Eastern European Banking Model

A traditional banking model in a CEEC (Central and Eastern European Country) consisted of a central bank and several purpose banks, one dealing with individuals’ savings and other banking needs, and another focusing on foreign financial activities, etc. The central bank provided most of the commercial banking needs of enterprises in addition to other functions. During the late 1980s, the CEECs modified this earlier structure by taking all the commercial banking activities of the central bank and transferring them to new commercial banks. In most countries the new banks were set up along industry lines, although in Poland a regional approach has been adopted.

On the whole, these new stale-owned commercial banks controlled the bulk of financial transactions, although a few ‘de novo banks’ were allowed in Hungary and Poland. Simply transferring existing loans from the central bank to the new state-owned commercial banks had its problems, since it involved transferring both ‘good’ and ‘bad’ assets. Moreover, each bank’s portfolio was restricted to the enterprise and industry assigned to them and they were not allowed to deal with other enterprises outside their remit.

As the central banks would always ‘bale out’ troubled state enterprises, these commercial banks cannot play the same role as commercial banks in the West. CEEC commercial banks cannot foreclose on a debt. If a firm did not wish to pay, the state-owned enterprise would, historically, receive further finance to cover its difficulties, it was a very rare occurrence for a bank to bring about the bankruptcy of a firm. In other words, state-owned enterprises were not allowed to go bankrupt, primarily because it would have affected the commercial banks, balance sheets, but more importantly, the rise in unemployment that would follow might have had high political costs.

What was needed was for commercial banks to have their balance sheets ‘cleaned up’, perhaps by the government purchasing their bad loans with long-term bonds. Adopting Western accounting procedures might also benefit the new commercial banks.

This picture of state-controlled commercial banks has begun to change during the mid to late 1990s as the CEECs began to appreciate that the move towards market-based economies required a vibrant commercial banking sector. There are still a number of issues lo be addressed in this sector, however. For example, in the Czech Republic the government has promised to privatize the banking sector beginning in 1998. Currently the banking sector suffers from a number of weaknesses. A number of the smaller hanks appear to be facing difficulties as money market competition picks up, highlighting their tinder-capitalization and the greater amount of higher-risk business in which they are involved. There have also been issues concerning banking sector regulation and the control mechanisms that are available. This has resulted in the government’s proposal for an independent securities commission to regulate capital markets.

The privatization package for the Czech Republic’s four largest banks, which currently control about 60 percent of the sector’s assets, will also allow foreign banks into a highly developed market where their influence has been marginal until now. It is anticipated that each of the four banks will be sold to a single bidder in an attempt to create a regional hub of a foreign bank’s network. One problem with all four banks is that inspection of their balance sheets may throw up problems which could reduce the size of any bid. All four banks have at least 20 percent of their loans as classified, where no interest has been paid for 30 days or more. Banks could make provisions to reduce these loans by collateral held against them, but in some cases the loans exceed the collateral. Moreover, getting an accurate picture of the value of the collateral is difficult since bankruptcy legislation is ineffective. The ability to write off these bad debts was not permitted until 1996, but even if this route is taken then this will eat into the banks’ assets, leaving them very close to the lower limit of 8 percent capital adequacy ratio. In addition, the ‘commercial’ banks have been influenced by the action of the national bank, which in early 1997 caused bond prices to fall, leading to a fall in the commercial banks’ bond portfolios. Thus the banking sector in the Czech Republic still has a long way to go.

In Hungary the privatization of the banking sector is almost complete. However, a state rescue package had to be agreed at the beginning of 1997 for the second-largest state bank, Postabank, owned indirectly by the main social security bodies and the post office, and this indicates the fragility of this sector. Outside of the difficulties experienced with Postabank, the Hungarian banking system has been transformed. The rapid move towards privatization resulted from the problems experienced by the state-owned banks, which the government bad to bail out, costing it around 7 percent of GDP. At that stage it was possible that the banking system could collapse and government funding, although saving the banks, did not solve the problems of corporate governance or moral hazard. Thus the privatization process was started in earnest. Magyar Kulkereskedelmi Bank (MKB) was sold to Bayerische Landesbank and the EBDR in 1994, Budapest Bank was bought by GE Capital and Magyar Hitel Bank was bought by ABN-AMRO. In November 1997 the state completed the last stage of the sale of the state savings bank (OTP), Hungary’s largest bank. The state, which dominated the banking system three years ago, now only retains a majority stake in two specialist banks, the Hungarian Development Bank and Eximbank.

The move towards, and success of privatization can be seen in the balance sheets of the banks, which showed an increase in post-tax profits of 45 percent in 1996. These banks are also seeing higher savings and deposits and a strong rise in demand for corporate and retail lending. In addition, the growth in competition in the banking sector has led to a narrowing of the spreads between lending and deposit rates, and the further knock-on effect of mergers and small-hank closures. Over 50 percent of Hungarian bank assets are controlled by foreign-owned banks, and this has led to Hungarian banks offering services similar to those expected in many Western European countries. Most of the foreign-owned but mainly Hungarian-managed banks were recapitalized after their acquisition and they have spent heavily on staff training and new information technology systems. From 1998, foreign banks will be free to open branches in Hungary, thus opening up the domestic banking market to full competition.

As a whole, the CEECs have come a long way since the early 1990s in dealing with their banking problems. For some countries the process of privatization still has a long way to go but others such as Hungary have moved quickly along the process of transforming their banking systems in readiness for their entry into the EU.

Read More

Universal Banking – Answer For The Best Banking Design?

1.1 INTRODUCTION

In recent years, universal banking has been growing its popularity in Indonesia. Mandiri Bank, for example, has taken strategy to become Indonesia’s universal bank; this bank has also initiated to develop an integrated financial risk system in terms of sounding financial performance and increasing shareholder value. In Germany, and most developed countries in Europe, universal banks have initiated its operations since nineteen century. There is mounting evidence that in those countries, universal banks have taken an important part in the development of real sectors and the financial system. In those countries, the growing numbers of universal banking practices are really supported by the regulation of central of bank.

Despite, in The United States, they are strict to regulate universal banks by blocking commercial banks from engaging in securities and stock markets practices. They argued that the practice of universal banking might be harmful for the financial system. ((Boyd et.al, 1998) cited in Cheang, 2004) The “risk” might be the key reason why the central bank of The U.S is worried about the universal banking system. Since, if the central of bank allowed banks to adjust their operation to be universal banks, the relationship among, banks, financial and stock markets would be closer. Consequently, this would give an uncertainty to the banks condition and performance. For example, if there were a disaster in stock market, banks would get problems in their financial positions. Thus, they would tend to be insolvent.

In addition universal banks would also threaten the market share of other specialized institutions, because more customers would choose universal banks that offer more option to their investment. Hence, more specialized institutions are likely to be ruined in the U.S financial industry.

One majoring factor, which is triggering a bank to be universal bank, is to increase the profit by enlarging their market share. According to João A. C. Santos (1998) universal bank itself can be defined as the financial institution, which enlarges its service range in terms of offering a variety of financial products and services in one site. Thus, by operating universal banking, banks could get a greater opportunity to expand to another financial area, such as : financial securities, insurance, hedge funds and etc.

Although the trend of banks has recently tended to universal banks, it is undoubtedly true that universal banks would also face further risks because a wide range of financial services is strongly associated with increasing risks and escalating monitoring costs. These are the major concerns why banks have to implement more advance technology in terms of financial risk management. Moreover, the practices of universal banks would cause significant risks to economy’s payment system. Since, the operation of universal banks connects closely to the financial and stock markets that are very fluctuate in a short term.

To win in the tight competition among financial institutions, banks have to alter their maneuver to lead in the market. Universal bank could be the wise choice for the bank manager, because they can attract more customers with a wide range of services. Furthermore, by altering their operation to the universal banking system, banks would get benefits from the efficiency and economies of scale.

In order to understand about the universal banking practices, this paper would examine the exclusive matters, which related to the risks and benefits in a universal bank. Moreover, this paper would also focus the whole impact of this institution to the financial system and the economy as a whole.

1.2 PROFITS AND COSTS IN UNIVERSAL BANKING: IMPLICATIONS FOR INDIVIDUAL BANKS

General problem related to financial intermediation, include universal banks and another type of banks, is about asymmetric information . It is the main problem that causes costs to increase and influence the performance of financial institutions. In Universal banks, the problems that would increase are slightly different with specialized banks; they are similar in that they should cope the risks problem associated with their financial position. Although, in universal banks, the risks are more bigger due to the wide range of financial instruments that they organized. Therefore, banks have to increase their spending on monitoring costs that are more complicated than specialized institutions or conventional banks.

Possible answer why more banks sacrifice to the escalating risks and transform it operation into the universal banking is that they want to compete and expand their market share, in order to seek a greater opportunity profits by serving more choices to their customers. Many banks has experienced a great performance after they alter their operation, the main concerns are that they could reach better economies of scale which can reduce the amount of spending in operational costs and also a greater opportunity to get more profits. The research finding which was conducted by Vender, R. (2002, cited in Cheang, 2004) about the efficiency of revenue in financial conglomerates and the level of both profit and cost in universal banking, has proved that both financial conglomerates and universal banking contain good performance in several indicators of bank profitability. His finding also suggests that the sustained expansion of financial conglomerates and universal banking practices may increase efficiency in the financial system.

This opinion is strengthen by another experts, like : George Rich and Christian Walter (1993). They state that universal banks which posse benefits over specialized institutions, are able to take advantage of reduction in the average cost of production and scope in banking. It is essential for banks that operate on a international level and in order to fulfill customer needs with a variety of financial services. They also mention a classic example how universal banks in some countries, such as : Switzerland, Germany and more European countries has experienced benefits by operating universal banking. In addition, they also state that the fear if universal bank would threaten specialized institutions has not proven. In Switzerland and Germany, for example, specialized institutions could achieve a better improvement in terms of cooperating with big banks. Universal banks are one of potential market channel which can sell their products directly to the customers, so specialized institutions also get additional return due to the increases in the number of universal banks. Therefore, this proves that universal banks do not threat other institutions; in fact, they support specialized institutions to market their products.

According to Fohlin, universal banking would lead to a bank’s concentration due to the increases the number of branch. Based on Germany’s experience, such branching-based expansion has led to the efficiency in banking because it could increase economies of scale in advertising and marketing, and open an enormous opportunity to enhance diversification and steadiness for banks.

A universal bank has unique position to tackle asymmetric information. As stated by Joao A. C. Santos (1998), that a universal bank has potential benefits on the reduction of agency cost and acquires profits due to information advantages. Although in other sides, universal banking also face problems related to the cost, conflict of interest and safety and soundness. But the default risk, which is generally happened in financial intermediation, would decrease substantially because universal banks are easier to control over their customers. Most of lenders in universal banks are their customers, so they can understand about the capacity of the customers from the information that they gather.

Nicholas Cheang (2004) also points out how universal banks could reduce a crucial problem in financial institution, asymmetric information. He argued that they could preserve a close relationship with their borrowers, by gathering more relevant information to make an important decision for investment. Their advantageous positions also vital to optimize the distribution of fund allocation, because banks have already known which investment that would give more margins to them. So, they don’t need to worry too much about the risk.

1.3 UNIVERSAL BANKS AND THE STABILITY IN THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM

Financial institution plays a vital role in terms of mobilizing funds in the economy. Consequently, stability in financial system is really important to manage by government in order to prevent wider implications to the real sectors. Financial disasters which happened in most countries in Asia in 1997 are the classic examples how importance to save banks to recover the economy.

As the financial supermarkets, which are handling a variety of financial instruments, they must face a greater risk than specialized institutions. As a consequence, this institution needs to be monitored closely in order to prevent more implications to the economy. According to Benston (1994), the escalating risks in universal banking would lead to a great problem because it can cause generous distress in the financial system. Hence, it will greatly increase the risk to the economy’s payment system. In another term, Rime and Strioh (2001) who examine the financial system in Switzerland in which universal banking are becoming more important in this country, state that difficulty in monitoring large universal banks is a major concern. This is the reason why universal bank has to spend more money in monitoring cost and develop an advanced system in information technology. In other words, it could say that the consequence of inefficient monitoring could lead to financial instability. (Cheang, 2004)

A wider range of universal banks in financial system makes the fund channels of banks to the customer are larger than specialized institutions. So, the economy will improve because universal banks will support more funding. This can be seen by the fact that a universal bank practice in Germany has triggered the progress of some enterprises performance in this country. (Stiglitz, 1985). It is understandable that when the allocation of fund can distribute widely and effectively to the potential enterprises, the economy will improve. In this context, universal banks have played as the key institution which mobilize fund to the potential lender.

Edwards (1996), has also proved that a universal bank is not just significantly contributed to economy from the external funds that they provide, but also from the improvement of the information flows. (cited in Cheang, 2004) Therefore, this proves that universal banks have played a significant role in terms of reducing the default risk by providing important information about the lender or customers. Furthermore, the safety of the financial system would be improved by the existence of universal banks.

1.4 CONCLUSION

The development of universal banks has to in line with the policy direction of central bank, because it is important to keep the stability of financial system and the economy as whole. There are three important areas that must be concerned related to universal bank operations, such as : the strengthened of capital and advanced risk management system. Consequently, in order to manage universal bank, people need to be aware about the unique of the risk type in universal banking. Furthermore, policy maker must also consider about the implication of universal banks in financial system.

Read More