Ýêîíîìè÷åñêèå
íàóêè/ 1.Áàíêè
è áàíêîâñêàÿ ñèñòåìà.
Ostapova Y. A.
Vlasova I. A.
Donetsk state university of economics and
trade
after Michael Tugan-Baranovsky, Ukraine
Banking sector in Ukraine
During the last decade, the banking sector in Ukraine
has been exhibiting a high growth potential and was the most dynamic and
leading sector in the country. As
in most countries, banking in Ukraine is a two-tier system, with the first tier
being the central bank and the second tier consisting of commercial banks. Two
main laws regulate the sector: the law On Banks and Banking (1991) and the law
On the National bank of Ukraine (1996). The latter law defines the two key
roles of the central bank in the country, the National Bank of Ukraine (NBU),
to be responsible for ensuring stability of the national currency and supervising
the activity of commercial banks. Most of the banks are universal and a few are
specialized in certain activities banks. About 80 percent of all the banks are
joint stock commercial banks and only 20 percent are limited liability
partnerships. Remarkably, since 1994 there have been only two 100 percent
state-owned banks in Ukraine, amounting to only about 10-15 percent of the
total banking sector assets, which is a very healthy indicator for a
transitional economy. For comparison, in 1999-2000, this share was 18.3 percent
in Bulgaria, 24.1 percent in Czech Republic, 35.4 percent in Russia, 50 percent
in Romania, 64.5 percent in Slovenia, while in Ukraine it was only 13.6
percent. The banking system of sovereign Ukraine passed through six
distinguishing stages of development. The first stage, roughly 1991-1993, was
the period of reorganization and rapid growth in the Ukrainian banking
industry. First of all, the NBU conducted re-registration of the banks earlier
registered by the State Bank of the USSR. Most of the banks that have been the
largest players in the sector until now were re-registered or opened in that
period. Secondly, the industry survived the wave of rapid growth in the number
of banks: a lot of small banks, many of which were so-called
"pocket-banks", appeared in the industry. The number of banks
registered by the NBU almost doubled from 1991 to 1992 and doubled again from
1992 to 1993. Such a dramatic increase in the number of banks was due to the
fact that the entry barriers were minimal. Indeed, the capital requirement was
only about the same as the market price for a 2-bedroom apartment in a large
city! The second stage of development, roughly 1994-1995, was shaped by the
first large wave of bankruptcies in the Ukrainian banking sector and, at the
same time, by the entrance of the first foreign banks in Ukraine. Here, the NBU
strengthened its banking regulations and activity, bringing the standards
closer to international standards. Some banks that had a lack of capital, a
large number of bad loans, and other problems had difficulty meeting the new
standards. As a result, 11 banks in 1994 and 1 bank in 1995 were liquidated,
which hurt some people but also helped to improve the banking sector.
Specifically, as a response to the wave of unexpected bankruptcies, the NBU
adopted a system of control by beginning to regulate the required financial
indicators characterizing a bank's liquidity, paying capacity, minimum risk
share per client, minimum percentage of equity, etc., which contributed to the
prevention of future bankruptcies. On the other hand, in 1994 the NBU also
improved the operating environment by implementing the national electronic
payment system that was fast, so that payments made at a designated payment
center, the post office for example, would appear on the creditor's computer
within an hour, despite the poor communication system at that time. The NBU
also finally tightened its monetary policy suppressing the hyperinflation that
had jumped from the annual rate of about 10,150 percent in 1993 to about 400
percent in 1994. The average interest rate spread reached its peak of about 46
percent in 1995, and started to decline since then, slowly reviving credit
feasibility for Ukrainian businesses and consumers. The third stage of development, roughly
from the beginning of 1996 to the middle of 1998, was a period of further
stabilization in the Ukrainian banking system and the Ukrainian economy in
general. The critical step here was the introduction of a stable national
currency, the hryvnia, in 1996, together with further tightening of the
monetary and budget deficit policy by the NBU and the government, which led to
further reduction in inflation and in the interest rate spreads. At this stage,
an average bank had much more capital and resources for giving loans as well as
more experience in operating in a market economy. Remarkably, the industry
profit in 1996 was twice that of the previous year. However, the rapid boom of
Ukrainian banking was suddenly hit by the Russian financial crisis in August
1998, which caused sudden depreciation of the Ukrainian hryvnia from about 2.1
to about 5.4 for 1 US dollar in 17 months. Sixteen banks were liquidated during
1998. The fourth stage, roughly mid-1998 to mid-2001, was a period of
modernization for the banking system in Ukraine. First, international
accounting standards were adopted in 1998, making the comparison of Ukrainian
banking with the rest of the world much easier. More banks with foreign capital
entered the industry encouraging a widening of the spectrum of banking
services. At this stage, banks became 'closer' to the client and started
offering some new products on the Ukrainian market such as securities custody,
registrar services, settlement schemes for the acquisition of shares, advanced
retail banking, various financial consultations, etc. The entrance of foreign
banks during this early period was expected to boost the Ukrainian banking
sector substantially, but it was suddenly constrained by the event that placed
a 'black spot' on the sector's development. This was the fifth stage of
development, roughly mid 2001-2003, which began with the inclusion of Ukraine
on the 'black list' of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF), in September
2001, as a country that had not cooperated with FATF and failed to enact
anti-money laundering legislation that met international standards.
Nevertheless, the sector was still growing: the total loans and assets in the
banking sector, for instance, grew, on average, by about 50 percent annually.
At the beginning of 2004, the FATF removed Ukraine from its 'black list'
inducing a new, sixth, stage in the sector's development - 2004-2006 -marked by
a wave of acquisitions of a number of Ukrainian banks by large foreign banks,
which attracted considerable attention of media, government, business people,
and just regular citizens. Recall that since 1994, Ukraine already had banks
that were 100 percent foreign as well as banks with some foreign share (see
Figure 1). Yet, the proportion of foreign ownership was relatively small, only
about 15 percent, with the largest 100 percent foreign bank taking just 8th
place in terms of assets. In the second half of 2005 (the deal was made on
October, 20), Ukrainian media published shocking news: the 93.5 per cent share
of the second largest bank, Aval, was purchased by Raiffeisen International for
US $1.028 billion. A few months later, (February 14, 2006), another major
business deal was announced - the sale of 85.42 percent of Ukrsotsbank to
Italian investors (Banca Intesa), for US $1.161 billion. A few other large
banks (Ukrsibbank, "Forum", Vabank, "Mriya") as well as
some smaller banks (Index-Bank, Megabank, etc.) sold some of their shares to
foreigners in 2005-2006 and yet a few more banks are in negotiation. By August
of 2006, the share of foreign ownership in the Ukrainian banking sector
doubled, amounting to about 30 percent. What the government should worry about
first, instead of building the new entry barriers for foreigners or any other
investor, is to make sure that the concentration within the sector remains low
- to keep the competition high. In general, it should not matter who buys a
bank - foreigners or locals - but what should matter is the resulting quality
of services offered by the new owner, its reliability, and how that purchase
would affect the level of competition in the entire financial sector of the
country and its particular regions. The second issue the government should
really worry about, instead of raising entry barriers, is the weakness of many
small banks that are on the verge of bankruptcy. As a matter of fact, Ukrainian
banking is very likely to be approaching a large shakeout, which we think would
be the seventh period of its evolution. An industry shakeout is the period of
development that is characterized by a massive exit of many players and
consolidation of other players in the sector. By looking at various industries
in the world it appears that all of them go through such a period, with the
first shakeout emerging, on average, around the 15th year of development - with
some variation depending on the industry and economy specifics. Ukrainian
banking has already lived through 15 years of development and satisfies one of
the key factors economists believe to be detrimental for inducing the
shakeout-a decent level of maturity in producing and supplying the main
products. So, in the next 2-3 years it is very likely that we will observe a
substantial reduction of banks in Ukraine, together with enlargement of some
banks, as well as an attempt of some small banks to survive by introducing
relatively new products for Ukrainian consumers. An important question is how
this massive exit of banks from the environment will be performed. In the worst
case, we will see a large wave of bankruptcies. A way to prevent or at least
minimize the number of bankruptcies is to encourage mergers between and
acquisitions of small banks-whether by locals or by foreigners. Indeed, many of
the small banks that are likely to be on the edge of bankruptcy do not have
fatal problems but just management and marketing difficulties that can be
resolved through replacement of their management-a natural step after the
merger or acquisition. One of the main reasons, however, that kept investors
away from buying such banks is their low level of transparency, which did not
allow getting a clear picture of true problems of the banks by potential
investors. Naturally, what the government and the NBU could and should do in this
respect is to make the international standards of transparency mandatory for
all banks in Ukraine. It is important to note that some positive steps have
recently been taken in this respect through the new law that was passed and
came in force on October 4, 2006. According to this law, all the banks must
become open joint stock companies within the next three years. Note that only
about half of existing banks already have the required status. Ironically, some
of the banks are registered as limited liability companies and even the central
bank (at least officially) does not know the true owners of some of the banks
and the new law is supposed to help in solving this problem. Also, according to
this law, new entrants in the banking sector would need to have minimum
statutory capital of 10 million. By the data from the second quarter of this
year, 117 banks out of 166 registered banks in Ukraine Overall, the dynamics of
the sector and the recent prophylactic measures taken by the authorities in
Ukraine suggest that Ukrainian banking is about to go through dramatic changes
which, we believe, would help it reaching a more advanced and robust level.
References
1.
http://www.ukraine-observer.com/articles/225/951
2.
http://www.bank.gov.ua/Engl/B_syst/index.htm
3.
http://www.mw.ua/2000/2040/38244/