We plan to increase loan book by Rs 10,000 crore in FY22: Murali Ramakrishnan, MD & CEO, South Indian Bank

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


We thought we could restructure Rs 1,200 crore, but we could only restructure Rs 351 crore. Yes, our provisions were lower for the fourth quarter.

South Indian Bank (SIB) announced a net profit of Rs 6.79 crore in the fourth quarter, against a loss of Rs 143.69 crore in the year-ago period. The asset quality deteriorated, with the GNPA ratio being higher at 6.97%. Murali Ramakrishnan, MD & CEO, speaks to Rajesh Ravi about the performance of the bank and the impact of the pandemic. Excerpts:

SIB reported a profit in Q4 after a loss of Rs 92 crore in Q3. Was it because of lower provisioning ?

At the end of Q3, the gross NPA (including the pro forma) was about 7%. And at the end of the fourth quarter, gross NPA is about 6.9%, as we could make some upgrade. Overall, we were able to reduce the stress book. If you see my guidance at the end of Q2, I had stated that the total stress book would be Rs 2,600 crore. We ended the last quarter with Rs 2,475 crore. But if you look at the composition, NPA, which I thought will be at Rs 1,400 crore ended up at Rs 2,125 crore. We thought we could restructure Rs 1,200 crore, but we could only restructure Rs 351 crore. Yes, our provisions were lower for the fourth quarter.

What is your outlook on slippages this fiscal given that the second wave is seen strong?

It is very difficult to predict . If you look at the yearly average slippage of SIB in the past few years, it is Rs 1,650 crore. Last year, in FY21, the bank had to take an increase of 40% in slippages mainly due to COVID, which on a gross advance of Rs 59,000 crore, led to a slippage ratio of 3.92% for the full year.

I expect that the slippage ratio for FY22 would be 3.3%-3.4%. I think recovery efforts will be also difficult in the coming year. We are looking at this very optimistically, and I believe that we will try to reduce the slippage. As far as guidance, I would say it will be as bad as last fiscal.

Net interest margin declined year-on-year to 2.61%.

There is a huge interest reversal which happened. As soon as the portfolio which we were carrying and accruing income became NPA, we had to reverse it. Even after reversal of interest income, I could maintain the NIM at 2.61% from 2.67%, a year ago. I could do this because of re-pricing and because I could bring down my deposit cost. CASA has improved and my deposit cost has come down. Even though there is a drop in my advances book, still my NII is maintained because of the efficient way I have raised resources. My deposit cost was 9.59% in Q4FY20, and it came down to 8.76% in Q4 of FY21. Cost of funds was 7.97% in the last quarter of FY20 and it came down 7.12% in the last quarter.

What is your outlook regarding advances as it has declined by 9% y-o-y?

The decline has happened due to two things. As a strategy, we wanted to reduce the concentration risk in corporate book. Wherever we have taken very high exposure, we were reducing it. As a result, Rs 100-crore plus corporate exposure has come down to 5% of the total corporate book. As far as new advances are concerned, we should worry about the quality. My strategy is profitability through quality credit. We plan to increase the loan book by Rs 10,000 crore in this fiscal.

Gold loan book has increased 18% y-o-y. How is your slippages in the gold loan portfolio?

We don’t have many slippages in the gold loan portfolio as we were very consciously working with the LTV. In a few cases, we had a high LTV of 95% and we could auction it and we did not lose any money. We have a separate vertical for the product and our endeavour will be to do more retail and agri-gold loan. Currently, our portfolio is more of agri and less of retail. This product is very good and we want to improve the yield. Our yield for retail is 10.5-11 % and agri is 9%. My total gold book is about Rs 9,000 crore out of a total advance book of Rs 59,000 crore.

Get live Stock Prices from BSE, NSE, US Market and latest NAV, portfolio of Mutual Funds, Check out latest IPO News, Best Performing IPOs, calculate your tax by Income Tax Calculator, know market’s Top Gainers, Top Losers & Best Equity Funds. Like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.

Financial Express is now on Telegram. Click here to join our channel and stay updated with the latest Biz news and updates.



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

BBB recommends BoB’s ED Jain for MD & CEO’s position at Indian Bank

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


The Banks Board Bureau (BBB) has recommended the candidature of Shanti Lal Jain for the position of MD & CEO in Indian Bank.

Jain is currently Executive Director in Bank of Baroda.

The Bureau also recommended the candidature of Soma Sankara Prasad, Deputy Managing Director at State Bank of India, as the candidate on the Reserve List for the MD & CEO position in the Chennai-headquartered public sector bank.

The Board of the Bureau interfaced with nine candidates from various public sector banks on May 24, 2021, for the forthcoming vacancy of MD & CEO in Indian Bank, BBB said in a statement.

Padmaja Chunduru, current MD & CEO of Indian Bank, will retire on August 31, 2021.

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Increase in default risk leads to rise in interest rate spread, decline in credit growth

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


An increase in default risk, captured by gross non-performing assets (GNPA) ratio, drives up interest rate spread and reduces real credit growth, according to a bank-level panel data analysis in an Reserve Bank of India (RBI) study.

In other words, if the credit risk increases, commercial banks raise their interest rate spreads to hedge the risk of default which, in turn, raise the cost of borrowing and tighten up lending.

A positive shock to risk premium increases the interest rate spread by 30 basis points and contracts credit and output by 75 and 40 basis points, respectively, according to the study “Risk Premium Shocks and Business Cycle Outcomes in India”.

“It causes a downturn in consumption, investment and price of capital goods, while softens consumer prices…A mix of expansionary fiscal and monetary policy is found to be effective in reducing the risk premium driven contraction in economic activity and expediting the recovery,” said authors Shesadri Banerjee, Jibin Jose and Radheshyam Verma.

The authors observed that the Indian banking sector has been going through troubled times weighed down by the overhang of stressed assets and the subsequent decline in profitability.

“It is observed that stability of the banking sector, measured by Z-score, declined as non-performing assets (NPAs) shot up,” they said.

Furthermore, macro-financial linkages – the standard co-movements between real and financial variables – appeared to have deteriorated during the period of financial stress.

“Given the evidence of high NPAs of banks, we conceive financial shock as a shock to the interest rate spread stemming from the change in the default risk of borrowers. It is termed as the risk premium shock and occupies the central stage in this study,” opined the authors.

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Do not to ignore the probable cost of lower inflation: RBI study

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


When inflation is higher than the threshold level, estimated at 6 per cent for India, reduction in inflation rate leads to a much smaller gain in the long-term growth compared to when inflation is lower and rises towards the threshold level, according to a Reserve Bank of India study.

The Study estimated the trade-off between long run inflation and steady State growth (SSG) rate, whereby the long-term growth would fall by 40 basis points/bps (or 0.4 percentage point) if the initial inflation rate was less than the threshold rate.

However, if the initial inflation rate was higher than the threshold rate, it would result in an increase of long-term growth by 15 bps.

“…Of course, there are arguments in favour of lower inflation rate in terms of its favourable redistribution impact particularly on the poor and the financial stability concerns,” said authors Ravindra H Dholakia, Jai Chander, Ipsita Padhi and Bhanu Pratap.

However, the findings of the present study caution the policy makers not to ignore the probable cost of lower inflation in terms of lower long-term growth of output and employment and hence lower rate of the poverty reduction.

These costs and benefits of fixing a long-term inflation target will have to be considered while making the choice, the authors opined.

The findings of the Development Research Group (DRG) Study show that the threshold inflation and corresponding growth are not unique for a country but depend on the other two parameters – Fiscal Deficit (FD)/GDP and Current Account Deficit (CAD)/GDP.

If a country chooses the target values of FD/GDP and CAD/GDP to be achieved in the long run, its potential output growth gets determined through the corresponding value of threshold inflation.

“If the country then chooses an inflation target that is lower than the threshold level, it cannot achieve its potential output growth and the system would remain in long-run disequilibrium requiring constant policy interventions to stabilize,” the authors said.

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

FlexiLoans.com partners Vivriti Capital to disburse loans worth ₹300-cr to MSMEs

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


Fintech platform FlexiLoans.com has partnered with Vivriti Capital to provide working capital financing of over ₹300 crore to Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) across the country.

MSMEs can apply for loans online and receive in-principal approval within 24-48 hours digitally without manual intervention.

The partnership will be powered by FlexiLoans.com’s technology and credit underwriting platform ‘BiFrost’, which has been integrated with Vivriti’s Co-lending platform ‘CredAvenue’The partnership is aimed at reaching out to more 10,000 MSMEs in the next 12-18 months, the company said in a statement.

Deepak Jain, Co-Founder, FlexiLoans.com said, “FlexiLoans has been scaling its co-lending platform since the IL&FS crisis a couple of years ago to service the wide range of ecosystem and boost assets under management growth. Vivriti has been our long-standing lending partner and its digital-first approach, deep lending expertise syncing perfectly with our co-lending ideology”.

Gaurav Kumar, Co-Founder, Vivriti Capital and CEO CredAvenue said, “The partnership is built on the combination of a deep technology integration via APIs and substantial capital base. We expect to unlock immense market potential and scale with it in the near future. CredAvenue’s co-lending platform has been specifically designed to enable scale-up of such partnerships for Banks, NBFCs and Fintech players vis automated discovery, underwriting, operations and reporting modules on one single portal”.

Since its inception in 2016, Flexiloans.com has disbursed more than ₹1,000 crore to over 30,000 customers across 1,500 cities in India. It receives over 1 lakh applications per month, largely from Tier-II, III and Tier IV cities.

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Zeta raises $250 million in a Series-D funding led by SoftBank

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


Fintech start-up Zeta, a company co-founded by billionaire and serial entrepreneur Bhavin Turakhia, has raised $250 million from SoftBank, while existing investor Sodexo also participated in this round as a minority investor.

The fund raise values Zeta at $1.45 billion, making it the latest to join the coveted unicorn status.

The fund was raised from SoftBank Vision Fund 2, and this is the largest single raise by a banking tech startup globally, said Bhavin Turakhia, Co-founder and CEO, Zeta told media over Zoom call.

In 2019, Fintech start-up Zeta raised a Series C investment of under $60 million from Sodexo at a valuation of $300 million. With this investment, Sodexo will have a minority stake of under 20 per cent in Zeta.

Also Read: Zeta secures Series C investment of nearly $60 million from Sodexo at $300 million valuation

Including Zeta, 14 startups have become a unicorn this year in the country.

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

IDBI Bank has transformed into a retail bank: Samuel Joseph, Dy MD

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


During the four years that IDBI Bank was under prompt corrective action (PCA), it transformed itself from a predominantly corporate bank to a retail bank. And the Bank, which exited PCA on March 10, 2021, would like to keep it that way, according to Samuel Joseph J, Deputy Managing Director. In an interaction with BusinessLine, he emphasised that it had aggressively accelerated provisioning, over and above the regulatory requirement, in the past to strengthen its balance sheet. So, write back to profits in the next two to three years, whenever the recovery from stressed assets happens, will be about ₹7,500 crore. Excerpts:

Now that your bank is free from the shackles of PCA, how does it plan to grow business?

During the period that we were under PCA, we were consolidating our position. We completely revamped our risk management policies, especially concerning corporate credit. So, everything was ready (for growing business) before we exited PCA. But unfortunately, the exit coincided with lockdown and related economic uncertainty. However, we will be able to expand our book in FY22. We propose to grow our corporate loan book by 8-10 per cent and our retail book by 10-12 per cent.

There is an impression that our Bank is a corporate bank. But if you look at our March 2021 numbers, our corporate to the retail ratio in the overall loan book was 38:62. This is a significant shift from where we were three-four years ago when the ratio was 60:40.

Going forward, we would like to keep the corporate book at about 40-45 per cent and the retail book at about 55-60 per cent.

And even on the liabilities side, we have transformed our liabilities franchise, and today our CASA (current account, savings account) is 50.45 per cent of total deposits. Even within term deposits, our reliance on bulk deposits is less than 15 per cent. Three years back, CASA was at about 37 per cent.

So, we have used the PCA period well to completely transform our business mix and strengthen the balance sheet.

How did you strengthen the balance sheet?

The first thing was recognition of non-performing assets (NPAs). We made aggressive provisioning for the NPAs and took the hit upfront on our Profit & Loss (P&L) account. So, today, our provision coverage ratio is at 96.9 per cent. The huge losses in 2019-20 were all because of aggressive accelerated provisioning. This was not required as per the regulatory norms, which give banks a gliding scale (for provisioning). Going by this, 96.9 per cent provisioning is not required at all. But we made accelerated provisioning to absorb the pain upfront. So, though the Gross Non-Performing Assets (NPA) ratio is slightly elevated at 22.37 per cent, the net NPA ratio is only 1.97 per cent as of March-end 2021.

We have not aggressively written off NPAs in the past because of the uncertainty relating to future profitability. But now that we have made five quarters of profit, we are fairly certain. Of course, we will wait for the Covid uncertainty to clear up, promoter change and all that and then we should be able to bring down GNPA by writing off 100 per cent provided for accounts.

How much provision write-back can you get from recoveries?

Our Gross NPAs are at about ₹36,000 crore. Technically written off (TWO) accounts already in our book aggregate to about ₹43,000 crore. So, both put together is about ₹79,000 crore. And this is about 97 per cent provided for….On average, let us say, we recover about 15 per cent. So, on ₹79,000 crore, we will be able to recover about ₹11,850 crore. Now, let us take a more conservative estimate — say, we recover only about ₹10,000 crore. Our net NPAs are only ₹2,500 crore because of aggressive provisioning. So, provision write-back to profits in the next two to three years, whenever the recovery happens, will be about ₹7,500 crore. The future (profit) potential of this aggressive past provisioning will at least be ₹7,000 crore to ₹7,500 crore going forward in the next two to three years.

Our Capital to Risk-weighted Assets Ratio (CRAR) is 15.59 per cent. So, from now on, we will be able to recoup our capital and increase CRAR much further. So, this is what we have done — on the P&L part, we have absorbed the pain upfront, and we have strengthened our balance sheet to recoup our capital through recovery and write-back to profits in the next two to three years.

Did you zero in on the stressed assets you will transfer to the National Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd?

We have identified the stressed assets for the transfer. The criteria for the transfer is that they should have been 100 per cent provided for, not be categorised as fraud, and it should not be very close to a resolution or recovery. Using these filters, we have identified the assets. We have a list of 11 accounts aggregating about ₹12,000 crore to be transferred to NARCL.

The immediate visual impact of this transfer on our balance sheet will be by way of a reduction in our Gross NPA ratio. Out of this ₹12,000 crore, some of the accounts may even be TWO accounts. The impact of TWO accounts is already reflected in our books. So, if out of ₹12,000 crore, Gross NPAs and TWO accounts amount to ₹6,000 crore each, then the GNPA could come down about 3.50 per cent.

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

HSBC CEO says Bitcoin not for us, BFSI News, ET BFSI

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


HSBC has no plans to launch a cryptocurrency trading desk or offer the digital coins as an investment to customers, because they are too volatile and lack transparency, its Chief Executive Noel Quinn told Reuters.

Europe’s biggest bank’s stance on cryptocurrencies comes as the world’s biggest and best-known, Bitcoin, has tumbled nearly 50% from the year’s high, after China cracked down on mining the currency and prominent advocate Elon Musk tempered his support.

HSBC’s stance also contrasts with rival banks such as Goldman Sachs, which Reuters in March reported had restarted its cryptocurrency trading desk.

“Given the volatility we are not into Bitcoin as an asset class, if our clients want to be there then of course they are, but we are not promoting it as an asset class within our wealth management business,” Quinn said.

“For similar reasons we’re not rushing into stablecoins,” he said, referring to the digital currencies that seek to avoid the volatility associated with typical cryptocurrencies by pegging their value to assets such as the U.S. dollar.

Bitcoin traded at $34,464 on Monday, down nearly 50% in just 40 days from its year high of $64,895 on April 14.

Pressure on the currency intensified after the billionaire Tesla Chief Executive and cryptocurrency backer Musk reversed his stance on Tesla accepting Bitcoin as payment.

‘Difficult questions’

China, which is central to HSBC’s growth strategy, said last Tuesday that it had banned financial institutions and payment companies from providing services related to cryptocurrency transactions.

Reuters reported in April that HSBC had banned customers in its online share trading platform from buying shares in bitcoin-backed MicroStrategy, saying in a message to clients that it would not facilitate the buying or exchange of products related to virtual currencies.

Quinn said his sceptical stance on cryptocurrencies partly arose from the difficulty of assessing the transparency of who owns them, as well as problems with their ready convertibility into fiat money.

“I view Bitcoin as more of an asset class than a payments vehicle, with very difficult questions about how to value it on the balance sheet of clients because it is so volatile,” he said.

“Then you get to stablecoins which do have some reserve backing behind them to address the stored value concerns, but it depends on who the sponsoring organisation is plus the structure and accessibility of the reserve.”

The soaring popularity of cryptocurrencies has posed a problem for mainstream banks in recent years, as they try to balance catering to clients’ interest with their own regulatory obligations to understand the source of their customers’ wealth.

HSBC’s stance against offering cryptocurrencies as an asset class marks it out against European rivals such as UBS, which is exploring ways to offering them as an investment product according to media reports earlier this month.



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Inside the race to avert disaster at China’s biggest ‘bad bank’, the Huarong Asset Management Co, BFSI News, ET BFSI

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


It was past 9 p.m. on Financial Street in Beijing by the time the figure inside Huarong Tower there picked up an inkbrush and, with practiced strokes, began to set characters to paper.

Another trying workday was ending for Wang Zhanfeng, corporate chairman, Chinese Communist Party functionary—and, less happily, replacement for a man who very recently had been executed.

On this April night, Wang was spotted unwinding as he often does in his office: practicing the art of Chinese calligraphy, a form that expresses the beauty of classical characters and, it is said, the nature of the person who writes them.

Its mastery requires patience, resolve, skill, calm—and Wang, 54, needs all that and more. Because here on Financial Street, a brisk walk from the hulking headquarters of the People’s Bank of China, a dark drama is playing out behind the mirrored façade of Huarong Tower. How it unfolds will test China’s vast, debt-ridden financial system, the technocrats working to fix it, and the foreign banks and investors caught in the middle.

Welcome to the headquarters of China Huarong Asset Management Co., the troubled state-owned ‘bad bank’ that has set teeth on edge around the financial world.

For months now Wang and others have been trying to clean up the mess here at Huarong, an institution that sits—quite literally—at the center of China’s financial power structure. To the south is the central bank, steward of the world’s second-largest economy; to the southwest, the Ministry of Finance, Huarong’s principal shareholder; less than 300 meters to the west, the China Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission, entrusted with safeguarding the financial system and, of late, ensuring Huarong has a funding backstop from state-owned banks until at least August.

The patch though doesn’t settle the question of how Huarong makes good on some $41 billion borrowed on the bond markets, most incurred under Wang’s predecessor before he was ensnared in a sweeping crackdown on corruption. That long-time executive, Lai Xiaomin, was put to death in January—his formal presence expunged from Huarong right down to the signature on its stock certificates.

The bigger issue is what all this might portend for the nation’s financial system and efforts by China’s leader, Xi Jinping, to centralize control, rein in years of risky borrowing and set the nation’s financial house in order.

“They’re damned if they do and damned if they don’t,” said Michael Pettis, a Beijing-based professor of finance at Peking University and author of Avoiding the Fall: China’s Economic Restructuring. Bailing out Huarong would reinforce the behavior of investors who ignore risk, he said, while a default endangers financial stability if a “chaotic” repricing of the bond market ensues.

Just what is going on inside Huarong Tower? Given the stakes, few are willing to discuss that question publicly. But interviews with people who work there, as well as at various Chinese regulators, provide a glimpse into the eye of this storm.

Huarong, simply put, has been in full crisis mode ever since it delayed its 2020 earnings results, eroding investor confidence. Executives have come to expect to be summoned by government authorities at a moment’s notice whenever market sentiment sours and the price of Huarong debt sinks anew. Wang and his team must provide weekly written updates on Huarong’s operations and liquidity. They have turned to state-owned banks, pleading for support, and reached out to bond traders to try to calm nerves, with little lasting success.

In public statements, Huarong has insisted repeatedly that its position is ultimately sound and that it will honor its obligations. Banking regulators have had to sign off on the wording of those statements—another sign of how serious the situation is considered and, ultimately, who’s in charge.

Then there are regular audiences with the finance ministry and the other powerful financial bureaucracies nearby. Among items usually on the agenda: possible plans to hive off various Huarong businesses.

The bigger issue is what all this might portend for the nation’s financial system and efforts by China’s leader, Xi Jinping, to centralize control, rein in years of risky borrowing and set the nation’s financial house in order.

Huarong executives are often kept waiting and, people familiar with the meetings say, tend to gain only limited access to top officials at the CBIRC, the banking overseer.

The country’s apex financial watchdog—chaired by Liu He, Xi’s right-hand man in overseeing the economy and financial system—has asked for briefings on the Huarong situation and coordinated meetings between regulators, according to regulatory officials. But it has yet to communicate to them a long-term solution, including whether to impose losses on bondholders, the officials said.

Representatives at the People’s Bank of China, the CBIRC, Huarong and the Ministry of Finance didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Focus on Basics

A mid-level party functionary with a PhD in finance from China’s reputed Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, Wang arrived at Huarong Tower in early 2018, just as the corruption scandal was consuming the giant asset management company. He is regarded inside Huarong as low-key and down-to-earth, particularly in comparison to the company’s previous leader, Lai, a man once known as the God of Wealth.

Hundreds of Huarong staff, from Beijing division chiefs to branch employees in faraway outposts, listened in on April 16 as Wang reviewed the quarterly numbers. He stressed that the company’s fundamentals had improved since he took over, a view shared by some analysts though insufficient to pacify investors. But he had little to say about what is on so many minds: plans to restructure and shore up the giant company, which he’d pledged to clean up within three years of taking over.

His main message to the troops: focus on the basics, like collecting on iffy assets and improving risk management. The employees were silent. No one asked a question.

Representatives at the People’s Bank of China, the CBIRC, Huarong and the Ministry of Finance didn’t respond to requests for comment.

One employee characterized the mood in his area as business as usual. Another said co-workers at a Huarong subsidiary were worried the company might not be able to pay their salaries. There’s a widening gulf between the old guard and new, said a third staffer. Those who outlasted Lai and have seen their compensation cut year after year have little confidence in the turnaround, while new joiners are more hopeful about the opportunities the change of direction offers.

Others joke that Huarong Tower must suffer from bad feng shui: after Lai was arrested, a bank that had a branch in the building had to be bailed out to the tune of $14 billion.

Dark humor aside, a rough consensus has begun to emerge among senior management and mid-level regulators: like other key state-owned enterprises, Huarong still appears to be considered too big to fail. Many have come away with the impression—and it is that, an impression—that for now, at least, the Chinese government will stand behind Huarong.

At the very least, these people say, no serious financial tumult, such as a default by Huarong, is likely to be permitted while the Chinese Communist Party is planning a nationwide spectacle to celebrate the 100th anniversary of its founding on July 1. Those festivities will give Xi—who has been positioning to stay in power indefinitely—an opportunity to cement his place among China’s most powerful leaders including Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping.

Huarong is “nowhere near” defaulting, the managing editor of Caixin Media wrote in an opinion piece on Saturday. Neither the Ministry of Finance nor Chinese regulators would allow it, Ling Huawei wrote.

What will come after that patriotic outpouring on July 1 is uncertain, even to many inside Huarong Tower. Liu He, China’s vice premier and chair of the powerful Financial Stability and Development Committee, appears in no hurry to force a difficult solution. Silence from Beijing has started to rattle local debt investors, who until about a week ago had seemed unmoved by the sell-off in Huarong’s offshore bonds.

Competing Interests

Huarong’s role in absorbing and disposing of lenders’ soured debt is worth preserving to support the banking sector cleanup, but requires government intervention, according to Dinny McMahon, an economic analyst for Beijing-based consultancy Trivium China and author of China’s Great Wall of Debt.

“We anticipate that foreign bondholders will be required to take a haircut, but it will be relatively small,” he said. “It will be designed to signal that investors should not assume government backing translates into carte blanche support.”

For now, in the absence of direct orders from the top, Huarong has been caught in the middle of the competing interests among various state-owned enterprises and government bureaucracies.

China Investment Corp., the $1 trillion sovereign fund, for instance, has turned down the idea of taking a controlling stake from the finance ministry. CIC officials have argued they don’t have the bandwidth or capability to fix Huarong’s problems, according to people familiar with the matter.

The People’s Bank of China, meantime, is still trying to decide whether to proceed with a proposal that would see it assume more than 100 billion yuan ($15.5 billion) of bad assets from Huarong, those people said.

And the Ministry of Finance, which owns 57% of Huarong on behalf of the Chinese government, hasn’t committed to recapitalizing the company, though it hasn’t ruled it out, either, one person said.

CIC didn’t respond to requests for comment.

The banking regulator has bought Huarong some time, brokering an agreement with state-owned lenders including Industrial & Commercial Bank of China Ltd. that would cover any funding needed to repay the equivalent of $2.5 billion coming due by the end of August. By then, the company aims to have completed its 2020 financial statements after spooking investors by missing deadlines in March and April.

“How China deals with Huarong will have wide ramifications on global investors’ perception of and confidence in Chinese SOEs,” said Wu Qiong, a Hong Kong-based executive director at BOC International Holdings. “Should any defaults trigger a reassessment of the level of government support assumed in rating SOE credits, it would have deep repercussions for the offshore market.”

The announcement of a new addition to Wang’s team underscores the stakes and, to some insiders, provides a measure of hope. Liang Qiang is a standing member of the All-China Financial Youth Federation, widely seen as a pipeline to groom future leaders for financial SOEs. Liang, who arrived at Huarong last week and will soon take on the role of president, has worked for the three other big state asset managers that were established, like Huarong, to help clean up bad debts at the nation’s banks. Some speculate this points to a wider plan: that Huarong might be used as a blueprint for how authorities approach these other sprawling, debt-ridden institutions.

Meantime, inside Huarong Tower, a key item remains fixed in the busy schedules of top executives and rank-and-file employees alike. It is a monthly meeting, the topic of which is considered vital to Huarong’s rebirth: studying the doctrines of the Chinese Communist Party and speeches of President Xi Jinping.

(Updates to mention Caixin managing editor’s opinion piece on the matter. )



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Banks file application in NCLAT on DHFL

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


The Administrator and lenders to troubled Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Ltd (DHFL) have filed two applications in the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT).

These have been filed challenging the National Company Law Tribunal order which directed DHFL’s Committee of Creditors to consider the offer made by its former promoter Kapil Wadhawan within the next 10 days.

Sources said that there are concerns that such a move will derail the resolution process of DHFL and could also set a bad precedent.

In his second settlement offer, Wadhawan had offered ₹91,158 crore, which is over ₹50,000 crore more than the ₹34,250 crore being offered by Piramal Enterprises Ltd.

The CoC, led by Union Bank of India, in its application has asked that the May 19 order of the NCLT should be set aside. Further the NCLT should also clear the resolution plan for DHFL.

DHFL Administrator R Subramaniakumar filed his application challenging the NCLT order on May 23.

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

1 333 334 335 336 337 540