When it comes to India’s banks, the default option is to delay any reckoning of losses. Never mind that this extend-and-pretend strategy has backfired for almost a decade. The official thinking seems to be that the government has done its bit for vulnerable small and midsize firms during the pandemic by guaranteeing fresh bank loans. Borrowers could use the cushion — plus the resources they preserved during a payment reprieve they got from the Reserve Bank of India — to repay creditors.
This benign view is supported by the low take-up rate for the RBI's one-time restructuring offer after the moratorium ended in August. Only $27 billion of requests came through by the Dec. 31 deadline, according to BloombergQuint. Rating firms were expecting debt recast to be four to five times as high.
So the idea, for now, is to not worry too much over the RBI’s stress test and wait for a V-shaped recovery in operating cash flows. If it doesn’t materialize, non-performing assets will surge. That can always be dealt with later.
But how? Papering over an economy-wide solvency problem by flooding the financial system with cheap liquidity is risky for financial stability, and not something the monetary authority wants to continue indefinitely. Alternatives, however, are scarce because India doesn’t have good tools to deal with insolvency. The 2016 bankruptcy law, heralded as a major reform, was struggling even before the virus outbreak. Liquidation, the outcome in most cases, has led to creditors recovering only 15%, compared with the global average of 80%. Yet the government extended the same regime to failing shadow banks.
Dewan Housing Finance
Corp., a mortgage lender whose controlling shareholders are currently in judicial custody on charges of accounting fraud and misappropriation of funds, became the first nonbank financier to enter an in-court bankruptcy process with an RBI-appointed administrator at its helm. That was in November 2019. Only this week will creditors get to vote on who they’ll sell the company to and recover a part of their $12 billion exposure.
It may not end there. After six rounds of bidding, which left the suitors groaning about how shabbily the process was being run, two front-runners are the distressed-debt guru Howard Marks’s Oaktree Capital Group and a financial services firm controlled by Indian billionaire Ajay Piramal. Oaktree says its plan gives creditors 388.2 billion rupees ($5.3 billion). That, it says, is $600 million more than Piramal Enterprises Ltd.’s bid, but only if lenders believe Oaktree’s assumptions. Not only is Piramal challenging them, it’s also asking how Oaktree can sweeten its offer after the bids had already been opened to reveal that the Indian contender was ahead.
The way the acrimonious contest is shaping up, it’s certain that whichever buyer the creditors select, the other party — or India’s Adani Group, which is also in the running — will mount a lengthy legal challenge. Every month of delay will cost creditors.
Oaktree’s Jan. 6 letter to creditors says their vote will “define the reputation” of India’s bankruptcy code in global markets. But international standing will be a byproduct of a fair, rules-based bidding process that holds up to domestic legal scrutiny and minimizes contagion risk. With Indian banks’ exposure to shadow financiers increasing, it’s critical to establish a template that can be used for swift resolution in the future.
Clearly, the task at hand is much more than filling the hole left by the $2.5 billion alleged fraud by Dewan’s former owners, or giving creditors some money now to make their end-March financial results look better. Lenders have to hang around for years to salvage value. So the goal must be to leave behind a well-capitalized mortgage financier with competent managers. If there are other entities in the bankrupt group — Dewan owns part of an insurance venture — those, too, must find owners acceptable to their regulators.
Much of this is common sense. When that’s given short shrift and the sanctity of deadlines is vitiated, you have to wonder how India will deal with a surge of Covid-19 bankruptcies.
Business Standard has always strived hard to provide up-to-date information and commentary on developments that are of interest to you and have wider political and economic implications for the country and the world. Your encouragement and constant feedback on how to improve our offering have only made our resolve and commitment to these ideals stronger. Even during these difficult times arising out of Covid-19, we continue to remain committed to keeping you informed and updated with credible news, authoritative views and incisive commentary on topical issues of relevance.
We, however, have a request.
As we battle the economic impact of the pandemic, we need your support even more, so that we can continue to offer you more quality content. Our subscription model has seen an encouraging response from many of you, who have subscribed to our online content. More subscription to our online content can only help us achieve the goals of offering you even better and more relevant content. We believe in free, fair and credible journalism. Your support through more subscriptions can help us practise the journalism to which we are committed.
Support quality journalism and subscribe to Business Standard.