Investments
Surplus deployment, counterparty limits, treasury products, board policy and impairment watch.
Investments
Surplus deployment, counterparty limits, treasury products, board policy and impairment watch.
← Back to hubSection-wise decoding
1. Objective
Surplus-cash investment policy exists to protect principal and preserve liquidity first, and to optimise yield only within those constraints — a treasury investment book is not the place to reach for yield the way a dedicated investment portfolio might.
2. Applicability
Relevant for companies with bank limits, imports/exports, debt, cash surplus, multi-bank operations or treasury products.
3. Core Rules
No treasury transaction should happen without approved policy, exposure evidence, authorised counterparties, segregation of duties and independent reconciliation.
4. Practical Example
Parking surplus cash entirely in one bank's fixed deposits because it offers the highest rate concentrates counterparty risk in a single institution — a board-approved counterparty limit exists specifically to force diversification even when it means accepting a marginally lower blended yield.
5. Common Mistake
Investing short-term surplus cash in an instrument whose maturity does not match the cash's actual availability window, forcing an early exit (and often a penalty or mark-to-market loss) exactly when the cash is needed for operations.
Practical compliance map
| Area | What to check | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Applicability | Entity type, thresholds, exemptions, board/audit committee requirements | Entity profile note, statutory registers, portal master data |
| Process | Owner, maker-checker, approval route, timeline and escalation | SOP, tracker, reviewer sign-off |
| Documentation | Working paper, calculation, source extract, management approval | PDF evidence pack and version history |
| Review | Legal freshness, numerical accuracy, final upload test | QA checklist and upload screenshot |
Exceptions and red flags
- Risk: Applying generic rules without entity-specific threshold checks.
- Risk: Missing event-based triggers while focusing only on monthly/annual items.
- Risk: Not preserving evidence for future audit, inspection or investor diligence.
Implementation checklist
- ✓ Capture exposure before trade execution.
- ✓ Check counterparty and product limits.
- ✓ Reconcile bank confirmations independently.
- ✓ Report MTM, maturity ladder and covenant headroom.
Q&A
| What is the first step? | Identify applicability. A rule may exist, but the entity may be exempt or subject to a threshold. |
|---|---|
| What makes this Finin2min-ready? | Plain-English decoding plus source base, examples, Q&A, summary and implementation checklist. |
| Can this be used as professional advice? | No. It is an educational upload asset; final action should rely on live law, circulars, forms and professional judgement. |
| What should be refreshed before publishing? | Dates, thresholds, circular amendments, portal utilities and any regulator FAQs issued after the source-log date. |
Building a counterparty and instrument limit framework
| Control | What it protects against |
|---|---|
| Single-counterparty exposure limit (e.g. capped as a percentage of total surplus, or an absolute rupee ceiling) | Concentration risk — a single bank or issuer default should never be able to impair a large share of the company's liquid surplus |
| Credit-rating floor for eligible instruments and issuers | Chasing yield into instruments whose issuer credit quality has not been independently assessed |
| Instrument-type whitelist (e.g. only fixed deposits, treasury bills, and specific categories of debt mutual funds) | Ad hoc use of complex or illiquid instruments that were never contemplated when the board approved the policy |
| Maturity-ladder limit | Locking too large a share of surplus into long tenors, leaving insufficient liquidity for near-term needs |
A policy that sets these limits once and never revisits them is nearly as risky as having none — counterparty ratings change, and a limit framework should be reviewed at least annually against the company's current surplus size and the treasury market's current conditions, not treated as a one-time board approval that stands indefinitely.
The instruments a corporate treasury actually uses for surplus cash
| Instrument | Typical tenor | What it trades off |
|---|---|---|
| Bank fixed deposits | 7 days to 1 year+ | Simple and low-risk, but concentrates counterparty exposure in whichever bank holds the deposit |
| Treasury bills (91/182/364-day) | Up to 1 year | Sovereign credit risk (effectively nil) at the cost of typically lower yield than corporate instruments |
| Commercial paper of other rated corporates | 7 days to 1 year | Higher yield than a T-bill for taking on the issuing corporate's own credit risk — exactly why a credit-rating floor matters here specifically |
| Liquid and overnight debt mutual funds | Effectively on-demand liquidity | Same-day or next-day redemption convenience, but returns are market-linked rather than fixed, and carry the fund's own portfolio credit risk |
A policy that names only "bank deposits" as an eligible instrument is not necessarily wrong, but it is a choice — one that trades away the diversification and marginally higher yield the other instruments can offer, in exchange for simplicity. Whatever the choice, it should be a deliberate, board-documented one rather than a default nobody revisited.
Marking the book — why "impairment watch" is its own discipline
Even a conservatively-managed treasury investment book needs periodic mark-to-market review, not just at year-end. A downgrade of an issuer held in the portfolio, a widening credit spread, or an early sign of stress at a counterparty bank should trigger a specific review of that holding well before any formal impairment is required under the applicable accounting standard — waiting for the accounting trigger means the treasury team is the last to know about a problem it should have caught first. A simple watch-list mechanism — flagging any holding whose issuer rating has moved, or whose market price has diverged materially from its carrying value — turns this from a year-end surprise into an ongoing, manageable process, and gives the board a genuine early-warning signal rather than a number that only moves once a year at the audit, when the room to act on it has already narrowed considerably and the options remaining are all worse than the ones available earlier.
Finin2min Summary
Investments in 2 minutes: Know the rule, check applicability, document the evidence, assign accountability, review exceptions, and refresh from official sources before filing, reporting or board use.
Source log
- RBI Master Directions repository — https://rbi.org.in/scripts/bs_viewmasterdirections.aspx
- RBI Risk Management and Inter-Bank Dealings directions — https://www.rbi.org.in/
- RBI FEMA FAQs — https://www.rbi.org.in/commonman/english/scripts/FAQs.aspx
- FIMMDA market documents — https://www.fimmda.org/
- SEBI circulars and market infrastructure regulations — https://www.sebi.gov.in/sebiweb/home/HomeAction.do?doListing=yes&sid=1&smid=0&ssid=7