There is action in property fractions

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


Fractional property ownership is an idea that is seeing increasing traction in the last few years. One route is listed Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) that allow retail investors to purchase shares in a larger property such as office building. Besides, there are platforms that facilitate private REITs. In just the last five years, ₹750 crore has been transacted through these fractional ownership companies, with ₹350 crore worth of deals in just the last year, as per JLL India.

Owning a fraction and getting rental income and potential capital appreciation has many merits. You get geographic and property diversity, minimizing risk. Property selection and management is done by professionals – reducing hassle. You can earn 8-10 per cent rental yields and only invest a smaller amount than in purchase. Also, the concept has worked well globally and can be a game changer in India too. That said, do understand how it works and critically evaluate various risks.

How fractional property ownership works

The investment platform service provider starts out by finding a pool of investors as well as suitable properties for investment. Some examples of providers include PropertyShare, RealX, Strata and hBits. Property developers also offer this service, with or without a technology platform.

A special purpose vehicle (SPV) is formed (typically for each property) that becomes the property owner with the investments received. Investors own shares or compulsory convertible debenture (CCD) in the SPV. The property is managed by the service provider on behalf of the SPV. The property is managed by the SPV and rental income received is distributed to investors – as interest on CCDs or dividend on shares. After the holding period (typically 5 years), the property is sold, and money returned to investors. You may also sell holdings in the SPV to other investors.

There are different types of costs for the services. Annual fees, for property maintenance may be about 1-2 per cent of investment amount or 8-15 percent of rents collected. When the property is sold, the platform may take a share – about 20 per cent of the gains. In some cases, this is only charged if the profits are above a certain limit. There may also be transaction fees – in buying and selling – and property tax, actual maintenance costs and other overheads.

Providers may also have a minimum investment size. Strata and hBits require ₹25 lakh to get you started. The amount may be smaller for others or based on the cost of the property being invested in (to limit the number of investors).

You are liable for taxes on interest income and dividend. The income is subject to tax deducted at source (TDS). The capital gains on sale is taxed at a rate based on the holding period (long-term or short-term). There is also GST on the rent, paid by the tenant.

Risks in fractional real estate investing

One key risk that is often overlooked is the fact that these entities do not yet fall neatly into a specific regulation. While the legal structures are valid and meet the required law, the concept of private REITs and fractional ownership is not yet directly regulated. Hence, even as you may be provided a property title report and get periodic disclosures, there are no distinct standards for it – making it difficult to compare or enforce.

Two, as the underlying asset is real estate, the issue of illiquidity cannot be eliminated. Also, you may not find a buyer for your shares if you want to exit during the holding period. As the concept is new, the potential issues that may arise when the property is sold are not yet known. You may have to hence account for delays in selling large commercial property in your analysis.

Three, as the segment is new, there may also be provider related issues. For one, smaller players may fold, leaving investors in a lurch. They may also not be experienced in selecting the best property – without legal issues, giving the best rent and occupancy. Or they may lack the ability to maintain it well, resulting in tenants leaving or higher repair costs as well as lower resale value. There may also be conflict of interest, related party transactions and such governance issues that may be difficult to unearth.

Four, there are no guarantees on returns. While the calculations may show a certain level of occupancy and rent, market situations in that location may change and what you may get may be much lower. So, you should do your homework to understand the nature of the asset – warehouse, office building – and the market demand as well as assess if the purchase price is right.

What to check

Before you take a plunge, be sure to ask about the due diligence done on the asset, selection criteria and the platform’s investment experience. You must get clarity on the lock-in period, exit options as well as the nuances in taxation.

If you want liquidity, find out the restrictions in the SPV structure on share transfers and an assessment of market demand for the shares. It also helps to get a handle on potential legal liabilities – from tenants and others.

On expenses, work out the actual return after fees and other costs.

On income side, calculate potential revenue based on market demand, rent escalation possibilities, lock in period and quality of tenant. Factor in vacancy risks, especially as office space demand and rents in some segments have taken a hit with the pandemic.

The author is an independent financial consultant

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Sundaram Finance raises ₹200 cr in third tranche of High Yield Secured Real Estate Fund

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


Buoyed by the earlier performance, Sundaram Finance has raised ₹200 crore in the third tranche of its High Yield Secured Real Estate Fund within a month of its launch and targets mopping up ₹700 crore in coming days.

The fund will seek to use its focused and robust credit policy to create risk-adjusted returns and periodically distribute cash to reduce risks and provide a current income model for its investors.

Risk mitigation strategies

Karthik Athreya, Head of Strategy, Alternate Credit, said the funds have significant risk mitigation strategies that are differentiated in the market in terms of underwriting methods and diligence focus.

Sundaram Finance Holdings: Why you should accumulate this oft-ignored small-cap stock

The real estate space is exhibiting growth — sales numbers reaching pre-Covid levels, prices remain in line in the company’s key markets and supply is managed. The growth is aided by the low interest rates offered by banks, attractive pricing, and incentives offered by developers, he said.

ESG compliance

Harsha Viji, Executive Vice-Chairman, Sundaram Finance, added, “Our focus across various investment strategies, going forward, is to also transition our portfolio into ESG compliance over the next few years, reflecting the strong vision of Sundaram Group as a responsible corporate citizen.”

Sundaram Finance eyes ‘decent’ growth in FY22 amid limited stress

The third series of AIF Cat II funds will invest in senior secured credit of real estate developers based out of South India. Fund III follows the better performance of the earlier two similar funds that raised over ₹840 crore and built a diversified asset book of 18 investments to date that are generating 18-20 per cent gross IRRs.

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

RBI imposes Rs 30 lakh penalty on Janata Sahakari Bank, Pune, BFSI News, ET BFSI

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


The RBI on Monday said a penalty of Rs 30 lakh has been imposed on Janata Sahakari Bank Ltd, Pune for non-compliance with certain directions. The penalty, the RBI said, has been imposed for non-compliance with specific directions issued by RBI under the Supervisory Action Framework (SAF) and RBI directions on ‘Frauds in UCBs: Changes in Monitoring and Reporting mechanism’.

The statutory inspection of the bank with reference to its financial position as on March 31, 2019, the Inspection Report pertaining thereto, and examination of all related correspondence revealed that the bank had not complied with the directions on exposure to sensitive sectors (real estate) and classification and reporting of frauds, the RBI said.

The RBI, however, added the penalty is based on deficiency in regulatory compliance and is not intended to pronounce upon the validity of any transaction or agreement entered into by the bank with its customers

Follow and connect with us on , Facebook, Linkedin



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Infrastructure NBFCs: On stable footing amidst a crisis

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


Summing up, the future of NBFC-IFCs is promising despite concerns.

By Manushree Saggar & Deep Singh

Infrastructure finance non-bank companies (NBFC-IFCs) have remained largely resilient to the Covid-19 crisis. While growth of NBFC-IFCs moderated over the last two years, the asset quality indicators have improved and, with a higher provision coverage (64% as of March 31, 2021, the strongest level since March 2016), their solvency too has improved. Moderate growth and healthy internal accruals have led to a decline in leverage, giving the entities further headroom for growth in the medium term. Improved systemic liquidity and consequent softening of cost of borrowings has also supported the earnings profile. Thus, the outlook for the sector is ‘Stable’ despite a challenging operating environment.

With infra credit penetration to GDP estimated at 10.9% as of March 31, 2021 compared to 12.4% in 2015 and 10-year average of ~11.4%, the growth potential is encouraging. This growth will be well supported by the government of India’s investment target of Rs 111 lakh crore under the National Infrastructure Pipeline (NIP) till 2025. A stronger NBFC-IFC balance sheet therefore will enable them to be a partner in this evolving growth story. At the same time, timely resolution of existing stressed assets would be critical for sustained improvement in the credit profile of these entities.

As for recent trends for NBFC-IFCs, their portfolio growth was flat in Q1FY2022, after improving in H2FY2021. In FY2021, while IFCs reported healthy credit growth of 16%, banks reported just 4% growth; the former were also helped by the Centre’s liquidity package for discoms, besides continued growth in IRFCs assets under management. Consequently, IFCs’ share in total infrastructure credit increased to 54% as of March 31, 2021 (from 39% five years ago) vis-a vis banks’ share of 46%.

Going forward, as resolution/recoveries gather pace, the improvement in asset quality indicators is expected to continue. The reported stage 3% for these entities declined to 4.1% as of March 31, 2021 (peak level of 7.3% on March 31, 2018) and remained stable at the end of Q1FY22. However, stage 2%, which is driven by state sector customers, was volatile and at elevated levels even as incremental slippages were controlled. As of March 31, 2021, the proportion of IFC portfolio restructuring was less than 1%; and the impact of the second wave has been negligible. This, coupled with further resolution of pending stressed assets in the near term, could lead to a further improvement in IFCs’ asset quality indicators.

In terms of portfolio vulnerability, solar and wind projects backed by relatively weaker credit promoter group and higher exposure to state discoms with extended receivable cycles, remain a monitorable. Also, NBFC-IFCs continue to face high concentration risks, thereby making them prone to lumpy slippages.

The ALM profile of IFCs, which was characterised by sizeable cumulative negative mismatches in the up to one-year buckets, improved in recent quarters, with long-term funds replacing short-term borrowings, supported by favourable systemic rates and higher on-balance sheet liquidity. However, the trend may not continue over the longer term. Hence, the liquidity profile of these entities is expected to remain dependent on their refinancing ability. Significantly, most IFCs maintain adequate sanctioned but undrawn bank lines to plug the ALM mismatches and enjoy healthy financial flexibility given their strong parentage.

With favourable borrowing cost trajectory and steady decline in non-performing loans, Public-IFCs achieved better RoA of 1.8% in FY2021 (six-year average 1.7%); however, the profitability of Private-IFCs remains considerably lower with a sub-par RoA of 1.19% (five-year average 1.21%).

Summing up, the future of NBFC-IFCs is promising despite concerns.

Manushree Saggar is Vice President & Sector Head and Deep Singh is Vice President, ICRA

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

World Bank’s IFC extends over Rs 550 crore debt support to IndoSpace logistics fund, BFSI News, ET BFSI

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


The World Bank Group member IFC has extended $75 million or over Rs 557 crore debt support to Industrial real estate and logistics parks’ developer IndoSpace’s logistics fund to develop logistics and industrial parks with an objective to enhance warehousing and supply chain infrastructure in India.

The development financial institution is extending the loan to IndoSpace Logistics Parks III LP, a $580-million vintage fund, and the first tranche of this amount has already been disbursed to IndoSpace.

The $580 million fund, post leverage is expected to create a corpus of over $1.2 billion to develop and acquire industrial and logistics-related real estate investments in the country.

IFC’s investment is expected to help IndoSpace expand and lease to e-commerce players and online retailers in the country to meet their growing demand for warehouses.

“IFC’s long-term finance in a challenging credit environment will enable us to continue our business plan and be market-ready as the economy recovers and the demand picks up in the near future. The timely investment will contribute toward developing a reliable and efficient logistics ecosystem in India, facilitating domestic and foreign trade while supporting local manufacturing,” said Rajesh Jaggi, Vice Chairman – Real Estate, Everstone Group.

IndoSpace is a joint venture between the Everstone Group, an India and Southeast Asia-focused private equity and real estate investor, GLP and Realterm, a US-based global industrial real estate group.

“In keeping with IFC’s priorities in India, the project will help accelerate a green post-Covid recovery by supporting a strong business infrastructure, which is critical to attract investment and boost the country’s industrial capacity,” said Rana Karadsheh, Regional Industry Director for Manufacturing, Agribusiness and Services, Asia Pacific at IFC.

According to her, while businesses look at recouping growth, they will have ready access to industrial and warehousing facilities, minimizing challenges to establishing or expanding their operations in India. This will help contribute to the resilience of real sector markets, helping the country overcome disruptions posed by the global pandemic.

The first investment from this loan facility will help IndoSpace build a warehouse in Luhari III, a site near with connectivity into Gurgaon, Delhi, and other key areas in the North.

In late 2020, IndoSpace partnered with KoolEx, a leading pharma cold chain logistics service provider, to build three temperature-controlled pharmaceutical distribution centers across India. The first one, near Mumbai, will be India’s largest stand-alone temperature-controlled warehousing facility.

With pandemic-related lockdowns creating pressure on traditional supply chains and prompting consumers to shift to online purchasing, IFC’s support will help strengthen warehousing facilities to accommodate the increasing demand for essentials, including pharmaceuticals and fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG).

Moreover, as India emerges from the pandemic-led crisis, the financing will help accelerate construction and development of parks, preserving thousands of jobs.

Logistics costs in India are estimated to be high at around 13% t0 14% of gross domestic product (GDP), compared with around 9% to 10% in the US and Europe. While warehousing is a fundamental part of logistics and supply chains, it is significantly undersupplied in the country. Further, the sector is largely fragmented with unorganized players accounting for nearly 90% of the market.

Against this backdrop, several estimates show that around $13 billion funding is required for the development of new warehousing capacity in India over the next decade. Given the market opportunity, a robust warehousing and logistics infrastructure that meets global standards, can help attract investment in the country and enable more commerce in the region, driving competitiveness.



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

How green rulings can put you in the red

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


Receiving environmental clearance (EC) for a residential project is often seen as a routine formality. But recent judgements by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) have hung a huge question mark over this assumption. The Tribunal had, in the last nearly 18 months, revoked ECs granted, imposed hefty penalties and even ordered the demolition of construction completely.

Hence, it is high time for home buyers to understand why EC has come under the spotlight, so that you can potentially weigh and mitigate such risks in your purchases.

Key rulings

While there are a few interesting rulings, the recent high profile one is that of Godrej Reflections, a high-rise residential project in Varthur, Bengaluru. The project had received EC on January 10, 2018 and was registered with RERA in March 2018. Bookings were opened to home buyers after that. But based on a petition filed, challenging the EC, the NGT cancelled the clearance in February 2020 – stating that there was construction in the buffer zone of a lake, which would be in violation of zoning plan.

The ruling was challenged in the Supreme Court and in August 2020, it was ruled that the NGT would reconsider the decision, but that no construction shall happen until the issue is resolved. Based on additional inspection reports submitted to the NGT, it ruled in July 2021 that the project was in violation. The constructions made on the site was ordered to be demolished and the habitat restored. Besides fine for the builder, it also imposed a fine of ₹10 lakh on Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (BBMP) for illegally allowing alterations of the storm water drain passing through the project site.

The order also noted that construction had commenced even before grant of consent to establish (CTE) by Karnataka State Pollution Control Board (KSPCB) and in violation of conditions of EC. It added that the committee which made inspections and submitted the report was not the one constituted by it and the Environment Ministry.

Buyers beware

Why are the facts of this case important? The import of the judgement, particularly as it involves a reputed builder, can be huge for those who purchase under-construction homes.

For one, while issues with violating green norms are not new, the impact has lately been tougher on the buyers. While this is a welcome move – as compliance is better enforced -, it is a big shift from the past where the rulings often only required payment of a fine by the builder. For example, in the case of Sushant Lok project in Gurugram, the builder was asked to pay a fine for flouting various norms. Likewise, Goel Ganga Developers based in Pune was asked to pay a fine of INR 195 crores in 2018 for multiple issues. Now, given that more is at stake, buyers can avoid projects in environmentally sensitive zones, advises Vijay Kumar, Advocate, who specializes in RERA related cases.

Two, this is the not an isolated case of EC being revoked by the NGT. In January 2020, the NGT had stopped work on a project by Young Builders in Delhi. This was based on questions raised on the validity of the EC – that it could only be granted by the Ministry of Environment and Forests and not by SEIAA – as the project is within 10 km from a Critically Polluted Area. Likewise, Falcon View, a residential project in Mohali, was asked to stop construction by the NGT as the EC it had obtained for a mixed-use development did not cover the housing project.

Given the repeated history of EC being inadequate, buyers must inspect this aspect closely – get advice from environmental lawyers to ensure the validity of the clearance and any possibilities of it being challenged. “Check land usage restrictions and land conversion approvals. Be sure to also inspect the city master plan to understand the nature of projects approved in that land/area”, advises Vijay Kumar.

Three, the process seems to be a roller-coaster ride with long delays. For example, in both the Delhi and Bengaluru cases, the builder challenged the order in the apex court, which set aside the order and required the NGT to consider reports from a new committee. However, the NGT had, after some delay in getting the report, stood by its decision to revoke the EC. In the case of Godrej Reflections, the first NGT order was made nearly two years from the start of customer bookings and the second order was after more than 3 years. If you do book early, make sure you check the clauses in the agreement that relate to exiting and be open to exercise it if there are early roadblocks such as lawsuits filed.

Four, despite the comfort provided by RERA, there is no assurance of completion for a project. And prerequisites for getting RERA, including the EC, may be revoked, adding to the risk. The implication is that RERA must not be seen as a guarantee and the truly safe option is to buy completed projects – preferably those with Occupancy Certificates. The OC is proof that the project meets the applicable building codes, regulations and laws, thereby avoiding completion and various legal risks.

The author is an independent financial consultant

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Anarock, BFSI News, ET BFSI

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


NEW DELHI: Banks and other financial institutions have an exposure of $100 billion to real estate sector, of which 67 per cent are safe while the remaining loans are under pressure or severely stressed, according to real estate consultant Anarock.

“At least 67 per cent (or approximately $67 billion) of the total loan advances ($100 billion) to Indian real estate by banks, NBFCs and HFCs is currently completely stress-free,” Anarock Capital, a subsidiary of Anarock, said in a statement on Monday.

Another 15 per cent (about $15 billion) is under some pressure but has scope for resolution with certainty on at least the principal amount.

“$18 billion (or 18 per cent) of the overall lending to Indian real estate is under ‘severe’ stress, implying that there has been high leveraging by the concerned developers who have either limited or extremely poor visibility of debt servicing due to multiple factors,” the statement said.

Anarock Capital said the overall contribution of non-banking financial companies (NBFCs) and housing finance companies (HFCs), including trusteeships, towards the total lending to Indian real estate is at 63 per cent.

Individually, banks have a share of 37 per cent, followed by HFCs at around 34 per cent, and NBFCs 16 per cent.

Around 13 per cent loans have been given under trusteeships.

According to Anarock Capital, banks and HFCs are much better placed with 75 per cent and 66 per cent of their lending book in a comfortable position.

“Not surprisingly, nearly 46 per cent of the total NBFC lending is on the watchlist,” the statement said.

About 75 per cent of the total lending to Grade A developers is safe.

“This presents a comfortable outlook because out of the total loans given to real estate, more than USD 73 billion is given to Grade A builders,” the statement said.



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Exposure of banks, financial institutions to real estate at $100 billion; 67% loans safe, says Anarock

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


Banks and other financial institutions have an exposure of $100 billion to real estate sector, of which 67 per cent are safe while the remaining loans are under pressure or severely stressed, according to real estate consultant Anarock.

“At least 67 per cent (or approximately $67 billion) of the total loan advances ($100 billion) to Indian real estate by banks, NBFCs and HFCs is currently completely stress-free,” Anarock Capital, a subsidiary of Anarock, said in a statement on Monday.

Another 15 per cent (about $15 billion) is under some pressure but has scope for resolution with certainty on at least the principal amount.

“$18 billion (or 18 per cent) of the overall lending to Indian real estate is under ‘severe’ stress, implying that there has been high leveraging by the concerned developers who have either limited or extremely poor visibility of debt servicing due to multiple factors,” the statement said.

Contribution of NBFCs and HFCs

Anarock Capital said the overall contribution of non-banking financial companies (NBFCs) and housing finance companies (HFCs), including trusteeships, towards the total lending to Indian real estate is at 63 per cent.

Individually, banks have a share of 37 per cent, followed by HFCs at around 34 per cent, and NBFCs 16 per cent. Around 13 per cent loans have been given under trusteeships.

According to Anarock Capital, banks and HFCs are much better placed with 75 per cent and 66 per cent of their lending book in a comfortable position.

“Not surprisingly, nearly 46 per cent of the total NBFC lending is on the watchlist,” the statement said.

About 75 per cent of the total lending to Grade A developers is safe.

“This presents a comfortable outlook because out of the total loans given to real estate, more than $73 billion is given to Grade A builders,” the statement said.

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Repco Home Finance Q4 net up 32%

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


Repco Home Finance (RHFL) has posted a 32 per cent growth in standalone net profit for the fourth quarter at ₹63.2 crore as against ₹47.7 crore profit in the corresponding quarter of the previous fiscal.

Total income of the lender dropped to ₹340.34 crore in Q4FY21 from ₹346.11 crore in the year-ago quarter.

Also read: All-India HPI increases by 2.7% yoy in Q4FY21

Standalone net profit for the full year grew by 3 per cent to ₹287.60 crore (₹280.35 crore) while total income during this period grew to ₹1,392.23 crore (₹1,351.1 crore).

During FY21, Repco Home Finance disbursed ₹1,840.9 crore of loans and its outstanding loan book as of March 2021 stood at ₹12,121.5 crore.

[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Less than 4% of bankrupt realty firms see resolution at IBC, homebuyers hit hard, BFSI News, ET BFSI

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


Five years after the Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code (IBC) was notified, only eight resolution plans have been approved although some 205 cases had been admitted until March 2021.

That translates into a success rate of under 4%, making it the worst-performing sector, barring computer and related activity.

The highest resolution is 10% for manufacturing where 178 of the 1784 admitted cases were resolved, followed by 7% for construction where 32 of 458 cases were resolved.

The hiccups

Unlike other sectors, there are more complexities in real estate. The rules keep evolving, which makes it difficult to comply with newer guidelines when a developer looks to take over a project.

For banks, the primary focus of the resolution exercise is to minimise the hit that they have to take on their loans and maximise the gains. In contrast, homebuyers want a more stable company to take over the company even if it means that lenders have to take a haircut.

A fall in real estate prices has complicated matters, making the project unviable for resolution applicants. In many cases, funds have been diverted and the debtor company doesn’t have sufficient money to construct the units. There are other complications when land is owned by more than one entity and needs to be combined, but in IBC there are no project or group insolvency provisions.

Less than 4% of bankrupt realty firms see resolution at IBC, homebuyers hit hard

Financial creditor status

The Supreme Court has upheld amendments to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) that introduced a minimum threshold of 100 home buyers or 10% of the total allottees of a project, whichever was lower, for initiating the insolvency process against a defaulting developer. The homebuyers had not taken kindly to these amendments on the ground that in every other category even a single creditor could by itself move the insolvency court.

They had argued that this was discriminatory and placed homebuyers at a disadvantage as they would have to herd a minimum number before they could act against any errant builder. It was also time-consuming, they had claimed in court.

Before these amendments were made, even a single buyer with claims of at least ₹1 lakh could move the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) seeking insolvency proceedings against any builder. The amendments had been brought in after a top court ruling, which placed homebuyers on par with other financial creditors.

Some of the petitioners were money lenders, who had to also fulfil the same requirements to recover their monies lent to the builders for their real estate projects.

Defending the law, the government had said that it reduces multiplicity of cases in the NCLT and ensures quick disposal.



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

1 2