Showing posts with label CGTMSE. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CGTMSE. Show all posts

Sunday, June 14, 2020

MAKING THE NEXT NORMAL WORK FOR TELANGANA MSMEs


Making the Next Normal Work for MSMEs:

NSS 73rd Round estimated 63.4mn non-agricultural enterprises in July-June 2016 with 84.2% as own-account enterprises, that is, entirely run by the promoters or their family members. They employ 111.3mn workers and remain as the second largest employer next to agriculture. 40% of the employment is with 11.4% of such enterprises. This formidable driver of the economy started shaking in the pre-covid slow down. Covid-19 compounded the problems. Several of them, known to be in the unorganized sector, often do not have regulatory compliances as their focus and this has mostly led to lack of trust between them and their lenders.

Several Surveys, CII, FICCI, Skoch Foundation, RGICS reveal that near about 70% had adverse effects on their businesses. Only 4-5 percent mentioned that their businesses improved. The sector has the resilience and entertains optimism in going forward.

Telangana, the fastest growing State in India with good and consistent EODB rankings has many things to ponder post pandemic as the markets and the world are not going to be as before. Preparing for the future has to be on strong foundation.

Economic growth engines of State of Telangana - the real estate, infra and construction, Pharmaceuticals, IT and ITeS are likely to be on tardy growth for the next six months. Tourism, entertainment, event management that have seen phenomenal growth during the last four years will have to wait for almost a year to come back to their glory. All these have strong supply chain linkage with the MSMEs at the front-end.

Telangana State, with around 33000 MSMEs (with 7842 sick or incipient sick), the steady growth can be expected from only 10% of them in pharmaceuticals, biotechnology, electronics and defence-oriented industries. Aeronautics will be on slow gear for a year.

Contribution of Mining, a fast growing sector, emerging from Nizamabad, Warangal and Khammam, Nalgonda districts is unlikely to recover because of the low footfall of Chinese buyers of granite in February due to Covid-19.. Marketing pitch through select Indian embassies showcasing Telangana strengths in raw granite and the incentives they offer for setting up processing investments and pollution clearances faster than any other country, should be a strategy worthy of pursuit.

As one of the leading growing States in the country, we have the unique advantage of Make-in-Telangana brand for all the food and aqua manufacturing industries. Packing, packaging, logistics should back-end the efforts of agro-industrialisation of the State. If we can keep safety standards in place we can really replace Philippines, Vietnam, Australia, Taiwan and Indonesia in agro-based industries. We should develop them in small village clusters and not aim big clusters. It is good to have large number of well-integrated small clusters around villages and have well-developed logistics at each Mandal level.

HR mapping is extremely important. Every industry would like to optimise on time and resources. Work from home may become the new normal. After all, industry having tasted human meat in tough times, would like to continue. New wage norms will also come in to being. Focus will be more on leadership challenges and quick deliverables. Job losses will stare at the State.

All the skill development centers should be developed in consonance with the requirements of the agro-industrial and agri-business clusters. Post-school education should be integrated with the requirements of the industry. Telangana will thus be the largest employer as well.

New enterprises should be built on knowledge and skills. Forward integration in Markets and Backward integration in raw material supply with strong value chains built, the State will bejewel the country. Focus more on employing 75 to 85 % of both rural and urban working force.

Effective mobilization on global funds may be cost effective beyond FRBM norms for agricultural and allied sectors and for SME's to be globally competitive. It is time that the State should have its own Small Finance Bank not that it will have freedom to do as it likes beyond the RBI norms but will have the scope to leverage its priorities and timely deliveries on its own call.

When it wants more FDIs and FPIs to come in, it should be strong in MSMEs. The present near 25-26 percent of sick MSMEs will not certainly be able to attract the global investments. Hence Telangana Industrial Health Clinic Ltd needs to be strengthened with better inter-linkages with the existing lenders and NBFCs and greater resources – both by way of grants and loans.

MSME growth is debt driven thus far and not equity driven. Atma Nirbhar Bharat Abhiyan targeted release of 20% of additional collateral free credit and the State’s share is estimated at Rs.12,000 cr. Of this, as per the data of Ministry of Finance, GoI as of 9th June 2020, of the Rs.1129.69cr sanctions to 19,965 accounts, Rs.633cr has been disbursed to 11,133 accounts. Banks will go for safe target and provide credit to not all those who need and who had adverse Covid impact, but to those who will reverse their NPA path. The subordinate debt to the stressed enterprises with Rs.20000cr fund backed by CGTMSE to the extent of around 23% default rate, is yet to benefit stressed enterprises due to delayed release of operational guidelines.

We need a strong and unwavering banking sector. State can think of having its own Small Finance Bank with public equity participation. Coupled with Telangana State Cooperative Bank, Srinidhi Bank and TIHCL the State’s credit infrastructure has potential to address the future needs of the state economy.
Tough times requires more tough solutions and we should be part of solution and not of the problem as Sadguru mentioned. The State has no room for complacence.
*Published this invited paper in the CII-Telangana News Letter MARCH-MAY 2020 ISSUE.


Thursday, October 10, 2019

Institutions loosing their relevance


Agri, MSME DFIs are failing to meet their objectives

The focus needs to shift from public sector banks to NABARD and SIDBI, whose functions greatly differ from their intended role

When one sees high inflation, the RBI comes to mind. When capital markets misbehave, SEBI is on the radar. When an insurance problem surfaces, the IRDA comes into the picture. These are institutions with proven credibility.

But when credit does not flow to agriculture or when farmers commit suicide, why does NABARD (National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development) not come to mind? Why do farmers go to the government for a resolution? Similarly, when MSMEs do not get credit on time or do not get the services promised, why is SIDBI not under scanner? Why should the RBI still have a department to resolve issues relating to agriculture and MSMEs and prescribe priority sector boundaries, despite these other institutions?
Agricultural credit

NABARD, a statutory corporation, was set up in 1982, to take up the work of the Agricultural Refinance and Development Corporation (or, Agriculture Refinance Corporation, till 1970), as well as some functions of the Agriculture Credit Department.

The NABARD Act was passed in 1981. Its preamble states that it is: “An Act to establish a development bank...for providing and regulating credit and other facilities for the promotion and development of agriculture (micro-enterprises, small enterprises and medium enterprises, cottage and village industries, handlooms), handicrafts and other rural crafts and other allied economic activities in rural areas with a view to promoting integrated rural development and securing prosperity of rural areas, and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.”

NABARD is a development finance institution (DFI) established under the statute to serve the purpose of providing and regulating credit and other facilities for the promotion and development of agriculture. It started regulating cooperative credit, but that space was ceded to commercial banks. It also started with regulating RRBs, but most of them merged into larger entities and RRB branches are now mostly seen in urban and metro centres.

When the statute provided for regulation of credit to agriculture, why did the RBI continue to hold the reins? Is it because of lack of confidence in NABARD, or a reluctance to cede control?
The Rural Infrastructure Development Fund is administered by NABARD. Why should NABARD fund States for infrastructure projects, and in the bargain became a banker for the State — not for agriculture and allied activities, rural and cottage industries? It undertakes more treasury business (pure financial operations) than refinancing of cooperative banks and RRBs at very soft rates, and through them, lends to the farmers of all hues. There has been a compromise of objectives, with full concurrence of both the RBI and the government. NABARD’s income comes more from investments than refinancing or development projects.

Commercial lending

Let us see the other DFI — set up under a separate statute in 1989 — the Small Industries Development Bank of India, or SIDBI. There are several Centrally-supported ‘funds’ for the development of small enterprises. But there is no review in the public domain as to how these funds are performing.

The Centre established SIDBI Venture Capital and the ventures funded were of the real estate sector and MFIs. It has no credible record of financing and promoting micro and small manufacturing enterprises or clusters. SIDBI started direct lending sparsely, with a minimum of ₹50 lakh. It did not consider, during the first decade financing, SME marketing activity as a term lending portfolio. Manufacturing enterprises did not get venture capital at a lower cost than the normal venture capital funds.

Commercial objectives continue to govern its functioning. Its regional offices are so autonomous that they do not even consider responding to RBI guidelines. Most of SIDBI’s lending is through collateral securities. It basks under sovereign protection to diversified activities.

Schemes such as MUDRA, CGTMSE, 59Minute Loan are all under its umbrella, albeit indirectly. No one has questioned SIDBI’s way of functioning in relation to the objectives spelt out in the statute: “An Act to establish the Small Industries Development Bank of India as the principal financial institution for the promotion, financing and development of industry in the small-scale sector and to co-ordinate the functions of the institutions engaged in the promotion, financing or developing industry in the small-scale sector and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.”

Thus, both the DFIs targeting specific sectors are non-performers in their supposedly dedicated domains. At a time when the Finance Minister is keen on bringing about institutional reforms, she should shift her antenna from mergers to these two DFIs.
The writer is an economist and risk management specialist. Views are personal


Thursday, July 19, 2018

Time for third wave of banking reforms


1969 followed by 1980 were considered as years of radical reform when 20 banks were nationalized. 80 percent of the banking sector was brought under the control of GoI with the declared objective of ‘controlling the commanding heights of the economy’.

Access to banking for the poor was the main aim and rural development was the focus. This era saw loan melas, the first Agricultural Loan write-off in 1990 and the birth of new institutions at the apex level – one for agriculture and rural development, viz., NABARD and the other for small industries, SIDBI. Both these institutions cannot claim that they are close to achieving their intended objectives. They act more as banks for the governments doing more treasury business than banking for the target groups.

Come mid-1990s, Narasimham Committee recommendations were accepted and the big bang reforms as economists and bankers termed it, allowing for privatization of banks in the name of ushering in competition. Banks competed alright but not for serving the unserved population but for profits. Technology was introduced. Costs of technology being huge had to be recovered from the customers. Charges for services started rising. Internet facilities were introduced. Convenience banking and convenience charges became the order of the day.

Technology became the master and banks became servants. Huge numbers of complaints started and Banking Ombudsman had to be appointed by the regulator. Banks were supposed to be financial intermediaries – intermediation between those who save and those who require money for acquiring productive assets and even consumption requirements. This intermediation was taken to the extreme, introducing universal banking providing for sale of third party products .

Yet, the reach to the unbanked and under-banked had to be thought of through financial literacy and board approved financial inclusion agenda despite the emergence of new institutions: MFIs, Banking Correspondents, Small Finance Banks and India Postal Bank etc. 2014 saw the ‘Jandhan’ as new avatar of ‘no-frill’ savings bank accounts. Credit to the needy sectors and persons had signs of improvement, al bait for short period.

Overall economic health depends on the vitality of the financial sector. This vitality was lost during the last ten years with irresponsible lending to corporates, several at the behest of government and vested interests resulting in unsustainable non-performing loans currently standing at Rs.10trn. Mechanical application of accountability to credit decisions has left bank managers shy of taking normal business risks. This has led to committee decisions on credit to large conglomerates making no one accountable for their failure.  Efforts to ‘tame the shrew’ through legal support  systems led to SARFAESI ACT 2002 and IBC code 2016.

The worst scenario prevails now: where the CBI is digging the graves of past sins of several bank top brasses fixing accountability for the current unrecoverable debts. If these Bank top executives followed unethical practices and extended patronage, more unethical is the investigating agencies announcing the names of the ‘offenders’ even before the charge sheets are filed and guilt is fully  established.

There is again a call for third generation reforms. The central issue of banking today is reducing government ownership in banks. With 82 percent of total banking in public space, government is active owner. It appoints the Chairpersons, Managing Directors, independent directors It reviews performance and directs the banks in appointments, transfers and closure or expansion of branches. These banks lost their autonomy and the freedom to run as banks either with a social purpose or commercial outlook.

Chidambaram who presided over the Finance Ministry after leaving the portfolio, delivering the Rajiv Gandhi Memorial Lecture on 21st August 1998 said: “the bureaucracy and the political system have developed a vested interest in maintaining the status quo – over 60% of the work of the Banking Division in the Ministry of Finance relates to Parliament work, a largely unproductive use of time.” It is a different matter that he did nothing after he again became the FM post 2009. Narasimham Committee suggested the winding up of Department of Banking for such reasons and is time to accede to this recommendation as the first agenda on reforms.

Cash credit system of lending should give place to working capital demand loan when the monthly or quarterly demands on the repayment become possible for review and timely action. Single dwelling house of any small enterprise should be prevented from SARFAESI proceedings in regard to micro enterprises, particularly when the Bank did not cover the loan under the CGTMSE.  

The second should be: let the ownership take responsibility for all the lapses and regulator admitting to laxity. This would mean refurbishing the capital of banks to the extent of shortfall in NCLT decisions by the government purely as a one-time measure.

Bank inspections and audits have become a matter of ridicule in the wake of serious frauds and malfeasance that came to light during this decade. ICAI should work on realistic accounting policies and accounting standards and disclosure norms. Audit begins where accountability ends, as the saying goes. RBI should restart the bank inspections of 1980s when a few large advances and branches were also being inspected. It should perform its regulatory function without fear of consequences.  Prompt action should follow on lapses noticed. 

Governance improvement in banks should be the third agenda on reforms. RBI should stop sending its persons to the Boards of Banks. Board should review its performance once in six months against the Director’s own commitment each year as to his contribution to the functioning of the Bank.
It’s time to restore the trust deficit in banks by GoI and RBI through vigorous media campaigns and supporting measures assuring service to every type of customer on time and at transparent cost. Safety, security, easy access at affordable cost of both deposit and credit services shall reign supreme on the reform agenda. RBI may appoint a high level committee of a few of the past governors and reputed economists sans MoF bureaucrat, with a mandate to provide the reform agenda within the next three months.
Published in Telangana Today, 19.7.18

Saturday, September 16, 2017

GOI DRAFT INDUSTRIAL POLICY

Industrial Policy 2017 needs re-discussion to make a stronger case for MSMEs: Expert


New Delhi, Sept 15 (KNN) With reference to the draft Industrial Policy 2017, the government has announced a set of measures for the different sectors of the industry, including the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises. However this is a need of discussion along several lines in order to make the policy a strong case for the sector, Yerram Raju, Economist opined.

Thursday, April 27, 2017

How to redefine and rebuild the banks in India

How to redefine and rebuild Banks?

‘Banks are basically meant to allocate capital to businesses and consumers efficiently.’ Post demonetization, customers feel the pain more than gain in banks. Farmers getting inadequate and untimely credit from banks take to huge private debt only to commit suicides later.

Manufacturing micro and small enterprises, the seed beds of employment and entrepreneurship, are being shown the door by the banks notwithstanding the CGTMSE guarantee up to Rs.2crore. Banks never went beyond the mandated Rs.10lakh guarantee cover for the MSEs.

Large number of customers is slapped with irrational minimum balances in their accounts and levy of penalties at will. RBI is averse to regulate such overtures in the name of micro management of banks being not their role.

With over 38% of the population still illiterate, Jan Dhan and Mudra Yojana as instruments of financial inclusion have only become compulsive agenda for the banking sector. Banks- Public sector or private sector, have their eyes set only on profit. Such profits are dwindling with net interest margins declining following the growing NPAs.

Institutional innovations like the Small Payment Banks, India Post and the likes as also the MFIs have also proved inadequate to meet the needs of the present leave alone the future banking needs of the population.

Cashless banking leading to poor inflow of deposits during the last four months and cashless ATMs demonstrate the erosion of faith in banking in India. Bad banking and good economy cannot co-exist and therefore, it is imperative that innovative institutional solutions should be thought of.

Indian economy targeting double digit growth ere long has competing clientele bases in the current milieu of banking. Domain banking has moved to high tech banking. Men at counters have now become slaves of the machine instead of being masters. Public sector banks have long back forgotten their purpose and their owner proving no better.

Emerging context requires that banking is redefined to meet the specificities of farming, employment, entrepreneurship, infrastructure, and international finance as distinct entities. In fact, Narasimham Committee (1991) suggested consolidation and convergence of the PSBs into six to serve the needs of the service sector, holding government securities, and retail lending; Local Area Banks to cater to the farmers and small entrepreneurs; International Bank to cater to the needs of exports and imports. Development Finance institutions, left untouched, would fund the infrastructure sector. FSLRC also echoed the same in its Report. This is the time to look at the spirit of such recommendations and rebuild the banks to regain the fast eroding trust in banking by the larger customer base of this country.

KISAN BANK:
Breaking the nexus between the farmer and politician can happen only when there is mutual trust between the bank and the farmer. Farm sector, consisting of crop farming (organic, precision, green technologies etc.), dairy farming, shrimp farming, poultry farming, sheep farming and agricultural marketing by itself is inherently capable of cross holding risks, save exceptions like the tsunamis, severe drought for long spells, huge typhoons. It is only in the event of such natural calamities that a Disaster Mitigation Fund should come to the rescue.

The existing commercial banks should shed this portfolio in favour of RRBs and merge all the rural branches with the RRBs. RRBs should be redesigned to take to farm lending in a big way – from farm machinery to crop farming and allied sectors on a project basis. Insurance plays a vital role in mitigating credit risk and therefore, the insurance products should be redesigned and modified on the lines of South Korean model.

All the Rural Cooperative Banks could continue their lending to the farm sector parallel to the RRBs as the lending requirements are huge and farmers require multiple but dedicated lending institutions.

RBI has not been comprehensive in regulating the sector. It is better that NABARD is restructured to play an exclusive refinance and regulatory role over the entire farm and rural lending consistent with its purpose of formation. Its other functions like the RIDF can be relegated to a new institution hived off from the NABARD.

UDYOG MITRA Bank

Nurturing entrepreneurship and promoting employment in manufacturing are moving at snail space in the Start Up, Stand Up and Make-in-India initiatives. Prabhat Kumar Committee (2017) called for setting up a National MSME Authority directly under the PMO to correct the milieu.

All the MSEs should be financed by dedicated MSE Bank Branches. All the existing SME branches should be brought under a new regulatory institution. SIDBI has disappointed the sector. It has to first consolidate all its FUNDS into just five: Incubation Fund; Venture Capital; Equity Fund to meet the margin requirements of MSEs when and where required; Marketing Fund to meet the market promotional requirements; Technology Fund; and Revival and Rehabilitation fund.

SIDBI should reshape into refinance and regulatory institution for the MSME sector with focus on manufacturing and manufacturing alone. It should divest its direct lending portfolio to avoid any conflict of interest. Its present lending to real estate and non-manufacturing MSME lending should be transferred to the commercial banks. RBI which is not currently able to cope with the regulatory burden of this sector can transfer it to SIDBI,

Vaanijya Banks (Commercial Bank):
All the existing commercial banks – both in the public and private sector – would do well confining to the project finance, lending to real estate, services sector, housing, exports and imports etc. All the Banks should constitute at the Board level a sub-committee on Development Banking to work on the transition arrangements to the above functionality.

Maulika Vitta Vitharana Samstha (Infrastructure Bank)
Huge NPAs have come from the practice of lending long with short term resource base coupled with lack of experience in assessing the risks in lending for infrastructure projects. ‘All the perfumes of Arabia’ (RBI’s structural debt restructuring solutions) did not sweeten the bloody hands of banks. It is time to revisit the universal banking model and reestablish Infrastructure Bank to fund the infrastructure projects and logistic parks.

These measures would help achieving the growth like never before.
RBI and GoI could constitute a High Level Committee to work on the modalities for transiting to the new structural transformation of the financial sector.

http://www.moneylife.in/article/how-to-redefine-and-rebuild-banks-for-emerging-demands/50376.html



Saturday, January 28, 2017

Budget 2017 for MSMEs

MSMEs and the Union Budget 2017

This is the time of expectations amidst the gloom of demonetisation. MSMEs hit worst in post demonetisation are looking eagerly to the FM for careful crafting of fiscal policy to boost the morale of MSMEs, particularly those in the manufacturing sector.

Banks have almost shut their doors to the manufacturing micro and small enterprises by biting their teeth strong through the recently amended SAFRAESI Act provisions. Their courage melts in the case of corporate defaulters. Large corporate defaulters cast a shadow of default on their vendors in the small sector and the banks are unwilling to buy this argument though the NPAs in the small industry segment is not significant compared to their elder brothers.

Friday, September 30, 2016

Lack of oversight on credit guarantee raises concerns

Lack of oversight on credit guarantees raises concerns

Just a year back, Pradeep Malgaonkar, the chief executive (CEO) of Credit Guarantee Fund Trust for Micro and Small Enterprises (CGTMSE) scheme was extolling the great strides it made in the geographical space of such guarantees. The Trust has issued cumulative guarantees to 23.23 lakh MSE loans involving an aggregate credit of Rs1.08 lakh crore over the past 16 years. Its corpus grew to Rs4,328 crore as of 31 March 2016. About 133 member lending institutions are participating in the scheme. 

But the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) in its Annual Report for 2016 expressed concerns about overleveraging of corpus and the way the guarantee scheme is functioning. Information asymmetry and adverse selection on the part of member lending institutions seem to worry the regulator. More worrisome issue is the absence of regulatory oversight on this institution.