Managing treasury risk: Interest rate risk (Part II)

|31-1-2017 | Lionel Pavey |

 

There are lots of discussions concerning risk, but let us start by trying to define what we mean by risk. In my first article of this series I wrote about risk managment and what the core criteria are for a solid risk management policy. Today I want to focus on interest rate risk. There are 4 types of interest rate risk.

 

Absolute Interest Rate Risk

Absolute interest rate risk occurs when we are exposed to directional changes in rates – either up or down. This is the main area of rate risk that gets monitored and analysed within a company as it is immediately visible and has a potential effect on profit.

Yield Curve Risk

Yield curve risk occurs from changes between short term rates and long term rates, together with changes in the spreads between the underlying periods. Under normal circumstances a yield curve would be upward sloping if viewed as a graph. The implication is that longer term rates are higher than short term rates because of the higher risk to the lender and less liquidity in the market for long dated transactions. Changes to the yield curve (steepening or flattening) can have an impact on decisions for investment and borrowings, leading to changes in profit.

Refunding or Reinvestment Risk

Refunding or reinvestment risk occurs when borrowings or investments mature at a time when interest rates are not favourable. Borrowings or investments are rolled over at rates that had not been forecast leading to a potential loss on projects or investments.

Embedded Options Risk

Embedded options are provisions in securities that cannot be traded separately from the security and grant rights to either the issuer or the holder that can introduce additional risk. Benefits for the issuer can include a call option, a right to repay before maturity without incurring a penalty, an interest rate cap. Benefits for the holder can include a put option, a conversion right via convertible bonds, an interest rate floor.

 

An attempt can be made to calculate the interest rate risk on either a complete portfolio or on individual borrowings or investment. This is done by comparing the stated interest rate to the actual or projected interest rate. Methods include:

  1. Mark to market
  2. Parallel shift in the whole yield curve
  3. Tailor-made shift in the whole yield curve
  4. Duration, DV01, Convexity
  5. Value at Risk (VaR)

These are all forms of quantitative analysis and well recognized. Personally I am of the opinion that VaR is not a very good method for interest rates. Interest rates do not display normal Gaussian distribution – they do not resemble a normal bell curve. Interest rate distribution curves display fat tails compared to normal statistical models.

Financial products that are commonly used to manage interest rate risk include FRAs, Futures, Caps, Floors, Collars, Options, Interest Rate Swaps and Swaptions.

Lionel Pavey

 

Lionel Pavey

Cash Management and Treasury Specialist

 

 

 

More articles from this author:

Safety of Payments

The treasurer and data

The impact of negative interest rates

How long can interest rates stay so low?

 

How much are you paying your bank ?

| 30-1-2017 | Patrick Kunz |

Does your bank send you a monthly invoice how much they charge you on banking costs? Some do but some don’t. Even if you receive an overview of these costs – do you look at them? Often organizations don’t and that’s a pity. A bank is as much a services provider as other suppliers of the company. Of course changing banks is not something you do every year but that does not mean you should never do it or never have a look at your banking costs.

Allthough even if another bank proves to be less expensive, it should not always imply to change the bank, as the indirect costs of a bank change should also be taken into account and you always have the option to renegotiate.

The first step when looking at your banking costs is how your payments look like. Is your company doing only national payments or SEPA or are you transferring (or receiving) money from outside the SEPA region and/or transferring non-EUR payments? This matters because a national payment and SEPA payment will cost you around 0,10 EUR per transaction while an international payment can costs on average EUR 6. The potential saving on international payments is much higher.

There are several ways to reduce the transactions costs:

  • Reduce the amount of transactions. This is often easier said then done because you have to pay your bills and your customers pay theirs to you. However, with international companies there is often a number of intercompany transactions. These transactions do not necessarily have to go via the bank account. They could be settled via in house bank or internal current accounts. Often these intercompany transactions are international transfers or non-EUR payments which brings me to the next point
  • Analyse the foreign currency transactions. As said above these transactions costs around EUR 6 per transaction (and I have seen banks charge up to EUR 50 per transaction) so the saving potential is big, if you do a lot of these transactions. You can ask yourself do you need to pay your supplier in foreign currency? Can I receive my invoice in EUR instead of foreign currency? Often complex questions leading to more questions (hedging?). It is not always possible to change transacting in foreign currency so another solution to reduce transactions costs is to move the bank account to the home country of the currency. This way the “foreign” currency becomes domestic and therefore transactions costs move from international (EUR 6) to domestic (EUR 0,10), a big potential. Of course there are some limitations to this.

Have a look at the total return of your bank. Your bank is one of your suppliers so it makes sense to compare the costs of the supplier to their competitors, especially if you have multiple banking partners. As for suppliers you do not always choose the cheapest but also take into account service level and worldwide availability. It does make sense to compare banking costs every 3 years for market conformity. My advice would be to take into account all banking costs (so also FX deals, corporate finance, trade finance, guarantees). Banks often cross sell their products and the total fees are never visible so you have to gather this information yourself. I prefer to calculate the RAROC (Risk adjusted return on capital) for each banking partner. This way you can easily compare the total return per bank. This helps a lot when renegotiating fees or (new) credit lines. RAROC calculation is not easy and it takes often quite some work to gather all information but once implemented it is a nice tool for companies with multiple banking partners to compare (and rank) banks.

Patrick Kunz

Treasury, Finance & Risk Consultant/ Owner Pecunia & Finance BV

 

 

Blockchain and Central banks: a Tour de Table (Part I)

| 27-1-2017 | Carlo de Meijer | treasuryXL |


Our expert Carlo de Meijer, distinguished blockchain specialist, has published an article that is worth sharing with you. This is Part I and Part II will follow soon. May we invite you to comment or share your experience with this intriguing topic:

In April last year I wrote a blog on blockchain and monetary policy. In this blog I went into a number of still unanswered questions posed by the European Central Bank around blockchain technology. There was a big uncertainty about the impact of this technology on the future role of central bank money and on monetary policy.

 

While at that time many financial institutions and startups already paid a lot of attention to this technology, only a handful of central banks were interested in blockchain with the most vocal being the Bank of England. Since than a lot has changed with a growing number of central banks around the globe starting to recognise the potential for blockchain to help them in obtaining their key objectives: stable financial system and efficient financial markets. In the first part of this blog I will try to answer why there is nowadays so much interest amongst central banks in blockchain technology, what are the main benefits and what are remaining concerns. In the second part a Tour de Table will be given, looking at the various initiatives of the central banks.

Central banks are experimenting with blockchain

Several central banks are or have been experimenting with different versions of blockchain-backed systems. A growing number are questioning the point of creating digital currencies, such as the Danes. But they are not alone. Also the central banks of Sweden, Japan, China and Russia have launched similar efforts. Others such as the central bank of Singapore and Canada have already tested blockchain-based currency systems for internet payments, while also the Reserve Bank of South Africa has expressed their optimism towards the blockchain technology and its potential impact on finance. The European Central Bank recently announced a new research undertaking in partnership with the Bank of Japan. Earlier last month the US Federal Reserve released its first major research paper on blockchain.

Why is there so much interest?

But why are so many central banks now embracing blockchain, seriously exploring their potential.

The turning point was a three-day event in Washington , hosted by the World Bank, the IMF and the US Federal Reserve where representatives from more than 90 central banks worldwide expressed broad interest “in how the technology might impact both the banks they regulate as well as their own regulatory practices”.

Central banks’ interest in deploying a blockchain “comes in step” with moves by the big banks to use the technology to ease cross-border settlement transactions and overhaul antiquated back-office infrastructure. Experiments by banks with distributed ledgers as a way to settle trades and record data and transactions, have clearly shown its potential to reduce costs and increase the efficiency of its operations. The distributed ledger and its potential to simplify the record keeping, tracking and accounting process makes it hard to ignore by central banks.

Central banks and public stances: some quotes

Over the course of the past half year many central banks representatives have taken a public stance on their potential use of distributed ledgers and digital currencies. Here follow some of the most interesting quotes.

 “Innovation using these technologies could be extremely helpful and bring benefits to society. The technology has the potential to transform multiple aspects of the financial system” Janet L. Yellen, Chairwomen Federal reserve

 “We are paying close attention to distributed ledger technology, or blockchain recognizing this may represent the most significant development in many years in payments, clearing and settlement” Lael Brainard, Federal Reserve Board

Other interesting quotes include:

“The conditions are ripe for digital currencies, which can reduce operating costs, increase efficiency and enable a wide range of new applications” People’s bank of China

“A state-sponsored digital currency is still on the agenda, and if adopted, the technology could deliver a range of benefits” Russian central bank

 “The technology could be worth using for central banks because it would make for a financial system that does not go down even if the central bank’s computer systems are temporarily taken offline” Mark Carney Bank of England

What are the potential benefits for central banks?

Central banks are now exploring the potential of blockchain and distributed ledger technology. As banks experiments have shown blockchain networks may lead to safer and better payments and securities systems..

  • Make money more easily traceable

The inherent property of immutability and transparency associated with blockchain makes it easier for the central banks to trace the money that is in circulation. It would allow them to track every euro, pounds, dollar or renminbi on every step through the financial system in real-time.

  • Build single shared record

Central banks are also interested in blockchain technology as a way to build a single, shared record of all transactions among several institutions. The central banks hope they can use the decentralised method of record-keeping to complete and record transactions in the real economy more effectively, quickly and transparently. The creation of a standardised way of recording transactions would allow all the players in the system to communicate more seamlessly. That could leave much less money sitting idle while banks reconcile their different ledgers, as now happens.

  • Simplify the settlement process

It has also the potential to create efficiency. Blockchain or the distributed ledger technology has the potential to simplify the settlement chain around securities transactions. The resulting cost reductions, speed of settlement and enhanced transparency may all contribute to more efficient and safer payments and capital markets.

  • Reduce transmission costs

It may also drastically reduce the transmission costs and time associated with cross border transfers, by enabling instant transfers between branches both within and outside the country.

  • Reduce operating costs

The use of blockchain-based digital fiat currency will reduce the amount of banknotes and coins that are in circulation. This will, in turn, reduce the operating costs associated with printing and distribution of currency notes by the central bank.

  • Fight money laundering

The wide spread implementation of blockchain based fiat currency will also help the central banks (and government’s) fight money laundering while eliminating the issue of counterfeiting.

  • Other advantages

The blockchain technology provides a tool to measure leverage in the system and counterparty exposure, and can monitor compliance in real time. It can also answer questions about collateral ownership.

A blockchain could untangle the spaghetti structure of central swap bank lines, which would improve crisis response capabilities.

  • Reach the unbanked

Digital currencies may eventually benefit the developing world too. Because they are low-cost and easy to use on electronic devices, digital currencies may enable greater access to financial services for the billions of the world’s unbanked.

  • Stable financial system

This all should make the financial system more transparent, fast, efficient and secure. According to a Bank of England research paper produced last year, the economic benefits of issuing a digital currency on a distributed ledger could add as much as 3 percent to a country’s economic output, thanks to the efficiency it could offer.

 Remaining concerns

There are however still a range of questions and all sorts of security and regulatory concerns where central banks will need answers for before blockchain technologies are to become a key part of the future central banking landscape.

Questions such as: How may it impact monetary policy?; What are the implications of issuance of central bank digital money?; What is the impact on physical cash?; How would it impact on central bank seigniorage?; What are the implications for the integration of the European capital market?; and What is the impact on exiting projects such as T2S?

In previous blogs I already tackled some of these issues. See: “Could blockchain bring the EU Capital Market Union forward?” November 6, 2016; “Blockchain: What about T2S?” June 30, 2016; and, “Blockchain and Monetary Policy” April 29, 2016.

There are also a number of concerns that are already highlighted, such as assurance around scalability, data integrity, resilience and resistance to cyber-attack. A big concern is regulation of digital currencies. This is a looming challenge that will require cross-border co-operation. Monetary authorities must come together to start thinking about the necessary regulation of digital money that will be flowing around the world.

See my blog: “Blockchain and Regulation: do not stifle innovation!” April 4, 2016.

When can we expect central bank-operated digital currencies?

When a move to official digital currencies might occur is hard to estimate. Central bank-operated digital currencies could be ‘decades away’ according to the more pessimistic (or realistic?). But what is sure is that it will take a number of years before any central bank issues its own currency onto a live distributed ledger. Research is still at an early stage and many puzzles still have to be worked out.

It has become clear that central banks are set to take a much more active role in the development of blockchain technology. But how active that will be is not yet clear. The Fed’s preference at this stage is still to take a fairly hands-off approach and allow banks take lead the way – “as long as they remain within defined guidelines and best practices”. A switch could happen within the next 5 to 10 years. When large parts of the financial system are using blockchain for financial transactions, so will central banks!

 

Carlo de Meijer

Economist and researcher

 

PSD 2: a lot of opportunities but also big challenges (Part I)

| 26-1-2017 | François de Witte |

The Directive 2015/2366 on payment services in the internal market (hereinafter PSD2) was adopted by the European Parliament on October 8, 2015, and by the European Union (EU) Council of Ministers on November 16, 2015. The PSD2 updates the first EU Payment Services Directive published in 2007 (PSD1), which laid the legal foundation for the creation of an EU-wide single market for payments. PSD2 came into force on January 13, 2016, and is applicable from January 13, 2018 onwards.

By that date the member states must have adopted and published the measures necessary to implement it into their national law.

PSD 2

PSD2 will cause important changes in the market and requires a thorough preparation. In this article, we are summarizing the measures and highlighting the impact on the market participants. In today’s Part I we will focus on abbreviations and main measurers introduced by PSD2.

List of abbreviations used in this article

2FA    : Two-factor authentication

AISP  :  Account Information Service Provider

API : Application Programming Interface

ASPSP : Account Servicing Payment Service Provider

EBA :  European Banking Authority

EBF :  European Banking Federation

EEA :  European Economic Area

PISP :  Payment Initiation Service Provider

PSD1:  Payment Services Directive 2007/64/EC

PSD2  :  Revised Payment Services Directive (EU) 2015/2366

PSP : Payment Service Provider

PSU:   Payment Service User

RTS : Regulatory Technical Standards (to be issued by the EBA)

SCA : Strong Customer Authentication

TPP :  Third Party Provider

Main Measures introduced by PSD2:

The  PSD2 expands the reach of PSD1, to the following payments:

  • Payments in all currencies (beyond EU/EEA), provided that the two PSP (Payment Service Provider) are located in the EU /EEA (two legs)
  • Payments where at least one PSP (and not both anymore)  is located within EU borders for the part of the payment transaction carried out in the EU/EEA (one leg transactions)

A second important measure is the creation of the Third Party Providers (TPP). One of the main aims of the PSD2 is to encourage new players to enter the payment market and to provide their services to the PSU (Payment Service Users). To this end, it creates the obligation for the ASPSP (Account Servicing Payment Service Provider – mainly the banks) to “open up the bank account” to external parties, the so-called, third-party account access. These TPP (Third Party Providers) are divided in two types:

·        AISP (Account Information Service Provider) : In order to be authorized, an AISP is required to hold professional indemnity insurance and be registered by their member state and by the EBA. There is no requirement for any initial capital or own funds. The EBA (European Banking Authority) will publish guidelines on conditions to be included in the indemnity insurance (e.g. the minimum sum to be insured), although it is as yet unknown what further conditions insurers will impose.

·        PISP (Payment Initiation Service Providers): PISPs are players that can initiate payment transactions. This is an important change, as currently there are not many payment options that can take money from one’s account and send them elsewhere. The minimum requirements for authorization as a PISP are significantly higher. In addition to being registered, a PISP must also be licensed by the competent authority, and it must have an initial and on-going minimum capital of EUR 50,000.

Banks will have to implement interfaces, so they can interact with the AISPs and PISPs. However, payment initiation service providers will only be able to receive information from the payer’s bank on the availability of the funds on the account which results in a simple yes or no answer before initiating the payment, with the explicit consent of the payer. Account information service providers will only receive the information explicitly consented by the payer and only to the extent the information is necessary for the service provided to the payer. This compliance with PSD2 is mandatory and all banks will have to make changes to their infrastructure deployments.

Source: PA Perspectives on Nordic Financial Services
http://www.paconsulting.com/our-thinking/perspectives-on-nordic-financial-services.

A third important change is the obligation for the Payment Service Providers to place the SCA (Strong Customer Authentication) for electronic payment transactions based in at least 2 different sources (2FA: Two-factor authentication) :

  • Something which only the client knows (e.g. password)
  • A device (e.g. card reader, authentication code generating device, token)
  • Inherence (e.g. fingerprint or voice recognition)

 

The EBA (European Banking Authority will provide further guidance on this notion in a later stage. It remains to be seen whether the current bank card with pin code is sufficient to qualify as “strong customer authentication”. This “strong customer authentication” needs to take place with every payment transaction. EBA will also be able to provide exemptions based on the risk/amount/recurrence/payment channel involved in the payment service (e.g. for paying the toll on the motorway or the parking).

PSD2 also introduces some other measures:

  • Retailers will be authorized to ask to the consumers for permission to use their contact details, so as to receive the payment directly from the bank without intermediaries
  • There will be a ban on surcharges on card payments
  • There will be new limitations on the customer liability for unauthorized payment transactions

In a second article soon to be published on treasuryXL, François de Witte will focus on the impact PSD2 has on market participants. 

François de Witte – Senior Consultant at FDW Consult

[button url=”https://www.treasuryxl.com/community/experts/francois-de-witte/” text=”View expert profile” size=”small” type=”primary” icon=”” external=”1″]

[separator type=”” size=”” icon=””]

Managing treasury risk : Risk Management (Part I)

| 23-1-2017 | Lionel Pavey |

 

There are lots of discussions concerning risk, but let us start by trying to define what we mean by risk.
It is a negative event that can potentially lead to loss or liability; it is exposure to uncertainty; it is a deviation from the expected outcome. It can be caused by people, changes in the law, products used in day-to-day activity to facilitate the business. Risk is not an uncertainty – it is a “known unknown”

 

 

Risk arises in every activity of a company and, therefore, a procedure of risk assessment has to be determined within a company and controls implemented. We can conclude that a risk management policy is a crucial part of the risk management function. The policy provides a framework – and details the framework – for decision making, whilst adhering to the company’s agreed viewpoint on risk.

Risk Management

A risk management policy can be very extensive as it relates to all risks faced by a company – we shall only focus on the risk relating to treasury operations. Treasury risk policy should be developed by the Treasury department, together with management, and approved by the board of directors. Once approved and implemented, the policy should be regularly reviewed and amended to ensure that it effectively meets the changing risks as the company advances.

Core criteria

The core criteria for undertaking the policy include:

  1. Providing a framework (matrix) for financial decision making
  2. Defining a policy for identifying and controlling risk
  3. Confirmation of the objectives and restrictions set by the board of directors and management
  4. Safeguarding the interests of stakeholders
  5. Enabling the reporting and measurement of treasury risk to the board of directors and management

Strategic components

Strategic components related to the policy include:

  1. Objectives
  2. Standards of care
  3. Authority and Responsibility
  4. Requirements for third party providers
  5. Types of transactions
  6. Constraints on transactions
  7. Reporting
  8. Policy review process
  9. Benchmarking

Major treasury related risks that shall be discussed in my next articles include:

  • Interest rate risk
  • Foreign Exchange risk
  • Commodity risk
  • Credit risk
  • Operational risk
  • Liquidity risk

A search through Google will show more risks, but we are attempting to show and discuss the main types of risk in treasury operations.

In the rest of the series, we shall elaborate on the above 6 major treasury related risk categories.

“Risk comes from not knowing what you are doing” – Warren Buffett

Lionel Pavey

 

 

Lionel Pavey

Cash Management and Treasury Specialist

 

 

More articles from this author:

Safety of Payments

The treasurer and data

The impact of negative interest rates

How long can interest rates stay so low?

Het belang van de basiskennis van delivery terms en betalingsinstrumenten in een organisatie

| 20-1-2017 | Ger van Rosmalen | treasuryXL

Al een tijdje geleden leverde Ger van Rosmalen dit boeiende verhaal en wij delen het graag met jullie, omdat het nog steeds actueel is. Het maakt eens te meer duidelijk dat goede communicatie tussen afdelingen in het belang van de hele organisatie is en hierin investeren geen overbodige luxe.
Daarnaast is het zeer zinvol dat niet alleen de verkoop-afdeling een goede basiskennis heeft van delivery terms en betalingsinstrumenten, maar ook de andere afdelingen in de verkoopketen en dat ook regelmatig uitgewisseld wordt met de treasury.

De treasury-afdeling van een bedrijf dekt een koersrisico af voor de levering van machines aan een afnemer in Turkije. De betaling is op 60 dagen na factuurdatum en de afnemer heeft een limiet onder de kredietverzekering. Afdeling sales heeft de machines verkocht met als delivery term (EXW) Ex Works. De afnemer stuurt een vrachtauto om de machines op te halen maar bij het laden gaat er iets verkeerd en valt één machine van de vorkheftruck en wordt total loss verklaard. Omdat de tweede machine alleen maar kan werken met combinatie met de andere machine die nu total loss is verklaard, weigert de afnemer te betalen.

Wellicht had de treasury-afdeling dit contract eerder kunnen rescontreren maar nu liep het contract tot de einddatum en volgde er geen betaling. De afdeling treasury werd niet geïnformeerd over dit probleem. De partijen zijn in een juridisch gevecht terecht gekomen want het laden van de vrachtauto blijkt door eigen personeel te zijn gedaan. EXW wil zeggen dat de chauffeur van de afnemer de machines zelf had moeten laden maar vaak, hoe goed bedoeld ook, doen de collega’s van het magazijn dit. In principe gaat het risico over van verkoper op koper bij EXW op het moment dat de machines van hun plek worden gehaald. Laden de magazijnmedewerkers de producten zelf dan had een andere delivery term afgesproken moeten worden namelijk FCA Free Carrier.

Bovenstaande situatie toont aan dat het belangrijk is om niet alleen de afdeling sales maar ook andere afdelingen basiskennis mee te geven van delivery terms en betalingsinstrumenten. Daarnaast is het van groot belang om de afdelingen sales, logistiek, finance, treasury en credit regelmatig met elkaar in gesprek te laten zijn (en te laten blijven), dat maakt dat iedereen attent is op risico’s die ook buiten hun eigen aandachtsgebied liggen. Je hebt tenslotte toch allemaal een gezamenlijk belang binnen een bedrijf?

Ger van Rosmalen

Trade Finance Specialist

 

Nieuw op treasuryXL: de Flex Treasurer

| 19-1-2017 | treasuryXL |

 

Wat is een Flex Treasurer?

Stel: je bent de eigenaar van of werkt in een kleine of middelgrote organisatie die geen treasurer of cash manager in dienst heeft. Je denkt waarschijnlijk dat er binnen jouw organisatie geen plaats is voor een dergelijke functie. Maar, oordeel niet te snel: ook het MKB heeft behoefte aan professionals als het gaat om treasury en cash management. Toch gaat het aannemen van iemand vaak een stap te ver.

Wij bieden je nu de mogelijkheid om een Flex Treasurer in te huren op urenbasis, als lump sum of in een abonnementsvorm. We willen met deze dienstverlening geen substituut worden voor de grote treasury consultancy organisaties maar we bieden graag ondersteuning bij vraagstukken die nu onbeantwoord blijven. Je kunt je vraag aan ons stellen en wij zullen je vrijblijvend in contact brengen met de juiste deskundige.

Wij kennen Flex Treasurers uit verschillende vakgebieden: risk, bankrelaties & technologie, regulations, non-profit, financiering, trade finance, cash management, SME & overige gebieden.

[button url=”https://www.treasuryxl.com/community/flex-treasurer/” text=”Ga naar de Flex Treasurer” size=”small” type=”primary” icon=”” external=”1″]

 

De verschillende diensten

Hieronder staat een overzicht van de diensten die we aanbieden in samenwerking met de Flex Treasurers.

[one_third]

[button url=”https://www.treasuryxl.com/community/flex-treasurer/financiele-instrumenten-en-derivaten/” text=”Financiële instrumenten en derivaten” size=”small” type=”primary” icon=”” external=”1″]

[button url=”https://www.treasuryxl.com/community/flex-treasurer/treasury-quickscan/” text=”Treasury Quickscan” size=”small” type=”primary” icon=”” external=”1″]

[button url=”https://www.treasuryxl.com/community/flex-treasurer/treasury-coach/” text=”Treasury Coach” size=”small” type=”primary” icon=”” external=”1″]

[/one_third]

[two_third]
[/two_third]

Het aanbod is in ontwikkeling en in de loop van tijd zullen er steeds meer diensten bij komen.

Meer informatie

Wil je gebruik maken van een van de aangeboden diensten of heb je een andere vraag? Of wil je je aansluiten als Flex Treasurer?

Pieter de Kiewit helpt je graag verder.

Pieter de Kiewit[email protected]
06-11119783

 

[separator type=”” size=”” icon=””]

Is your payments process limiting your business?

| 18-1-2017 | Treasury Intelligence Solutions GmbH (TIS) | Sponsored content |

TIS iVWith globalisation and an increasingly complex business environment, having an efficient and centralised payment system is vital to any multinational’s success. Recognising this, we at HSBC are proud to have successfully connected to Treasury Intelligence Solutions (TIS) in Asia for automated payment and bank statement processing.

Read more about the collaboration between TIS, HSBC and Netherlands-based Fugro Group, an international geophysics and geotechnics company, which did not have a central treasury department until Group Treasurer Simon Karregat established one in 2014. The Group had numerous ERP systems connected separately to the local banks via several e-banking tools.

“We have reached a unique milestone in Fugro. With great enthusiasm and dedication, we managed to have our payment entered in our ERP routed via TIS directly to the bank. This new setup will result in significant time saving on our operations as well as IT systems maintenance,” praises Karregat.

If you want to read more about this subject please click on in this whitepaper.

TIS (Treasury Intelligence Solutions GMBH)

 

 

 

 

Read also: How can you protect your company against fraud?

 

Impact of Basel III on Notional Cash Pooling

|17-1-2017 | Arnoud Doornbos |

afbeelding

 

Since the start of the financial crisis a growing need for more bank independency with companies has arisen. Bank counterparty risk became an issue. A large cash management bank announced in 2015 to stop their transactional banking services for continental Europe. What will happen with current cash pools running with banks in the UK? Increased regulations (Basel III) may stop certain banking products.
All types of events where companies feel a growing need for more bank independency.

Basel III

In the coming years, banks have to prepare themselves for compliance with the new Basel III rules on financial institutions.
The financial crisis of 2008 brought the shortcomings of Basel II to light. The capital requirements for banks were found to be insufficient and banks were running risks which were not identified by Basel II.
Therefore the focus of Basel III is to restore previous mistakes and adding requirements to both the quality and composition of the capital held by banks and liquidity position and governance to manage the risks.

Effective liquidity management is a way to look for “Idle” cash. An increasing number of companies therefore choose for notional pooling as it enables them to gain more insight into their (global) financial position and in order to optimize the interest income on their accounts.
Simultaneously Basel III imposes stricter requirements on offsetting balances (credit and debit), and this brings notional pooling possibly into danger. The question is what impact the introduction of Basel III has to notional pooling services offered by banks.

Notional Pooling

Notional pooling is a mechanism for calculating interest on the combined credit and debit balances of accounts that a corporate parent chooses to cluster together, without actually transferring any funds between the accounts. It is ideal for companies with decentralized organizations that want to allow some autonomy to their subsidiaries, including their control over bank accounts.

Treasury Services- without notional pooling

Benefits of notional pooling

The use of notional pooling has increased tremendously in recent years. At the moment it is a commonly used structure to concentrate balances and maximize the interest income on bank accounts. In addition it will provide companies with an increased understanding of their financial position and the company is therefore able to manage their money more effectively. Another commonly used technique is physical pooling (zero balancing) where the money from the participating accounts is transferred via a physical transfer to a higher-level account. The difference between them is that with notional pooling the money shall be paid only virtual and with physical pooling a physical transfer of money takes place. By using physical pooling through physical money transfer, internal debt positions will be created. Notional pooling and physical pooling can also be combined in an overlay structure.

Liquidity management

Basel III introduces a number of new financial ratios that aim to strengthen the capital base of banks.
One of the most significant ratios is the liquidity coverage ratio which banks are required to hold in high-quality liquid assets (cash money or assets which can be sold on the market quickly). This liquidity coverage ratio shows how far banks are able to withstand sufficiently a ‘crisis’ on cash flows for a period of thirty days. Moreover, the new law increases the capital requirements for banks and make these requirements more risk-weighted than before. The requirements are also countercyclical, intended to encourage banks to build up more capital in economic good times.
Liquidity management is gaining popularity by two simultaneous developments. On the one hand, credit is a less attractive source of profit for banks, which enforced banks to shift their focus to activities without capital requirements. On the other hand, companies need to make optimal use of internal cash as bank financing is becoming increasingly difficult. Notional pooling offers the option to concentrate the balances at several (international) accounts and optimize the interest.

Uncertain future for notional pooling

Basel III does not always allow that liquidity ratios are calculated by means of netting the outstanding balances of accounts in the notional pool. This means that banks must calculate their ratios based on the gross value of individual accounts. To cover the negative positions in the notional pool banks need to hold more liquidity. The negative position is seen as overdraft, which is associated with unattractive Risk Weighted Asset (RWA) for the bank. The conditions for reducing this RWA vary by bank and are depending also on the central bank of an individual country. To prevent that banks are required to hold a higher amount of risk capital they must be in possession of a legal right of offset. However, the process to obtain this right involves a lot of time and high costs (both for the bank and the company) and requires the necessary legal and tax knowledge. First, the law in the jurisdiction of each participant of the notional pool must allow compensation in the event of bankruptcy. In addition each participant of the notional pool must sign a paper that allow them to guarantee for other participants. Finally, the company must demonstrate that netting has occurred periodically.

Regarding the future of notional pooling, there are a number of scenarios to think of when it comes to the continuation of this service by banks:

  • Banks will only allow entities in the notional pool if there is an enforceable right of compensation;
  • Banks will charge the higher costs related to notional pooling to the companies;
  • Banks offer notional pooling selectively based on the creditworthiness of the company.

If banks decide to increase the price for notional pooling, it is likely that companies will go for alternatives for their cash management activities (e.g. physical pooling). Therefore it is advisable to contact your bank regarding notional pooling, so you are not faced with unnecessary surprises.

Treasury Services monitors the developments in the Basel III framework closely and combines its expertise in the areas of Payments, Treasury and Risk in order to provide its customers the best advice.
The Treasury Services Cash Management Scan analyses the impact of Basel III on your current cash pools and will explain how to manage this in the future.

Bank independent Cash Pooling

Treasury Services has developed a solution to set up cash pooling structures completely independent from banks through software. This creates significant additional savings and advantages compared to a cash pooling solution with banks.

The bank independent cash pooling allows companies to pool different bank accounts with different banks in different countries.

The advantages are:

Treasury Services advantages Cash pooling tool

The solution we have developed is a complete solution. It does not only consist of a software solution, but also proposed changes for policies and processes, and we investigated the legal and fiscal constraints.

For  more information please refer to this link.

 

arnoud-doornbos

 

Arnoud Doornbos

Partner at Treasury Services

 

 

 

Interesting transfer Joop Wijn from ABN to Adyen

| 16-1-2017 | Pieter de Kiewit |

Joop WijnLast Thursday I attended a very interesting breakfast meeting about PSD2, organized by Alexander Huiskes of EY with support from DNB. I will write about this in a separate blog. Not being up-to-date on my Financieele Dagblad reading, I was surprised by the question what my opinion is about the transfer of Joop Wijn from ABN Amro to Adyen. I replied to my best knowledge, digested the question and decided upon this blog.

Not being involved at all, I think there are two aspects in this transfer: industry developments and his strategic career management. Fact is that Joop Wijn surprised us before with career changes from banking into politics and back.

We all know banks have to rethink their place in the value chain and their proposition. New services appear and replace traditional banking services. Also traditional services are executed better or cheaper by new suppliers. Adyen , as a payment services provider, offers a perfect example of these developments. Risk management within Fintech gets, just so, increasing attention. Topics like anti money laundering, authentication, fraud and hacking should be addressed. Not only because regulators want this but of course clients see this as essential. My first thought was that Joop Wijn is too senior, as board member of ABN, to be responsible just for risk. As risk management is essential, I can understand Adyen aims this high and Joop accepted.

From a strategic career perspective I have two assumptions. The first is that one of the motivators of Joop might be the impact he can have. Not being considered as chairman of a Dutch bank stops his career advancement, thus the possibility to increase his impact. Being responsible for a strategic topic within a global market leader in a growing market, might be more appealing. The second assumption is that he made a reshuffle of what is important. I often see this with candidates with a longer track record. This move might enable him to change his priorities.

Perhaps he will inform us about the above, perhaps he will keep this to himself. Fact is, it is an interesting career move.

Pieter de Kiewit

 

 

Pieter de Kiewit
Owner Treasurer Search