement are limited. The best way to reduce cost is through the merger of PSBs. The exorbitant establishment costs of similar products of one owner, the government, are not judicious. If this experiment does not work, then the age old adage should be allowed to have its way, “government should govern and not to do business” and the government should come out of financial services sector.

(The views expressed in the article are merely for academic purpose and are not subscribed by the organisation where the author is working)



Tilak Gulati, Assistant General Manager, UCO Bank
Author:  www.itstrgulati.blogspot.in
Resume: https://in.linkedin.com/in/tilakgulati
Email:    itstrgulati@gmail.com