By Chandu Epitawala

Since the unprecedented crisis in the country in 2022, many people (experts as well as laymen) have weighed in on what ails Sri Lanka in terms of its governance and macroeconomic failings and missteps which eventually led to the collapse of the economy, the currency and default on its debt. Many have also commented/highlighted the brain drain or migration of trained/skilled minds that is taking place or even accelerating. I like to dwell on a slightly different aspect/cause or focus on the same issue of the economy and its remedies purely from a Finance standpoint which I find not discussed widely enough in media and public/private fora.

As any student of Finance will tell you, studying for a Degree in Finance will lead you to three main career paths. Regular Banking (mostly specializing in Debt), Asset or Fund Management and Merchant Banking or Corporate Finance. I will attempt to look at Sri Lanka’s economic crisis and its possible solutions more from the vantage point of the Merchant Banker or purely from a financing point of view.

What are the essential or fundamental elements of a Country (or a Company) for it to efficiently or competitively function and thrive in a globalized economy? (Sri Lanka, in general, and the government entities/SOEs in particular, sadly lacks all these elements in varying degrees.)

A set of Physical Assets (investment)

A group of People (human capital/Expertise/Know How)

A governance/management Structure – Entrepreneurial Drive/Spirit

A Plan/Skill/Ability to sell/export/market the output (goods or services)

I will mainly focus on the challenge of how to put together the essential Public Infrastructure Assets (or restructure existing set of Assets/SOEs) to revive economic activity and fuel growth, as that’s the one which requires the bulk of financing. When one refers to Finance, what does that entail?

A set of Public Assets required to run a Country efficiently generally includes highly capital-intensive public infrastructure such as Roads/Highways, Sea Ports, Airports, Bridges, Power Generating/Distribution infrastructure, Irrigation Infrastructure, and Storage/Logistics Infrastructure etc. etc. I like to highlight the fact that this type of infrastructure requires some Government (State and Local) involvement, at least at the initial stage as investment (finance) required are quite high, involves macro/national or strategic planning, land acquisition, very long gestation period etc. However, the principles of financing such Projects are no different to Corporate Finance. In fact, at the country level, one may have even better options, such as borrowing at concessional rates or getting equity participation from multilateral agencies (Ex. IFC etc.)

As any Accounting, Banking, or Economics student would point out, at the simplest/elementary level, a set of Assets (which gets recorded in a Balance Sheet) can be financed only in one of two ways; Equity/Own Capital or Debt/Borrowed Capital. (However, many hybrid combinations and sophisticated variations are available, but that goes beyond the scope of this Note). Following is the basic equation of a Company Balance Sheet.

TOTAL ASSETS = DEBT (Borrowed Capital) + EQUITY CAPITAL (Ownership)

At the national or macro level, Sri Lankan capital accumulation/formation or total Savings (individual and corporate) in the Banking system is around 17% of the GDP. For Sri Lanka to achieve an 8% real annual growth rate, the Country needs around 30% of GDP in capital investment (including private investments in factories, housing, etc.) every year, including in Public Infrastructure, mostly undertaken by the Government. This leaves a significant 13% or so of GDP (nearly $6-8 billion every year) gap/shortfall in Financing required to fuel the annual growth required to provide adequate employment opportunities etc. This capital can only come from outside the Country or from the Savings of foreigners or citizens of other countries. Either we can borrow (Debt Financing) this Capital or try to attract Equity (FDI). From a macro perspective, it would be highly unwise to borrow in entirety such amounts from foreign sources even if can. The way to get out of our current predicament of unsustainable levels of government debt is aggressively canvassing for equity capital (foreign or local) in exchange for ownership transfer of government-owned Assets, thereby rebalancing the macro-level Capital Mix or Structure.

In Finance, there’s an important concept called the Optimal Capital Structure (where the Weighted Average Cost of Capital is the lowest). Any balance sheet must have the right mixture/balance of Debt and Equity to balance the above equation. It is not desirable to have too much Debt (borrowed capital) or Equity (own capital).

Debt in itself is not a bad thing as long as one knows the following;

How much to borrow (as a % of the Balance Sheet and certainty/riskiness of Turnover/Income)

On what terms (rate, repayment schedule, collateral required etc.)

How or Where to deploy the funds (in productive activity that gives a better return etc.)

Equity (FDI) is usually better (especially in the SL context, where we have borrowed too much on unfavourable terms and are now unable to repay). It should be welcomed, but ownership of those Assets will not be held by locals (ownership of the existing set of Assets need to be handed over to the investor/new owner), which in Sri Lanka appears to be a controversial and divisive topic due to lack of proper understanding of basics of Finance. In other words, purely from a Financing standpoint, it would have been much better if Sri Lanka (or any other country in our situation) were to get $3 Bn in FDI in exchange for ownership in a Sri Lankan SOE than the EFF Facility (debt or borrowing) from the IMF. The bulk of the foreign reserves of the country should be equity (FDI, Remittances, Tourism Receipts and Export Proceeds) and not borrowed dollars/euros. That would have warranted lighting firecrackers and celebrations. (Admittedly, IMF Program, with its monitoring mechanism, sends other important positive signals to the international community of lenders and investors and governments)

I want to state here a wise quote apparently made by the late Mr Upali Wijewardena; ” the ownership of a set of Assets is not important. What is important is having access to or the users of those Assets”. This rationale/logic would apply equally to corporates or individuals. The reason is ownership comes with investing/blocking a sum of money (which always has opportunities elsewhere or opportunity cost), and if Sri Lankan taxpayers (or anyone else for that matter) can have access/users to a business, service, infrastructure without doing the investment ourselves/utilizing our own equity funds, why not? Do we care who owns a business/set of assets?

I would take Hambantota Port (HIP) as an example which drew much condemnation and protest from sections of the Sri Lankan public against Foreign Investment/Ownership to illustrate the point. There should be no argument that the Chinese Investor has far better worldwide connections/network, port/logistics management expertise and deep pockets to continuously invest and improve the HIP and surrounding infrastructure than Sri Lanka Ports Authority or GoSL. The GoSL oversees the Security of the Port, Customs duties, and Immigration.

Only the commercial aspects are handled by the Chinese investor. SL exporters and importers have access to or are the users of a modern, efficient Harbour. I do not see any reason for Sri Lankans to complain (other than on the terms of the Sale, which is a done deal). From a Finance standpoint, it’s essentially a Debt Equity swap. SLPA (or GoSL) balance sheet, Debt came down, and ownership or management control on a lease was transferred to the Chinese party for 99 years. That Asset (or set of assets) cannot be removed from our sovereign soil and thus comes forever under the SL Ports regulator. What’s more, any income/profits derived from an efficient operation can be taxed, and the SLPA/GoSL charges fees/levies.

Many other examples, such as Sri Lanka Telecom (SLT) and Lanka Indian Oil Company, can be given from our own country. Numerous examples can be given from all over the world, especially India, Malaysia etc. Remember, unlike when loans are taken when foreign equity is committed to the country, the periodic forex outflow from the country is part of the dividends paid out to the owning/controlling entity, and that is only when the business is profitable/thriving.

Ownership of Assets/Businesses change hands all the time on a daily basis (Ex. The Stock Markets) in the real world, and that is nothing to fear. Companies regularly make in-house or outsourced decisions/choices. Individuals are often called upon to make own, hire/lease/rent choices. In fact, anyone who understands the basics of Finance should welcome equity financing (as opposed to excessive debt financing) and welcome more and more FDI giving up government or private ownership (along with risks, challenges such as finding export markets/clients, maintenance/upkeep and other headaches) and enjoy the benefits (users and access) of efficiently run, thriving business operations (Power, Energy, Ports, Telecom, or whatever) by foreigners or even aliens functioning from our soil and servicing our people and paying their due taxes and fees.

If Sri Lanka were to fully open up the country and create the necessary conditions, such as maintaining the rule of law and policy consistency, to attract/welcome foreign equity capital (FDI) and foreign human talent/know-how/expertise ( Entrepreneurial, Managerial, Technical and Creative) like had been aggressively done and still being pursued in Dubai and Singapore and many other places like Panama, Malaysia, Thailand etc., Sri Lanka can not only come out of this crisis but also somewhat mitigate or even reverse the ill effects from the brain drain that is taking place. I

t would be a grave mistake to assume we Lankans have all the requisite talent/expertise to run globally competitive businesses or can do everything better. Believe it or not, though those who are born and bred in Sri Lanka may be eager to migrate to the West looking for greener pastures, there are many in the West (and in other countries) with specific skills/talent/expertise we badly need, and with capital we lack who would consider moving here (or merely investing here) on a long term basis if the right conditions as mentioned above are created and available. Again, nothing for locals to fear as such opening up only would create vibrant, thriving businesses and an economy which in turn creates many employment and other opportunities for locals from which locals will gradually learn and acquire the know-how/expertise over time, not to mention the potentially large tax revenues for the government.

To reiterate, from an economic and financial point of view and indeed a commonsense point of view, Ownership/Control is unimportant. Enjoy the access and users while allowing the government to foster competition, regulate and tax these entities/businesses and pass on the benefits or redistribute such revenues to the public/masses by enhancing and expanding free health care and education, welfare programs and the like.

.