POBO/ROBO

Managing Bank Relationships in Japan

Report date: 
18 Mar 2024

Commentary

With complex countries, we usually think of emerging markets. Japan is one of the most advanced, largest and affluent economies in the world – but it is also a very complex place for foreign companies to operate in.

Usually, the complexity for treasurers comes from regulation. In Japan, this is not the case: the yen is freely traded in one of the deepest markets; cash can be pooled and swept both within the country and across borders; one participant does POBO there; Japanese banks willingly report transactions and balances by MT 940; it has deep and open capital markets; and four of the world’s twenty largest banks by assets are Japanese. Instead, the complexity comes from a very strong culture, which is often not well understood by non Japanese, and which leads to a different way of doing business.

This call, which was well attended and quite animated, went into the challenges foreign treasurers face in this environment. Peers raised the following:

  • High bank fees: Japanese banks are reluctant to negotiate these down
  • Japanese banks are not used to RFPs for cash management – this is not how the domestic market operates. Many large Japanese companies have strong historical relationships with their banks, which often involve minority shareholdings.
  • While MT 940s are not an issue, one participant faced significant issues getting their Japanese bank to implement even a simple host to host communication
  • Communications challenges: it can be difficult to find Japanese employees who speak good English – very few bankers in domestic operations speak it.
  • The need to carefully manage business meetings: these are usually more formal than in many other cultures: deference to senior personnel is required
  • Difficulty managing onshore operations from a remote location: the local online banking tools are nearly all Japanese language only
  • The language issue is further complicated by the katakana character set
  • Resistance of local teams to change, especially if it involves working with foreign banks
  • Complexity in managing relationships and wallet share with Japanese banks, who are often key global providers of credit and FX
  • The use of company chops instead of signatures, and the related control issues
  • The requirement to use local bank accounts for certain types of tax payments
  • Security and confidentiality in Japanese online payment systems is not best in class – one participant had an issue with a single person (not in HR) making all payroll payments
  • Repatriating cash via dividends and intercompany loans is not a problem, but it brings the usual complications: the need for retained earnings (one participant’s business receives advance payments), withholding tax and currency hedging cost. 

How to handle these problems?

  • One peer did an RFP a few years ago, and awarded

Please Log in or Register to continue reading this commentary

Service providers discussed in this report: 

Please log in, or create a free account, to read the whole report summary.

Mexico - Corporate Treasury Update

Report date: 
12 Jan 2024

Commentary

In many ways, Mexico is a paradox. It has a vital, and complicated, relationship with its northern neighbour: apart from anything else, migration across its land border into the USA is a significant, and highly contentious, topic in US domestic politics.

But the reality is that Mexico has a thriving economy, and has modernised its financial and banking infrastructure to the point where the consensus on the call was that it is a country where it is relatively easy to work, and where most modern treasury management techniques can be used. There are no exchange controls, cash can be freely transferred across the national borders, and cross border cash pooling is regularly practiced. FX hedging can be done freely both onshore and offshore, and the country is well banked, with both good local banks and most international banks being well represented.

Despite this overall positive environment, we still had a lively call. There are a series of challenges, and some points were not always totally clear. None is particularly serious, but they still take up management time and attention:

  • Citibank operate through a relationship with Banamex. While this works well, several participants reported service level issues, and there were challenges with data not being transmitted through the IT systems. This resulted in manual interventions which should not have been required.
  • Consistent with their global strategy, Citi/Banamex are withdrawing from the retail banking sector. For some participants, this caused a problem, as banks in Mexico share the Latin American practice of giving employees a better deal on their retail banking services if the company pays payroll through them.
  • Otherwise, some participants reported issues setting up and managing local
Please Login or Register to access the rest of this free commentary.
If you haven't previously Logged in but receive commentaries via email, simply use your email address to change your password to Log in.
Service providers discussed in this report: 

Please log in, or create a free account, to read the whole report summary.

Treasury & Banking in India

Report date: 
25 Apr 2022

Commentary

This call took place against the background of the war in Ukraine – but it was a useful chance to catch up on the ever improving situation in India.

India has always been complex, with many regulations and poor clarity. This is clear from the comments below, where participants often have different experiences on the same topic. But, overall, the economy is working well, people are making profits (this was not always the case), and regulations are becoming more user friendly, even if they remain challenging.

Business structure: most participants have one legal entity which faces customers, and a different one which acts as an international shared service centre, invoicing other companies in the group on a cost plus basis. This can lead to inefficiencies in cash management: everyone struggles with domestic cash pooling and intercompany loans, while the shared service centre has guaranteed profits and cash generation. One participant has all activities in the same legal entity, which makes life easier.

Intercompany loans within India create transfer pricing and tax challenges: there is a required or recommended interest rate of 8%, compared to deposit rates of 4% to 4.5%.

Cross border cash pooling and intercompany loans are generally very difficult: many approvals are required. Dividends are subjected to withholding tax of 15%, which is sufficient to deter some, but not all, participants from paying dividends. However, this is an improvement on the previous 22% dividend tax, which was often not creditable against tax in the receiving country.

Netting of intercompany invoices is not allowed. However, one participant is using an Indian entity to centralise all invoices within the country using a POBO/ROBO process, and limiting the transactions to a single, large, gross in/gross out settlement. They are also looking at a non resident INR account.

Participants mostly use deposits for investing their excess cash. One is using the TIDE deposit: the bank automatically sweeps fixed amounts of cash above a defined threshold into deposits. These receive a higher rate if they remain for more than two weeks, but can be released if needed, with a lower interest rate being paid.

Most participants use international banks, mainly Citi and BNPP. Most complained that Citi are reluctant to...please sign in to continue reading

Please sign or set up a  free registration to read the rest of this commentary and get access to all CXC commentaries together with occasional free reports. (if you receive our updates, use your email to re-set your password)

 

Service providers discussed in this report: 

Please log in, or create a free account, to read the whole report summary.