Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Project Financing Definition

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Project Financing Definition"— Presentation transcript:

1 Project Financing Definition
The International Project Finance Association defines Project finance as “financing of long-term infrastructure, industrial projects, power plant, etc., where project debt and equity used to finance the project are paid back from the cash-flow generated by the project.” The two key aspects of project financing are: 1. The project revenues (cash flows) are expected to service debt or equity interest taken by the providers of capital. 2. The loans are secured by the project assets or, to the extent security interests are restricted or have limited value, are secured by contingent support from sponsors and other project participants.

2 SPV Private companies use project finance as a means of financing a large project off-balance sheet through creation of SPV with limited equity invested by consortium of sponsors, thereby enabling the sponsors to maintain their level of book debt low as this project finance transaction are not treated as company debt.

3 Structure of project Finance
Sponsor Sponsor Sponsor Concession contract Loan Project Finance Co SPV Lenders Government Principal & Interest Pay toll Construct Power Plant User Electricity Subcontractor design, build Subcontractor operate Subcontractor maintenance

4 Privately owned and publicly regulated
Types of PPP Public Domain Public Private Privatization Public procurement of services Privately owned and publicly regulated DBFT (design, build, finance, transfer BOT (build, operate, transfer DBFO (design, build, finance, operate BOO (build, own, operate)

5 Phases of PPP Identification
Tender the project for bid by public sector Selecting the lowest bidder sponsor Construction Operation Transfer

6 Advantages of BOO/BOT The BOO/BOT projects are conducted in a fully competitive bidding situation. project risks are transferred to the private sector through allocation of the appropriate risk to a party who can be able to mitigate its exposure. The public sector get the benefits of private sector’s ability to mobilize finances, and to use the management skills in the design, construction, and the operation of the project. The public sector get the comparative advantage of the private sector in the latest technology, and typically the project is constructed faster and in timely fashion. The public sector get the project Implementing efficiently albeit with higher cost.

7 Economic incentives for PPP
Lack of public funding Increase efficiency in production of public goods Introduce competition Poor infrastructure Increase innovation in procurement of public projects for greater good

8 Privatization Improving the Economy
Public funds would no longer be channeled into non-profitable enterprises. Rather,revenues generated will be re-directed to the government through corporate taxes. Consumers benefit from the improved quality and efficiency of services provided. Privatization under the right structure will enable the government to focus on governance privatization can widen and deepen the local capital market on i.e., improve liquidity, increased market capitalization, and transparency. New projects embarked can be financed by local as well as foreign investment and debt

9 Why PPP Sharing of risk between private and public sector.
Accelerate construction of a key project with positive externalities to the economy Changing the role of government from provider to that of a facilitator and regulator. Innovation brought by private sector in procuring a target output. Skill transfer from private to the public sector. Complexity premium, Uk, carry high premium than Spain.

10 Project financing feasibility and rationale
Project feasibility -financial and economic feasibility -legal framework for contractual and financial structuring - balance between tariff increases and value added for public (service users) Risk sharing - mitigate completion risk (costs/time/specification), operation risk (demand/operating/performance/quality), financial risk (interest rate/inflation/foreign exchange), legal, and political risk (force majeure) - distribute risks among project participants (contractors, sub-contractors, lenders, and other parties) based on who is best positioned to efficiently manage and mitigate the risks Revenue Sharing - for public services the main proceed is tariffs or tolls, therefore - tariff setting policies and securities for minimum tariffs are key

11 Financing Cost of capital is usually higher for private provider than government raised finance, however competition in the financial market has increased tenor, resulting in narrowing of spread. Any marginal higher cost of funding by private sector is more than offset by higher marginal savings on the project that is procured on time on budget and on the specification due to, diversification and transfer of construction risk to the private sector, increased efficiency and innovation in procuring a public project. In a PFI project financing cost is usually 1/3 of the total cost. The PFI project in some countries must pass PSC test that compares the cost of the PFI with the comparable project procured by traditional basis and demonstrate significant saving to the rate payers before being embarked in the UK. A recent study by Arthur Anderson in UK found that PFI projects made and average of 17% project cost savings as compared to projects procured in traditional basis with over 1 billion pound savings to the tax payers.

12 Key Challenges for developing Economies on PPP
High risk region, Eastern Europe, Middle East, South America, Asia and Africa Lack of legal framework Promoting PPP through legislative mandate. Central government commitment for promoting PPP. Establishing necessary legislative changes Changes in tax laws that weigh against PPP approach. Establishing working example of pilot PPP project

13 Advantage of PFI Synergies in design construction and operation
Proper risk sharing and risk allocation Faster project completion Curtailing cost overrun Encourages innovations Maintenance cost are accounted for adequately

14 Disadvantage of PFI High tendering cost
Lengthy and complex negotiation Difficulty in specifying quality of service resulting in dispute Difficulty in pricing operation and maintenance during the bidding phase Agency problem arising due to conflict of interest between various parties Small contractors are left out due to sheer size of the project

15 Revenue Risk The provider is compensated in three ways:
Direct payment, i.e., Toll, fees Risk, the amount of toll can be negotiated, however the amount of traffic (demand for the out put) is beyond the control of provider. Indirect payment, i.e., shadow tolls on road Risk, payment to the provider depends on volume so that the fees structured minimize the risk to the provider. Availability payment, the assets being available for use. Risk, this risk is under provider’s control

16 Sources of Funds Funds for project financing comes from variety of sources: such as: equity capital, governmental aids, loans, which can be export (Eurobonds, private placement and commercial papers), loans at favorable terms from development institutions such as the World Bank or the Agency for International Development, loans from multilateral agencies (IFC, ADB), commercial bank term loans or loans backed by export credit guarantees.

17 Project Financing Risks

18 General risks May be related to deficiencies in the feasibility studies: Too often preliminary studies fail to show upside potential and downside risk of the project. Many developing countries, have spent time and money studying or constructing projects that turned out to be unfeasible. For example, During the late 1970s and early 1980s, there were a substantial number of “white elephant” projects undertaken in developing countries for reasons relating more to national pride and other social considerations than to economic viability. Projects that succeeded in the 2000s, are likely to be governed primarily by market driven considerations. The World Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development will finance feasibility studies, as will the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC).

19 Market Risk Related to the assessment of whether market exists for the energy produced. This part of the feasibility study is therefore key to the success of the project. Cash flow projections may be affected by a number of factors, such as economic and industry cycles, demand from the retail and whole sale end users driving request for electrical power. Competition from other producers, albeit non-existant in the emerging markets. Market risk could be mitigated to some extent by putting in place contractual assurances. Two major types of agreement can be entered into, and these are: take or pay contracts or tolling agreements. Take or pay contracts are contracts (generally used for commodities like electricity, oil and gas). In a typical take or pay contract structure, the contract is entered into between the project company and the buyers, but all payments arising from the contract are assigned by the project company to the lenders. Production payment agreement (PPA). The financial effects of such contractual scheme are those of a financing arrangements (taking equity interest) through the purchase of a stake in the economical activity of the project. Such assignment guarantees the right to receive part of revenues generated from sales of electricity, up to retirement of the debt.

20 Tolling Agreement Tolling agreements are agreements to put a specified amount of raw material per period through a particular processing facility. The toller, who is going to be the purchaser of electric energy (Dispatching), provides the toll processor (Power Plant owner) the natural gas for the production of electric energy and generally pays for transportation costs to the power plant. In this contractual scheme, therefore, both the fuel availability risk and the fuel supply risk are to be borne by the toller, while the toll processor is involved exclusively in the productive process. The toller pays the toll processor a fee (called toll) Clearly, the tolling agreement is closer to a conversion contract (or a service contract) than to a sale: the power plant does not sell energy, the toll processor is therefore a servicer and not a seller. Usually, the toll processor shall: Generate electrical energy with the gas or oil supplied by the toller, Supply energy exclusively (optional) to the toller; Hold the gas in custody on the toller’s behalf. Usually, the toller shall: Supply natural gas and fuel oil; Absorb electric energy in the determined amount or (optional) in minimum amounts (“take or pay” clause); Pay the toll processor for the energy supplied, which usually includes: a conversion fee (for the service); a capacity availability fee; a fee for other services rendered by the toll processor connected to the energy generation.

21 Feedstock Risk Related to the availability of feedstock (be it oil, natural gas, water etcetera). Power plants require significant amounts of fuel to operate on ongoing basis, it is key to the success of the project to make sure that such fuel is available and will remain available during the operation of the plant. In order to limit such the availability risk, lenders will normally require long-term supply contracts with the principal suppliers to ensure adequate supplies of the necessary volume and quality of feedstock at prices consistent with the financial projections for the project.

22 Political Risk Political risks may be considered a sub-category of force majeure events. Political risks represent a significant factor in structuring the financing of a developing country power project. Such risk may include: Terrorism, war, civil war, rebellion, revolution; Prevention of, or delay in, the payment of external debt by the host government or by that of a third country through which payment must be made; Expropriation by the host government, either of equity debt interests or assets, or even bank accounts; Cancellation or non-renewal of export licenses; Actions or failure to act by governments in breach of international law, causing delay or stop in payments; Destruction of all or part of the manufacturer's assets or debt servicing ability, or interruption of the manufacturer's operations.

23 Force Majeure Force Majeure is a risk of a prolonged interruption of operations for period after a project finance project has been completed due to fire, flood, storm, or some other factor beyond the control of the projects sponsors. Force majeure risks are circumstances that are not within the reasonable control of the parties. The acts beyond the control of the contractor, including acts of God, natural disasters, insurrections, civil disorder, strikes as well as political violence and other political acts

24 Permits Permits are usually the responsibility of the sponsors or contractors. In order to attract lenders to the project, sponsors and contractors must be able to show that they have fully analyzed the regulatory structure of the host country and acquired, all necessary permits to get the project underway.

25 Sponsor Risk Lenders analyze in depth sponsors’ and other participants’ strengths and weaknesses. Such analysis usually focuses on the strict financial strengths of the sponsor, such as Balance sheet strength, proforma and projected earnings performance, and managerial skills of its directors. The analysis of the track record of the sponsors in similar projects, and focuses also on examining, last but not least, the political support for the project, which is paramount.

26 Legal Risk The contract should be carefully drafted to include provisions of governing law and consent to foreign jurisdiction. In case the consent to foreign jurisdiction is agreed, it will be necessary to ascertain whether local government will enforce and recognize foreign decision, or will tend to retry the matter in the court. In some developing countries issues of sovereign immunity arise. Sometimes sovereign nations refuse to acknowledge foreign jurisdictions. Usually a provision waiving sovereign immunity both as to the arbitration and the enforcement of the arbitral award is included in contracts. It would be desirable to insert arbitration provisions in the contract, even though lenders are usually not willing to derogate to court jurisdiction. Sponsors will usually insist for negotiating an arbitration clause or by applying international conventions, such as the Convention on the Settlements of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States (ICSID),

27 Environmental Risk Projects In the past, were largely constructed with little regard to environmental issues or the adverse social impact of the project on local populations. Lending institutions, host countries and sponsors are focusing much more attention on these issues today and in the future, particularly for projects that involve the production of significant hazardous waste. As developing countries do not currently have a detailed codified body of environmental law, lenders will require project compliance with international environmental standard such as the World Bank guidelines or the standards from environmentally advanced countries, such as the U.S.

28 Case Study1: N4 toll road The Trans African Concessions (Pty) Limited (TRAC) was awarded the 30-year build-operate-transfer (BOT) concession for the N4 toll road between Witbank, South Africa and Maputo, Mozambique. More than one project company was established and the sponsors’ interests extend beyond their equity investment. The TRAC Consortium will own the assets for the life of the BOT, and the SBB Consortium, consisting of the primary TRAC Consortium construction companies (sponsors), is contracted to provide the construction and maintenance of the toll road.

29 Project finance structure
Three construction companies, Bouygues, Basil Read and Stocks & Stocks together own 40 per cent of the TRAC Consortium and 100 per cent of SBB. Although they are equity investors in the project, their primary interest is in the earnings they will generate in constructing and maintaining the toll road. Recognizing this, the other equity and debt investors in the project require these sponsors to maintain their equity position in the TRAC Consortium for a minimum of four years.

30 TRAC financing structure
Equity R331 million to be increased if required (20 per cent of total financing) Sponsors – R132 million (40 per cent of equity) Non-sponsor equity holders – R199 million (60 per cent of equity) Debt R 1324 million (80 per cent of total financing)


32 Non-financing bank participation in issuance of TRAC equity
Lead arranger Future Bank Corporation Merchant Bank (South Africa) Co-arranger in Mozambique Banco Comercial e de Investimentos (Mozambique) Underwriters Investec (South Africa) Development funding Commonwealth Development Corporation (United Kingdom) South African Infrastructure Fund (South Africa)

33 Equity and debt investors in TRAC
The governments of South Africa and Mozambique jointly and severally guarantee the debt of TRAC. Under certain conditions, the governments also jointly and severally guarantee the TRAC equity. Equity (Sponsors/construction companies) Bouygues (France) Basil Read (South Africa) Stocks & Stocks (South Africa) Equity (Non-sponsors) South African Infrastructure Fund (South Africa) RMB Asset Management (South Africa) Commonwealth Development Corporation (United Kingdom) South African Mutual Life Assurance (South Africa) Metropolitan Life Limited (South Africa) Sanlam Asset Management (South Africa) SDCM (Mozambique)

34 Equity and debt investors in TRAC
Debt (excluding equity investors that are also debt investors) ABSA Corporate and Merchant Bank (South Africa) Development Bank of South Africa Limited (South Africa) First National Bank (South Africa) Mine Employees and Officials Pension Funds (South Africa) Nedcor Bank (South Africa) Standard Corporate and Merchant Bank (South Africa)

Download ppt "Project Financing Definition"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google