Theharshadmehtascam
Theharshadmehtascam
Theharshadmehtascam
SCAMS
Various scams, scandals and stigmas have surfaced in the recent years. These may not all be attributable to the antics and bungling of politicians, but they have been facilitated largely because of the vitiated atmosphere that the politicians and the political system have created in the country. Some of the most famous SCAMS that have surfaced during the time are:
The 1200 crores fodder scam relating to the procurement of nonexistent fodder on payments from the state exchequer. The Scam in printing & selling of stamp papers, which is used for recording documents for registration purpose. This scam is of about Rs. 2200 crores & involves fraudulent printing & sale of stamp papers in the various parts of the country. There is the famous Bofors scam, which was about the purchase of important defense equipment from foreign markets
The list goes on & on & moreover there are continuous additions to the same.
The Securities Scam refers to a diversion of funds to the tune of Rs. 3,500 crores from the banking system to various stockbrokers in a series of transactions (primarily in Government securities) during the period April 1991 to May 1992.
Harshad Mehta was an Indian Stockbroker and is alleged to have engineered the rise in the BSE stock exchange in the year 1992. Exploiting several loopholes in the banking system, Harshad Mehta and his associates siphoned off funds from inter bank transactions and bought shares heavily at a premium across many segments, triggering a rise in the Sensex.
Brief
Before we go forward, I would like to give an outline of what the following slides contain. It is very essential to have a clear understanding of the below points to get an idea of what exactly happened then.
Introduction. The Two Securities Market. Liberalization of the Economy. The Ready forward Deal. The Mechanics of the Scam & its explanation. Bank Receipt. Breakdown of the Control System Other Aspects of the Scam. Where has all the money gone ? Impact of the Scam
Introduction
In April 1992, the first press report appeared indicating that there was a shortfall in the Government Securities held by the State Bank of India. In a little over a month, investigations revealed that this was just the tip of an iceberg which came to be called the securities scam, involving misappropriation of funds to the tune of over Rs. 3500 crores. In an ever expanding ambit, the scam has engulfed top executives of large nationalized banks, foreign banks and financial institutions, brokers, bureaucrats and politicians. The functioning of the money market and the stock market has been thrown in disarray. A large number of agencies, namely, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), the Income Tax Department, the Directorate of Enforcement and the Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) are currently investigating various aspects of the scam.
In fact one can say that the borrowing bank actually sells the securities to the lending bank and buys them back at the end of the period of the loan at (typically) a slightly higher price.
This was wonderfully engineered by the Brokers. To give a better understanding of the mechanism, the whole process has been segregated into three different parts viz.
During the scam, however, the banks or at least some banks adopted an alternative settlement process which was similar to the process used for settling transactions in the stock market.
In this settlement process, deliveries of securities and payments are made through the broker. That is, the seller hands over the securities to the broker who passes them on to the buyer, while the buyer gives the cheque to the broker who then makes the payment to the seller.
In this settlement process, the buyer and the seller may not even know whom they have traded with, both being known only to the broker.
The brokers instead of merely bringing buyers and sellers together started taking positions in the market. In other words, they started trading on their own account, and in a sense became market makers in some securities thereby imparting greater liquidity to the markets.
When a bank wanted to conceal the fact that it was doing an RF deal, the broker came in handy. The broker provided contract notes for this purpose with fictitious counter parties, but arranged for the actual settlement to take place with the correct counter party.
Payment Cheques
A broker intermediated settlement allowed the broker to lay his hands on the cheque as it went from one bank to another through him. The hurdle now was to find a way of crediting the cheque to his account though it was drawn in favor of a bank and was crossed account payee. As it happens, it is purely a matter of banking custom that an account payee cheque is paid only to the payee mentioned on the cheque. In fact, exceptions were being made to this norm, well before the scam came to light. Privileged (corporate) customers were routinely allowed to credit account payee cheques in favour of a bank into their own accounts to avoid clearing delays, thereby reducing the interest lost on the amount. Normally, if a customer obtains a cheque in his own favour and deposits it into his own account, it may take a day or two for the cheque to be cleared and for the funds to become available to the customer. At 15% interest, the interest loss on a clearing delay of two days for a Rs. 100 crores cheque is about Rs. 8 lakhs.
Payment Cheques
On the other hand, when banks make payments to each other by writing cheques on their account with the RBI, these cheques are cleared on the same day.
The practice which thus emerged was that a customer would obtain a cheque drawn on the RBI favoring not himself but his bank. The bank would get the money and credit his account the same day.
This was the practice which the brokers in the money market exploited to their benefit.
But this, by itself, would not have led to the scam because the RF after all is a secured loan, and a secured loan to a broker is still secured. What was necessary now was to find a way of eliminating the security itself!
There
Bank Receipt
In an RF deal, as we have discussed it so far, the borrowing bank delivers the actual securities to the lender and takes them back on repayment of the loan. In practice, however, this is not usually done. Instead, the borrower gives a Bank Receipt (BR) which serves three functions:
The BR confirms the sale of securities. It acts as a receipt for the money received by the selling bank. Hence the name bank receipt. It promises to deliver the securities to the buyer. It also states that in the meantime the seller holds the securities in trust for the buyer.
In short, a BR is something like an IOU (I owe you securities!), and the use of the BR de facto converts an RF deal into an unsecured loan. The lending bank no longer has the securities; it has only the borrower's assurance that the borrower has the securities which can/will be delivered if/when the need arises.
1. A bank may short sell securities, that is, it sells securities it does not have. This would be done if the bank thinks that the prices of these securities would decrease. Since this would be an outright sale (not an RF!), the bank issues a BR. When the securities do fall in value, the bank buys them at lower prices and discharges the BR by delivering the securities sold. Short selling in some form is an integral part of most bond markets in the world. It can be argued that some amount of shortselling subject to some degree of regulation is a desirable feature of a bond market. In our opinion, an outright sale using a BR, which is not backed by securities, is not harmful per se though it violates the RBI guidelines. Contd..
Separation of Functions: The different aspects of securities transactions of a bank, namely dealing, custody and accounting are carried out by different persons. Counterparty Limits: The moment an RF deal is done on the basis of a BR rather than actual securities, the lending bank has to contend with the possibility that the BR received may not be backed by any/adequate securities. In effect, therefore, it may be making an unsecured loan, and it must do the RF only if it is prepared to make an unsecured loan. This requires assessing the creditworthiness of the borrower and assigning him a "credit limit" up to which the bank is prepared to lend. Technically, this is known as a counterparty limit.
These pertain to information that can cause significant changes in the prices of securities as well as the information supplied by the commercial banks on their financial performance.
On each occasion the coupon rate was increased by 1/2%, thereby raising the coupon rate from 11.5% to 13% during this ten month period. The major implication of raising interest rate on new borrowings is that it would trigger a fall in the market prices of the old loans which are pegged at the old (lower) interest rates. The price of the 11.5% Government Loan 2010 dropped by 3% to 5% with each coupon rate hike. If anyone has advance information about these changes in the coupon rates, he could make enormous amounts of riskless profit by short selling the old securities just before the announcement of rate hike and buying back (covering his position) after the prices have fallen.
There have been several allegations in this regard. However, it will probably be very difficult to prove with any degree of certainty that there was insider trading based on information about coupon rate changes, because of the size of the market.
With a daily trading volume of Rs. 3000 - 4000 crores, it would have been very easy for anyone to take a position (based on inside information) of Rs. 500 or even Rs. 1000 crores without anyone suspecting anything untoward.
A large amount of the money was perhaps invested in shares. However, since the share prices have dropped steeply from the peak they reached towards end of March 1992, the important question is what are the shares worth today? Till February 1992, the Bombay Sensitive Index was below 2000; thereafter, it rose sharply to peak at 4500 by end of March 1992. In the aftermath of the scam it fell to about 2500 before recovering to around 3000 by August 1992. Going by newspaper reports, it appears likely that the bulk of Harshad Mehta's purchases were made at low prices, so that the average cost of his portfolio corresponds to an index well below 2500 or perhaps even below 2000. Therefore, Mehta's claim that he can clear all his dues if he were allowed to do so cannot be dismissed without a serious consideration. Whether these shares are in fact traceable is another question.
market, there was an equally powerful "bear cartel", represented by Hiten Dalal, A.D. Narottam and others, operating in the market with money cheated out of the banks. Since the stock prices rose steeply during the period of the scam, it is likely that a considerable part of the money swindled by this group would have been spent on financing the losses in the stock markets. It is rumored that a part of the money was sent out of India through the Havala racket, converted into dollars/pounds, and brought back as India Development Bonds. These bonds are redeemable in dollars/pounds and the holders cannot be asked to disclose the source of their holdings. Thus, this money is beyond the reach of any of the investigating agencies. A part of the money must have been spent as bribes and kickbacks to the various accomplices in the banks and possibly in the bureaucracy and in the political system. As stated earlier, a part of the money might have been used to finance the losses taken by the brokers to window-dress various banks' balance sheets. In other words, part of the money that went out of the banking system came back to it. In sum, it appears that only a small fraction of the funds swindled is recoverable.
Thank You