LIIofIndia Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

Indian Parliamentary Research Service Legislative Summaries

Parliamentary Research Service
You are here:  LIIofIndia >> Databases >> Indian Parliamentary Research Service Legislative Summaries >> 2007 >> [2007] INPRSLS 3

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Documents | Noteup | LawCite | Help

The Micro Financial Sector (Development and Regulation) Bill, 2007 - Legislative Brief [2007] INPRSLS 3 (20 March 2007)

Legislative Brief

The Micro Financial Sector (Development and Regulation) Bill, 2007

The Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha on March 20, 2007.

It has been referred to the Standing Committee on Finance (Chairperson: Shri Ananth Kumar) on April 27, 2007. The Committee is scheduled to submit its report within three months.

Highlights of the Bill

Key Issues and Analysis



Recent Briefs:

The Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Bill, 2007

June 20, 2007

The Limited Liability Partnership Bill, 2006

May 22, 2007



Kaushiki Sanyal

kaushiki@prsindia.org

June 21, 2007

PRS Legislative ResearchCentre for Policy Research Dharma Marg Chanakyapuri New Delhi – 110021

Tel: (011) 2611 5273-76, Fax: 2687 2746



PART A: HIGHLIGHTS OF THE BILL1

Context

Micro finance is defined as the provision of thrift (savings), credit and other financial services and products of very small amounts to the poor for enabling them to raise their income levels and improve living standards.2 In India, micro finance is provided by apex development financial institutions (such as National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development - NABARD, Small Industries Development Bank of India, and Rashtriya Mahila Kosh), commercial banks, regional rural banks, co-operative banks, non banking financial companies (NBFCs)1 and various not-for-profit entities.3

There are different mechanisms through which the delivery of micro credit loans takes place. Banks may lend directly to customers. Second, NABARD sponsors the Self Help Group-Bank Lending Programme (SBLP).4 Under SBLP, self help groups (SHGs) need to save regularly for a minimum of six months and maintain prescribed records and accounts in order to become eligible to be linked to local banks. This programme provides credit to 22.38 lakh SHGs.5 Third, commercial banks or apex institutions lend to micro finance organizations (MFOs) for further lending to groups or individuals (see Chart 1).



Chart 1: Institutional Flow of Micro Finance

Banks/Apex Institutions/Grants

Micro Finance Organisations

Self Help Groups/ Joint Liability Groups



Individuals









Table 1: Difference between SHGs and Grameen/JLGs

MFOs lend to SHGs and joint liability groups (JLGs, which are also known as grameen groups).Error: Reference source not found The number of MFOs in India involved in lending activities is estimated to be around 800.Error: Reference source not found These MFOs vary significantly in size, outreach and credit delivery methodologies. Presently, the lending activities of MFOs are not regulated except for those registered as NBFCs.Error: Reference source not found


SHGs

Grameen/JLGs

Size

Upto 20 members

5-15 members

Nature of Loan

Single loan to the SHG as a whole, which decides how it should be allocated.

Loan recorded in the names of Individual borrowers.

Source: Microfinance in India: A State of the Sector Report, 2006, Prabhu Ghate, CARE, Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, and Ford Foundation

A number of committees have deliberated the manner in which MFOs should be regulated and supervised.6 The Micro Financial Sector (Development and Regulation) Bill, 2007 seeks to promote the micro finance sector and provide a regulatory framework for MFOs.











Key Features

Micro Finance Organisations



Promotion and Regulation of MFOs

Micro Finance Development and Equity Fund

Offences and Penalties



PART B: KEY ISSUES AND ANALYSIS

Purpose of the Bill

The Bill has two broad objectives: (a) to promote and regulate the micro finance sector; and (b) to permit MFOs to collect deposits from eligible clients.

The major issues that arise out of these objectives are as follows: (i) whether MFOs are the appropriate vehicle to address credit needs of the poor; (ii) whether NABARD is the appropriate body to regulate the sector; and (iii) whether there are adequate safeguards to protect depositors’ funds.

Efficiency of MFOs

Commercial banks have fixed costs per transaction. Therefore, the transaction costs as a percentage of the loan amount rises as the loan size decreases. This deters banks from lending small amounts. Typically, lending to small borrowers follows an indirect route. Banks lend to MFOs who then lend to various SHGs and JLGs. Individual borrowers get funds through SHGs and JLGs.

Proponents of this model claim that (a) it is characterised by low transaction costs and high repayment ratesError: Reference source not found; (b) it provides access to credit to the under-servedError: Reference source not found; and (c) the work of SHGs also builds livelihood capacity and social capital among the poor.7 However, there is an opposing view which suggests that MFOs do not incur lower transaction costs but transfer the cost to donors through subsidised borrowings or to borrowers through higher interest rates. For example, NABARD funds commercial banks at 7.5 per cent per annum, banks on-lend to MFOs at 10-15 per cent, MFOs then lend to SHGs at 12-24 per cent and the groups lend to individual members at 24-36 per cent.8

Table 2: Comparative Cost Structure of Bank, NBFC and MFO

There is also evidence that repayment rates slacken as the size of the loan increases and as the frequency of borrowing rises. For example, in the Grameen Bank, the default rate was 0.4 per cent among first-time borrowers, 1.2 per cent among second-time borrowers, 6.6 per cent among third-time borrowers and 9.5 per cent among fourth-time borrowers. Error: Reference source not found


Bank

NBFC

MFO

Average Interest rate on lending (%)

8.3

10.6

19.1

Average Interest rate on borrowing (%)

5.3

6.3

6.6

Net Interest Spread (%)

3.0

4.3

12.5

Operation Cost as % of loans

3.9

2.5

9.6

Note: Data used for banks is State Bank of India, 2006-07; for NBFCs, Sundaram Finance Ltd., 2005-06; and for MFOs, Bangladesh Grameen Bank, 2005. Averages calculated by PRS.

Role of NABARD as Regulator

The Bill has designated NABARD as the regulator for the micro financial sector. However, NABARD also provides equity capital and debt funds to MFOs. This raises the issue of conflict of interest between its various roles. Other deposit taking entities (banks and NBFCs) are regulated by RBI. The conflict between RBI’s various roles has also been a matter of discussion. The recent High Powered Expert Committee Report on Making Mumbai an International Financial Centre (Chairperson: Percy Mistry)9 published in March 2007 addresses some of the issues.

Prudential Norms

Presently, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) regulates the collection of public deposits. Organisations authorised to do so are subject to the prudential norms set by RBI, with a view to the safety of the savings/deposit. Other than banks, NBFCs are allowed to accept public deposits if they follow the regulations prescribed by RBI. Table 3 outlines the prudential norms for deposit taking NBFCs and commercial banks. In addition, all deposits with banks are insured upto Rs 1 lakh, ie if a bank is unable to honour its liabilities, deposits upto Rs 1 lakh would be paid by the Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation of India.

The Bill allows MFOs to offer thrift services if they meet certain prescribed provisions. The Bill has prescribed conditions that have to be met before an MFO can offer thrift services. They include: (a) the net owned funds of an MFO has to be at least Rs 5 lakh, and (b) the MFO has to be in existence for three years before it can offer thrift services. The minimum net owned funds required is not related to the amount of deposits taken by the MFO. However, NABARD may prescribe other norms for an MFO.

Table 3: Key Prudential Norms for NBFCs taking Public Deposits and Banks


NBFCs taking Public Deposits

Banks

Net Owned Funds

Rs 2 crore

Rs 300 crore

Capital Adequacy Ratio

Minimum of 12%

Minimum of 9%

Non Performing Assets

Need to make provisions against non performing assets

Need to make provisions against non performing assets

Credit Rating

Minimum investment grade or other specified credit rating

None

Period of Public Deposit

Between 1 year and 5 years

Current and demand deposits and minimum 7 days for time deposits

Interest Rate on Deposits

Interest rate ceiling specified (now 12.5% per annum)

No restrictions

Transfer to Reserve Fund

20% of profits

None

Investment in Approved Securities

Minimum 10% of liquid asset in approved securities and 5% in unencumbered term deposits with any scheduled commercial bank

Minimum 25% of liabilities in approved securities

Limit of Deposits

4 times net owned funds for lease companies and 1.5 times net owned fund for loan and investment companies

None

Source: Reserve Bank of India

There are two points of view on allowing MFOs to offer thrift services. The first point of view argues that such a provision would increase the outreach of micro financial services. It would also offer an alternative to the poor, who had to rely on riskier and lower yielding savings instruments.10 The other point of view argues that if prudential norms for such MFOs are lowered it might put depositors’ money at risk. Since MFOs offering thrift services mainly cater to the poor, allowing a lower level of protection for their savings might lead to further impoverishment, especially of women who form the majority of SHGs in the country.11

An Advisory Committee appointed by the RBI recommended that in view of the need to protect the interests of depositors, MFOs may continue to extend micro-credit services to their clients but should not be permitted to accept public deposits unless they comply with the extant regulatory framework of the RBI. The Committee further added that MFOs could play an important role in facilitating access of their clients to savings services from the regulated banks.12

Since NBFCs and Section 25 companies shall also be regulated by the Bill, it is not clear whether they would follow the prudential norms set by RBI or NABARD.

Formation of Reserve Fund

MFOs are required to transfer 15% of the net profit to a reserve fund as a protection to depositors. However, if an MFO offering thrift services does not make any profit and thereby does not form the reserve fund, there is no safety net for the depositors.

Definitions

The Bill has not defined “Self Help Group” and “Joint Liability Group”, though it refers to these terms.

Any organisation providing “micro financial services” is defined as a “micro financial organisation.” All micro financial organisations are regulated by NABARD. “Micro financial services” includes life insurance, general insurance and pension services approved by their respective regulating authorities. However, the definition does not specify to whom such services are to be provided. This implies that every insurance or pension company serving any individual would be regulated by NABARD.

Exemption from Usurious Loans Act, 1918

The Bill does not exempt registered MFOs offering thrift services from the Usurious Loans Act, 1918 or state laws which prohibit charging of excessive interest rates (such as Tamil Nadu Money Lenders’ Act, 1957, Kerala Money Lenders’ Act, 1958). This could lead to dual regulation of MFOs offering thrift services. The rate of interest charged by banks is exempted from the Usurious Loans Act, 1918 and any other law related to indebtedness in force in any state.13



DISCLAIMER: This document is being furnished to you for your information. You may choose to reproduce or redistribute this report for non-commercial purposes in part or in full to any other person with due acknowledgement of PRS Legislative Research (“PRS”). The opinions expressed herein are entirely those of the author(s). PRS makes every effort to use reliable and comprehensive information, but PRS does not represent that the contents of the report are accurate or complete. PRS is an independent, not-for-profit group. This document has been prepared without regard to the objectives or opinions of those who may receive it.



1The Reserve Bank of India defines NBFC as a non-banking institution which is a loan company or an investment company or an asset finance company or a mutual benefit financial company.



2Net owned funds means the net worth or shareholder’s funds.

1Notes



1. This Brief has been developed on the basis of The Micro Financial Sector (Development and Regulation) Bill, 2007 introduced in Lok Sabha on March 20, 2007. It has been referred to the Standing Committee on Finance (Chairperson: Shri Ananth Kumar) on April 27, 2007. The Committee is scheduled to submit its report within three months.

2. Summary and Recommendations of the Task Force on Supportive Policy and Regulatory Framework for Microfinance, NABARD, 1999.

3. “Extracts from an article presented at the APRACA Seminar at Manila on Regulation of MFIs in July 2004 by K.Muralidhara Rao, General Manager, NABARD,” National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (see http://www.nabard.org/microfinance/mf_institution.asp).

4. “Microfinance in India: A State of the Sector Report, 2006,” Prabhu Ghate, CARE, Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation, and Ford Foundation.

5. “Annual Report: 2006-07,” Ministry of Finance, Government of India.

6. For example, Working Group (constituted by Government of India) on Legal & Regulation of MFIs, 2002; Informal Groups (appointed by RBI) on Micro Finance which studied issues relating to (i) Structure & Sustainability, ii) Funding (iii) Regulations and (iv) Capacity Building, 2003; Advisory Committee (appointed by RBI) on flow of credit to agriculture and related activities from the Banking System, 2004.

7. “Microfinance and Poverty Alleviation,” Kamal Vatta, Economic and Political Weekly, February 1, 2003.

8The Microcredit Alternative?” Madhura Swaminathan, Economic and Political Weekly, March 31, 2007.

9. The report is available at http://finmin.nic.in/mifc.html

10. “Consumer Protection in Indian Microfinance: Lessons from Andhra Pradesh and the Microfinance Bill,” Prabhu Ghate, Economic and Political Weekly, March 31, 2007.

11. “One Step Forward or Two Step Back? Proposed Amendments to NABARD Act,” Smita Premachander and M. Chidambaranatham, Economic and Political Weekly, March 24, 2007.

12. “Report of the Advisory Committee on Flow of Credit to Agriculture and Related Activities from the Banking System,” Submitted to Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai, June 2004.

13. Section 21A of The Banking Regulation Act, 1949.




LIIofIndia: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.liiofindia.org/in/other/INPRSLS/2007/3.html