HSBC MF gets off SEBI hook with a mere warning

Market regulator Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has let off HSBC Mutual Fund, HSBC Asset Management (India) Pvt Ltd (HSBC AMC) and its chief executive officer with a mere warning, despite finding them contravening regulations.
 In an order, SEBI's full-time director Dr KM Abraham said, “I hereby warn the Board of Trustees of HSBC Mutual Fund, HSBC Asset Management (India) Pvt Ltd and its chief executive officer that they shall strictly comply with the law governing their conduct and business of mutual funds in the securities market.” 

The matter relates to the HSBC Gilt Fund. It was alleged that in January 2009, HSBC AMC changed fundamental attributes of the scheme without following procedures. In a letter dated 3 March 2009, the AMC told the market regulator that it has made certain changes in the scheme. HSBC AMC said that it changed the name of the scheme to HSBC Guild Fund from HSBC Guild Fund-Short Term Plan, changed the benchmark index to 'I Sec Composite Index' from 'I Sec Si-Bex' and modified duration of the portfolio not exceeding 15 years from 'normally not exceeding 7 years'.

Following the changes, some investors complained to SEBI that their value of investments in the scheme had come down. They also alleged that the same was because of the abrupt changes in the investment objective such as shifting the investments from ultra short-term to long-term bonds of the scheme in January 2009.

There were some media reports which said that the Fund had shifted about 80% of its assets from ultra short-term to long-term bonds in a single day. The AMC cited liquidity crisis and the corresponding volatility of the assets under management, as the reasons for increasing the duration.

The AMC had launched a scheme called HSBC Gilt Fund during the year 2003. The scheme is an open-ended scheme, which sought to generate reasonable returns through investments in government securities (also referred to as G-Secs).

The said scheme had two plans—Long Term Plan and the Short Term Plan. In the offer document, it was mentioned that the Short Term Plan was suitable for investors seeking to obtain returns from a plan investing in gilts (including treasury bills) across the yield curve with the average maturity of the portfolio normally not exceeding seven years and modified duration of the portfolio normally not exceeding five years. The Long Term Plan was intended to suit investors with surpluses for medium to long periods and that the plan would invest in gilts (including treasury bills) across the yield curve with the average maturity of the portfolio normally not exceeding 20 years and modified duration of the portfolio normally not exceeding 12 years.

However, the AMC wound up the Long Term Plan after failing to get the minimum 20 investors mandated by SEBI and continued the Short Term Plan. Subsequently, the said plan underwent certain changes, the major change being the change of the modified duration from 'normally not exceeding 5 years' to 'not exceeding 15 years'.

The counsel for the AMC argued that it was specifically mentioned in the offer document that the average maturity and the modified duration could undergo a change in case the market conditions warrant and according to the views of the concerned fund manager and contended that SEBI did not object to the same while scrutinising the offer document.

Dr Abraham in his order said: "The noticees may be technically correct in stating that the changes made by them are not fundamental attributes, as per the aforesaid SEBI Circular, and therefore there is no legal compulsion on them to adhere to the procedure and manner prescribed under Regulation 18 (15A) of the Mutual Funds Regulations. However, the vital point that the noticee seems to have sadly overlooked is the aforesaid Regulations clearly extend to all changes that affect the interests of unit-holders."

"I am of the view that the board of trustees of the Fund and the Fund have contravened the provisions of Regulations 18(9) & 18(22) of the Mutual Funds Regulations and Clauses 2, 6 and 9 of the Code of Conduct laid down in the Fifth Schedule of the Mutual Funds Regulations. Further, the AMC has contravened Regulations 25(1) & 25 (16) of the Mutual Funds Regulations and Clauses 2, 6 and 9 of the said Code of Conduct. The Chief Executive Officer of the AMC having failed to ensure that the mutual fund complies with all the relevant legal provisions has contravened Regulation 25 (6A) of the Mutual Funds Regulations," Dr Abraham said in an 18-page order.

New biz for life insurance grew 25 pct in FY10

Led by state-owned LIC, new business for the life insurance industry recorded a growth of 25 per cent during 2009-10, overcoming the decline witnessed a year ago on account of the global financial meltdown.
According to industry sources, the 23 life insurers mopped up a first year premium of Rs 1.09 lakh crore in 2009-10 compared to Rs 87,108 crore in the previous year. In 2008-09, the insurers registered a degrowth of 6 per cent.
In 2009-10, Life Insurance Corporation collected a premium of Rs 70,891 crore compared to Rs 52,954 crore in 2008-09, thereby growing by around 34 per cent during the year. The market share of LIC has also increased to 65 per cent in 2009-10 compared to around 61 per cent in the previous year.
The other 22 private insurers mopped up a first year premium of Rs 38,399 crore in FY2010, compared to Rs 34,154 crore during the previous year, translating into a growth of over 12 per cent.
Among private life insurers, SBI (SBIN.NS : 2223.1 +117.3) Life emerged as the biggest player. The insurer collected Rs 7,041 crore as first year premium in the last fiscal compared to Rs 5,386 crore in 2008-09, thereby growing by over 30 per cent.
However, ICICI (ICICIBANK.NS : 943.85 -8.05) Prudential, which was at the top position in 2008-09, registered a 7 per cent degrowth during 2009-10.
It managed to mop up a Rs 6,334 crore premium in the last fiscal as against Rs 6,813 crore in 2008-09.
Among other big players, Reliance Life collected Rs 3,921 crore as first year premium in 2009-10, compared to Rs 3,541 crore in the previous year, thereby growing by over 10 per cent.

Equity funds pip Sensex in bull run

Equity fund managers do well in bull markets, but any signs of sideways or bearish sentiments, they underperform (or give lesser returns than that of) market returns, according to a study conducted by FE of decade long returns of diversified equity funds vis- -vis its benchmark indices.
For each (calendar) year, the returns of equity funds were compared with its benchmark indices which varied from Sensex (^BSESN : 17573.99 +101.43), BSE 100 to S&P CNX 500. In the bull market of 2009, when Sensex rallied 81%, almost all funds (97% of equity funds) outperformed (or gave more returns than) its benchmark index returns. But for the year 2010 till date, when the market has literally given no returns, the outperformance figure came down to 63%.
Long-term outperformance is key to the survival of fund managers and the fund management industry. Afterall, the mutual fund industry gets paid as management fees for its active fund management - which are typically 1-1.25% pa of assets.
But, any chances of sustained underperformance would mean the investors might shift to lower-cost index funds. In developed markets especially in US, a large proportion of equity funds are allocated towards index funds. This is because US fund managers are increasingly finding it difficult to beat markets year after year. However, in India, the case is different. In fact, in the entire bull market cycle, the outperformance figures have been around 92% on an average. What is worrisome though is what happens in a bear market.
The year 2008 was the worst year ever for the equity fund managers, when the markets tanked. Sensex fell by 52% in 2008 and only 4% of funds managed to give more returns than that of Sensex. In the bear market of 2001 and 2002, when Sensex corrected 18-20%, the outperformance was lower at 12% and 22% respectively. As a retail investor though, long term performance (3-5 year returns) is key - and here at least 80% have given more returns than that of its benchmark.
While this should keep the investors happy, a soul search also needs to be done as to how the returns were earned. While the long-term outperformance scorecard looks good for Indian equity fund managers, there is a crying need to stick to investment mandate.

IndusInd Bank to unveil credit card

Bangalore: To extend its reach to the customers, IndusInd Bank plans to enter the credit card segment. The bank expects a turnover of around Rs. 500 crore from the new business in its very first year, reports Rupee Times.

Talking to Rupee Times, Paul Abraham, CEO of IndusInd Bank said, "So far, our retail lending has been entirely secured. We want to move towards unsecured lending. A credit card will complete the suite of products. We expect the credit card business to pick up in the next three years and will target around Rs 500-crore business in the first year."

The bank has partnered with IIT- Madras to provide the technology for this facility. "From a manufacturer to a dealer, everyone across the chain can avail themselves of credit under one umbrella. The objective is to disburse credit faster and, thereby, help us grow the loan book," said Ramesh Ganesan, EVP head - Transaction Banking, IndusInd Bank.

In the last financial year, the bank has shown commendable performance owing to higher margins and increased loan book. It posted a net profit of Rs 97.96 crore in three months to March 2010, a 94 percent jump year-on-year. Total income stood at Rs.852.57 crore, a growth of nine percent.

United Stock Exchange of India gets SEBI's approval

The United Stock Exchange of India (USE) has finally got the permission from SEBI to commence operations in currency futures. The exchange is expected to launch contracts in all the four pairs of currencies -- $-rupee; Euro-rupee; Pound Sterling -rupee and Japanese Yen-rupee, reports PTI.

After the approval, BSE's Managing Director and CEO Madhu Kannan said that USE has tentatively planned to commence operations in June 2010. According to the company's release, Nearly 150 members have submitted their applications for membership of USE. Most of the members of BSE are expected to join USE.

T S Narayanasami, Managing Director & CEO, USE said, "USE's membership drive is in full swing and we are pleased to see spontaneous response from the banks which are natural partners of USE apart from broking community. Trading membership is initially free with nil transaction charges to begin with."

In the years to come, USE may play an important role in transforming India into a modern financial hub, by being India's most preferred stock exchange.

Investors need not worry over ULIP issue: Khurshid

Corporate Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid today downplayed fears that investors would lose confidence due to the row between SEBI and IRDA over market- linked insurance policies, as the issue will be resolved in favour of either one regulator or the other by the courts.
"Investors will have confidence that at the end of the day, even if there is disagreement between regulators, one regulator will prevail (over ULIP issue). It's only a matter of time, one regulator will prevail. So investors need not worry," Khurshid told reporters on the sidelines of an Assocham event on transpCorporate Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid today downplayed fears that investors would lose confidence due to the row between SEBI and IRDA over market- linked insurance policies, as the issue will be resolved in favour of either one regulator or the other by the courts.

"Investors will have confidence that at the end of the day, even if there is disagreement between regulators, one regulator will prevail (over ULIP issue). It's only a matter of time, one regulator will prevail. So investors need not worry," Khurshid told reporters on the sidelines of an Assocham event on transparency and accountability.
Related Stories

* Orient Green Power plans IPO, files prospectus with SEBI
* Shirram EPC up 4% after associate company files DRHP
* Banks' proposal to float holding firms revived
* Warns brokers against mis-selling
* Sebi to tighten distributor certification norms

He said regulators are new institutions and there are bound to be overlaps in their functioning.

"There are overlap rules that are supposed to apply... Engagement rules... If we find there is a gap in engagement rules, we clarify. I think that is what the Finance Ministry wanted to do, either do itself or let courts do it. In this case, the Finance Ministry seems to have suggested that let the courts decide the overlap rules," he said.

Engagement rules refer to practices followed in situations of opposing interests. ULIPs are products which combine insurance features with market investment.

Khurshid said conflict may arise between the Competition Commission of India and SEBI or the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission, but engagement rules are supposed to resolve these issues.

"Everywhere, in the Competition Commission for instance, there will be an overlap with SEBI, electricity commission, and we have engagement rules. They are supposed to resolve any such issue, any potential or actual conflict. It is not an impossible task," he said.

Conflict between market regulator SEBI and insurance regulator IRDA arose when the former banned 14 life insurers from raising money from market-linked insurance schemes (ULIPs), following which the latter asked the companies to ignore the order.

Subsequently, the Finance Ministry intervened and the two regulators agreed to jointly seek a legally binding mandate from the court as to who has jursdiction over ULIPs.

Till then, status quo ante was restored by the Finance Ministry.

After the agreement, SEBI amended its order and banned only new ULIPs launched after April 9, when the first order of SEBI was issued.

IRDA, however, asked the companies to ignore this directive as well.
He said regulators are new institutions and there are bound to be overlaps in their functioning.
"There are overlap rules that are supposed to apply... Engagement rules... If we find there is a gap in engagement rules, we clarify. I think that is what the Finance Ministry wanted to do, either do itself or let courts do it. In this case, the Finance Ministry seems to have suggested that let the courts decide the overlap rules," he said.
    
Engagement rules refer to practices followed in situations of opposing interests. ULIPs are products which combine insurance features with market investment.
    
Khurshid said conflict may arise between the Competition Commission of India and SEBI or the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission, but engagement rules are supposed to resolve these issues.
    
"Everywhere, in the Competition Commission for instance, there will be an overlap with SEBI, electricity commission, and we have engagement rules. They are supposed to resolve any such issue, any potential or actual conflict. It is not an impossible task," he said.
    
Conflict between market regulator SEBI and insurance regulator IRDA arose when the former banned 14 life insurers from raising money from market-linked insurance schemes (ULIPs), following which the latter asked the companies to ignore the order.
    
Subsequently, the Finance Ministry intervened and the two regulators agreed to jointly seek a legally binding mandate from the court as to who has jursdiction over ULIPs.
    
Till then, status quo ante was restored by the Finance Ministry.
    
After the agreement, SEBI amended its order and banned only new ULIPs launched after April 9, when the first order of SEBI was issued.
    
IRDA, however, asked the companies to ignore this directive as well.

Highlights of RBI's FY11 Annual Policy Statement

MAIN HIGHLIGHTS

* Hikes reverse repo, repo rate, CRR by 25bps each
* Reverse repo, repo rate hikes with immediate effect
* CRR hike effective from Apr 24
* CRR hike to impound 125 bln rupees from banks
* FY11 GDP growth projection at 8.0% with upside bias
* March end inflation projection at 5.5%
* FY11 banks' credit growth projection at 20.0%
* FY11 banks' deposit growth projection at 18.0%
* FY11 money supply growth projection at 17.0%
.
STANCE

* Hike in policy rates, CRR to help contain inflation
* Hike in policy rates, CRR to anchor inflationary expectations
* Measures to sustain recovery process
* Govt borrow needs, private credit demand will be met
* Hikes to align policy tools with evolving state of econ
* To closely monitor macro events, prices; take warranted steps
* Econ firmly on recovery path, industrial growth broad based
* India economy resilient, recovery consolidating
* FY11 econ growth to be higher, more broad-based vs FY10
* Lower policy rates can complicate inflation outlook
* Lower policy rates also impair inflationary expectations
* Despite 25bps hike in rates, real policy rates still negative
* Need to
normalise policy rates in calibrated manner
* Inflationary pressures "accentuated" in recent period
* Inflation getting increasingly generalised
* Capacity constraints to re-emerge as econ growth rises
* Must ensure demand-side inflation does not become entrenched
* FY11 fresh govt bond issuances 36.3% higher vs FY10
* FY11 fresh govt bond issuances "a dilemma"
* Policy considerations demands liquidity be curbed
* Govt borrow needs supportive liquidity conditions
* Need to absorb liquidity without hurting govt borrow plan
* To respond swiftly, effectively to inflationary expectation
* To actively manage liquidity, ensure private credit demand is met
.
INFLATION
* Significant changes in drivers of inflation in recent months
* Overall food inflation high despite seasonal ease
* Rise in global commodity prices upside risk to inflation
* Household inflation expectations remain at elevated level
* Demand pressures may rise as recovery gains momentum
* Monsoon prospects unclear, blur FY11 inflation outlook
* Volatile crude prices cloud FY11 inflation outlook
* To ensure price stability, anchor inflationary expectations
* To monitor overall, disaggregated components of inflation
* keeps medium-term inflation objective of 3.0%
* An unfavourable monsoon may exacerbate food inflation
* Unfavourable 2010 monsoon may add to fiscal burden
.
GROWTH
* GDP projection assumes normal monsoons
* GDP projection also assumes good industrial, services growth
* Industrial growth to take firmer hold going forward
.
FISC
* Fiscal prudence to avoid crowding out private credit demand
* Fiscal prudence must shift to structural improvements
* Govt borrow "very large", can pressure interest rates
.
GLOBAL
* Pace of global econ recovery remains uncertain
* Uncertain global econ recovery downside risk to India GDP
* Trade, financial linkages to other economies may impact India GDP
* Commodity price seen up more if global recovery gain momentum
* Rise in global commodity prices may up inflation pressure
* Expansionary fiscal policy may not be unwound in advanced economies
* Expansionary policies may trigger large FX flows to India
* Excessive flows challenge to FX rate, monetary mgmt
* FX rate policy not guided by pre-announced target
* Keep flexibility to intervene in FX market to manage volatility
* Need to be vigilant volatile FX rate movements
.
MARKET

* RBI panel to mull single point reporting for OTC FX derivatives
* To launch reporting platform for secondary deals of CDs, CPs
* Asked FIMMDA to develop CD, CP reporting platform
* To allow banks to purchase non-SLR bonds by infra companies in HTM
* OKs bourses to launch plain vanilla dollar/rupee options

The New Pension Scheme: Good intentions, poor execution

 In the current Budget, the Central government had announced that it would contribute Rs1,000 towards each New Pension Scheme (NPS) account opened this year. The Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA) plans to make the scheme more attractive. While various efforts have been made to make the NPS attractive, the Centre has failed to attract its own States towards the scheme.

Even after six years of its launch, only 12 States have executed the NPS scheme, eight have merely entered into an agreement with the NPS Trust. Administrative difficulties in identification of eligible employees and the difficulties of implementation of a payroll-linked programme are some of the difficulties that have been cited by various States for non-implementation of the scheme.

The NPS was introduced by the government in April 2004, to cover all entrants in government service. It was subsequently extended to the general public later. At that time, around 23 States in the country had notified adoption of the NPS for their employees.

However, even after six years, the implementation of the scheme has not taken off. According to the 13th Finance Commission Report (2010- 2015), only 12 States have executed their agreements signed with the Central Record Keeping and Accountancy Agency (CRA). In the case of NPS, the National Securities Depository Limited (NSDL) has been appointed as the CRA.The Report further states that an additional eight States have entered into agreements with the NPS Trust.

This lacklustre performance from the States has led to an abysmal transfer of funds worth Rs 133crore so far to the NPS. The amount is quite meagre compared to the total corpus that the government had transferred to pension fund managers. As on 31 March 2008, this amount stood at over Rs1,117 crore. Thus, the total amount transferred to the NPS stands at around 10% of the total amount that the Centre had allocated to the Scheme. According to the Report, this Rs113 crore is the transfer amount put together for only two States.

The Report states, “The contributions of State employees are lying in the State public accounts, earning a return equal to the interest rate allowed for the General Provident Fund. The migration to the NPS needs to be completed at the earliest.” The Report has also recommended a grant to assist States build a database for their employees and pensioners.
The Centre’s intentions may be noble, but if it can’t get the States to follow the NPS, how will it convince the general public to go in for what otherwise is a well-conceived scheme? — Amritha Pillay

Important changes in PPF rules

Public Provident Fund Scheme, 1968: (1) Clarification regarding reckoning of the date of deposit (2) Reiteration of instructions on opening of an account for a minor

Circular No. DGBA.CDD. H-7530/15.02.001/2009-10, dated 29-3-2010

1. Reckoning the date of deposit in case of cheque payment:

(a) As you are aware, in terms of Ministry of Finance letter No. F. 3(9)-PD/72 dated September 4, 1972, in the case of Public Provident Fund Scheme, 1968 (PPF) “when a subscriber makes a deposit by local cheque or demand draft, the date of tender of cheque or draft at the Accounting Office is treated as date of deposit, provided the related cheque is honoured on presentation for encashment.” However, in case of all other Small Savings Schemes of the Government of India (GoI), such as, Post Office Savings Schemes (POSS), as also Senior Citizens Savings Scheme, 2004 (SCSS), if the money is deposited in the account by means of a cheque (local or outstation),the date of encashment of the cheque is treated as the date of deposit.

(b) In order to bring uniformity in the reckoning of the date of deposit in the PPF vis-à-vis POSS and SCSS, the GoI, vide their letter F. No.7/7/2008/NS-II dated February 10, 2010, have decided that hereafter in modification of Ministry of Finance letter No.F.3(9)-PD/72 dated September 4, 1972 “when a deposit is made in the PPF account by means of a local cheque or demand draft by the subscriber, the date of realization of the amount will be the date of deposit.”

(kindly ensure that your cheque is cleared by the 5th of the month to earn interest for that month,

also do not wait for 31st March to make PPF deposits)

(c) You may bring this to the notice of your branches undertaking PPF business and ensure that the same is also incorporated in the computerized system. The information should also be duly displayed at the branches for awareness of the customers.

2. Opening of an account for a minor:

(a) In view of complaints being received about non-opening of accounts for minor by some Agency banks, it is reiterated that as per Rule 3 (1) of PPF Scheme, 1968, an individual may, on his own behalf or on behalf of a minor, of whom he is the guardian, subscribe to the Public Provident Fund. Further it is reiterated that as clarified, vide Ministry of Finance letter F.7/34/88/-NS II dated November 17, 1989, either father or mother can open a PPF account on behalf of his/her minor child but not both.

(b) You are advised to reiterate these instructions to your branches operating the PPF Scheme.

FinMin puts Sebi's Ulips order on hold

The government today said the two regulators Sebi and IRDA have agreed to maintain the status quo that existed before market regulator's ban on 14 life insurers from raising funds for unit-linked schemes.
The status quo will be maintained till a court decides who can regulate ULIP schemes, Finance Minister Pranab Mukherjee told reporters here.
ULIP is an insurance product in which a bulk of the premiums is invested in equities and bonds.
"To resolve any ambiguity and to ensure smooth functioning in the market, the regulators have agreed to jointly seek a binding legal mandate from an appropriate court," Mukherjee said.
"Meanwhile, status quo ante is being restored," he told reporters outside the finance ministry.
Mukherjee's comments came after a series of meeting between Finance Ministry officials and IRDA Chairman J Hari Narayan Sebi chief C B Bhave.
Sebi last Friday banned 14 life insurance companies from raising funds through unit-linked insurance policies.
A day later, insurance sector regulator IRDA asked the companies to ignore the Sebi order and do business as usual.
The ball had since gone into the Finance Ministry's court. Bhave and Hari Narayan held separate meetings with Finance Secretary Ashok Chawla on the ongoing tussle between the two regulators.
The life insurance companies against whom Sebi passed the order are SBI Life, ICICI Prudential, Tata AIG, Aegon Religare Life, Aviva Life, Bajaj Allianz, Bharti AXA, Birla Sunlife, HDFC Standard Life, ING Vysya Life, Kotak Mahindra Old Mutual Life, Max New York Life, Metlife India and Reliance Life.