Just when you thought emotions around
the Banking (Amendment) Act, 2016 have died down, I’m about to whip
them up again. My apologies.
Obviously the Act still
continues to top everybody’s mind—from the President to the ordinary
borrower. In fact, since its promulgation in mid-September 2016, it has
been flipped, rolled, propped, punctured-and even lionised, all in equal
measure.
What I want to do now is to highlight its
actual impacts on commercial banks’ performance since
operationalisation. Looking at banks’ 2016 financial results, I must
say that in just three months, the Act literally shredded commercial
banks’ income statements.
I’m pretty confident
‘shredded’ is a fair adjective in this context. And I’m referring to
commercial bank’s performance in the fourth quarter of 2016.
But
before delving into details, I must point out that banks faced strong
business headwings in 2016. As if the Banking (Amendment) Act 2016 was
not enough, they had to deal with elevated loan non-performance. I mean
to be fair, this was (and still is) a systemic issue.
Anyway,
let’s move on. So, how did banks fare in the fourth quarter? First, by
repricing their loan books from tree-tops to 14 per cent, commercial
banks took a total Sh5.7 billion in income haircut on their loan books
in the quarter.
The large Tier 1 banks took a Sh3.3
billion haircut—and Equity Bank accounted for 80 per cent of that. The
mid-sized Tier 2 and Tier 3 banks took Sh2.6 billion and Sh700 million
respectively.
Essentially, combined, commercial banks were losing
Sh1.9 billion monthly in the quarter. Tier 1 banks were losing some
Sh1.1 billion every month while tier 2 and Tier 3 banks were losing
Sh864 million and Sh232 million monthly respectively.
These
are quite steep figures—and had profound impacts on the bottom line.
Talking of bottom line, fourth quarter industry profit before tax (PBT)
declined by a third quarter-on-quarter (nominally, that translates into
some Sh13 billion off banks’ PBT). Resultantly, 14 banks reported net
loss position in the fourth quarter; 10 of them were the smaller Tier 3
names, while the rest were the mid-sized Tier 2 names.
In
fact, Tier 3 banks slipped into a net loss position. I mean, an income
haircut of Sh232 million per month is quite elevated for their balance
sheet sizes. They just had to capitulate.
That’s the fourth quarter performance review within the context of the Banking (Amendment) Act, 2016.
However,
I need to point that the fourth quarter bottom line performance also
needs to be looked at in the context of elevations in loan loss
provisions.
During the quarter, banks ramped up
provisions by an additional Sh3.2 billion. But that withstanding, your
fixation should now shift to 2017 performance expectations. Investors
are forward-looking, so its only fair. I say prepare for more shredding.
First,
I don’t see any likelihood of the Act being repealed in 2017—even
through some goodwill has been expressed by policymakers.
Second,
on a business-as-usual basis, and contingent on a neutral monetary
policy stance, we are looking at around Sh22 billion off banks’ topline
in 2017. Don’t call me a doomsayer.
I haven't seen any
eye-catching volumisation strategies across board to counter that
figure. Add elevation in loan loss provisions into the mix and you get
yourself a very impotent investment cocktail for the banking sector.
Happy Easter and keep off bank stocks, for now.
No comments :
Post a Comment