Islamic Banking in Singapore

Reuters reported that DBS, Singapore and south East Asia’s largest bank is scaling down on its Islamic banking operations, signalling the city-state’s efforts to promote Shariah banking are not bearing fruit.

DBS’ Islamic Bank of Asia (IBA), Singapore’s only wholly-owned full licensed Islamic bank, suffered a loss of US$77.1 million (RM256 million) in 2009 after making specific allowances on debt owned by customers in the Gulf region. The bank had US$725 million in assets as at end-2009, including US$453 million in payments due from non-bank customers. A source had earlier told Reuters the Islamic unit of DBS planned to get out of the lending business entirely. (Reuters; May 24, 2010)

What struck me was the statement on “lending business”. I have argued in past and still maintain my stand – Islamic banking is not about lending. Islamic banking is all about putting resources together and sharing risks and rewards in an economically beneficial business venture. Any lending should be kept at a minimum and should only be for exceptional cases and given interest free.

So, given my stand, I’m not surprised that Islamic banking is not making much headway in the non-traditional markets. While the traditional markets (read Muslim countries) have the added advantage of having religious obligation as a marketing tool, the non traditional markets needs more than that to push Islamic banking. Focus has to be on the uniqueness of system, the part that differentiates it from conventional banking. One of it is that it promotes risk and reward sharing instead of just plain borrowing and lending.

It is often lamented that Islamic finance lack knowledgeable practitioners. I want to add that the industry also lacks knowledgeable investors. By knowledgeable investors I mean investors who appreciate what Islamic finance stands for. For as long as investors demand a solution that mimics conventional products, Islamic finance will not take off, even in traditional markets. 

Islamic Finance Resists Equity Shift, May Stunt Growth

Shariah finance has been labelled “copycat” for its reliance on debt funding

Reuters – KUALA LUMPUR, April 27 — When Kuwait Finance House Malaysia helped develop a US$1.3 billion (RM4.1 billion) real estate project in the country in 2005 as a partner in the deal, Islamic equity property ventures were a rarity.

Five years on, the bank is embarking on its fourth building project using a similar equity concept but few others in the industry want to follow the same path, reflecting Islamic finance’s slow and difficult shift away from debt instruments.

Debt funding’s dominance of Shariah finance has earned the US$1 trillion industry the tag of “copycat” and limited its growth as critics question its ability to offer a fairer way of sharing risks and rewards that truly distinguishes it from conventional banking.

“Profit-sharing or equity structures are the true way of doing Islamic financing,” said Siti Mariam Mohd Desa, Kuwait Finance Malaysia’s real estate advisory director.

“It is a different concept because if you were to give out straight loans, you may as well go to a conventional bank.”

As the global financial system emerges from the debt crisis and banks shy away from assuming added risks, practitioners want Islamic finance to rely more on partnership structures and less on straight financing which they say has created a brand of finance which is Shariah compliant in form, but not in spirit.

They say equity financing such as musharaka and mudaraba are closer to the Shariah’s aim of ensuring gains and losses are shared equitably and a shift back to it would help banks win new business beyond its traditional markets.

While Islamic finance has flourished in Muslim markets such as the Middle East and Malaysia, many non-Muslims are unconvinced, saying the industry differs from conventional banking only in name.

“We cannot add value in markets which are mimics of conventional markets. At the moment, it’s difficult to see the value-added,” said Safdar Alam, head of Islamic structuring at JP Morgan in Bahrain.

“It’s a real opportunity, with the increased awareness globally of Islamic finance, to demonstrate this value and the difference and benefits. This is a chance that we might miss if we don’t do this well quite quickly.”

But banks’ reluctance to bear the risk of projects funded, companies’ unwillingness to share profits and scarcity of banking capital make equity financing an unappealing proposition.

The recent property slump in the Gulf, where equity financing is more common, badly hit Islamic firms such as Bahrain’s Gulf Finance House and could compound banks’ fears of becoming project partners.

Kuwait Finance Malaysia, which uses the musharaka equity structure to develop real estate, had a non-performing financing level of 6.73 per cent in September, more than thrice the industry average.

Its parent Kuwait Finance House, the Gulf state’s top Islamic bank, posted a 24 per cent drop in net profit in 2009 to 118.74 million dinars.

Equity financing models were born out of a belief in Islam that the financier must share the risks if he wants the rewards and that profits should be earned through enterprise.

While equity funding is commonly associated with higher returns, bankers say it may not necessarily be more profitable than debt as the latter allows for higher leverage.

Traditionally, popular Islamic debt-based instruments such as istisna and murabaha have been likened to interest-based loans where banks take limited risks and are guaranteed a return.

But as Islamic finance grew beyond traditional roles such as agriculture financing to funding government budgets and billion dollar real estate projects, some banks began leaning more towards debt instruments to limit their risks.

As banks’ capital grows scarce, they will be wary of parting with large sums to back equity ventures, said Mohammad Faiz Azmi, PriceWaterhouseCoopers’s global Islamic finance leader.

“On the demand side, the issue are is there enough corporates who are essentially willing to give up the upside?” Faiz said, referring to profit-sharing structures.

“The reality is that the people that would want to have equity forms of financing are usually the ones that you want to avoid lending money to anyway.”

Some practitioners say the push for more Islamic equity financing is ill-conceived.

“From the shariah’s perspective, there is no such evidence to support (the view) that Islamic banks or whoever wants to do business should do profit-sharing more than debt-based,” said Shariah scholar Aznan Hasan, who advises Barclays Capital London and Malaysia’s stock exchange operator Bursa Malaysia.

“Whether it is debt or equity that suits you better, it depends on commercial and business decisions, not Shariah matters.” — Reuters

Cost of Funds

When determining the interest rate to charge borrowers, one of the factors to consider is the cost of funds, i.e. the price the bank has to pay to the owners of the funds, who are either depositors or lenders for using the funds.

On the other hand, a partnership or trade based (Islamic) financial transaction should not have a cost of funds simply because the owners of the funds are not lending or selling the funds and therefore should not expect any consideration for the transaction. Funds are monetary capital and Shariah stipulates that money cannot be traded because it is not a commodity, it is merely a medium of exchange.

So, technically, under Shariah terms, capital has no cost. Surely this is a concept which traditional conventional bankers may find difficult to grasp.

Why is money devoid of any cost?
This is because the owners of money cannot expect to earn more money without undertaking some form of economic activity. Shariah stioulates that owners of money cannot trade the money for profit. Any exchange of money which is not equal in amount constitutes riba.

When determining the profits to be charged to customers (‘profits charged’, oxymoron?) for a Murabahah or Istisna transaction, banks cannot base it on the cost of funds simply because there is no cost to start of with. The cost of funds arises when Shariah based banks operate in an identical manner to a conventional banks, i.e. as an intermediary between lenders and borrowers.

Tendering for Short Term Papers

In the Malaysian debt market, a short term bond is called a Commercial Paper (CP). A CP is either issued via a tender or private placement. In a tender, the CPs will be issued to the highest bidder(s) making the tender process a platform for investors to demand a rate of return that matches their risk appetite and/or investment objective. The basis for the bids is on the credit worthiness of the issuer. Once the CPs is issued to the winning bidders, the issuer is compelled to pay the promised returns to the investors.

Surprisingly, the same tender process applies to the Islamic CPs (ICP). I can understand if the ICPs are issued based on the Ijarah or Murabahah contract, there should not any problem with individually setting the rental or mark-up. The problem is when Musharakah and Mudharabah based CPs are subjected to the same procedure. I just cannot comprehend how an investor can demand, upfront, a fixed profit from a Musharakah/Mudharabah venture. It is totally against Shariah principles and contravenes the “profit and loss sharing” (PLS) model. Although the transaction documents clearly states that the returns are merely “expected” profits but in all likelihood, the projection will be met, 100% of the time.

What’s worse, the ICP is (usually) issued at a discount to nominal value and the issue price is calculated in accordance with the formula specified in Part III, Section 5 of the FAST Rules, the same formula used to calculate the discount for the conventional CPs.

Shariah based instruments and transactions may not be compatible with conventional platform all the time, it must un on its own unique platform.

So much for being in the forefront of Islamic finance.

Defaulting Sukuks

Reuters reported that industry experts are warning more Sukuk defaults are coming after Kuwaiti firm Investment Dar defaulted on their USD100 million Sukuk. At the same time, Saudi conglomerates Saad Group and Ahmad Hamad Algosaibi & Bros are restructuring their debt, triggering concerns of a spill over effect on the Islamic finance industry. Neale Downes, a Bahrain-based lawyer at Trowers & Hamlins, estimated that 5-8 percent of Islamic bonds, or sukuk, in the market are susceptible to default as many were raised for real estate projects which have been hurt by the slowdown. "The longer the global recession goes, the higher the likelihood of default," said Mohammad Faiz Azmi, global Islamic finance leader at PricewaterhouseCoopers. "People are now using reserves or savings to try to keep themselves going. How long can that last? So far what we've seen is the tip of the iceberg."

My question is; if the Sukuk is structured on a pure profit and loss sharing (PLS) concept, can it default? In my opinion, PLS structures do not recognise defaults. This is because by definition, PLS means sharing profits when they are made (according to predetermined ratios) and absorbing losses when they arise. PLS is not a contract where returns (coupons/profits/dividends) are guaranteed regardless of actual performance. Defaults are caused by the guarantee d returns element in the structure – just like in the conventional bond arrangements.

However, Sukuks structured on an Ijarah or Murabahah contracts may default if the contracted payments are not made. This is because such contracts are not contracts of partnership but instead lease contract (Ijarah) and debt contract (deferred payment Murabahah). In this case, payment of coupon/profit/lease is contracted and obligatory, non-payment will result in a default.

When reporting on Sukuk defaults, it must be made known what is the underlying contract it was based on. I am still of the opinion that partnership based Sukuks have no risk of default apart from in cases of negligence or fraud.

Project Finance

There are many definitions for project finance.

Finnerty (1996, p. 2) defines project finance as:
. . . the raising of funds to finance an economically separable capital investment project in which the providers of the funds look primarily to the cash flow from the project as the source of funds to service their loans and provide the return of and a return on their equity invested in the project.

Nevitt and Fabozzi (2000, p. 1) define it as:
A financing of a particular economic unit in which a lender is satisfied to look initially to the cash flow and earnings of that economic unit as the source of funds from which a loan will be repaid and to the assets of the economic unit as collateral for the loan.

The International Project Finance Association (IPFA) defines project finance as:
...the financing of long-term infrastructure, industrial projects and public services based upon a non-recourse or limited recourse financial structure where project debt and equity used to finance the project are paid back from the cash flow generated by the project.

The above definitions mainly describe project finance from the debt perspective i.e. as a loan transaction.

Mechanics of a Shariah based project finance:

If a project is financed under the contract of Istisna, the project sponsor or initiator shall award the construction job to a contractor and the contractor will be paid according to the agreed terms, be it progressively, periodically or bullet payment at satisfactory completion etc. The price paid will include the contractor’s profit margin.

The project sponsor/initiator may raise the funding for the project via a Mudharabah or Musharakah arrangement whereby investors are invited to participate in the project. The returns from the Mudharabah or Musharakah venture cannot be predetermined and it shall be sourced from the cash flow or revenue of the project. It is therefore acceptable that no returns will be earned during the construction and pre-operating period. The project is owned by the Mudharabah or Musharakah investors/venture and upon completion; they may lease the asset for rental income or sell the asset for profit.

Ijarah Mausufah Fi Dhimmah is an arrangement whereby the financiers of a project are able to earn the lease rental during the construction period in the form of advanced lease. The setback of this arrangement is that should the project stall or fail, the owners will have to repay the Lessee(s) the advance lease paid.

There is always a completion risk in project financing. Should the project fail to be completed, the contractors should be paid what is due to them based on the work done. The Mudharabah or Musharakah investors will then share, according to their respective rights; the proceeds form the disposal of the project. The investors have no recourse to claim the full amount of their investment unless fraud or negligence on the part of the contractor or project manager is proven.

The main difference between Shariah based PF and conventional PF are;

(1) Ownership of assets (project)
Under conventional financing the project is held as collateral and the financers can claim from project sponsors for any shortfall in repayment.
Under Shariah financing, the asset/project is owned by the financiers and therefore they can only claim up to the value of the asset/project or the outstanding lease rental and nothing more.

(2) Returns from financing
Conventional financiers are repaid a fixed, predetermined payment over a specified period regardless of the profitability of the project. Any overdue payment will be charged a penalty and a default will force the asset to be forced-sold to recover the debt. Any shortfall will be met by the project sponsor.
Under Shariah financing, the investors are paid returns only when the project has positive cashflow. They can only claim for payment if fraud or negligence on the part of the contractor/project manager is proven.

(3) Risk
Conventional project financing places the construction, completion, market risks on the borrower and the bank (financier) only assumes the credit risk of the borrower.
Shariah financing distributes the risks amongst all the parties involved in the project. No one party can be insulated from the risk, unless fraud and negligence is proven.


Having being so used to earning predetermined returns with some recourse, banks would naturally be hesitant to finance projects the Shariah way. To overcome this, Shariah based project financing has to be marketed differently, highlighting the merits of risk-reward sharing and equitable distribution of income.

Islamic Finance - a Primer

Islamic finance, as the name implies, is finance based on Islamic laws and norms and is a subset of Islamic economics. The principles of Islamic economics are sourced from the two main sources of Shariah, the Quran and Hadith (sayings of the Prophet pbuh). Contrary to Adam Smith’s theory of self interest, Islamic economics subscribes to the policy of ‘prosper thy neighbour’.

The Western model of finance is based solely on monetary transaction where the bank acts as the middleman between those with excess funds (depositors) and those in need of funds (borrowers). The structure of Western banking is that of a lender-borrower, exchanging money for money. The price of money is interest rates and the determinant of the price is the risk associated with ability of the borrower to repay. The utilisation of the proceeds is of no concern of the bank, only the timely repayments of the loan. Hence, the success of the business does not matter to the bank for as long as loan repayments are met by the borrower. The bank does not assume any risks associated with the utilisation of the funds, even if the economy turns into a recession, the borrowers are still contracted to repay the principal and interest back to the bank within the stipulated period. Failing this will result in further monetary penalty, compounded over time.

Islamic and Western (conventional) finance is akin to Petrol and Diesel engines; they run on totally different platforms. Using the wrong fuel would be very detrimental to the engines. Therefore, how it is conducted; the mechanics and modus operandi, pricing, risk management, repayment, recourse, transaction documentation and marketing and sales must conform to the basic Islamic principle of just and equity.

The most significant difference is the basic concept of Islamic finance – risk sharing partnership instead of a borrower-lender relationship. What this means is that all transacting parties must enjoy equal benefits from the transaction and in a case of a loss, all must share the loss equally. The transactions must be conducted in such a way that none of the parties have an unfair advantage over the others.

Being just and equitable does not mean at the expense of profits. Islamic law requires debts to be paid, contracts to be honoured and promises to be kept. However, there is also a need to be compassionate, when the debtor is facing financial distress, it would be the duty of the creditor to understand and not make matters worse. An alternative arrangement must be made to ensure the debt is repaid. Loans per se are not an Islamic financial instrument. Borrowing and lending money is not encouraged unless in times of distress. Debts or obligations to pay only arise in trade transactions where the payment terms are deferred. The only type of loan recognised under Islamic law is the “benevolent loan” or qardhul hasan. This loan does not carry any interest rate nor does it carry a fixed repayment period. The debtor is expected to repay as soon as he is able and the creditor is not encouraged to demand repayment. The elements of trust and responsibility play a fundamental role in this transaction.

Money according to Islamic law is not a commodity. They are merely the intermediary to facilitate a transaction and therefore on its own cannot be traded.

The main characteristics of Islamic finance include;

• Prohibition of interest (riba / usury).
• Prohibition of elements of gambling and uncertainty.
• Partnership instead of lender-borrower relationship.
• Full transparency and disclosure
• Transaction must not involve prohibited goods and services such as pork, alcohol, gaming, armaments.
• Profit and loss sharing instead of fixed returns on the part of financiers.
• Shariah compliant asset backed financing.
• No short selling, i.e. full ownership must be obtained prior to selling.

Islamic finance can be used to facilitate any kind of financial transactions such as;

• Project financing
• Working capital financing
• Leasing
• Trade financing
• Liquidity management
• Sukuk (investment certificates)
• Takaful (insurance)
• Mortgages
• Asset management
• Hire purchase
  

Common contracts / concepts used in Islamic finance include:

• Murabahah (cost plus sales)
• Ijarah (leasing)
• Musharakah (joint venture)
• Mudharabah (trustee profit sharing)
• Istisna (project financing)
• Salam (forward sales)
• Wadiah (trustee safekeeping)
• Wakalah (agency)
• Kafalah (guarantee)
• Hibah (gift)
• Ibra (rebate)
• Qardul Hassan (benevolent loan)
• Tawidh (penalty)
• Ujr (fee)
• Wad (promise)
• Rahnu (collateral)