Many poor states still cut off from trade finance

GENEVA, (Reuters) – Many developing countries remain  cut off from trade finance, which before the credit crunch was  often their only source of private-sector funding, despite a   recovery in the industry, a meeting of experts heard yesterday.
Difficulties still encountered by some poor countries in  Africa, Asia, Latin America, Eastern Europe and Central Asia to  obtain funding for their exports threatens to undermine their  entire economic development, one expert said.

“For them it’s an important lifeline with respect to  development,” said the expert, requesting anonymity, after the  meeting of commercial and development bankers active in trade  finance hosted by the World Trade Organization.

Trade finance — the lifeblood of global commerce — dried  up in late 2008 and early 2009 amid the broader credit crunch,  contributing to a 12 percent decline in global trade volumes in  2009, the biggest contraction since World War Two.
The industry, which underpins 60-80 percent of the $12-13  trillion in merchandise trade, has recovered since the G20  agreed at its summit in London in April last year to mobilise up  to $250 billion to revive the sector.

But even as trade expands by an unprecedented 13.5 percent  this year, banks are concentrating on the safest customers.
Countries finding it hard to access trade finance include  Vietnam, Pakistan and Bangladesh in Asia, some 20 countries in  Africa, 5 low-income states in central and southern America, and  Ukraine and Kazakhstan, the trade finance expert told reporters.
WTO Director-General Pascal Lamy is likely to raise the  issue at next month’s G20 summit in Seoul and on Oct. 27 when he  attends a meeting of the African Development Bank in Tunis,  trade sources said.

Current and proposed regulations are discouraging banks from  providing trade finance to developing countries because they  increase the amount of money banks must set aside to cover  risks, making the low-margin transactions unprofitable.
“There comes a point at which the cost of doing business …  is just not worth it,” said the trade finance expert.
Under current banking regulations, known as Basel II, banks  must set aside capital according to the risk of the country they  are lending to, not the corporate customer. In many developing  countries, companies — especially those selling commodities and  raw materials — have much better credit ratings than the state.

Proposed new rules known as Basel III, intended to prevent  banks hiding toxic assets off their balance sheets — one of the  causes of the financial crisis — also penalise trade finance  because its traditionally safe instruments such as   letters of  credit are held off-balance-sheet.
The irony is, bankers argue, that trade finance is much  safer than other forms of credit.
That was long a matter of faith and anecdote, but nine  leading trade finance banks have now pooled data on trade  finance to demonstrate to regulators just how safe it is and  argue for a change in the rules.

A trade finance default register, set up by the  International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and Asian Development  Bank, collected 5.2 million transactions over 5 years, worth  $2.5 trillion.

The database shows only 1,140 transactions defaulted — a  default rate of 0.02 percent, compared with rates of several  percentage points on real estate lending.

Even in those cases 60 percent of the money was recovered as  trade finance lending is secured on the underlying shipment.