Breaking

Showing posts with label profit or loss. Show all posts
Showing posts with label profit or loss. Show all posts

Tuesday, 20 June 2017

08:10

Risks Associated with Bankers’ Acceptances

Risks Associated with Bankers’ Acceptances
For purposes of the OCC’s discussion of risk, the OCC can be said to assess banking risk relative to its impact on capital and earnings. From a supervisoryperspective, risk is the potential that events, expected or unexpected, may have an adverse impact on a bank’s earnings or capital. The OCC has defined ninecategories of risk for bank supervision purposes. These risks are credit,interest rate, liquidity, price, foreign currency translation, transaction, compliance, strategic, and reputation.
The risks associated with bankers’ acceptances are transaction, compliance,credit, liquidity, foreign currency translation, and reputation. These risks are discussed more fully in the following paragraphs. (Once an examiner determines whether the bankers’ acceptances are held as a loan or investment,they should refer to the appropriate booklet in the Comptroller’s Handbook for further guidance.)
Transaction Risk
Transaction risk is the current and prospective risk to earnings and capital arising from fraud, error, and the inability to deliver products or services,maintain a competitive position, and manage information. Risk is inherent in efforts to gain strategic advantage, and in the failure to keep pace with changesin the financial services marketplace. Transaction risk is evident in each product and service offered. Transaction risk encompasses product development and delivery, transaction processing, systems development,computing systems, complexity of products and services, and the internal
control environment.
Banks should work closely with borrowers seeking bankers’ acceptance financing to ensure that the borrower fully understands the supporting documentation and timely processing requirements related to this type of financing. The basic documentation for a bankers’ acceptance consists of
A bankers’ acceptance credit agreement which contains the borrower’s promise to repay the bank when the acceptance
matures.
• A “purpose statement” or letter from the borrower that describes the underlying trade transaction being financed, certifies that no other
financing is outstanding, and specifies that the transaction has not been refinanced.
• A draft.
Compliance Risk
Compliance risk is the current and prospective risk to earnings or capital arising from violation of, or nonconformance with, laws, rules, regulations,prescribed practices, internal policies and procedures, or ethical standards. Compliance risk also arises in situations where the laws or rules governing certain bank products or activities of the bank’s clients may be ambiguous or untested. This risk exposes the institution to fines, civil money penalties,payment of damages, and the voiding of contracts. Compliance risk can lead to diminished reputation, reduced franchise value, limited business opportunities,reduced expansion potential, and lack of contract enforceability.
The major compliance risk associated with bankers’ acceptance financing relates to creating ineligible bankers’ acceptances but treating them as if they were eligible for Federal Reserve discount. If this occurs, the Federal Reserve will generally impose a retroactive reserve requirement on the accepting bank.
If the bank has created a bankers’ acceptance based upon accurate information provided by the borrower in the purpose statement, only to learn later that it erroneously considered the transaction eligible, the bank will not be able to collect compensation from the customer to cover the reserves.
Compliance with the legal lending limit must be considered. When a bank discounts or holds its own bankers’ acceptances, they are converted to a loan and included in the legal lending limit. Purchased bankers’ acceptances are exempt
Credit Risk
Credit risk is the current and prospective risk to earnings or capital arising from an obligor’s failure to meet the terms of any contract with the bank or
otherwise to perform as agreed. Credit risk is found in all activities where success depends on counterparty, issuer, or borrower performance. It arises
any time bank funds are extended, committed, invested, or otherwise exposed through actual or implied contractual agreements, whether reflected on or off
the balance sheet.
Bankers’ acceptances contain credit risk not only for the bank creating the acceptance, but also for the exporter, for banks purchasing another bank’s acceptances, and for other investors (such as money market mutual funds, trust departments, state and local governments, insurance companies, pension funds, corporations, and commercial banks) who buy bankers’ acceptances.
The principal credit risk of this instrument is that the importer will be unable to make payment at maturity of the bankers’ acceptance — leaving the accepting bank responsible to make payment. For acceptances purchased in the market, credit risk is somewhat mitigated because bankers’ acceptances
are considered to be “two-name paper,” which means that the importer is secondarily liable on the instrument. In addition, the instrument is a contingent obligation of the drawer (exporter). In other words, the exporter (drawer) is contingently liable if the importer does not pay. The acceptance is also an obligation of any other institutions that have endorsed it. That is,“holders in due course” that have bought and sold the acceptance in the market.
Liquidity Risk
Liquidity risk is the current and prospective risk to earnings or capital arising from a bank’s inability to meet its obligations when they come due without incurring unacceptable losses. Liquidity risk includes the inability to manage unplanned decreases or changes in funding sources. Liquidity risk also arises from the failure to recognize or address changes in market conditions that affect the ability to liquidate assets quickly and with minimal loss in value.
Partly because the maturities of most bankers’ acceptances are short, the  market generally views acceptances as safe and liquid. The fact that “name”
banks dominate acceptance financing also limits liquidity risk. Liquidity risk will be greater if the accepting bank is lower rated, is not a “name” or “prime”
institution, or if the instrument is not eligible for Federal Reserve discount.

Thursday, 3 November 2016

23:31

Banks can now issue masala bonds: RBI

Banks can now issue masala bonds: RBI 

MUMBAI: Indian banks can raise Tier I, Tier II and funds for lending to the infrastructure sector by issuing rupee denominated masala bonds within the Rs 2.44 lakh crore foreign investment ceiling for corporate bonds, Reserve Bank of India said in a notification on Thursday. 

Banks can raise perpetual debt which qualifies as Tier I capital through rupee denominated bonds overseas. They can also raise long term funds to finance infrastructure and affordable housing projects in India, the central bank said. Tier I capital is the core capital of the bank is used to gauge a bank’s capability of absorbing losses 

On Thursday, RBI just notified the measures announced for the bond market in August which included allowing banks to issue masala bonds. 

Until now these bonds could only be issued by companies and NBFCs. These bonds are different from other overseas instruments because the currency risk is borne by the investor. 

Monday, 24 October 2016

08:36

Reserve Bank expecting only first cut reporting from banks, says ED, RBI

Reserve Bank expecting only first cut reporting from banks, says ED, RBI

NK Bank, New Delhi [India], Oct 7 : The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) is expecting a rough, first cut reporting from banks vis-a-vis proforma Ind AS (Indian Accounting Standards) financial statements for the half year ending September by November 30 to ascertain the difficulties and problems faced by banks as part of transition to International Financial Reporting Standards from April 2018, a top RBI official said at an ASSOCHAM event held in New Delhi today.

"I know it will be very difficult to expect any kind of accuracy in that reporting, what I am hoping is it will throw up difficulties, problems which we will work on," said Sudarshan Sen, executive director (ED), RBI while inaugurating an ASSOCHAM seminar.

"We are not going to hold a sword to the banks and say that this reporting has to be absolutely perfect, on the contrary it will be a discovery and learning for us and banks which is why we have asked for this proforma reporting from September half year onwards," said Sen.

He also said that capacity building both in terms of human as well as IT (information technology) resources is the need of the hour for banks to follow Ind AS converged with International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) from April 2018.

"It is imperative for the human resources in banks to meet the challenges of implementing Indian Accounting Standards (Ind AS), another very big area is that huge modifications will be required to IT systems," he added.

He said that the basic Core Banking Solution (CBS) which exists in banks is a barebones nominal value recording framework, but to move the data there into the kind of financial reporting and the measurement which is required under the Ind-AS will require lot of application programming interfaces, lot of middleware will have to be developed which will basically convert all the raw numbers into numbers which are compliant in Ind-AS.

"But this is again a huge challenge and given this especially in public sector banks (PSBs) there are processes involved in upgrading software and hardware, it takes time, there are approvals required and there are budgets to be made, it is a big challenge as to how they would be able to meet the timelines given by us," he said.

He added that banks need to develop and strengthen their data capture systems to enable the assessment of impairment.

"Now we will be going to loss modeling, we will be looking at data based estimation of future losses and the additional problem is that we do not have a lot of work actually done internationally for us to draw from that so we will be inventing to a large extent domestically," said the RBI executive director.

Highlighting that Ind AS provides for extensive disclosures in respect of financial instruments and their attendant risks and also fair value measurements as well as consolidation requirements, he said "Banks will have to put in very robust systems in place and make lot of efforts and possibly expenses to meet the requirements in this regard."

He also said that RBI will have to very carefully review various regulations that are there and bring them in tune with the Ind-AS.

"Where we have to deviate, we will consciously deviate and where we have to join we will consciously join, but a lot of work is there," said Sen.

He further said that formats of balance sheets and the profit and loss account

under the Banking Regulation Act will change under the Ind-AS landscape. "All this is being looked at, all reporting formats will undergo a great change." 

Saturday, 15 October 2016

07:53

Loss-making PSU banks including SBI may find the going more tough

Loss-making PSU banks including SBI may find the going more tough
Public sector banks that made losses or experienced sharp dip in profit in the last fiscal could lose their ability to service coupon on additional tier-1 (AT1) bonds issued under the Basel III capital regulations, ratings company Crisil has said in a report.
A sharp dip in profitability and mounting losses could wipe out the revenue reserves of some public sector banks, it said. As many as 13 of the 21 public sector lenders (taking the State Bank of India and its associates as a consolidated entity) reported losses for fiscal 2016, and almost half of them could do so again this fiscal, the ratings company said.
Crisil, however, did not divulge the names of the banks in risk of defaulting on the AT1 bond coupon payment. As on date, 14 banks have Rs 22,600 crore of additional tier-1 bonds outstanding.
The government has committed capital support to the banks it owns to sustain their capital ratios above the regulatory minimum of 9%, but the coupon on AT1 bonds can be serviced only through current year’s profit or from revenue reserves.
Hence, capital infusion alone cannot improve a bank’s ability to service coupon on the bonds, the report said. “Apart from the high probability of posting losses this fiscal, negative or low revenue reserves are likely to make six PSBs vulnerable. Of these, four have AT1 bonds outstanding, where continued losses could wipe out their revenue reserves and pose a challenge when it comes to coupon servicing,” said Krishnan Sitaraman, senior director at Crisil.
Four other PSBs are also expected to post losses in the near term, but they have adequate revenue reserves (after adjusting for expected losses) to service the coupon on AT1 bonds outstanding. But, their ability to continue to do so over the medium term will depend on the return to profitability.
Crisil observed that some banks report revenue reserves in their audited balance sheets without adjusting for profit and losses account. Instead, these losses are being shown as a negative ‘balance in P&L account’ on the liability side. As a result, reported revenue reserves do not deplete despite losses. For loss-making banks, the ability to service coupon on AT1 bonds depends only on the adequacy of revenue reserves.
“The Basel III compliant AT1 bonds are meant to be loss-absorbing in times of stress and, hence, when rating them, Crisil considers revenue reserves net of P&L losses to assess a bank’s ability to service coupon,” said Rajat Bahl, director - financial sector ratings, at Crisil.

Saturday, 7 May 2016

19:15

With profits dipping, PSB staff fear cutback in allocation to welfare fund

With profits dipping, PSB staff fear cutback in allocation to welfare fund

Fearing that allocation to staff welfare funds could get curtailed due to the likelihood of some public sector banks either posting a loss or a sharp decline in net profit for the second quarter on a trot, a bank employees’ union has sought the intervention of the Indian Banks’ Association to change the way the allocation is made.
The All-India Bank Employees’ Association (AIBEA) wants the allocation to the staff welfare fund to be calculated as a percentage of operating profit instead of net profit, subject to the maximum per year ceiling.
Explaining the logic for seeking this change, CH Venkatachalam, General Secretary of the Association, said: “With the Reserve Bank of India asking banks to provide for bad loans under its asset quality review exercise, many banks are likely to post a net loss even though they may record an operating profit.
“So, we have requested the Association to take operating profit as the basis for allocating staff welfare funds and not net profit for this year. Otherwise, most bank managements will say since there is no profit, there will be no allocation.”
He cautioned that curtailing allocation towards staff welfare will be extremely de-motivating for the employees, who are not at fault for the bad loans mess in the banking system.
The activities that are pursued by public sector banks under staff welfare include holiday home facility for existing and retired employees; scholarship to bright students of employees; health check-up facility; canteen subsidy; financial assistance to employees on leave on loss of pay on account of major ailments/surgery; financial assistance to the dependents of employees who die in harness.
The staff welfare fund for public sector banks (PSBs) is pegged at 3 per cent of net profit, subject to yearly ceiling. In the case of State Bank of India, the maximum yearly ceiling for staff welfare fund is Rs. 100 crore.
For PSBs with business mix (deposits plus advances) of over Rs. 3-lakh crore and employee strength of 30,000, the maximum yearly ceiling for staff welfare fund is Rs. 25 crore; for PSBs with business mix of Rs. 1.5-lakh crore to Rs. 3-lakh crore and employee strength of 20,000 to 30,000, it is Rs. 20 crore; and for other PSBs the amount is set at Rs. 15 crore.

Friday, 30 October 2015

07:18

Germany's biggest bank is taking the knife to costs after posting a massive 6 billion euro ($6.6 billion) loss in the third

Germany's biggest bank is taking the knife to costs after posting a massive 6 billion euro ($6.6 billion) loss in the third 

Deutsche Bank will cut 9,000 full time jobs and reduce the number of technology contractors it uses by 6,000. The bank said another 20,000 jobs will be shed over the next two years as it sells businesses and withdraws from certain markets.

Taken together, that represents a 27% fall in the number of people employed at the bank.

The sweeping overhaul is part of efforts by new CEO John Cryan to help Deutsche compete with its global peers by reducing the cost and complexity of operations.

The bank will close 200 branches in Germany -- with the loss of 4,000 jobs -- and pull out of 10 countries altogether, including Argentina, Chile, Mexico, Peru, Denmark, Finland and Norway.

Deutsche Bank (DB) is paying a heavy price for years of management, business and technology failings.

"We know exactly where we want to go, but for many years Deutsche Bank has had a serious problem with executing the strategy," Cryan told reporters.

Litigation costs alone have totaled 11 billion euros since 2012 -- including a hefty Libor-rigging fine earlier this year -- and tougher regulation has forced it to write down the value of investment and retail banking.

Deutsche will completely rethink the way it uses technology. It will work with startups, innovation labs and others to look at new technologies, and defend its business from potential disruptors.

"We have a traditional business in transaction banking... and we may have an 'Uber' moment and find that there's a new way of doing it. We need to protect that business," Cryan said.

In addition to slashing costs by 3.8 billion euros by 2018, the bank is also likely to scrap its dividend this year and next to preserve cash.

Shares in the bank fell more than 6% Thursday. They've gained just 3% this year compared to a jump of 10% on Germany's DAX index.

Cryan said settling outstanding legal and regulatory investigations will continue to weigh on the bank's performance through 2017.

Source :Money.cnn

Tuesday, 27 October 2015

21:24

PUBLIC SECTOR BANKS WILL NOT DIE


PUBLIC SECTOR BANKS WILL NOT DIE

Apropos to the so called expert view by Ms. Latha Venkatesh today, titled “Banks set to turn less profitable, Some need to die”

I request your expert to first know the statistics correct. 

The number of Jan Dhan Accounts opened so far is 188.6 Million as per Govt of India site and the total number of accounts in our country was 684 million SB accounts in 2013 itself as per Crisil report published in the Business Standard dated 28th June 2013. Today, it is around 900 million accounts and not 210 million quoted by your expert. As on 31st March 2015, SBI itself has 273.2 million accounts.

Your expert is a good TV anchor and she has extracted some useful information shared by 3 bankers who have rightly pointed out that there will be competition and the existing banks will be able to cope up with the competition.

But unfortunately, Ms. Latha Venkatesh ends the article by saying “the midcap PSU banks looks set to die. And this death won’t be a loss but a gain. Even the most ardent proponents of PSU Banks have began to admit that Bank Nationalisation is an unmitigated failure. The advent of payment and small banks may be an opportunity for the country to cleanse out atleast some of these PSU Banks that have become irreparable failures. PSU Banks have been hot beds of political patronage for a very long time which is why I worry if the Govt will have the political will to kill them or let them die. One hopes these entities are not kept alive at the cost of the tax payers money as has been done with Air India.”

Let me remind you that out of the 188.6 million accounts opened under Jandhan only 7.2 million were opened by the Private Sector Banks. Please also recollect what happened to Global Trust Bank which was once lauded as successful New generation private bank. 

Public Sector Banks are capable to face any competition as they have faced earlier also. They are not eating tax payers money. Let me quote an article by Dr. Soumya Kanti Ghosh published in Economic Times on 21st January 2015.

Let me start with the most discussed myth that PSBs are monoliths, which, over the past decade have been repeatedly bailed out through capital injections at the taxpayer’s expense. This is a bizarre data interpretation, to say the least. Consider this simple arithmetic. For the decade ended FY14, cumulative capital infusion into PSBs was at Rs 60,000 crore, but the dividend payout (at 20 per cent) was roughly Rs 64,000 crore and the cumulative income tax paid was around Rs 1.30 lakh crore. Thus, on a combined basis, dividend and tax paid to the government was more than 300 per cent during the past decade.

When the great US Banks failed in 2008 and the crash continued almost across the globe it is because of the Public Sector Banks India did not get into a financial crisis. Let us not forget this.

It is only because of nationalisation of Banks Banking services reached the nook and corner of the country, many Govt schemes became successful, priority sector lending came into existence to help agriculturists, small industries and traders. The credit deposit ratio improved even in the so called backward states and small credit was available to the common man. If not for nationalisation India would have still remained an under developed country. Atleast we are a developing nation now.

Indian Banking System is still under banked as per the following statistics.

As on 2013 India had only 11.4 Bank Branches per 1 lakh population whereas Australia had 31.8, Belgium 44.4, Brazil 47.3. Bulgaria 61.2, Canada 21.4, Cyprus 97, France 38.8, Italy 68.4, Japan 33.9 , New Zealand 33.3, Spain 85.1, Switzerland 48.8 and United States 35.3 Branches per one lakh population. So our country has still lot of scope for more Banks and more branches.

So I request Ms. Latha Venkatesh to stop spitting venom on Public Sector Banks, though she is an anchor of CNBC TV18 which is owned by Reliance Group. Let your Newspaper show some sense of neutrality and ethics.

D. Thomas Franco Rajendra Dev
President
All India State Bank Officers’ Federation &
Senior Vice President, All India Bank Officers’ Confederation

Source:IndianBankKumar.