Valuation of Corporate Guarantees: A Comprehensive Overview for CXOs and Senior Finance Professionals
The valuation of corporate guarantees, especially in the context of financial guarantees, is an essential aspect of corporate financial reporting. As per the regulatory requirements of IND AS 109 and IAS 109, companies are required to value such guarantees at fair value when preparing their financial statements. This article aims to provide a detailed understanding of the valuation requirements, methodologies, and taxation considerations surrounding corporate guarantees.
Page Contents
1. Regulatory Requirements: IND AS 109 & IAS 109
IND AS 109: Issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India (ICAI), IND AS 109 focuses on the measurement of financial instruments, including corporate guarantees. Under this standard, a corporate guarantee provided by a parent company on behalf of its subsidiary is considered a financial instrument.
According to IND AS 109, a financial guarantee contract is defined as:
“A contract that requires the issuer to make specified payments to reimburse the holder for a loss it incurs because a specified debtor fails to make payment when due in accordance with the original or modified terms of a debt instrument.”
A guarantee involves assuming responsibility for the payment of a debt or the performance of an obligation should the liable party not fulfill their responsibilities. An example of a guarantee supporting a loan is provided below.
Financial guarantee contracts can take different legal forms, including guarantees, certain types of letters of credit, credit default contracts, or insurance contracts. Their accounting treatment is determined by their characteristics rather than their legal form.
IND AS 109 stipulates that the issuer initially recognises a financial guarantee contract at fair value. The fair value of this guarantee should be recognized on the balance sheet, typically as a liability, at its inception. If issued to an unrelated party in a stand-alone arm’s length transaction, the fair value at inception will typically correspond to the premium received, unless there is evidence indicating otherwise.
IAS 109: The International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) counterpart, IAS 109, has similar requirements for the recognition and measurement of financial instruments. IAS 109 applies to both private and public companies, ensuring consistency across jurisdictions. It defines the requirement to account for financial guarantees as financial liabilities, valued at fair value through profit or loss or amortized cost, depending on the specific circumstances.
2. Valuation Methodologies for Corporate Guarantees
Two fundamental principles underpin guarantee valuation:
First, the value of a risk-free transaction is equivalent to the sum of the value of a risky transaction and the value of the associated guarantee. Combining a risky transaction with a guarantee effectively creates a synthetic risk-free transaction, which can be represented as:
(1) Value of Guarantee = Value of Risk-Free Transaction – Value of Risky Transaction
Second, any contingent liability—including guarantees—should be measured at its expected present value:
(2) Value of Guarantee = Present Value of the Probability-Weighted Estimated Cash Flows
The valuation methodologies referenced herein are aligned with the fair value hierarchy prescribed by IND AS 113, which provides for:
Level 1: Models and valuations based on quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2: Models and valuations based on quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities (with necessary adjustments).
Level 3: Models and valuations that rely on internal data inputs.
Valuation Methodologies
A. Market Value Method
The market value method is a straightforward approach; however, its application is often limited by the availability of required inputs. This method aligns with Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy. There are generally two scenarios where this method can be used. In the first scenario, comparable risk-free (guaranteed) and risky (non-guaranteed) instruments exist for the liable party, and their market values are known. The value of the guarantee is determined as the difference between the market values of the risky and risk-free instruments. This situation may arise when an entity has both non-guaranteed debt and guaranteed debt. In the second scenario, a fee is charged for providing the guarantee, and the value of the guarantee corresponds to the fee received.
B. Credit Spread Method
The credit spread method corresponds to Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy and is based on the following valuation principle:
Value of Guarantee = Value of Risk-Free Transaction – Value of Risky Transaction
The calculated value of the guarantee is accurate only if the guarantor’s probability of default is zero. To estimate the value of a guarantee when the guarantor may default, the following relationship is applied:
Value of Guarantee = Value of Guaranteed Transaction – Value of Risky Transaction
The credit spread refers to the difference between the risky rate (non-guaranteed rate) and the rate with a guarantee. The value of the guaranteed obligation or loan is estimated by discounting the expected cash flows (principal and coupon payments under the risky rate) at the guaranteed rate, while the value of the non-guaranteed loan is discounted at the risky rate. The value of the guarantee is the difference between the values of the guaranteed and non-guaranteed loans.
C. Contingent Claims Valuation Methods
Guarantee contracts are considered contingent claims on future outcomes, making contingent claim pricing methodologies suitable for estimating the value of guarantees. This approach can be applied to various types of guarantees. The contingent claims method is consistent with Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy and relies on the following valuation principle:
Value of Guarantee = Present Value of the Probability–Weighted Estimated Cash Flows
There are multiple methodologies within the contingent claims valuation category that may be used to determine the fair value of a financial guarantee, depending on the availability of relevant inputs. Some examples include:
(a) Loan Guarantee as a Put Option
(b) Binomial Tree with Actual Probabilities of Default
(c) Binomial Tree with Specified Risk-Neutral Probabilities of Default
(d) Monte Carlo Simulation Method
Guarantee as a put option.
This is one of the most used method for valuation of guarantee. A risk-free loan is equivalent to a risky loan and a guarantee, is also equivalent to a portfolio of a risky loan and a put option. A put option gives the owner the right, but not the obligation, to sell an asset for a pre-specified price (the exercise price) on or before a certain maturity date.
A guarantee is a put option on the assets of the firm with an exercise price equal to the face value of the debt.
3. GST Requirements with Respect to Corporate Guarantee Taxation
Corporate guarantees are also subject to Goods and Services Tax (GST) under the Indian tax regime. As per the GST Act, the provision of a corporate guarantee is considered a “service,” and therefore, is taxable under GST. The guarantee fee or any charges received by the company in return for providing the guarantee are subject to GST, based on the applicable rate (typically 18% for financial services). However, if the guarantee is provided for free, as per the GST circular dated 11th July 2024 providing clarifications on the taxability of the corporate guarantee, valuation of corporate guarantee has to be done in accordance with the Rule 28 of the CGST Rules.
4. Conclusion: Why Proper Valuation Matters
The fair valuation of corporate guarantees plays a critical role in ensuring that a company’s financial statements reflect the true financial position. Accurate valuation helps in:
- Enhancing transparency and compliance with accounting standards.
- Allowing management to make more informed decisions regarding the company’s credit exposure and financial health.
- Providing investors and creditors with an accurate picture of the company’s liabilities, which is crucial for trust and long-term financial stability.
As CFOs, CAs, and senior finance professionals, it is imperative to understand the regulatory framework, adopt appropriate valuation methodologies, and ensure compliance with tax requirements to mitigate risks and protect the company’s financial interests.
If your company is required to account for corporate guarantees, it is essential to seek professional guidance to ensure that the valuation is conducted in accordance with the latest regulatory standards and methodologies.
Author Bio
