Treasury Centres, In-house bank and Shared Services Centre. What are the differences?

I received a question asking me what is the difference between Treasury Centre (TC), In-house bank  (IHB) and Shared Services Centre (SSC).

One similarity between TC, IHB and SSC is centralizing in one location. As for the difference, we will understand more if we look into what objectives and activities for each of them.

Treasury Centres (TC)

TC is responsible for managing and strategize its company liquidity by monitoring their cashflows, to decide if require additional capital through borrowings or capital raises. TC is also responsible for managing investment assets, internal processes, FX and making decisions on changes to working capital. 

Roles of TC includes the following below:

1. Cash forecasting
• Measuring the accuracy
• Determine the information sources for the forecast
• Establish controls, policies and procedures of cash forecast
• Automating cash forecasts
2. Cash Management
• To manage the flows (payments and receivables) with objectives on costs savings and effectiveness
• To manage balances with objectives to reduce liquidity & credit risk, cash balances efficiencies
3. Investment Management
• Managing surplus funds not required for operational activities or bank obligations (fees, overdraft)
• Consider the types of investment, strategies, goals and criteria
4. Treasury risk management
• Establish and allow better overall control over group-wide, information and policies on risk management
• Better pricing on FX hedging and better pricing
5. Managing banking relationships
• Negotiate consolidate pricing
• Concentrate on core banks to strengthen the relationship
6. Raising capital
• To raise capital via borrowings or equity issuance
• Working with sell side (bank) to offer company bond and equity offerings
7. Granting of credit
• Manage and establish procedures to grant credit to customers/suppliers to have some control on working capital locked in receivables
8. Maintaining credit rating agencies relationships
1. Treasury responds to credit rating agencies and provides information to maintain their credit rating which will help in getting cheaper debt

In-House Bank (IHB)

IHB is often used and refers as treasury centre as its solutions offer centralized payment flows and balances by executing all flows through the operating companies’ internal multi- currency accounts from 1 location.

IHB is actually a corporate tool for financing purpose using company resources for treasury functions. It is used to execute payment or receivables flows by performing netting on all payments from the group which resulted in savings as fewer payments are executed. 

Cash visibility is improved as balances are maintained in inter-company accounts instead of decentralized individual accounts

As for balances, IHB can leverage balance tools such as cash concentration, notional pooling, interest optimization and managing intercompany loans. Tax needs to be considered as well when executing intercompany loans within the group entities.

Shared Services Centre (SSC)

If IHB is used for execution, SSC is responsible for processing the flows. In my previous post on SSC, it  is centralizing operational & back-office routines such as making payments, collecting receivables, reconciliation, confirming & executing, reporting, 

In transaction banking perspective, its role involves processing payments commonly x-borders payments, reconciliation, FX processing, invoicing etc. My previous post on SSC can be found here.

Summary

In summary, TC is more focusing on the strategies to manage liquidity. IHB is a financing tool employed by TC for cash management and used for execution on behalf of entities. SSC is focusing on processing for payments/collections, reconciliation, operation and backoffice matters.

Shared Service Centres (SSC)

Technologies advancement and corporates looking for solutions to reduce complexity and reduce replicated operations for their business in each geographical area has prompted them to look for Shared Service Centres for answers.

Shared Services Centre (SSC) Vs Outsourcing

1. Is SSC equivalent to Outsourcing? To be exact, outsourced services are provided by an external company while SSC is provided by an internal organizational entity
2. Internal customers of SSC have control in the cost and quality of the service they receive

SSC vs Treasury Centres

1. SSC is actually centralizing operational & back-office routines such as making payments, collecting receivables, reconciliation, confirming & executing, reporting,  Payroll etc.
2. Treasury, on the other hand, manage treasury related matters and strategies such as maximizing deposit returns, loans and risk management using derivatives such as swaps, forwards for hedging
• Treasury also look at debt management by managing debt and establishing control
• Investment management such as using strategies to manage investment i;e: matching strategy, laddering or tranched cash flow allocations
• Interest and equity management
3. SSCs are typically processing on behalf of operating entities, while treasury centres is working more on the importance of managing the working capital and strategies of the corporate
4. SSCs do not need to be tax efficient as they do not process for their own books unlike treasury centres as they are booking transactions in their own books. For example Treasury centres moved their routine payment flows to SSC. SSC will initiate payments from accounts maintained in the treasury centre. These bookings are maintained in TC books instead of SSC as these accounts are held under TC entity name.

What are some considerations required to do to establish a SSC?

1. Talent in the geographical area and labour costs
2. Language and communication
3. Financial infrastructure in that geographical area
4. Ensure internally what operations are to be managed by SSC, what to consolidate and centralize with established best practices to track KPI
5. To invest in training and recognize the importance of employees

What are the benefits for having a SSC?

From: https://www.treasury-management.com/article/4/73/665/a-shared-service-centre-for-treasury-operations.html

Project Ubin Phase 2. Exploring Corda, Hyperledger Fabric and Quorum for RTGS clearing/settlement

There are interesting results and findings from this project to explore using DLT for RTGS settlements. In one of my earlier post, I mentioned that one of the uphill tasks is convincing the banks to participate in Ripple's DLT.

In order for banks to work seamlessly with DLT, banks may have to upgrade or overhaul their existing system. That boils down to what choices to make.

1. Continue to use SWIFT which is already mainstream for x-border payments or 
2. using DLT where there is no concrete proof of concept that it can work or create future unforeseen issues

Project Ubin Phase 2 is using 3 DLT, Corda, Hyperledger Fabric & Quorum for RTGS settlements with focus on funds transfer, queuing and resolving gridlocks. Each of these DLT presents their plus and minus features of the DLT which I will list below shortly after viewing their report from Accenture.

There are more than 1 DLT in the market but seldom I see there are comparisons done for each of them at solving real world problems. The report from this project revealed the findings

In gridlock resolution, Corda uses Cycle solver algorithm developed by themselves and Hyperledger and Quorum uses EAF2 algorithm . The EAF2 algorithm is the earliest FIFO-based algorithm used in Germany.

Corda

Extracted from the report: "Corda is a distributed ledger technology platform designed for use with regulated financial institutions. It is designed for recording, managing and synchronising commercial agreements between known and identified parties at scale without compromising privacy"

Plus points

1. To cater to privacy requirements, Corda shares with banks on need to know basis rather than broad broadcast
2. The funds transfer is able to continue even when there is gridlock resolution running
3. High resiliency as a network can still operates even when some nodes failed
4. New banks integration is easy when  adding a new participating node involves only the installation of the new node itself.

Minus points

1. Its UTXO model requires input states to link 1 or more transactions creating a long chains which makes processing slower as time goes by
2. As single  Notary service (Provides uniqueness and/or validating consensus on received transactions by providing signature to indicate transaction finality.) was used, it introduced a potential single point of failure. If the single notary failed, transactions cannot be completed

Hyperledger Fabric

Extracted from the report: "Hyperledger Fabric is a permission network with the ability to set up private channels between participants where each channel maintains an independent ledger. Channel enables information to be shared between parties on a need-to-know basis."

Plus points

1. As this DLT allows channels for bilateral exchange which are private and having their own ledgers, speed in high when it comes to processing

Minus points

1. Difficult to maintain in future as channels will increase with increase participants
2. New payments are queue if there is gridlock resolution running
3. If orderer (An orderer broadcasts the transactions to all peers in a channel for validation before committing the transaction) fails,it presents a single point of failure to network
4. Requires funding to account for each channel

Quorum

Extracted from the report: "Quorum supports both public and private transactions within the permissioned network. The public transactions are broadcast to all the nodes within the network and are processed like regular Ethereum transactions. The private transactions are sent directly to the specified recipients by Quorum’s privacy service Constellation as encrypted blobs."

Plus points

1. If any Quorum node is disconnected from network, the rest of the network can still function as normal.
2. Supports private and public transactions
3. It sends hashes to all participants and if a participant requires validation of transaction in future, they can confirm with the rest of the network by comparing to hashes that network holds without having to trust their counterparty

Minus points

1. Zero-knowledge proofs generation is slow and consumes computing power
2. New payment instructions submitted is set as 'Inactive' and will not be processed during gridlock resolution processing
3. DAPP orchestrated the settlement transaction and if it fails, entire netting round fails for finality stage