Under a WRS, a warehouse receipt (WR) is issued to a named
depositor (who may be a farmer, farmer group, processor or trader)
as evidence that he or she has deposited a specified commodity, of
stated quantity and quality, at a specified location. The holder of
the receipt may pledge it to a lender (with the stored commodity
being the collateral for a loan) or transfer it to a buyer (by way
of a sale). The warehouse operator or collateral manager, who has
custody of the stocks, guarantees delivery against the receipt, and
should be able to make good any value lost through theft, fire or
other catastrophes. The key players in the WRS are depositors, the
warehouse operator or collateral manager, and lenders. Their roles,
responsibilities and benefits may differ depending on whether the
WRS is regulated or not as discussed below. Unregulated warehouse receipt systemsAn unregulated WRS is a legal or formal system of inventory
collateralization, in that the provision of services as well as the
rights and obligations of parties are based on existing contract
law. Aggrieved parties can therefore seek redress through the
courts. However, unlike the regulated WRS, neither the collateral
managers (who take custody of stored commodities) nor the issuing
of receipts are regulated by an independent regulatory agency. Contractual obligations and rights under the system are usually
defined in tripartite collateral management agreements
between three key players shown in figure 3.2: borrower, collateral
manager and the lender (usually a bank). In the cotton sector,
borrowers tend to be medium-scale to large-scale ginning or export
companies, handling large enough volumes of seed cotton or lint to
justify the cost of this service, and who either own or can lease
suitable storage space. Very large traders, especially the
vertically integrated multinational companies, often do not use WRS
because of relatively easier access to cheaper offshore finance.
For reasons of scale, it is often difficult for smaller-scale
traders and groups of smallholder farmers to use it. Figure 3.2: Key players in the unregulated
WRS 
The collateral managers usually issue non-negotiable,
non-transferable warehouse receipts and guarantee of delivery of
the stored commodity. Most of them are local subsidiaries of
international inspection companies, which obtain international
insurance and performance bonds to back their guarantee of
delivery. They also tend to have a track record in quality and
quantity certification for various commodities. Société Générale de
Surveillance (SGS) is the best-known example of such companies.
Others include Audit, Control and Expertise (ACE), Cotecna, Baltic
International, Bureau Veritas and Socotec/ITS. Transaction cycle under an unregulated WRS for cottonThe cycle is typically as follows: - The borrower applies for credit prior to the opening of the
harvest season. The loan application is usually assessed on the
basis of the borrower's balance sheet and track record as well as
on the adequacy of security provided.
- If the loan application is approved in principle, the bank and
the borrower will select a collateral manager; but quite often the
bank's view is paramount in the choice made. A collateral
management agreement (CMA) is then signed between the borrower
(ginner), the collateral manager and the financing bank.
- The collateral manager, on the basis of the CMA, takes
exclusive access to the warehouse provided by the borrower - it may
be leased if the borrower does not own a suitable facility. A
nominal fee (about $1) may be paid to the borrower by the
collateral manager to cement legal control over the warehouse.
- From that point, the collateral manager has legal custody of
the seed cotton and/or lint stored in the warehouse and is
authorized to release such stocks only with explicit authorization
from the specified lender. The collateral manager is expected to
provide regular updates on the quantity, quality and value of
stocks, which are expected to be insured by the borrower.
- After ginning and upon receipt of a confirmed order, the bank
authorizes release of the lint to an importer. The importer must
have either paid for or made satisfactory arrangements to pay for
the lint delivered.
- Payments to the ginner are required to be channelled through
the lending bank, to ensure full recovery of the loan and related
servicing costs. Some banks insist that if the contract is not
backed by an L/C then stock release will be permitted only after
payment has been received.
- Payments to the ginner are required to be channelled through
the lending bank, to ensure full recovery of the loan and related
servicing costs. Some banks insist that if the contract is not
backed by an L/C then stock release will be permitted only after
payment has been received.
Quite often the banks will, in addition to the CMA, require the
following as additional security: - Personal charge over the assets of directors and/or
shareholders as well as a fixed and floating charge on the
borrower's assets, usually the ginnery.
- A confirmed fixed-price off-take contract or L/C against which
the cotton collateral will be valued.
The main drawbacks of the system include lack of access,
especially by relatively small ginners for whom the cost of
collateral management and insurance may be too high. Financing
decisions can be slow and the requirement for fixed-price off-take
contracts often denies borrowers the opportunity to benefit from
favourable price movements. Since the receipts issued are
non-transferable, they can not be used as delivery instruments
against contracts, hence limiting their role in facilitating
trade. Collateral managers, like other operators, sometimes experience
losses through theft and fraud. Their liabilities, when they occur,
are often limited by indemnity and 'limitation of liability'
clauses in the CMA. Hence, it is essential for lenders to carry out
effective due diligence in the selection of collateral managers and
closely monitor their operations. The regulated warehouse receipt systemThe involvement of an independent regulatory agency is what
distinguishes the regulated WRS from the unregulated model. The
regulatory agency may be government-based, as is the case in the
United States (where USDA is the main regulator) and the United
Republic of Tanzania, which opted for this model following
promulgation of enabling legislation in 2005. A
private-sector-based agency, for instance a strong commodity
exchange as is the case in South Africa, can also regulate
warehouse operators issuing negotiable receipts which are traded.
In Zambia and Uganda, another model is being promoted, in which an
arm's-length private-sector-controlled agency is authorized by the
government to enforce appropriate laws and industry standards
regulating the WRS. The independent regulator is responsible for licensing or
certifying warehouse operators as custodians of collateralized
stocks (ensuring that they comply with criteria set in relevant
laws and regulations); regulating the issue of standardized
warehouse receipts to minimise the risk of fraud; and overseeing
the operations of warehouse operators (including carrying out
unannounced stock and quality verifications). Licensed operators offer 'public' warehousing services, implying
that they can store commodities on behalf of multiple depositors
(of all sizes) in a single warehouse or site. The receipts issued
may be transferable and negotiable, depending on the enabling
legislation. Licensed warehouse operators may include international
as well as local inspection companies, and processing companies
such as ginneries. Transaction cycle under the regulated WRSDepositors requiring financing for initial procurement of seed
cotton apply for credit prior to the opening of the marketing
season. The application is usually appraised on the basis of
traditional criteria and procedures, including: - The borrower's balance sheet and credit history or track
record.
- Satisfactory demonstration of the feasibility of the proposed
activity.
- Personal charge over the assets of directors and/or
shareholders, and/or fixed and floating charge on the
company/group's assets.
- Price risk mitigation, in the form of off-take contracts, where
market-based price risk instruments are absent.
As in the case of lending under the unregulated WRS,
decision-making is slow and bureaucratic, involving recommendations
by credit officers, credit committees and management. Once seed cotton is procured or assembled by farmer groups, it
is delivered to designated ginneries for storage and processing.
The independent regulatory agency is responsible for licensing or
certification of the designated ginneries. Deposits can be made by
any party but must meet the following criteria: - Minimum volumes as determined by individual designated
ginneries (e.g. 3 to 7 tons of seed cotton in the United Republic
of Tanzania and Uganda) - in order to reduce administrative,
transport and transaction costs.
- Minimum quality standards set by the independent regulator in
consultation with the trade. The seed cotton must be storable, and
the lint readily marketable.
The designated ginners issue WRs to depositors, after weighing
and grading the seed cotton deposited. The WR states the quantity
and quality of the seed cotton deposited; the name of the
depositor; and the obligation of the ginner to deliver the seed
cotton described or its lint equivalent to the depositor or a bona
fide party to whom the receipt has been transferred. The WR also
contains the terms and conditions under which the stocks are being
stored. Where the depositor intends to borrow against the collateralized
stocks, the process involved includes the following steps: - The borrower approaches a bank providing inventory financing
with the relevant application backed by the WR and, where required,
an off-take contract.
- The bank confirms the status of the WR from the designated
ginner before advancing any credit - this is critical in minimizing
the risk of fraud.
- The credit advanced depends on the market valuation of the lint
out-turn from the deposited seed cotton, with appropriate
adjustments reflecting anticipated future price movements.
Prior to sale, a system of monitoring the collateralized stocks
is enforced to safeguard the interests of depositors and lenders,
including: - Submission by warehouse operators of daily stock position
reports to lenders and the regulators.
- Unannounced inspections by regulators to verify the volume and
quality of stocks and confirm compliance with storage standards and
regulations.
- Complementary inspections by insurance companies and
banks.
- Monitoring of market developments that affect the value of the
collateral by credit officers, who can advise clients liquidate
stocks if necessary to minimize exposure to potential adverse price
movements.
When the crop is sold, payment is required to be made through to
the financing bank. This is often included in the off-take
contracts. The financing bank will, after being satisfied that the loan
obligations have been satisfied, release the WR to the bona fide
buyer, who can take delivery of the lint or seed cotton, after
presentation of the WR to the designated ginner. When the WR and
instructions from the bank are presented, the ginner will allow
delivery of the lint or seed cotton to the buyer and cancel the WR
to complete the transaction. The regulated WRS has the added benefit of being accessible by
small-scale operators, such as farmer groups, as illustrated in the
cases from the United Republic of Tanzania and Uganda. However,
establishing such a system requires painstaking work on creating
and maintaining a supportive regulatory and policy environment. WRS pilots for cotton in the United Republic of
Tanzania and Uganda The regulated WRS has been successfully piloted in the
United Republic of Tanzania and in Uganda. One farmer group, the
Oridoyi Rural Cooperative Society in the United Republic of
Tanzania, which has used the system, was able to raise seed cotton
output by its members almost 10-fold over a period of four years.
Financing was provided by a local bank, CRDB Bank Ltd, which also
lends about $10 million per year against collateralized coffee. The
cooperative was also able to market its lint direct to a United
Kingdom-based cotton merchant in the 2005/06 season. The rise in
output was primarily financed by the cooperative society from
retained profits accumulated through marketing cotton on behalf of
its members, through the WRS. In Uganda, the Nyakatonzi Cooperative Union offered storage
and toll-ginning services to its member primary cooperative
societies, making it possible for them to use the WRS. The primary
societies did not obtain inventory finance, as members were
prepared to wait for payment until after the lint was sold.
Participating farmers earned incremental income of over 40% because
they sold lint and cottonseed, instead of seed cotton. The
cooperative union also benefited from increased throughput without
having to raise additional financing for procuring seed
cotton. Source: Natural Resources Institute reports. |