Skip to main content

Time-bound listing plan fails to take off

Time-bound listing plan fails to take off
The ‘ time-bound listing’ for public sector undertakings (PSUs), announced in this year’s Union Budget, isn’t being met.
A state- owned unit was to list within 165 days after its initial public offer of equity (IPO) got approval by its parent ministry or department and by the department of investment and public asset management (Dipam).
The idea was to help the Centre with its ambitious disinvestment target of over Rs 70,000 crore for the current financial year. However, PSUs have repeatedly missed the schedule set under the guidelines, which had deadlines for each task in the IPO process. Examples are General Insurance Corporation (GIC Re), New India Assurance, IRCTC and Ircon.
For instance, the Centre had allowed 90 days for the company to file an offer document with market regulator Sebi, from the day of board authorisation for the IPO. Within this period, 45 days were allotted for investment bankers to do the duediligence and for filing of offer documents. Notably, the Centre had budgeted only 30 days for Sebi’s nod to the IPO; typically, this takes at least two months.
The boards of GIC Re and New India Assurance approved the resolution to list in July 2016. They’re yet to complete the listing process. Both GIC and New India Assurance filed their draft prospectus with Sebi at the beginning of this August. They’ve yet to get a go-ahead from Sebi. Similarly, Indian Railways-backed IRCTC’s and Ircon’s IPO proposal was approved in April and bankers were appointed four months earlier. However, these two are yet to file the draft prospectus with Sebi.
Cochin Shipyard is the latest PSU to come out with an IPO but it did not follow the guidelines. It had filed its prospectus with Sebi on March 31 this year. However, it took nearly 145 days for the company (from the date of filing the draft prospectus) to list on the exchanges.
Investment bankers handling the issues say the timelines set by the Centre ignored various practical issues. Not did it take into consideration the need for approval from multiple regulatory authorities in some cases, as with GIC Re or Cochin Shipyard.
A senior Dipam official said the According to time-bound listing guidelines put up by Dipam, a PSU should ideally list within 165 days from the time when IPO process started Within 165 days, 15 days are given for the board of the PSU to approve the IPO, 90 days for appointment of bankers, due diligence and filing offer document The document expects a nod timelines were “indicative” and might be falling short but the aim was to hasten the entire listing process. “Until last year, it took two three years for a PSU to complete the listing process. Now, things are moving much more quickly. 
With the listing of Hudco and Cochin Shipyard, you can be sure about the seriousness of the government about these listings,” said the official.
According to sources, the ministry of environment took close to three months to give a go-ahead for the Cochin Shipyard IPO. Similarly, GIC Re and New India Assurance required a nod from the insurance from Sebi within 30 days and the company is expected to launch the IPO within 30 days from the approval date Boards of GIC Re and New India Assurance approved the IPO proposal more than a year ago, the IPO is yet to hit the market Similarly, IRCTC and Ircon commenced the IPO process more than four months ago, but are yet to file the offer documents regulator, apart from Sebi.
“The IPO process is complicated and there could be unexpected hitches. Sometimes, the approvals take longer than expected. Further, bankers could also face hurdles during due-diligence. Most important, even if every procedure is completed on time, the market conditions might not be conducive for launch of the issue,” said a banker.
So far this financial year, the Centre has raised Rs 19,078 through various divestments, show Dipam data. At least half a dozen IPOs of PSUs are expected to hit the market before March 2018.
The Business Standard, New Delhi, 14th September 2017


Popular posts from this blog

RBI minutes show MPC members flagged upside risks to inflation

RBI minutes show MPC members flagged upside risks to inflation Concerns about economic growth and easing inflation prompted five of the six monetary policy committee (MPC) members to call for a cut in the repo rate, but most warned that prices could start accelerating, show the minutes of the panel’s last meeting, released on Wednesday. The comments reflected a tone of caution and flagged upside risks to inflation from farm loan waivers, rise in food prices, especially vegetables, price revisions withheld ahead of the goods and services tax, implementation of house rent allowance under the 7th pay commission and fading of favourable base effect, among others. On 2 August, the panel chose to cut the repurchase rate—the rate at which the central bank infuses liquidity in the banking system—by 25 basis points to 6%. One basis point is one-hundredth of a percentage point. Pami Dua, professor at the Delhi School of Economics, wrote that her analysis showed “a fading economic growth outlook, as …

Shrinking footprints of foreign banks in India

Shrinking footprints of foreign banks in India Foreign banks are increasingly shrinking their presence in India and are also becoming more conservative than private and public sector counterparts. While many of them have sold some of their businesses in India as part of their global strategy, some are trying to keep their core expertise intact. Others are branching out to newer areas to continue business momentum.For example, HSBC and Barclays Bank in India have got out of the retail business, whereas corporate-focused Standard Chartered Bank is now trying to increase its focus on retail “Building a retail franchise is a huge exercise and takes a long time. You cannot afford to lose it,” said Shashank Joshi, Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ’s India head.According to the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) data, foreign banks’ combined loan book shrunk nearly 10 per cent from Rs 3.78 trillion in fiscal 2015-16 to Rs 3.42 trillion last financial year. The banking industry, which includes foreign banks…

Differential Tax Levy under GST: Food Firms May De-Register Trademarks

Differential Tax Levy under GST:Food Firms May De-Register Trademarks The government’s decision to charge an enhanced tax rate on trademark food brands is leading several rice, wheat and cereal manufacturers to consider de-registering their product trademarks. Irked by the June 28 central government notification fixing a 5 per cent goods and services tax (GST) rate on food items packaged in unit containers and bearing registered brand names, the industry has made several representations to the government to reconsider the differential tax levy, which these players say is creating an unlevel playing field within these highly-competitive and low-margin industries. Sources say that the move has affected the packaged rice industry the hardest and allowed the un-registered market leaders, India Gate and Daawat, to gain advantage as compared to other registered brands such as Kohinoor and Lal Qilla. Smaller players are even more worried with this enhanced rate of tax (against the otherwise …