Several NPAs transferred to bad bank may head to liquidation, cost govt a bomb, BFSI News, ET BFSI

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


The government has announced the setting up of National Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd with much fanfare and committed over Rs 30,000 crore guarantee for bad assets acquired by it, but it may be used up soon, going by the initial assets going by the list of assets proposed to be transferred to the bad bank.

Banks have identified Rs 82,496 crores worth of bad loans that could be transferred to the NARCL, which includes the following companies.

COMPANIES TOTAL BAD LOANS
Videocon Rs 22,532 crore
Reliance Naval & Engineering Rs 8,934 crore
Amtex 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

Also read: NARCL will empower lenders, but recovery from 26 accounts is not easy, industry says
Several assets such as Videocon have seen realisable value close to liquidation value in National Company Law Tribunal proceedings. Many big-ticket resolutions at Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code have seen haircuts over 90%. With most of the NPAs proposed to be transferred to the bad bank being old legacy ones, there has been an erosion in value, making them more likely to head to liquidation.

Lavasa Corporation has got bids worth Rs 700 crore for loan claims of over Rs 8,000 crore at NCLT.

Several NPAs transferred to bad bank may head to liquidation, cost govt a bomb

Close to liquidation

Though banks have made 100% provision for these assets, even Rajkiran Rai, chairman of Indian Banks Association, and MD & CEO of Union Bank of India does not expect more than 20-25 per cent recovery from these legacy accounts, he told a television channel.

The State Bank of India has identified NPAs with Rs 17,000-18,000 crore outstanding to be transferred to the NARCL, while Punjab National Bank has identified Rs 8,000 crore worth of NPAs, Union Bank of India Rs 7,800 crore of NPAs to be transferred to the National ARC. The Bank of India has identified about Rs 5,500 crores of assets for transfer while Indian Bank about Rs 1,900 crore.

“I am not hopeful. Because these are bad assets. Finally, all these will go under liquidation,” Siby Antony, chairman of the ARC Association of India.

The bad bank

Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman announced a Rs 30,600 crore government guarantee for the National Asset Reconstruction Company Limited (NARCL) for acquiring stressed loan assets, paving the way for operationalisation of the bad bank.

Also read: Finance Minister Sitharaman announces bad bank, Cabinet approves backing of up to Rs 30,600 crore

The finance minister 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.

Also read: What are NARCL and IDRCL? How do they work and what is the plan?

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 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.

Click here to read more stories on banking



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

IBC is less of resolution and more of liquidation, BFSI News, ET BFSI

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


Bankers feel that they are not getting a good price under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, which has seen dismal recoveries in many cases.

IBC is not the right solution. It is a resolution tool. If there is no resolution, automatically it goes to liquidation. That is a big problem. Resolution can be made if the underlying business is robust, says Siby Antony, chairman of the ARC Association of India.

He says banks feel that they are not getting the right price in IBC.

“Alok Industries was thought to be a very good asset but went for 17%. Binani Cement, Essar Steel were robust businesses and saw interest from strategic investors. But there are hundreds of assets where there is no interest from investors. These are smaller assets,” he said.

The status of IBC cases

Out of the total 3,774 cases or corporate insolvency resolution processes (CIRPs) filed since the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) came into existence in 2016, 1,604 cases, or 43 percent have closed, by way of resolution, liquidation or other means. The rest 57 percent are ongoing with many overshooting the 330-day maximum time limit.

Of the 1,604 closed cases, only 14 percent have found a resolution, whereas 57 percent have ended in the liquidation of the companies.

Interestingly, the 72% cases of CIRPs ending in liquidation were already defunct and under the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction.

About 312 cases have been closed on appeal or review or settled, 157 have been withdrawn; 914 ordered for liquidation and 221, saw approval of resolution plans.

The recovery rate for resolved cases under IBC is 44% with Rs 1.84 lakh crore recovered so far of the Rs 4.13 lakh crore admitted claims.

In case of the 12 large defaulters identified by RBI, the creditors recovered Rs 1.36 lakh crore from eight cases that have been resolved so far, with recoveries ranging from as low as 17 percent of claims in the case of Alok Industries, to almost 100 percent for Jaypee Infratech.

N Kamakodi, MD & CEO of Citi Union Bank said he preferred the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Securities Interest Act (SARFESI) over IBC.

“Since our focus is more on SME lending, we have control over the assets of the borrower. Hence, most of our resolution plans are through SARFAESI action more than the IBC.”

He added, “What is more important is whether the borrower has the skin in the game. When you want to sell it as a going concern and when there is a sufficient value, then IBC is preferable. But if the borrowers’ skin in the game is less, then the SARFAESI is a better option.”

The delays in NCLT

The 221 CIRPs that saw resolutions took an average of 375 days for the conclusion, exceeding the maximum 330 days permitted. The 914 cases under liquidation took on an average 309 days for the conclusion.

As on September 30, 2021, out of the 1,942 ongoing insolvency resolution cases, as many as 1,442 have been stretched beyond 270 days, while 349 such cases have been pending for periods of more than 180 days but less than 270 days.
As on September 30, 2021, out of the 1,942 ongoing insolvency resolution cases, as many as 1,442 have been stretched beyond 270 days, while 349 such cases have been pending for periods of more than 180 days but less than 270 days.

As on September 30, 2021, out of the 1,942 ongoing insolvency resolution cases, as many as 1,442 have been stretched beyond 270 days, while 349 such cases have been pending for periods of more than 180 days but less than 270 days.

Recently, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) directed to initiate the liquidation process of edible oil company K S Oils Ltd and set aside an NCLT order passed against it. Terming it “unfortunate”, the appellate tribunal observed that even after the lapse of 981 days and repeated compliance by the Resolution Professional to initiate the liquidation process, the NCLT had not considered it.

Leading bank State Bank of India, one of the Committee of Credit (CoC) Member, on behalf of joint lenders forum who collectively holds 76.53 per cent had moved NCLAT based on which the appellate tribunal had on November 18, 2019, directed lenders to consider revised plans if any within two weeks and directed NCLT to pass appropriate order in accordance with the law.

Bad bank challenge

The government is planning to set up a bad bank and an asset management company (AMC). Loans greater than Rs 500 crore which have not been declared fraudulent will be transferred to the bad bank. It is likely that the assets would not be subjected to IBC in the first instance, and the AMC will first try and revive these companies or package the loans to an investor.

Bad Bank
Bad Bank

Also, creditors of several companies had signed the Inter Creditor Agreements (ICA) and may continue negotiation under the framework roping in distressed asset investors. Also, most of the ICA cases will have loans greater than Rs 500 crore, which will be transferred to the bad bank. MSME will be outside the scope of IBC pending notification of the designated framework.



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Bad bank can be only a warehouse of bad assets, says Siby Antony, BFSI News, ET BFSI

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


Antony has been working in the ARC sector for the last two decades. He was heading Edelweiss ARC and now is the Chairman, ARC Association of India. In an interview with ETBFSI he explained different aspects of the bad bank

He believes “Bad bank will be a warehouse of bad assets. If the objective of a bad bank will be to aggregate the debt and hand it over to ARC and AIF it will work. Because debt aggregating is still a problem in ARC the reasons being different banks have different provision coverage and many more such issues.” he said.

Antony also narrated the crux of the issues pertaining to asset reconstruction companies (ARCs). Such as why are banks unable to find resolution despite there being 28 ARCs? What are the major challenges that ARCs face? What has the Association of ARCs asked the RBI?

Antony also sees a surge in cases in the National Company Law Tribunals after March once the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code suspension is revoked.

Also read: Raghuram Rajan’s formula has led to over 50% recovery for ARCs

Follow and connect with us on , Facebook, Linkedin



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY

Raghuram Rajan’s formula has led to over 50% recovery for ARCs, BFSI News, ET BFSI

[ad_1]

Read More/Less


The recovery rate of asset reconstruction companies (ARCs) has been over 50% in the last five years since Raghuram Rajan brought in the ’15:85 structure’ for acquiring non-performing assets from banks.

“From FY16 onwards, recovery has been more than 50% in ARCs, which is much much better than even an IBC. In IBC resolution everyone talks of resolved cases, but 75% cases of IBC are going into liquidation, recovering less than 10 % of loans” says Siby Antony, chairman, ARC Association of India.

In FY2015 Raghuram Rajan brought in the 15:85 structure, under which the cash component ARCs would have to pay to a bank was raised to 15% while the rest was security receipts, from the earlier 5:95 split.

The 5:95 split

“The 5:95 (5% cash and rest SR) split was a very skewed structure in favour of ARCs. It was a blind game ARCs could play,” says Antony.

Under 5:95 structure, ARCs could earn a positive net return just on the basis of management fees, without any value addition by securitisation or asset reconstruction.

The increase of cash proportion to 15% pushed the ARCs to raise their returns through securitisation and asset reconstruction.

The 15:85 structure

“15:85 is an excellent structure. Unless the ARC recovers 130% of the acquisition value, it will not make its return. Even at 100%, ARC will make loss because the management fee of 1-2% doesn’t make any ARR for ARC. Recovery should be over 130% so that 100% of security rights will be redeemed,” Antony said.

Provisioning killed the goose

However, in September 2016, the Reserve Bank of India introduced new regulatory guidelines regarding provisioning. From April 2018 banks have to sell at 90% cash and 10% SRs. If a bank holds more than 10% SR, it had to continue provisioning for the loan which is not even on their books.

“So there was no incentive for them to transfer to ARCs. Now no banks transfer on 15:85 and all deals are on cash,” says Antony.

Cash deals

At such high levels of cash, the market becomes unviable for all but a few. Some ARCs such as Edelweiss, JM Financial that have raised money from Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs) do transactions on a cash basis, but other ARCs have deployed whatever capital they had, and now have none.

The holdings of such AIFs which have the capital to invest in newly-issued security receipts have risen sharply. These funds hunt for viable assets. Vulture funds and AIFs look for 25% plus returns while the ARCs look at 18-20%



[ad_2]

CLICK HERE TO APPLY