According to corporate law firm Nishith Desai Associates, the three-year residual maturity requirement, imposed by the government, will pose a hurdle in having put and call options or other optionality clauses in an agreement between a company, issuing bonds and a foreign portfolio investor (erstwhile known as foreign institutional investor or FII). Earlier this month, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) and the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) issued circulars restricting FPI investments in bonds with residual maturity of three years or more. The move, aimed at attracting stable flows, means that all future investments by FIIs will have to be in corporate paper, which are to mature in not less than three years. The move also disallows FIIs from investing in short-term instruments like liquid and money market mutual funds.
“Imposition of three-year residual maturity requirement would not only impact shorter term loans, it would also restrict various contractual arrangements like call / put option vis-à-vis the issuing company, part redemptions, etc., to be exercised prior to the expiry of three years,” said a note by Nishith Desai. According to legal experts, the restriction is likely to prove a deterrent for companies, as it will disallow early redemptions or structures where the repayment is linked to business accruals. Nishith Desai said structures where principal is paid in the beginning, while there interest is back-ended might no longer be feasible.
Attractive yields and easy availability of liquidity has increased FPI demand for corporate papers in recent months.
However, the latest restrictions on FPI investments, which come after substantial easing and simplifications of norms over the years, could also hurt demand going ahead.
“The introduction of minimum three years residual maturity requirement is a major dampener for FPIs and corporates,” Nishith Desai Associates said.
According to the law firm, the domestic corporate bond market at $242 billion is much smaller than China’s $1.65 trillion, South Korea’ $1 trillion and Japan’s $786 billion.
Nishith Desai said the new norms “don’t augur well with the intention of the government to encourage debt.”
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
)