Open Forum
New Delhi, 30 March 2017
Bad Bank
TACKLE NPAs
JUDIOUSLY
By Dhurjati
Mukherjee
The top brass of the Reserve Bank of
India (RBI) met recently regarding setting up a bad bank, an idea most recently
highlighted by Chief Economic Adviser Arvind Subramanian. This would help
handle the country’s huge backlog of non-performing assets (NPAs) as well as
work on a plan to tackle the State run banking sector’s top 50 bad loans by
taking over firms and selling their assets. Though no decision has yet been
reached, it is understood that the matter is under serious consideration of the
Government.
It must be noted that public sector
banks reported a 56 per cent rise in bad loans in 2016. In all, total NPAs,
including both public and private, rose to Rs 6.97 lakh crores as on December
2016. The RBI has sought to be form and has been pressing the public sector
banks to take over assets and sell these to recover dues instead of negotiating
with high profile debtors and agreeing to bail-outs.
One may mention here, that a little
more than a year back, the then RBI governor Raghuram Rajan had scared banks
and steel firms alike by demanding that many loans, which banks were passing
off as ‘standard’ or normal loans, should be reassessed. The review exercise
forced banks to recognise many of these loans as bad debts or stressed debts,
requiring these to make provision for more money as security for such loans. It
was also found that a section of bankers were shielding these big business
houses that had defaulted in payments.
Rajan had pointed out that a big
chunk of NPAs at PSBs pertain to projects that are viable. However, these
projects have not gone through to the completion stage for reasons that are
mostly extraneous to the project, such as problems in land acquisition or getting
environmental clearance. At the same time, with restructuring and additional
funding, these can be completed and would certainly create significant
capacities.
Selling these loans to a bad bank,
on the other hand, would be a time-consuming process. It would impede fresh
flow of funds into these projects. Their debt would rise as the interest rate
grows and piles up. Rajan was of the opinion that bad banks were typically
intended for situations where projects were not viable. It was found that money
was diverted for projects which were not part of the loan agreement with the
banks. In fact, though no official figures are available, it can be said that
at least 30-35 per cent could have easily repaid their loans as they were not
actual defaulters.
While Rajan was opposed to the idea
of a bad bank, his successor, the top brass of RBI including its chief, Urijit
Patel, has come out in its favour and in tune with government thinking.
Possibly some strictness is needed to give immediate power either to the
concerned bank or later to the newly created bad bank to sell assets and
recover loans. The terrible legacy in the country of not repaying bank loans must
be put to a halt immediately and this can only happen if both the government
and the RBI are serious and strict.
It goes without saying that the
banks’ pile of bad loans is a huge drag on the economy and a drain on the banks’
profits. Because profits are eroded, the public sector banks, where the bulk of
the bad loans reside, cannot raise enough capital to fund credit growth. Lack
of credit growth, in turn, comes in the way of the economy’s return to an 8 per
cent growth trajectory. Clearly, the bad loan problem requires effective
resolution, as early as possible.
The bad bank idea has, no doubt,
problems. A big motivation for floating such a bank is to dress up the PSBs by
getting rid of their bad loans. Then, private capital can be attracted to these,
perhaps through the sale of small stakes to strategic investors. PSBs would
also be able to access the equity markets for funds and would not be as
dependent on the government for capital, as we see them. Today’s weaker PSBs
can be merged with the stronger ones, the process of which has already
started.
Is there a way in which the
positives can be realised without creating a bad bank that itself requires too
much capital and is too big to manage? One answer may be to set up a bad bank
to deal with NPAs at some of the weaker PSBs, instead of one that picks up NPAs
from all PSBs. It would prove less controversial if the government had a
majority stake in it. Let us see how the experiment goes.
This may be complemented with other
steps, the most important of which would be for the government to infuse more
capital into the better-performing PSBs. Some experts have suggested that an
apex Loan Resolution Authority may be created for tackling bad loans at PSBs.
The authority would vet restructuring of the bigger loans at PSBs. This would
mitigate the paralysis that has set in at the PSBs because of the fear factor
and get funds flowing into stalled projects to ensure their timely completion.
Resolution of bad loans and
restoring the health of PSBs is among the biggest challenges the economy faces
today. It’s a challenge that requires a response on multiple fronts.
Simultaneously, the immediate task would be to be extra cautious in granting
loans to corporate projects and ensure that these do not become stressed assets
in future.
Moreover, what is critical is that banks
have to come out of the influence of political leaders and also powerful
businessmen so that these are not in a position to influence loan sanction,
specially those that are of heavy amounts. In fact, a large portion of the NPAs
could well be said to be because of the politics of getting loans, where the
bank doesn’t say a no.
Banks have to work in a free and
unfettered manner and carry out their work judiciously without any bias and
pressure from any quarters. Finally, it needs to be pointed out that public
sector banks have to become more professional in their approach. And, acquire
that competitive edge, which their counter parts have in the private sector. ---INFA
(Copyright,
India News and Feature Alliance)
|