It’s only been a week since Bramer Bank closed and the Mauritian social media is already abuzz with the most outlandish of rumors. Some people claimed the government is nationalizing the banking industry, others that it’s purely a political vendetta. When the 24000 clients with the “Super Cash Back Gold” policy were told they weren’t guaranteed to get their money back, even more speculation arose.
The reality of the situation is that there is no government conspiracy to make the BAI fail and “Super Cash Back Gold” was never a legitimate insurance product.
Bramer Bank has been insolvent for a long time
If you think that the BAI and the Bramer Bank’s troubles started in December 2014, you probably have not read the 2007 report from the International Monetary Fund which ends with this conclusion about the BAI : “the company may suffer a liquidity crisis.”
This is what the IMF said about BAI: :”a notable development in the insurance market was the significant expansion between 2002 and 2004 of investments in related companies by a leading life insurer (BAI), putting policy holder reserves at risk.”
This is how the IMF in 2007, qualified the BAI’s decision to purchase real estate assets: “[they are] raising the level of potentially illiquid and difficult-to-value assets to a staggering level of 59 %”.
Their conclusions are even more damning for the Bramer Bank, which according to the IMF should not even have received a banking license: “rather disconcertingly, despite its adoption of unsound investment principles, this financial group was granted approval in principle in late 2006 to obtain a license under the Banking Act by the Bank of Mauritius, without any consultation between the BOM and FSC.”
The IMF wasn’t the only institution to notice suspicious activity. The FSC has been investigating BAI since 2012 despite, according to the ex-president of the FSC, a political unwillingness to act.
Government conspiracy accusations
The current government has been accused of not only failing to intervene to prevent the collapse, but also causing it by removing 1.5 billion rupees from the bank.
In this interview, the BOM director explains at length all the past and current administrations’ efforts to keep Bramer from collapsing. It turns out that the government has been continuously injecting money into Bramer to keep it afloat since last year and the bank still didn’t recover. In fact, its situation just got worse.
Did you really want the government pension fund to remain in the same bank that the IMF says should not even have received a license in the first place?
However, the government didn’t abandon Bramer Bank. It left its two additional billions in the bank. When the BAI asked for an emergency loan of 3.5 billions, the BOM offered to lend BAI the money if they could come up with 350 millions by March 31st, which they failed to do. By this point, BAI had exhausted all its government securities, the only collateral the BOM can legally accept.
To what extent are we obligated to support a failing private company? How can you demand that the government continue to inject billions in a company that has clearly shown itself to be irresponsible?
“Super Cash Back Gold” policies
When the government decided to take over most of the insurance policies of the BAI, there was understandable outrage from people whose policies were left out. After all, a lot of them invested their entire lives’ earnings and it was an immense shock for them to learn that they might lose it all. It’s a horrible thing for anyone to have to face.
Some people started to feel that the government was purposefully discriminating against them. They failed to understand what set their policies apart and why the government was taking over.
The most important thing to understand is that it is dubious BAI is capable of repaying its clients, no matter what kind of policy they bought. Read the previous section, if you don’t believe it. Without some kind of intervention, everyone would have lost their money.
The government doesn’t have a magical reserve of money to simply assume all of BAI liabilities. It cannot simply pay everyone the value of their policies as much as we would like that to be the case.
Usually, in an insurance policy, a policy holder pays a monthly amount over time in exchange for a sum the insurer dispenses when pre-agreed criteria are met. These are the ones the government are taking over because these policies still generate a steady revenue stream. These policies are less of a burden to bail out because people are still paying their monthly premiums.
In “Super Cash Back Gold”, the clients have put in large lump sums beforehand and get interest at fixed time intervals based on that money. This would be fine if BAI hadn’t lost all that money in risky investments. It would be too costly for the government to take over that particular policy as they would have to pay out the entire sum the policy holders have put in.
If you want your money back and BAI cannot refund it, get together and sue BAI and its subsidiaries. The government can do many things, but giving you back that money is not only impossible but also sets an incredibly bad precedent. People would be able to start Ponzi schemes and get away with not having to repay any of it because the government would be easily pressured into using taxpayer money to do it.
The other issue is whether there was a Ponzi or not.
That is much more unclear. But what we do know is that the BAI was offering suspiciously far above market interest rates of 5.75 to 12%. For comparison, MCB offers 3.15% on savings accounts and SBM offers 3.45% on short term deposits and 4% on long term deposits. The Prime Minister even mentioned a policy where you received the interest upfront.
In the long term, had the company failed, and we have many reason to believe it was going to imminently, that money would have been lost and the results would have been equivalent to a Ponzi, whether it started out as one or not. Taking into consideration the news that Rawat transferred 500 millions to the Bahamas and that the company bought a castle worth 250 millions in Rome, I don’t see how the government was in the wrong in assuming control of the Bramer Bank.
That doesn’t mean that people shouldn’t be upset, they have every right to be. They should however be asking the right questions, such as how did the BAI manage to get (and retain) a license for the Bramer Bank in 2006 when the IMF itself recommended against it?
They should also make sure that their anger is targeted at the right people, for example, a certain ex-BOM director who has been suspiciously quiet lately...