Videocon, Reliance Naval among first lot of assets to be sold to NARCL, BFSI News, ET BFSI

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


Companies that have had a shot at debt resolution under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, including Videocon Oil Ventures and Reliance Naval, are among the first tranche of 22 non-performing accounts that are being sold to the National Asset Reconstruction Company (NARCL) by various lenders, according to a report.

State Bank of India (SBI) is planning to sell Videocon Oil Ventures’ bad loans of Rs 22,532 crore, while Union Bank of India plans to offload the Rs 9,000-crore Amtek Auto debt, the report said.

IDBI Bank is selling Reliance Naval and Engineering’s loans of Rs 8,934 crore while Union Bank is looking to sell the Rs 1,400 crore debt of Lavasa Corporation.

A consortium led by Mumbai-based industrialist Nikhil Merchant was leading the race to acquire the debt-laden Reliance Naval and Engineering Ltd, originally known as Pipavav Shipyard, with Rs 2,100 crore offer while another bid was of Rs 400 crore from the Naveen Jindal group.

In the case of Lavasa Corporation, the lenders are still undecided over the two offers received from Dhir Hotels and Resorts and Darwin Platform Infrastructure, with the last date of finalising a resolution being November 25. Lavasa Corporation has got bids worth Rs 700 crore for loan claims of over Rs 8,000 crore at NCLT.

Though banks have made 100% provision for the assets to be transferred to the bad bank, experts do not expect more than 20-25 per cent recovery from these legacy accounts.

The assets

Banks had identified Rs 82,496 crore worth of bad loans that could be transferred to the NARCL, which names like Videocon’s VOVL (Rs 22,532 crore total exposure), Reliance Naval and Engineering Ltd (Rs 8,934 crore), Amtek Auto (Rs 9,014 crore), Jaypee Infratech (Rs 7,950 crore, Castex Technologies (Rs 6,337 crore), GTL Ltd (Rs 4,866 crore), Visa Steel (Rs 3,394 crore), Wind World India Ltd (Rs 3,161 crore), Lavasa Corporation (Rs 1,424 crore), Consolidated Construction Consortium Ltd (Rs 1,353 crore), among others.

Several assets such as Videocon have seen realisable value close to liquidation value in NCLT proceedings. Many big-ticket resolutions at IBC have seen haircuts over 90%. With most of the NPAs proposed to be transferred to the bad bank being old legacy NPAs, there has been an erosion in value, making them more likely to head to liquidation.

The bad bank

Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman in Budget 2021-22 announced the setting up of a bad bank as part of the resolution of bad loans worth about Rs 2 lakh crore.

The bad bank or NARCL will pay up to 15 per cent of the agreed value for the loans in cash and the remaining 85 per cent would be government-guaranteed security receipts (SRs). The government guarantee would be invoked if there is a loss against the threshold value.

This sovereign guarantee would be for a period of five years and NARCL would have to pay a fee for this.

“The SRs are getting the backstop through government funding only in as much as to pay the gap between the realised value (resolution/liquidation) and the face value of SRs and this will hold good for five years,” Sitharaman had said.

The fee for the guarantee would be initially 0.25 per cent, which would progressively increase to 0.5 per cent in case of delay in resolution of bad loans.



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Will the proposed Bad Bank cure India’s banking sector? Here’s how it may shape up

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


The earlier FSR released in January 2021 had projected that the gross non-performing assets (GNPAs) of banks may rise to 13.5% by September 2021 in the baseline scenario.

By Nitin Jain

In Feb 2021, RBI announced a structure for a proposed bad bank, “What you call a bad bank is not really that; an ARC-type entity will be set up to take over bad loans from the books of public sector banks and it will try to resolve just like any other ARC,” RBI Governor Shatikanta Das had said.

Proposed Structure of Bad Bank

Though no formal structure has been announced yet, we understand basis news reports, that a National Asset Reconstruction Company Limited (NARCL) is going to be set up to take over NPAs from banks. The Promoters are likely to be power finance companies while the PSU banks will hold the remaining equity stake in the ARC. As per recent news reports, state-owned banks have shortlisted 28 loan accounts to be transferred to the NARCL with a total of Rs 82,500 crore of loans due, and further loans could also be transferred such that the AUM is over Rs 2 lakh crore. The list of borrowers includes big names such as Videocon Oil Ventures Limited (VOVL), Amtek Auto, Reliance Naval, Jaypee Infratech, Castex Technologies, GTL, Visa Steel, Wind World, Lavasa Corporation, Ruchi Worldwide, Consolidated Construction.

Normally the NPA loans at the time of takeover by an ARC are valued around 30-40% of the principal amount. However, as we understand from news sources, in the case of NARCL the loans may be acquired at the current book value. The NARCL would pay 15% in cash and the balance 85% in security receipts or any other proportion as they may decide. Further, the government would provide a guarantee to the security receipts issued by the bad bank. Let’s assume that a bank sells a loan of Rs 100 to NARCL. Now, if the Bank has already made 75% provisions for the loan, then the book value of this loan is Rs 25, and 15% of Rs 25  i.e. Rs 3.75 is cash to be paid to banks. Thus, using these assumptions, for taking over say Rs 2 lakh crore of bad loans, a cash outflow of Rs 7,500 crores and issuance of SRs worth Rs 42,500 crore may be required. (Please note that these assumptions have been taken for the purpose of explaining this concept only and are not indicative or confirmatory in any nature).

Pros and Cons of the Proposed Bad Bank Structure

Pros
-Cleans the balance sheet of the banks.
-Will provide immediate relief to the banking system which will now be facing fresh NPA on account of disruption due to Covid.
-Banks will become capitalized and ready for fresh lending.
-Faster decision making by one body (NARCL) v/s Consortium of banks.
-A secondary market can be created for the SRs which have a sovereign backing, that would provide further liquidity to the banks.

Con
The actual recovery of these loans may be lower than the book value of the loans transferred, thereby could lead to erosion of capital at NARCL over the medium and long term.
-If NARCL will need to take decisive, focused steps to recover these loans, otherwise the process may not be successful.
-The process entails transferring the bad loans at current date, and recovery or resolution to happen in future.
-May lead to aggressive fresh lending by Banks.

Taking control of management of these companies from the Promoters. The RBI had demonstrated effective management of DHFL, by taking over the board and appointing an administrator to manage the company and find a resolution.However, a Bad Bank, or even a network of bad banks, will not make the losses disappear. The losses, or non-performing loans, transferred to a bad bank will still exist. The process may allow better recovery of these loans in future. It will be important for the banks to review their lending policies and put in place a robust risk management system.  Further, it would be crucial to see how NARCL will manage these bad assets. I believe that one will require specialized expertise for recovery of these bad assets such as:

-Interim Crisis Management in these Companies – restructuring, reducing costs, identifying surplus assets and to sell these assets to generate liquidity, and providing transparent and clear communications to all stakeholders.
-Classification of bad loans by sector. The Government already has significant expertise in the Road/ Highways and Power Sector via its Undertakings. However, expertise may need to be built in other sectors via sector experts to facilitate day-to-day management of the operations of the company and to find a viable resolution to preserve value.
-Provisioning policies of NARCL will need to be reviewed such that they are in accordance with the tenor/ maturity of the SRs issued.
-NARCL will need to take a decision as to the route to be taken for recovery from the bad loan. Some potential routes could be: 

    1. Initiating corporate insolvency process on the Company
    2. Engaging an investment banker to pursue mergers and acquisitions transaction for the said asset.
    3. Undertake a compromise or settlement u/s 230 of Companies Act.

Though the ‘Bad Bank’ appears to be a sweet pill for the banking sector to get rid of their immediate problems, it would be a tough task ahead for the proposed NARCL to preserve the tax- payers’ monies over the medium and longer term.

(Nitin Jain is a veteran corporate and investment banker having worked in banks like Standard Chartered Bank and Bank of America. He is a Restructuring Expert and is also an Insolvency Professional registered with IBBI. The views expressed in the above article are the author’s personal views.)

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