KFA: A CASE STUDY IN THE MAKING?
KFA: A Case Study in Making?*
M G
Warrier
The
unfolding Mallya story is being used by media for asking more questions and
digging up more dirt to throw at banks and corporates. Here we try to learn
from ‘Vijay Mallya episode’ a couple of lessons for the future. This is not the
end of the road. India has survived the impact of two World Wars, Bengal
Famine, 1962 War with China and Harshad Mehta Scam (list illustrative) and this
‘testing time’ too will pass…In all probability ‘KFA’ will have a much longer
shelf-life as a case study on lending to corporates, perhaps because of the
unconcealed and ‘innocent’ arrogance in the body language and lifestyle of an
individual and his ‘admirers’.
On December 16, 2003, Vijay Mallya, Rajya
Sabha member, asked the government (Unstarred Question No. 1,438) whether it
was “aware of various write-offs of principal loans made by Public Sector Banks
operating in the United Kingdom”. The government promised to table the
information. I have not accessed the information tabled by the government.
Quoted this question here because the mind-set behind the question is relevant
in the analysis of the journey of Vijay Mallya to today’s ‘Mallya’ (somewhere
media has dropped his first name!).
Mallya is still Rajya Sabha MP
and according to media reports, has left India even
as public sector banks moved the Supreme Court to recover dues of up to Rs.
9,000 crore from him. His conduct will now be scrutinised by the Ethics
Committee of the Rajya Sabha chaired by Karan Singh. Other members of the
committee include Satish Chandra Misra (BSP), Avinash Rai Khanna (BJP), Sharad
Yadav (JD-U), Sitaram Yechury (CPI-M), Mukul Roy (Trinamool Congress), Neeraj
Shekhar (Samajwadi Party), A. Navaneethakrishnan (AIADMK) and Devender Goud T
(TDP).
Meanwhile, the Enforcement Directorate,
probing money laundering charges against Mr. Mallya, has expressed worries that
attaching his assets may be a problem as the CBI’s primary charge of breach of
trust (Section 409) does not come under its ambit. Section 409 of IPC does not
come under the offences listed in the schedule of the Prevention of Money
Laundering Act, which empowers the Directorate to attach proceeds of crime. The
CBI has registered its case under Section 409 (criminal breach of trust) read
with Section 120 B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code and other
provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act against unknown IDBI officials
pertaining to abuse of office to extend favours allegedly to Kingfisher
Airlines. Section 409, a stringent provision that prescribes a maximum of life
sentence, does not come under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, which
empowers the Directorate to attach proceeds of crime. Let the sleuths go deeper
into the provisions under which cases have to be charged. Mallya has been
summoned by Enforcement Directorate to make a personal appearance before its
investigating officer in Mumbai on April 2, 2016 in connection with its money
laundering probe in the Rs900 crore IDBI loan fraud case.
Raghu Mohan,
writing in Business World wondered, “Now that the King of Good Times has flown
the coop, what happens to the nearly Rs 10,000 crore he owes to banks?” and
mentioned that ‘you need to have a peculiar kind of disposition to think it
will ever be recovered fully’. Going by the past experiences, he has
articulated the concerns of any citizen in the given situation. Analysts are
working overtime and media is full of articles and analyses about what went
wrong with KFA and why Mallya is behaving the way he is behaving.
According to one
estimate, Mallya had a domestic unencumbered net-worth of more than Rs5000
crore in companies, in which he has a stake alone, in the first week of March
2016. Though I do not subscribe to the ‘too big to fail’ theory for individuals
or institutions or countries for that matter, expediency lies in allowing
Mallya to survive the present crisis; and in all likelihood, he will. That may
not make him a good boy as de-addicting a person from the influence of the
united spirits of good times has been near impossible in recent history. But,
the present government, the regulators and the enforcement authorities in India
are capable of mustering the courage to show the world that past performance do
not guarantee future ‘vulnerability to pressures’.
I base my above inference on the
commitment given by Finance Minister Arun jaitley on March 17, 2016, which has
come not long after RBI governor Dr Rajan in his deposition to the Standing
Committee of Parliament on Finance said, “We have to go after corrupt bank
management as well as corrupt promoters. There is no doubt that we need
to do it… We do not have enough teeth. There are these promoters who have
diverted funds. I would say plainly that they have stolen the funds, and we
cannot go after them. It takes too long.”
FM
said, ‘banks will recover every penny of loan given to Mallya and investigative
agencies will take strong action against the liquor baron wherever he is found
to have violated the law’. The combined will of enforcement agencies,
regulators and judiciary uninterrupted by usual political influences exerted
through the government limbs, will take this episode to a logical end which
will remain a reference point whenever unethical financial practices surface in
future. With this pious wish, let us leave the Mallya story for a moment.
Growing ‘stressed assets’ with banks
On August 24, 2015, speaking on ‘Strong growth for the Indian
Economy’, RBI governor Dr Raghuram rajan made the following observations:
“ In dealing with stressed bank assets,
RBI has been focused on getting the underlying real project back on track.
There are a number of impediments here. The stigma as well as the provisioning
(and the associated fall in profitability) attached to a loan being labelled
“non-performing” makes banks eager to avoid the label. In some cases, they
ignore the reality that existing loans will have to be written down
significantly because of the changed circumstances since they were sanctioned
(which includes extensive delays, cost overruns, and over optimistic demand
projections). The Debt Recovery Tribunal system has not been speedy, which also
emboldens uncooperative promoters and keeps them from accepting their share of
the losses. Regulatory forbearance, where RBI makes it easy for banks to
“extend and pretend”, is not a solution. Since no other stake-holder – such as
the promoter, tariff authorities, tax authorities, etc. -- contributes to
resolution, the real project limps along becoming increasingly unviable.
Meanwhile, analysts grow increasingly
suspicious of bank balance sheets
and the growing volume of “restructured” assets. Also, some large promoters
take advantage of banker fears about assets turning non-performing to extract
unwarranted concessions, without any sacrifice in the value of their stake.
Regulatory forbearance therefore ensures that problems grow until the size of
the provisioning required to deal with the problem properly becomes alarmingly
large – which then prompts calls for yet more forbearance. Forbearance is also
a disservice to the bank’s owners (which may include the Government) who,
instead of being faced with a small problem early and being given the
opportunity to apply corrective action, are faced with large problems suddenly
when they cannot be pushed into the future any more.”
Protecting Indian banking system
Unlike their fellow-travellers in the corporate sector, banks are
targeted mercilessly for all systemic irregularities and the failures in the
economy. The main reasons for this include the transparency with which the
banking regulator (RBI) functions and the constant public interaction by GOI in
their capacity as owners of PSBs with RBI and banks. This is admittedly a
healthy trend and will help initiating timely corrective measures. The Indian
banking system is presently through one such phase.
In his address at CII’s
first Banking Summit on February 11, 2016, referring to cleansing of bank
balance sheet as ‘deep surgery’, RBI
governor observed:
“…to do deep surgery such as restructuring or writing down loans,
the bank has to recognize it has a problem – classify the asset as a Non
Performing Asset (NPA). Think therefore of the NPA classification as an anaesthetic
that allows the bank to perform extensive necessary surgery to set the project
back on its feet. If the bank wants to pretend that everything is all right
with the loan, it can only apply band aids – for any more drastic action would
require NPA classification.
Loan classification is merely good accounting – it reflects what
the true value of the loan might be. It is accompanied by provisioning, which
ensures the bank sets aside a buffer to absorb likely losses. If the losses do
not materialize, the bank can write back provisioning to profits. If the losses
do materialize, the bank does not have to suddenly declare a big loss, it can
set the losses against the prudential provisions it has made. Thus the bank
balance sheet then represents a true and fair picture of the bank’s health, as
a bank balance sheet is meant to. Of course, we can postpone the day of
reckoning with regulatory forbearance.”
Now the process of cleansing banks’ balance sheets with a
timeframe extending up to March 2017 is on and there will be more cases of
wilful defaulters, not necessarily as bad as KFA, surfacing and creating scare.
But once the regulator (RBI) and GOI are on the same page as regards the need
to handle the two categories of loan defaulters, wilful defaulters from whom
recovery need to be effected by invoking securities and guarantees and those
needing support in restructuring their loans and the modus operandi to get
things done, banks will wake up and rise to the occasion.
While the profitability of
some banks may be impaired in the short run, the system, once cleansed, will be
able to support economic growth in a sustainable and profitable way. The
economic assets of our public sector banks, such as the trust they are held in
by the population, their knowledgeable employees, their location and reach, and
the low-cost funding they have access to, can then be fully realized. The need
of the hour is to recognise that banking is not just ‘social service’ and like
any other business is a commercial activity in which every transaction has to
be seen from the angle of cost and benefit. Just as every rupee of deposit need
to be repaid with interest at contracted rates, every rupee advanced has to be
recovered with interest. Defaults will have to be made good by insurance and
other means of securing repayment in cases of delay or failure of
projects/purposes financed.
It may look
tough for anyone to rescue public sector banks (PSBs) from the shameful
situation they have been dragged into by government policies or to defend the
high level of bad loans they have accumulated. Since nationalisation, political
leadership has been meddling with the working of PSBs, using the ‘assumed’
ownership rights, with immunity. The miraculous survival of PSBs including SBI
(State Bank of India) can be attributed to the high net interest margins (NIMs)
banks in India were privileged to enjoy continuously. During the current ‘Rajan
era’, even at times of near ‘cartelisation’, RBI has been merciful when it
comes to passing on the benefits of lower resource cost by reducing lending
rates.
Judging the
performance of banks with reference to the bad loans accumulated or the support
they need from the owners, by itself, is not rational. Comparison is always
with private sector banks. To get a clear picture, one has to remember that Public
sector Banks’(PSBs) share in banking business is three times that of private
sector banks. What prevents the private sector banks from increasing their
share in business is a riddle that policy-makers and regulators should solve,
at least at this stage, before succumbing to the pressure to again ‘privatise’
PSBs.
It may be
recalled that banks were nationalised because of the refusal of the private
sector to plough back deposits mobilised from small savers to sectors that
benefited inclusive economic development. The residual and new private sector
banks continue to be selective in providing credit; the social responsibility
of the banking system was largely met by PSBs. The corporates, which did not
want to follow the banking discipline, used their influence to get credit from
PSBs. All these, together, resulted in differential treatment for public and
private sector banks. Given a level playing field and semblance of functional
autonomy, the future of Indian banking is safe in the hands of PSBs.
Epilogue
We, the common citizens of India
who do not have access to the ‘goings on’ behind the scenes or trust the daily
dose of ‘news and views’ dished out by media, are being taken for a ride. In my
2014 book “Banking, Reforms & Corruption”, writing about corruption, I had
observed “The current decade is an opportunity for India to come to terms with
the real problems and bring about a change in direction, not allowing back-seat
driving by external influences, making a path motorable for coming generations
and showing the world that the country’s inherent strengths and vision are in
tact. To make this possible, the fourth pillar of democracy, the people, should
play their role effectively. The greed of the rich and the powerful is preventing this from
happening” (page 92 of the book). I find, change is on the way. As government,
regulators and enforcement agencies in India are now on the same page, ready to
handle unethical practices impairing the financial system and economy like
cancer, restoring normal health of the economy has become a possibility.
The unfolding Mallya story is
being used by media for asking more questions and digging up more dirt to throw
at banks and corporates. This is not the end of the road. India has survived
the impact of two World Wars, Bengal Famine, 1962 War with China and Harshad
Mehta Scam (list illustrative) and this ‘testing time’ too will pass…In all
probability ‘KFA’ will have a much longer shelf-life as a case study on lending
to corporates, perhaps because of the unconcealed and ‘innocent’ arrogance in
the body language and lifestyle of an individual and his ‘admirers’.
************ ************* **********
*Submitted version of an article(Can the Banking Sector Survive the 'Beer' Hug?: It Seems It Can) published in April 2016 issue of The Global ANALYST.
Comments