CAP Funding

Our Services

Brochure

when an unknown printer took ga lley offer typey anddey.

PDF. Download DOC. Download

If You Need Any Help Contact With Us

+91 705 2101 786

Get More Info

    How and why does CAP Funding use a financial guarantee?

    For project developers, Financial Guarantees serve as an excellent mechanism to obtain advantageous terms and enable access to funding that might otherwise be out of reach.  Note:  This is NOT an INSURANCE policy.

    For aligned sponsors or backers of guarantees, CAP’s innovative structure enables scalable realization of strategic or business goals, depending on whether the prospective guarantor is passive or actively participating in the project being funded.  The main advantage for guarantors is preservation of available cash (non-cash assets are often used for guarantees) while still having a big impact, cash liquidity and other benefits. 

    What is a CAP Financial Guarantee?  

    Sharply different from a traditional loan guarantee, which would stay in place for the life of the loan, IFI’s CAP guarantee taps into our Family Office’s private capital reserves to mitigate the risk of new project completion and delivery.  This contrasts with the more traditional path of a loan guarantee, which we do not require, where a loan guarantee would enhance the borrower’s credit for the life of the loan. 

    Instead, IFI-CAP funding uses a Completion Assurance Guarantee (CAG) to mitigate at least some of the risk of project non-delivery. 

    CAGs are similar to loan guarantees used by institutional lenders with the funding structure of such loans, with Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) that provides limited or no recourse for the lender in case things go wrong.  But here, with IFI-CAP’s funding, the private Family Office funding is secured by a relatively short-term, partial or full CAG, which usually involve a bank (so the guarantee can be safely delivered and held until the project is built and commissioned to begin commercial operations) then it is allowed to expire and is removed.

    IFI CAP turns the traditional project finance process upside-down, saving everyone time and trouble, with the flexibility accept quite a different risk profile, even if not “shovel ready,” without expecting control, and with quite favorable terms.

    Traditional funders won’t know with any sort of precision how much risk is too much.  Ask them.  They’ll describe a blind alley where the funder will “know it when they see it” (but usually not until due diligence, if you get that far) making the certainty of securing the money illusive, and often the work required just to make a clear determination, a yes or no answer, can become quite expensive.

    Traditional lenders also often use a senior lien (pledge of collateral) against the project’s assets as “first” line protection, with loan guarantees a close second in case the borrower defaults on repaying the loan.

    Refreshingly, IFI CAP is far “faster, easier and better” and far from traditional.  In3 solves a set of common problems in the project finance industry, and thus can afford to offer better terms for up to 100% financing with zero initial costs, but also In3 saves client time and trouble with another innovation, a reliable and efficient pre-application process, resulting in greater certainty (less guesswork), and far fewer wasted steps. 

    We can offer a yes/no verdict quickly, without dragging our feet, based on confirmation of the Completion Assurance guarantee, with several handy guides to assist you with making this “light” process logical, stepwise and linear.

    What is the guarantee for? Why is it needed? How much coverage?

    The CAP guarantee itself acts as a source of assurance, transactional security, or “surety” that the project will be full funded and successfully completed and commissioned to begin commercial operations.

    Once the project reaches Commercial Operation Date (COD) the guarantee instrument is allowed to expire and is released.  If there are delays, the guarantee can be renewed until COD has been reached.  In practice, if issues arise, the parties will “keep their eyes on the prize” of completion knowing that project delivery is key to everyone being paid.  If there are problems that cannot be solved, worst case, then with decades of experience, we work them out some other way.  For example, what if the project itself cannot be completed (we would reassign the guarantee to one that could be) or the site is not viable (pick another site) or the developer gives up, leaves town or forfeits their own project (as ridiculous as that sounds, we’ve seen it happen!), then we step in and identify players that will take it over.

    While traditional lenders structure loans with collateral and as close to zero risk as they possibly can (which itself can takes months or years to perfect), our Family Office takes on different risks, including any remaining credit risk, technology risk, and performance/execution risk, … as true joint venture (equity) partners.  Operating in this way, IFI’s capital partner uses a more forgiving (less picky and particular) underwriting standard.  

    How much of the total funding requested needs to be covered by a guarantee?  At least 30%, but in practice it is better for the developer/owner to obtain 50-80% coverage.  Why?  Faster draw schedule and less expectation for equity carried interest.  Ideally, about 70% coverage is sufficient to enable advantageous terms and conditions.  If the funding requested is close to our minimum ($25M), then a higher percentage is needed, as the minimum guarantee face value we can accept is ~$18M, so whatever is above that (no matter what the percentage, above minimum 30%) is to your advantage.  More guidance on how to use CAG leverage.

    The client’s “credit enhancement” extends only until COD. The instrument guarantees that, one way or another, the project will be delivered.  Nobody gets to give up or point fingers if something goes wrong.  The parties will work together to finish the project.  If they do not, or it is determined that they cannot, for some reason, then the underlying problem will be solved, whether that means it was a personnel issue (someone gets replaced), a site usability issue (if irreparable, find a new site), a technical issue (work together to find a solution), or even a fundamental project viability problem following a lengthy cure period (worst case, transfer the guarantee to a new project that gets delivered instead).  In practice, the instrument will not and must not be called. 

    Why we have advantages over bank and institutional finance

    Offering to fund up to 100% of the project budget is something banks would never do. Banks seek a separate equity partner or cash from the developer’s side to reduce credit risk. Our unique structure funds projects through a US family office using a combination of debt and minority equity carried interest, which will be negotiated and committed once we complete our due diligence.

    Further, we do not ask for loan collateral (a senior lien on the project’s assets); instead we offer mezzanine debt, requiring no pledge of collateral as security once the project begins operations. The developer and our investment partner co-own the SPV’s project assets, enabling project developers/owners to build out qualifying pipelines more rapidly with this “Completion Assurance” Program™ (CAP funding) approach, advantageous terms and expedited process.

    Facilitating such a guarantee for a non-recourse loan can be relatively straight-forward or quite a challenge, depending on (a) whether or not your own company has assets (balance sheet depth), or a strong enough credit rating, to involve a rated commercial bank or credit union, or (b) how you go about inviting a sponsor with deeper pockets to bring forward a guarantee on your behalf.

    If using a sponsor (a rich uncle, well-established EPC or Construction firm, OEM, etc.), they will be asked to propose a “specimen” (sample) guarantee, and IFI will review it and offer either feedback or approval of the instrument verbiage, confirming that at least one of our funder’s banks is willing to receive it to fund the project in full according to the disclosed Uses of Funds. 

    Important sidebar:  many bankers, OEMs, EPC firms and even some well-established General Contractors quite often will misread this request for a usable guarantee simply because they are unfamiliar with CAP funding’s unique structure. There are some subtle but important differences to standard (mainstream) practices with CAP that offer advantages for the company seeking funding. But note that we are NOT looking for a traditional completion bond, or insurance, nor a traditional completion guarantee, nor a loan guarantee, as mentioned above.  Although this “Completion Assurance” guarantee serves as security for the funding, and thus has elements of these other guarantee forms, it is actually none of the above.

    Our CAP funding’s guarantee is entirely standard within the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) Uniform Rules for Demand Guarantees (URDG), ICC pub no. 758 (2010 edition), or ICC590 or ICC600 (following “standby” rules), and can take on several forms including a Standby Letter of Credit (SbLC), which is by far the best type as it has fewer restrictions, resulting in faster funding.  Under URDG ICC 758 only, we can also accept a Bank Guarantee (BG) or variations on that title so long as it adheres to our template’s verbiage (wording).  We can also accept a Sovereign Guarantee (SG) with bank confirmation.

    Within the Private Wealth and Private Banking divisions of bank, the required verbiage is completely normal and expected, as it mirrors their standard practices.

    So long as this bank-involved “demand guarantee” involves a different bank on both ends, and is thus a true financial instrument (not an insurance product), with face value large enough for the funding requested — at least 30-70% or more of the project total budget — then IFI’s funding partners can provide project funding, up to 100%, with some as mezzanine debt and the rest as equity carried interest. The exact split will be negotiated with the client after due diligence completes.

    Why does this matter?

    We usually offer better terms, making up to 100% funding accessible, and we reach closings more quickly (less than 30 days, once pre-qualified) compared to the traditional route, which can instead take many months, if closing is even possible given that underwriting standards are based on not just the likely case but worst-case scenario across a range of risk or perceived hazards or conceivable downsides that IFI-CAP, as equity partners, simply do not factor in. Our funder also fills the gap between the guarantee face value and the total required capital, usually as an equity “kicker” (again, the exact amount will be negotiated in good faith upon completion of our due diligence, for which we do not charge), but without expecting control.

    The biggest challenge with Project Finance is securing it.  Sometimes the offer seems “too good to be true” because, well, it is.  So many developers waste time with funders that cannot deliver, for various reasons, because the underwriters are looking for the rare project that has no appreciable risk left unmitigated.  The process of obtaining comprehensive insurance wraps can help flesh out which risks are insurable and which ones are inherently not. IFI-CAP funding turns that equation around and funds commercially viable projects that may have additional work to begin or complete construction, but we will work a partners to get started and reach COD without delay under terms that are usually more favorable for the client than anticipated.  

    Summarized, short version of why this matters?  To obtain the benefits and advantages of IFI’s “next gen” capital, and to radically improve funding certainty. We say “faster, easier, better.” For exactly how we achieve that for your particular projects, read on.

    Stage of Readiness does not matter

    Such guarantees streamline investor/lender due diligence, ensure continuity and certainty of reaching closing(s), thereby greatly expedite funding, deliver better and more generous terms. Further, we can accommodate projects that are not yet shovel-ready (we can cover the costs of remaining development steps as part of the loan/investment package), and simultaneously overlook various other risks or vulnerabilities that would likely delay or outright kill opportunities for otherwise securing a project’s funding.

    Defining & understanding financial guarantees

    All financial guarantees — IFI’s “Completion Assurance” as well as traditional Loan Guarantees — are legal instruments (an official letter) that assign some or all of the responsibility for an investment or a loan.  Developers that can facilitate IFI’s CAP guarantee will transfer some of the risk of non-completion to the guarantor as a way to align the parties on project delivery.  We use the market value proportion of the guarantee instrument — they are usually discounted from issued face value — to access established commercial lines of credit at IFI-CAP’s funding banks, which must be asked to approve the instrument for this purpose, along with our partner’s own holdings as an equity investment.

    By contrast, a loan guarantee would consider non-payment of the loan itself a form of default, while a financial (completion) guarantee instead uses the borrower’s breach of contract (loan agreement), such as due to fraud, malfeasance or other failure to honor obligations prior to COD, following a cure period.  Nobody wants to see the instrument get called.  Such guarantees are a “last resort” promise or pledge — a type of credit enhancement (improvement of the borrower’s credit profile) — in the event of non-performance, which the traditional loan guarantee could experience at any time prior to the loan’s repayment.

    Financial guarantees also differ from Completion Bonds (insurance), although such insurance-backed “completion guarantee” products are often used by developers or hired contractors in addition to our CAP financial instrument.  The difference is subtle, but important:  Completion Guarantees are issued and backed by insurance companies, while financial instruments used for project financing involve a bank so that closings and funding can move with greater security, loans can be at lower rates of interest, and equity partners can be gained that do not expect a controlling interest.  Project funds move on an automated draw schedule with certain aspects similar to so-called “Smart Contracts”.

    These and other innovations offer great advantages to project developers and their hired vendors, sponsors, intermediaries and contractors.

    IFI project finance uses primarily bank-related guarantees (traditional “standby” or “demand guarantee” as a Bank Guarantee / SbLC or non-traditional Avalized Promissory Note) until COD to ensure that the assets are completed and commissioned to begin commercial operation.  We can also accept a Sovereign Guarantee with public/private cooperation, once it is verified by a rated commercial bank

    Benefit:  a financial (completion assurance) guarantee frees up the parties to do their respective jobs, with …

    • Less risk aversion by IFI investors, more streamlined due diligence, greater flexibility in working with issues, including a willingness to pay for any remaining pre-construction steps
    • Greater speed and certainty in reaching closing and first funding (once pre-qualified, mutually-acceptable terms will be available within 2-4 weeks), and then less scrutiny after reaching financial closing, during construction, along the way to Commercial Operation.
    • Fewer constraints or restrictions placed on the operating company, such as longer loan tenors (allowing plenty of time to repay the loan, no penalty for early repayment), ability to invest in the local currency, and no lien against operating assets (see below).

    Financial guarantees serve to both expedite and backstop the capital, providing mutual protection from bad behavior such as fraud, gross negligence, or other incurable breach of contract.

    Originally, sovereign guarantees were instituted to make up for market failures*, but in modern times, capital guarantees are now used in the commercial (private) sector to streamline project financing by simply holding developers and their counterparts to their promise to honor the terms of the financing. With IFI’s Completion Assurance [Guarantee] Program™ (CAP), the guarantee is offered as a form of surety/security that the project’s assets will be completed and commissioned to reach COD.

    Even if you are already familiar with loan / financial guarantees, or similar techniques for credit enhancement, please read our materials carefully, as there are many sharp differences between the conventional uses of guarantee instruments (namely trade finance, and so-called “documentary” letters of credit — see below for further clarification) and how they are used for access to this advantageous, next-generation project funding.

    Conventional loan guarantees are used by most institutional, non-bank lenders as an additional layer of security (as a form of “credit enhancement”) until the loan has been repaid in full — for the “life of the loan.”  Such lenders also require a pledge of collateral to secure the Senior Debt via the project’s operating assets — equipment, buildings, etc.  Here, with CAP we require NONE OF THAT.   We can accept either a Bank Guarantee / Standby Letter of Credit (BG/SbLC) or Avalized Promissory Note (AvPN) that goes away upon COD, there is no Senior Debt required (our offered debt capital is closer to mezzanine) nor is there a pledge of collateral via the project’s operating assets.

    Instead, the project company or a third party sponsor most often works with a rated bank to transfer completion risk to that institution.  Upon COD the guarantee is dropped.

    To be clear, a similar type of financial guarantee (a type of Letter of Credit or LC) is widely used in trade finance, an irrevocable “documentary” LC, issued by a bank to a third-party beneficiary and promising to pay on behalf of the transaction originator a specific sum of money against delivery of documents satisfying the terms and conditions of the LC.  That is also not at all what we are doing here. 

    With project finance, the original asset or collateral underlying a Standby LC/BG is “preserved” and must remain “blocked” (the banking terms that means “held for a particular purpose”, in this case, the lender/beneficiary) until successful completion of the project.  Upon reaching COD this SbLC/BG is released — technically, it is allowed to expire and thus goes away, with the underlying collateral left untouched.  Some purchased SbLC can be cashed or monetized upon expiration, but that’s not what most IFI-CAP customers do.

    The asset type that can be used is up to the issuing bank and the project owner/developer/sponsor/backer.  See below.

    Whether a Bank Guarantee/SbLC or Avalized Promissory Note, we use Uniform Rules for Demand Guarantee (URDG, ICC publication 758; see below), and BG/SbLC and confirmed Sovereign Guarantees use the customary SWIFT system for bank-to-bank communication, where SWIFT itself helps maintain the chain of legitimacy, as any bank instrument of sufficient size will tend to attract fraudulent activity.

    We also now accept a Promissory Note (simple template available) that would be avalized (a stamp or seal) by a rated bank. An SG, BG/SbLC or Avalized Promissory Note (APN) is issued in favor of someone other than the owner of the underlying asset (called the “beneficiary”), collateralizing the asset while allowing for an investment/loan against it.  APNs are a special case, as they’re not issued by the bank, and the “exposure” to the bank depends on the asking party’s creditworthiness. 

    We pay careful attention to fairness and mutuality in these dealings, and although widely practiced, it is easy to misunderstand and assume there is no protection for the issuer if they are going to issue a guarantee in favor of another party to make sure they do not default.  That is simply not the case.  The issuer is fully protected under the preferred rules.  See Note #3, below.

    Further notes on this:

    1. Ordinarily, MT760 is used to block or set aside cash-backed assets — which does not necessarily mean cash on deposit, by the way, a misnomer — in favor of someone other than their owner.  When an MT760 SWIFT is issued, the issuing bank puts a hold on their client’s funds, blocking the client from using them for another purpose temporarily, while the instrument is operative (in force).  This arrangement does not USE the funds that are blocked; it is well controlled, and designed to see through the project’s completion, then the underlying asset is released (technically, it is allowed to expire and fall away on the “maturity” date).
    2. Note that, once issued, if there are no loan funds transferred, then the BG/SbLC or APN has no effective value.  In fact, it can be unwound or returned right away, not that anyone would actually do that, having come that far.  Just clarifying for bankers that may confuse this SbLC or APN with trade-related transactions (Documentary LCs), where the guarantee serves to protect sellers (exporters) and buyers (importers), where the underlying capital assets are transferred (paid) to the seller upon satisfaction of the terms of the transaction.  With a project finance-related guarantee, the instrument is released and returned to the guarantor upon project COD (completion of the project construction/commissioning) per the terms/conditions of the loan agreement.
    3. Under these banking rules, the guarantee issuer (the project developer/owner/sponsor) is protected against the guarantee being arbitrarily called or used for any purpose other than intended — backstopping the project financing.  Thanks to well-proven Uniform Rules for Demand Guarantees, ICC pub. 758 (URDG 758) it is quite safe because it is difficult to make a claim against or “call” (cash or draw on) the instrument and prevail in the courts.

    In general, guarantors can be any of the following:

    • An involved private party, such as a well-established engineering (EPC) firm or general contractor, technical services or diversified corporation, usually with a commercial interest in the project. Offering a modest equity carried interest helps align incentives, but some well-established EPC or general contractor firms do not wish to own an equity stake.
    • At large “sponsors” or “backers” such as private family offices (single or multi), dedicated funds, or specialized impact investors of various types. Their guarantees usually involve offering a equity carried interest in the project.
    • Sovereign governments — typically the Minister of Finance can issue a Sovereign Guarantee (SG) on behalf of the nation’s treasury. Developed countries will not issue SGs (they don’t need to), nor will the poorest (IDA) countries, typically, except when the IMF does not object.
    • Development finance institutions like Export-Import (ExIm) Banks, regional development banks or multilaterals like U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC, America’s development bank, formerly OPIC & USAID), though such institutional guarantees would be heavily discounted.

    Will it be worth it? What are the tradeoffs?

    In all cases with project finance, the guarantor assumes an obligation only if the borrower defaults (material breach of contract following a reasonable “cure” period). In that unlikely event, which really must not happen, some investors or lenders would not “call” (require repayment) of the loan, as the existence of the guarantee enables the parties to work through any issues and, if there is no way to finish the project, come to an equitable solution. In that sense, guarantees avoid or prevent criminal actors and their unethical practices of fraud, malfeasance, money laundering, etc.

    Guarantees constitute leverage and can be used to greatly enhance the developer’s credit while qualifying for better investment/loan terms, faster closings, and greater freedoms than could otherwise be afforded without similar accountability / backstop / surety.

    In conclusion, such BG/SbLCs, AvPNs or SGs used for CAP funding will not work for everyone, and although often free to the project owner, not always within reach. Owners need to have a project that is provably feasible, well planned, and confidence but some degree of humility (social skills) to gain proper attention and earn trust.

    The guarantee itself is not usually free to the project owner, as the involved bank charges a fee to issue it, with three exceptions: 1) Sovereign Guarantees (not available in all countries), or 2) When a sponsor, such as an EPC firm or general contractor, can be involved as the source of the qualifying guarantee, or 3) When a qualified company issues an Avalized Promissory Note (APN), where the bank providing the Aval views the PN as coming from a creditworthy customer, in which case no collateral is required, and the bank typically does not charge the issuing company for the Aval — or at most, charges a nominal processing fee. But if not creditworthy, the bank will likely say the PN issuer will need collateral as their Aval makes them a likely target in the event of default.

    In cases where the source of the guarantee can be authenticated and verified as part of a legitimate practice, we may be able to advance the cost of the bank issuing the instrument just slightly ahead of the first draw of funding. If this is your requirement, be sure to let us know.

    How can IFI help a developer secure a guarantor for CAP funding?

    We can help arrange guarantees for projects we finance under a Management Services Agreement, with a tightly defined scope-of-work and timetables for each milestone and deliverables. To avoid these service costs, if you are seeking project capital, better to bring forward your own guarantee or cash deposit as part of qualification for CAP funding.

    There are no up-front fees whatsoever if developers bring forward the required capital guarantee or cash deposit without asking us to “sponsor” the project owners. Our preferred model is direct financing of qualified projects and we are committed to providing the tools and techniques to make that easier.

    Note that IFI’s Registered Affiliates may also be adept in building your project’s qualifying profile as they have received training via our MasterClass to serve your needs.

    For example, we offer sample contractual language to assist you with proposing that asset owners you know “sponsor” a Completion Assurance Guarantee (usually in the form of a partial Standby Letter of Credit).  

    Is a capital guarantee right for you?

    History shows that it has worked out well for many developers seeking faster, easier and better access to available capital for qualified projects of US$25 million or more.

    All that said, we realize CAP is not for everyone. Some developers just do not have the patience or drive to explore possible sources of a qualifying completion assurance guarantee, which would be unfortunate (the advantages would far outweigh the costs or effort), but fine. The only time CAP does not work — which is the one time that qualification is just not within reach — is when the developer has no liquidity, inadequate credit, and also no possibility of gaining support from a backer/sponsor/senior lender (minimum 30% of the project’s total funding, perhaps delivered in 2 or more tranches or chunks) because there is no contractor or well-established vendor or anyone else that can be involved. The project is just not solid enough to involve others.

    This unfortunate scenario assumes the project is also not part of a public-private cooperation with a national government agency involved that could “sponsor” that way, or some other, creative solution. Is that true for your situation? It is rare, but it happens.

    Contact us with questions or for further information on how to take advantage of IFI’s Completion Assurance Program to accelerate project finance closings and obtain the best terms.

    * “Market failures” in the sense that small borrowers, especially those in developing countries, regardless of creditworthiness, sometime lack access to the credit resources available to large borrowers, or borrowers in more developed parts of the world.  (More at article or original paper at EconBiz.de archive.)

    Difference between a Bank Guarantee and a Standby Letter of Credit (LC or Standby LC / SbLC) are subtle, but in the US and most developed economies, a BG and SbLC are effectively the same thing.  Most often in the US the instrument is called an SbLC, but a BG elsewhere. 

    As stated above, UNLIKE trade finance, that uses these instruments to guarantee payment upon receipt of goods, IFI-CAP uses a SbLC or Sovereign Guarantee (when available), or cash deposit, to ensure completion of a project’s construction and commissioning to commence commercial operations. In other words, it is designed to prevent fraud

    Guide to Completion Assurance Guarantees

    More about the underlying rules for such project finance transactions with Standby Letters of Credit, with a preference for Uniform Rules for Demand Guarantees (URDG 758), including legal analysis that compares who benefits and to what degree. Other rules can be acceptable depending on the location. 

    * “Market failures” in the sense that small borrowers, especially those in developing countries, regardless of creditworthiness, sometime lack access to the credit resources available to large borrowers, or borrowers in more developed parts of the world.  (More at article or original paper at EconBiz.de archive.)

    Difference between a Bank Guarantee and a Standby Letter of Credit (LC or Standby LC / SbLC) are subtle, but in the US and most developed economies, a BG and SbLC are effectively the same thing.  Most often in the US the instrument is called an SbLC, but a BG elsewhere. 

    As stated above, UNLIKE trade finance, that uses these instruments to guarantee payment upon receipt of goods, IFI-CAP uses a BG/SbLC or AvPN to ensure completion of a project’s construction and commissioning to commence commercial operations. In other words, it is designed to prevent fraud.

    Guide to Completion Assurance Guarantees

    Companies seeking an SBLC frequently encounter offers involving “leased SBLCs”
    rented balance sheets or instruments supposedly available without meaningful
    underwriting.

    These structures deserve considerable scrutiny.

    A genuine issuing bank evaluates credit exposure. Banks also operate within
    regulatory, compliance and internal risk frameworks.

    A credible financing structure therefore begins with the applicant’s financial position
    and the economics of the underlying transaction.

    The question should be:

    What assets, cash flows and financing sources can support the required credit
    exposure?

    That approach creates a financing strategy grounded in commercial reality.

    How IFI Structures SBLC Financing Programs

    IFI works with companies that have legitimate Standby Letter of Credit
    requirements and require assistance structuring the collateral side of the transaction.

    The process typically begins by determining:

    • The amount and purpose of the SBLC.
    • The collateral already available.
    • The resulting collateral shortfall.
    • The assets and cash flows that may support financing.
    • The potential capital providers.
    • The expected repayment source.
    • The appropriate credit enhancement structure.

    From there, the transaction can be positioned across relevant financing channels.

    This may involve structured debt, asset-backed lending, receivables financing,
    private credit or other forms of credit enhancement.

    Build the Financing Around the Transaction

    A company requiring a Standby Letter of Credit should evaluate the entire capital
    structure rather than viewing the SBLC as an isolated banking product.

    Cash collateral is one form of credit support.

    Receivables, assets, contracts, sponsor equity and structured debt can also
    contribute toward a broader financing solution.

    For companies with credible commercial transactions, strong repayment sources and
    a genuine SBLC requirement, creative financing can help bridge the gap between
    available collateral and the amount required by the issuing institution.

    IFI structures financing programs for companies seeking Standby Letters of
    Credit, trade finance and other forms of structured credit enhancement.

    Explore our SBLC collateral financing solutions to review potential structures for
    transactions where full cash collateral is unavailable.

    When an unknown printer took a galley of type and scrambled it to make a type specimen bookhas a not only five centuries, but also the leap into electronic typesetting, remaining essentially unchan galley of type and scrambled it to make a type specimen book.