Peer reviewed analysis from world leading experts

Can Indian financial reform build better banks?

Reading Time: 4 mins

In Brief

In India’s most recent budget Finance Minister Arun Jaitley formally announced that it would slash the number of Indian public sector banks from the current 27 to just 10. Consolidating India’s public sector banks will result in improved efficiency, greater economies of scale and large-scale financial institutions that can cater to the needs of a growing economy.

Share

  • A
  • A
  • A

Share

  • A
  • A
  • A

The process of consolidation is already underway, with the State Bank of India (SBI) proposing to merge its five associate banks with Bharatiya Mahila Bank. The discussion between the boards of SBI and its associate banks took place in late May and, according to reports, the merger is underway, although the time frame is yet to be confirmed. While the planned bank merger will have different implications for different stakeholders, it is a welcome step for India’s financial sector in general. And, provided it is done properly, it is good for the Indian economy.

Bank mergers bring greater efficiency to operating costs and rationalise bank branches and organisational structures. For example, at present both SBI and its associate banks have bank branches in the same area vying for the same client base. Similarly, every associate bank has its own unique organisational structure of higher officials. Efficiency indicators like loans and investment per employee as well as net profit per employee are therefore likely to improve after the merger. In a globalised world where instability of banking and financial markets is one of the major reasons for large-scale economic crisis, greater efficiency is a welcome move.

If the merger goes through as planned, SBI, the parent bank, will enter into the top 50 banks in the world with assets worth US$550 billion. This scale has certain advantages in terms of funding large-scale projects, withstanding external and internal shocks, and adopting new technology. In general, bigger banks with large asset bases are better users of capital and more willing providers of low cost funding.

In India, there is huge demand for large-scale banks to fund mega-projects like industrial corridors and transport infrastructure upgrades. Smaller banks with low asset bases, if poorly managed, would find it difficult to compete with bigger private and public sector banks due to their higher operating cost. Therefore, the scale achieved in the Indian banking sector through this merger has positive flow on effects for the economy as a whole.

Though associate bank customers may face some initial difficulties in adjusting to new interest and deposit rates, they are likely to benefit more in the future. That is, in time all financial products and services would be integrated into SBI, which has lower lending interest rates than most of the associate banks. In a growing economy like India’s, the prevalence of different interest rates for each financial product is not efficiency enhancing.

But consolidating India’s banks won’t fix all its problems. Bigger banks are not always better. Today, India’s public sector banks make up more than 70 per cent of total banking business in India but most of them are suffering from bad balance sheets. Sometimes small public or private banks do much better than big banks. Rather than size, it comes down to due diligence when lending, managing assets and conducting efficient business operations.

Simply merging associate banks with SBI will not solve the bigger problem of bad balance sheets in public sector banks due to high non-performing assets and the need for recapitalisation funds. The Indian government needs to not only help banks improve their efficiency but also provide more funds for recapitalisation than the 250 billion rupees (US$3.7 billion) that was delivered in the last budget.

Another constraint on the proposed banking reform is that it faces stiff resistance from employees and trade unions of the associate banks. There is apprehension that fewer bank branches will result in banks downsizing their employees. But the government has made assurances that it will manage any negative impact on employees.

There is some rationale for concerns that the bank mergers will see shifting employee responsibilities, bases and positions, but overall it is a good move for the Indian economy.

Pravakar Sahoo is Associate Professor at the Institute of Economic Growth, India and visiting fellow, Bruegel, Brussels.

4 responses to “Can Indian financial reform build better banks?”

  1. These are all good points, especially the author’s reticence to endorse bigger state banks as necessarily more efficient than smaller or privately owned banks.

    In my experience pioneering the financial restructuring industry in India, it was obvious that NPLs were a major drag on the efficiency of the banking sector, and the economy as a whole.

    One of the biggest problems to banking reform is the reluctance to take effective action to enforce securities supporting defaulted loans. This means not only that banks have impaired balance sheets, but that billions of dollars are tied up in enterprises that are not performing, and not providing jobs and growth. Recycling the money supporting these NPLs can provide the finance for new and innovative industries which India needs to generate wealth.

    The economic and social reform that would be possible by bringing efficiency to resolving NPLs would be far greater than many of the government sponsored spending projects, which are underpinned by dubious economics.

    The question then is how to bring this about? The answer lies more in what happens inside state owned banks, than how they are structured. Middle and senior level management must be remunerated on the efficiency of the assets they have in their portfolios, and on their ability to make loans that are still performing three or five years after they are made. Executives must also be incentivised to clean up defaulted loans in portfolios they inherit.

    India has all the legislative mechanisms to do this. What is needed are banking executives who will take decisive action, and not merely reward borrowers with a track record of default with ever more “one time settlements” that they will not honour, and which return less to the bank than effective enforcement.

  2. Thanks for an informative summary of plans for Indian state run banks. The potential for improvements is significant. But the fact that these banks are carrying underperforming loans is equally important. Japan is an unfortunate example of what can happen when banks are allowed to continue to carry such loans over time. The so called ‘zombie’ banks in that country have exerted a very powerful drag on the economy for more than 20 years now. I hope Indian officials will make the admittedly painful decisions needed to clean up the balance sheets of these banks and to institute reforms needed to incentivize management to perform more effectively.

Support Quality Analysis

Donate
The East Asia Forum office is based in Australia and EAF acknowledges the First Peoples of this land — in Canberra the Ngunnawal and Ngambri people — and recognises their continuous connection to culture, community and Country.

Article printed from East Asia Forum (https://www.eastasiaforum.org)

Copyright ©2024 East Asia Forum. All rights reserved.