考试.net – 第463页

CITF-学习笔记（11.6.1 动态贴现-Dynamic discounting）

11.6.1 动态贴现-Dynamic discounting

定义：动态贴现是动态贴现，它增加了应付账款融资功能的一个有效利用。虽然这不是标准定义中包含的供应链金融技术之一，但这是由金融科技公司（fintechs）领导的积极发展。
One effective use of technology that has added to the functionality of payables finance is dynamic discounting. Although this is not one of the supply chain finance techniques included in the standard definitions, this is a positive development led by financial technology firms (fintechs).

在经济或政治不确定期间，大型企业经常会推迟用于偿还债务或占用现金储备的投资决策。对于一些大型企业公司来说，这导致了动态折扣的采用，应付账款融资的变化。在这里，金融科技公司采用了古老的结算折扣原则（买方同意与供应商提前付款以获得折扣），并使用数据分析为大公司创建工具。
During economic or political uncertainty, it is normal for major corporate businesses to postpone investment decisions with a preference to pay down debt or hold on to their cash reserves.For some major corporate companies this has led to the adoption of dynamic discounting, a variation of payables finance. Here, fintechs have taken the age‑old principle of settlement discount (where a buyer agrees early payment with their supplier for a discount) and used dataanalytics to create tools for the major corporate.

这些软件应用程序使公司能够研究如何在为供应商提供早期付款的同时最好地使用免费现金。此外，一些动态贴现平台已经与银行合作，当大型公司公司希望将其现金部署到其他地方时，银行将成为替代出资者。
These software applications enable companies to look at how best to use free cash while offering suppliers early payment. In addition, some dynamic discounting platforms have teamed up with banks who become substitute funders when the major corporate company wishes to deploy its cash elsewhere.

结论Conclusion
在本主题中，您了解了物理和金融供应链之间的关系。您还了解了贸易周期分析以及GSCFF发布的标准定义中定义的各种供应链金融解决方案和技术。
In this topic you learned about the relationship between the physical and financial supply chains. You were also introduced to trade cycle analysis and various supply chain finance solutions and techniques as defined in the standard definitions published by the GSCFF.

注意事项:
1.本学习笔记仅用于本博客的交流学习，相关学习笔记均为本站整理资料。
2.欢迎读者交流分享，转载请注明出处“WWW.考试.NET”并严禁用于商业用途。
3.欢迎在博客下端评论、提出学习见解，本博客将尽快回复，对好的意见进行收录整理！

推荐链接：
本站主页
 CITF学习笔记目录
返回上一级:11.6 Innovation in supply chain finance I

CITF-学习笔记（11.6 供应链金融创新-Innovation in supply chain finance II）

11.6 供应链金融创新-Innovation in supply chain finance II

分布式账本技术和智能合约的作用
Role of distributed ledger technology and smart contracts
如今的供应链金融解决方案主要是发票驱动的。技术和数字化的进步意味着有机会将供应链融资扩展到提供端到端解决方案，涵盖贸易周期的采购订单和库存阶段。然而，目前大多数分布式账本和智能合约合作更侧重于改善现有贸易和供应链金融解决方案的管理和交付，而不是新产品开发。
Supply chain finance solutions today are predominantly invoice‑driven. The advances in technology and digitisation mean the opportunity to extend supply chain finance to delivering an end‑to‑end solution will be possible, covering the purchase order and inventory stages of the trade cycle. However, most of the distributed ledger and smart contract collaborations in place today are more focused on improving the management and delivery of existing trade and supply chain finance solutions rather than on new product development.

数字颠覆者的进入-Entry of digital disruptors
由于2007-08年全球金融危机，银行被要求对其资本的部署进行战略性审查。这为新进入者创造了机会，成为现状的革新者，利用其敏捷性从银行和现有金融机构捕获业务。许多国家开发或改造了针对中小企业的新技术和电子平台，承诺提供更方便客户和更快捷的服务，而不必经历银行和其他公司雇用的费力的入职和信贷流程。
As a consequence of the 2007–08 global financial crisis, banks have been required to strategically review the deployment of their capital. This has created the opportunity for new entrants to become disrupters of the status quo, using their agility to capture business from banks and existing financial institutions. Many have developed or adapted new technology and e‑platforms aimed at SMEs with a promise to provide a more customer‑friendly and quicker service, without having to go through the laborious onboarding and credit processes employed by banks and others.

高效交付传统解决方案-Efficient delivery of traditional solutions
然而，这些替代融资提供商中的大多数并不一定创建了新的产品解决方案，而是复制了现有的装运后保理和/或应付账款融资解决方案。他们成功地变得更加灵活，并针对上传单个或多个发票提供即时融资，并且通常采用自动信贷算法进行更快的信贷决策。
However, most of these alternative finance providers have not necessarily created new product solutions and have replicated the existing post‑shipment factoring and/or payables finance solutions. They have succeeded in being more flexible and providing immediate finance against an upload of single or multiple invoices, with speedier credit decisions often employing automated credit algorithms.

注意事项:
1.本学习笔记仅用于本博客的交流学习，相关学习笔记均为本站整理资料。
2.欢迎读者交流分享，转载请注明出处“WWW.考试.NET”并严禁用于商业用途。
3.欢迎在博客下端评论、提出学习见解，本博客将尽快回复，对好的意见进行收录整理！

推荐链接：
本站主页
 CITF学习笔记目录
返回上一级:11.6 Innovation in supply chain finance I

CITF-学习笔记（11.6供应链金融创新-Innovation in supply chain finance I）

11.6供应链金融创新-Innovation in supply chain finance I

11.6 Innovation in supply chain finance II
11.6.1 Dynamic discounting

电子发票的发展 Developments in e‑invoicing

实体供应链和金融供应链的数字化一直是大力发展和投资的主题。公司已经以电子方式相互发送采购订单。电子发票的增长也使贸易方之间能够进行更直接的电子通信。
The digitisation of both the physical supply chain and the financial supply chain has been the subject of a great deal of development and investment. Companies already send purchase orders to each other electronically. The growth of e‑invoicing has also enabled a more immediate electronic communication between trading parties.

电子提单和其他电子单据 E‑bills of lading and other electronic documents
正在进行的数字化其他关键文件（如检查报告）的发展以及电子提单的创建将简化向完全数字化和透明的贸易和交易周期的转变。
Ongoing development to digitise other key documents, such as inspection reports, and the creation of an e‑bill of lading will ease the transformation to a completely digitised and transparent trade and transaction cycle.

请注意，在大多数法域，普通法或大陆法不承认电子提单，因此在技术上不是可转让的所有权凭证。没有可供任何人拥有的实际提单，因此不会产生对其中所述货物拥有所有权的”持有人”的概念。此类解决方案的提供商，如Bolero和ESSDOCS，运行着一个基于成员资格的系统，要求所有各方签署一个共同的规则手册。从本质上讲，它们是封闭的生态系统，其中所有权转让记录在数字所有权登记处，所有各方都受制于共同合同。
Note that e-bills of lading are not recognised in common law or civil law in most jurisdictions and are not, therefore, technically negotiable documents of title. There is no actual bill of lading for anyone to possess, therefore the concept of a ‘holder’ having title rights to the goods described therein does not arise. Providers of such solutions, such as Bolero and ESSDOCS, operate a membership-based system whereby all parties are required to sign-up to a common rulebook. In essence, they are closed ecosystems in which transfers of title are recorded in a digital title registry and all parties are subject to a common contract.

最近的技术发展现在使创建“数字原始文档”成为可能它区分了原件和副本，允许持有人拥有原始数字文件并通过交付转移原始文件。这复制了纸面文档的特性，但避免了与纸面文档相关的许多缺点（例如，易受欺诈影响、文档管理成本、与在当事方之间传输文档相关的成本和延迟以及原始文档丢失的风险）。这项技术有可能制作真正的数字提单，即可转让的所有权凭证。由于海事法的复杂性，这些障碍现在主要是法律上的，而不是技术上的。
Recent technological developments now make it possible to create a ‘digital original document’which distinguishes between an original and a copy, allows a holder to have possession of the original digital document and to transfer the original by delivery. This replicates the properties of paper documents but avoids the many disadvantages associated with paper documents (e.g. susceptibility to fraud, cost of document management, cost and delay associated with transferring documents between parties and risk of loss of the original document). This technology has the potential to enable the creation of genuine digital bills of lading which are negotiable documents of title. The obstacles are now primarily legal rather than technological, due to the complexity of maritime law.

这种技术的早期应用可能是提单和本票等可转让支付票据的数字化。法律挑战不那么复杂，几个司法管辖区正在取得进展，以更新管理可转让支付工具的立法，以明确允许数字版本。
An earlier application of this technology is likely to be the digitisation of negotiable payment instruments such as bills of lading and promissory notes. The legal challenges are less complex and progress is being made in several jurisdictions to update the legislation governing negotiable payment instruments to explicitly allow digital versions.

注意事项:
1.本学习笔记仅用于本博客的交流学习，相关学习笔记均为本站整理资料。
2.欢迎读者交流分享，转载请注明出处“WWW.考试.NET”并严禁用于商业用途。
3.欢迎在博客下端评论、提出学习见解，本博客将尽快回复，对好的意见进行收录整理！

推荐链接：
本站主页
 CITF学习笔记目录

CITF-学习笔记（11.5.10 应付账款融资-Payables finance II）

11.5.10 应付账款融资-Payables finance II

典型客戶-Typical clients
大多数买方主导的方案都是由投资级买方实施的，这些买方正在寻找融资提供者与其供应商签署应收账款购买协议，以购买其买方所欠的应收账款。通过这种方式，主要企业买家希望实现资产负债表外的解决方案，并避免银行债务水平的增加。
The majority of buyer‑led programmes are put in place by investment grade buyers that are looking for finance providers to sign a receivable purchase agreement with their suppliers to purchase receivables owed by their buyers. In this way, major corporate buyers are hoping to achieve an off‑balance‑sheet solution and avoid an increased level of bank debt.

流程启动-Onboarding
对于融资提供商来说，这通常是一个具有挑战性和复杂的过程，因为必须对供应商进行全面的客户尽职调查，包括了解您的客户（KYC）和反洗钱（AML）检查。供应商不太可能是现有客户，并且可能位于银行未开展业务的地区。
This is often a challenging and complex process for finance providers as full customer due diligence involving know your customer (KYC) and anti‑money‑laundering (AML) checks must be carried out on suppliers. Suppliers are unlikely to be existing customers and may be domiciled in a territory that the bank does not operate in.

非银行提供商的吸引力- Attractiveness of non‑bank providers
非投资级购买者倾向于与非银行融资提供者签订方案，因为资产负债表处理方面的考虑不那么迫切。然而，债务能力和信贷偏好的考虑因素仍然存在。非银行融资提供商通常会获得信贷针对买方义务的保险或与其他方签订有资金的风险参与投资者。
Non‑investment grade buyers tend to enter into programmes with non‑bank finance providers as the balance sheet treatment considerations are less acute. However, debt capacity and credit appetite considerations still arise. Non‑bank finance providers will often obtain credit insurance against the buyer’s obligations or enter into funded risk participations with other investors.

对买家的好处Benefits to buyers
Buyers putting in place a payables finance programme will often do so as part of their drive to:
1.通过延长商定的付款条件来优化流动性
optimise liquidity through an extension of agreed payment terms;
2.在整个供应商群中实现条款标准化
standardise terms across their supplier base; and
3.通过降低供应商的财务成本，降低供应链内的成本。
achieve cost reductions within their supply chain by enabling a lower cost of finance for their Suppliers.

对买方来说，另一个潜在的好处与会计处理有关。目标通常是确保应付账款融资方案不会导致将贸易债权人重新分类为银行债务。这对于被投资者分析资产负债表比率的投资级买家尤其重要。任何银行债务的增加都可能对市场情绪产生不利影响。
A further potential benefit for buyers relates to the accounting treatment. The aim is typically to ensure that the payables finance programme does not result in the reclassification of trade creditors as bank debt. This is particularly important for investment grade buyers whose balance sheet ratios are analysed by investors. Any perceived increase in bank debt can have a detrimental effect on market sentiment.

对卖家的好处Benefits to sellers
These include:
1.立即获得现金收益，因为知道这类方案提供的资金成本将反映其买方的信用状况，并且对大多数供应商而言，将比其正常资金成本便宜
an immediate cash benefit with the knowledge that the cost of finance provided by this type of programme will reflect their buyer’s credit‑standing and for most suppliers will be cheaper than their normal cost of funds; and
2.将主要客户转变为相当于现金提供方，降低卖方的风险。
a reduction in the seller’s risk by, in effect, turning a major customer into the equivalent of a cash sale.
但是，卖家还必须考虑，与买家的紧密联系可能意味着降低价格的压力更大，因为他们的买家将影响他们的融资成本。
However, sellers will also have to consider that the increased tie‑in with their buyers may mean more pressure to reduce their prices as their buyers will have influenced their cost of finance.

注意事项:
1.本学习笔记仅用于本博客的交流学习，相关学习笔记均为本站整理资料。
2.欢迎读者交流分享，转载请注明出处“WWW.考试.NET”并严禁用于商业用途。
3.欢迎在博客下端评论、提出学习见解，本博客将尽快回复，对好的意见进行收录整理！

CITF-学习笔记（11.5.10 应付账款融资-Payables finance I）

11.5.10 应付账款融资-Payables finance I

定义：
This technique is described in the standard definitions as follows:
应付账款融资是通过买方主导的计划提供的，在这个计划中，买方供应链中的卖方能够通过应收账款购买获得融资。这种技术为货物和服务卖方提供了在实际到期日之前收到应收款（以未付发票表示）的贴现价值的选择，并且通常以与买方信用风险相一致的融资成本接收应收款。
“Payables finance is provided through a buyer‑led programme within which sellers in the buyer’s supply chain are able to access finance by means of a receivables purchase. The technique provides a seller of goods and services with the option of receiving discounted value of receivables (represented by outstanding invoices) prior to their actual due date and typically at a financing cost aligned with the credit risk of the buyer. The payable continues to be due by the buyer until its due date.”
(GFSCF, 2016, p45)

应付账款融资安排由买方和融资提供方商定。参与买方供应链的卖方被邀请参加该计划。
The payables finance facility is agreed between the buyer and the finance provider. The sellers involved in the buyer’s supply chain are invited to participate in the programme.

以买家为中心的模式A buyer‑centric model
这是一种以买方为中心的模式，买方将寻求与一个或多个融资提供商一起实施应付账款融资计划。这些方案旨在为买方提供无担保和无承诺的资产负债表外解决办法，银行对买方标明信用额度，并以折扣价向卖方提供加速付款，但不得超过方案中规定的限额。
This is a buyer‑centric model where the buyer will look to put in place a payables finance programme with one or a number of finance providers. These programmes are geared to provide the buyer with an off‑balance‑sheet solution on an unsecured and uncommitted basis, with the bank marking a credit limit on the buyer and providing an accelerated payment at a discount to the seller, up to the limits set within the programme.
买方的批准取决于买方与融资提供人之间的协议，该协议包括无条件、不可撤销的承诺，即在发票到期日向融资提供方付款。融资提供人依赖这一承诺，因此无需考虑卖方的信用状况。
The approval by the buyer is predicated by an agreement between the buyer and the finance provider that includes an unconditional, irrevocable commitment to pay the finance provider on the invoice due date. The finance provider relies on this undertaking, obviating the need to consider the credit standing of the seller.

注意事项:
1.本学习笔记仅用于本博客的交流学习，相关学习笔记均为本站整理资料。
2.欢迎读者交流分享，转载请注明出处“WWW.考试.NET”并严禁用于商业用途。
3.欢迎在博客下端评论、提出学习见解，本博客将尽快回复，对好的意见进行收录整理！

CITF-学习笔记（11.5.9 Forfaiting II）

11.5.9 Forfaiting II

规则：URF 800
福费廷交易主要纳入了福费廷国际商会第800号出版物（URF）的统一规则，其中规定了审查文件的有限追索权制度和标准。使用URF的旨在实现真正销售的会计处理。
Forfaiting transactions in the main incorporate the Uniform Rules for Forfaiting ICC Publication 800 (URF), which sets out, among other things, a limited recourse regime and standards for examining documents. Sales using the URF are designed to achieve true‑sale accounting treatment.

基于事务的解决方案 Transactional‑based solution
金融工具的使用以及所融资的付款义务与基础商业合同之间的明确区别，使这在适当的情况下成为有效的解决方案。与基于流量的金融相比，福费廷更适合交易金融，可以说是一种非常传统的贸易融资产品。它证明了纳入供应链金融技术家族是合理的，因为它通常被视为未平账应收账款融资解决方案的更强大的替代方案，也是信用证的可交易替代方案。
The use of financial instruments and the clear distinction between the payment obligation being financed and the underlying commercial contract make this an effective solution in the right circumstances. Better suited to transactional finance than flow‑based finance, forfaiting is arguably a very traditional trade finance product. It justifies inclusion within the family of supply chain finance techniques because it is often seen as a more robust alternative to an open‑account receivables finance solution and a tradable alternative to a letter of credit.

客户适用特征：
Forfaiting is an effective solution for clients whose businesses exhibit the following characteristics:
1.商品或服务以180天至几年的延期付款条件出售
goods or services are sold on deferred payment terms between 180 days and several years;
2.单次交易价值很高（例如超过100，000美元）
individual transactions are of high value (eg in excess of USD100,000); and
3.每笔交易都需要单独融资
each transaction needs to be financed on an individual basis.

典型客户-Typical clients
In addition, clients seeking to use forfaiting to finance receivables are likely to be:
1. 涉及指定阶段付款的合同
involved in contracts that specify stage payments;
2.在新兴市场或困难市场中与客户进行交易
trading with customers in emerging or difficult markets; and/or
3.在中端市场和主要企业部门，而不是中小企业部门。
in the mid‑market and major corporate segments rather than the SME segment.

福费特人可能准备将资产保留在他们的账簿上直到到期，但如果这对他们没有吸引力，他们可以在二级市场上出售付款义务。在真实销售的基础上分配资产（即出售）的能力是福费廷的内在特征。
The forfaiter may well be prepared to hold the asset on their books until maturity but, if this is not attractive to them, they can sell the payment obligation in the secondary market. The ability to distribute the asset (ie sell it) on a true‑sale basis is an intrinsic feature of forfaiting.

Benefits to sellers
卖方能够加速收取基于延期付款条件出售给客户的货物或服务的应收账款。卖方在出售金融时获得贴现收益将付款义务转让给forfaiters或转移给forfaiters，而不必等到现金到期日。
Sellers are able to accelerate their receivables in respect of goods or services sold to customers on deferred payment terms. The seller receives discounted proceeds when they sell the financial instrument or transfer the payment obligation to forfaiters, rather than having to wait until the due date for their cash.

资产负债表外和无追索权 Off balance sheet and non‑recourse
这是一种资产负债表外解决方案，在无追索权的基础上提供融资。买方的付款义务融资的基础，这一义务独立于商业合同下的权利和义务。这意味着，一旦他们发出了付款义务，即使他们有合法理由由于卖方所称的合同违约而扣留商业合同下的付款，买方也有义务付款。
This is an off‑balance‑sheet solution with finance provided on a non‑recourse basis. The buyer’s payment obligation is the vehicle for the provision of finance and this obligation is independent of the rights and obligations under the commercial contract. This means that, once they have issued the payment obligation, the buyer is obliged to pay even if they have legitimate grounds to withhold payment under the commercial contract due to alleged contractual default by the seller.

注意事项:
1.本学习笔记仅用于本博客的交流学习，相关学习笔记均为本站整理资料。
2.欢迎读者交流分享，转载请注明出处“WWW.考试.NET”并严禁用于商业用途。
3.欢迎在博客下端评论、提出学习见解，本博客将尽快回复，对好的意见进行收录整理！

–

CITF-学习笔记（11.5.9 Forfaiting I）

11.5.9 Forfaiting I

定义：
This technique is described in the standard definitions as follows:
福费廷是应收款购买的一种形式，包括无追索权购买以金融票据或付款义务（通常为可转让或可转让形式）所代表的未来付款义务，以折扣价或面值换取融资费用。
“Forfaiting is a form of receivables purchase, consisting of the without recourse purchase of future payment obligations represented by financial instruments or payment obligations (normally in negotiable or transferable form), at a discount or at face value in return for a financing charge.”
(GSCFF, 2016, p34)
福费廷历来被用来为主要资本货物的出口提供资金，期限为五到七年。通常，付款条件将规定在最初的宽限期之后开始，每半年一次分期付款。这些定期付款义务将由一系列期票(本票)证明，其到期日与付款时间表相匹配。最近，福费廷已被用于解决短期营运资金需求，期限短至六个月。
Forfaiting was historically used to finance the export of primarily capital goods with tenors of five to seven years. Often, the payment terms would specify stage payments on, perhaps, a semi‑annual basis starting after an initial grace period. These regular payment obligations would be evidenced by a ‘bundle’ of promissory notes bearing maturity dates that matched the payment schedule. More recently, forfaiting has been used to address short‑term working capital requirements with tenors as short as six months.

福费廷交易不同于其他形式的应收款购买，因为融资提供人是根据可接受的工具和付款义务提供资金的，其中可能包括
Forfaiting transactions differ from other forms of receivables purchase as the finance provider is providing funding against an acceptable instrument and payment obligation, which may include a:
1.汇票bill of exchange;
2.期票promissory note;
3.信用证项下的延期付款承诺
deferred payment undertaking under a letter of credit;
4.应收账款（前提是有可接受的票据和付款义务证明）。
receivable (provided it is evidenced by an acceptable instrument and payment obligation).

金融工具或付款义务可能由第三方担保，也可能不由第三方担保。对于汇票或本票，银行可以通过在票据本身中增加其担保（保函）来分别担保接受人或发行人的承诺。或者，银行可签发单独的担保或备用信用证，承诺在票据到期时被拒付时向票据持有人付款。
The financial instrument or payment obligation may or may not be guaranteed by a third party. With a bill of exchange or promissory note, a bank may guarantee the undertaking of the acceptor or issuer respectively by adding its aval (guarantee) to the instrument itself. Alternatively, the bank may issue a separate guarantee or standby letter of credit by which it commits to pay the holder of the instrument should it be dishonoured at maturity.

注意事项:
1.本学习笔记仅用于本博客的交流学习，相关学习笔记均为本站整理资料。
2.欢迎读者交流分享，转载请注明出处“WWW.考试.NET”并严禁用于商业用途。
3.欢迎在博客下端评论、提出学习见解，本博客将尽快回复，对好的意见进行收录整理！

CITF-学习笔记（11.5.8 保理和发票贴现 Factoring and invoice discounting II）

11.5.8 保理和发票贴现
Factoring and invoice discounting II

保理和发票贴现之间的区别-Distinction between factoring and invoice discounting:
术语保理用于描述包括债务人投资组合和收款，以及提供资金的一套产品。发票贴现通常仅描述财务解决方案。
The main distinction between factoring and invoice discounting is that, in most markets, the term factoring is used to describe a product that includes management of the debtor portfolio and collection of the payment, as well as the provision of finance. Invoice discounting, on the other hand,is generally used to describe a finance‑only solution.

保理解决方案通常向债务人披露，卖方通知债务人发票已转让，债务已转让给融资机构，并且只能在融资机构收指定的归集帐户收到付款到后才算清偿债务。
The factoring solution is normally disclosed to the debtors with the seller inserting a notice of assignment on the invoice that informs the debtor that the debt has been assigned to the finance provider and can only be discharged on receipt of payment by the finance provider into a designatedcollection account.

发票贴现通常是在不公开的基础上提供的，即买方没有被告知转让，但仍被卖方指示将其付款存入一个收款账户，该账户可能是以卖方的名义，但由融资提供人控制。
Invoice discounting is generally offered on an undisclosed basis, where the buyer is not informed of the assignment but is still directed by the seller to make their payment into a collection account that could be in the name of the seller but controlled by the finance provider.

追索权或无追索权-Recourse or non‑recourse
如果买方违约，两者都可以在追索权或无追索权的基础上提供给卖方。在提供无追索权的情况下，融资提供人可利用信贷保险作为债务人违约风险的额外缓解措施。与其他无追索权应收款融资一样，融资提供人在发生合同纠纷时仍有权追索出卖人。

Both can also be offered on either a recourse or non‑recourse basis to the seller in the event of a default by the buyer. Where non‑recourse is offered, the finance provider may utilise credit insurance as an added mitigant to the risk of debtor default. As with other non‑recourse receivables finance, the finance provider will still have rights of recourse to the seller in the event of contractual dispute.

基于总营业额 Whole‑turnover basis
通过银行提供的大多数保理或发票贴现方案都基于总营业额，其中融资提供人取得出卖人产生的所有应收款的所有权，并根据符合与出卖人商定的一些列应收账款融资系数发放贷款。
The majority of factoring or invoice discounting facilities offered through banks are provided on a whole‑turnover basis, where the finance provider takes ownership of all the receivables generated by the seller and creates an availability of finance against a basket of receivables that fits within the financing parameters agreed with the seller.
其他融资提供商和平台主要提供精选或单一发票融资，卖方可以出售发票（通常通过在线平台），平台提供商或其他出资者可以出价购买发票。与总营业额的安排不同，出卖人没有转让其全部应收账款组合，但在这种情况下，出资人必须确信，所注资的发票尚未在其他地方质押。
Other finance providers and platforms predominantly offer selected or single invoice finance, whereby the seller can sell an invoice (often through an online platform) and either the platform provider or other funders can bid to purchase the invoice. Unlike the whole‑turnover arrangements, the seller is not assigning their whole receivables portfolio but, in this case, the funder must be satisfied that the invoice being funded is not already pledged elsewhere.

对卖家的好处Benefits to sellers
大多数被保理和发票贴现所吸引的公司是中小企业，他们可能获得营运资金的机会有限、或者没有银行要求的固定资产作为银行贷款的担保。拥有基于发票反映业务增长的的方案（如保理或发票贴现）是向业务释放现金的有效方法。卖方对一个或几个客户的依赖程度，具体取决于他们的客户信誉，无追索权选项为客户提供了一些补偿和违约保护，这可能会影响卖方继续交易的可行性。
The majority of companies that are attracted to factoring and invoice discounting are SMEs who may have limited access to working capital or do not have the fixed assets required by banks as security for bank loans. Having an invoice‑based facility such as factoring or invoice discounting that mirrors the growth of the business is an effective way of releasing cash into the business.
Where the seller has a level of dependency on one or a few customers, depending on their creditworthiness, a non‑recourse option provides some comfort and protection from customer default, which may affect the viability of the seller to continue trading.

注意事项:
1.本学习笔记仅用于本博客的交流学习，相关学习笔记均为本站整理资料。
2.欢迎读者交流分享，转载请注明出处“WWW.考试.NET”并严禁用于商业用途。
3.欢迎在博客下端评论、提出学习见解，本博客将尽快回复，对好的意见进行收录整理！

CITF-学习笔记（11.5.8 保理和发票贴现 Factoring and invoice discounting I）

11.5.8 保理和发票贴现 Factoring and invoice discounting I

定义：
Factoring and its variations are described in the standard definitions as follows:
保理[和保理变种]是应收账款购买的一种形式，灵活适用。其中货物和服务的卖方在向融资提供商获得贴现（通常称为”保理商”）。保理的一个关键区别是，通常融资提供人负责管理债务人投资组合并收取基础应收款的付款。
“Factoring [and factoring variations] is a form of receivables purchase, flexibly applied, in which sellers of goods and services sell their receivables (represented by outstanding invoices) at a discount to a finance provider (commonly known as the ‘factor’). A key differentiator of factoring is that typically the finance provider becomes responsible for managing the debtor portfolio and collecting the payment of the underlying receivables.”
(GSCFF, 2016, p39)

主要特点-Key features
发票贴现是保理的一种变体。两者的主要特点是，它们不涉及贷款，而是要求通过转让或质押来，来购买应收款进行贴现。对于许多公司而言，符合条件的债务上限的80-90%的融资百分比，可能只能获得应收账款总价值的70%或更少。然而，可以根据应收账款价值筹集的资金量一般高于将同一资产获取贷款或透支。
Invoice discounting is a variation of factoring. The main feature of both is that they do not involve a loan but instead require the purchase of a receivable through an assignment or pledge of that receivable at a discount.
For many companies, the headline percentage of funding of 80–90 per cent of eligible debts may represent an actual financing of 70 per cent or less of the total receivables value. Nevertheless, the level of finance that can be raised against the value of receivables will be higher than when trying to utilise the same asset for a loan or overdraft.
大多数保理或发票贴现便利主要面向国内，在提供出口融资的情况下，融资提供者需要确信债务可以在债务人的法域内对债务人强制执行。
The majority of factoring or invoice discounting facilities are predominantly domestically orientated and where export finance is provided, the finance provider needs to be satisfied that the debt can be enforced against the debtor in the debtor’s jurisdiction.

注意事项:
1.本学习笔记仅用于本博客的交流学习，相关学习笔记均为本站整理资料。
2.欢迎读者交流分享，转载请注明出处“WWW.考试.NET”并严禁用于商业用途。
3.欢迎在博客下端评论、提出学习见解，本博客将尽快回复，对好的意见进行收录整理！

CITF-学习笔记（11.5.7 应收账款贴现-Receivables discounting）

11.5.7 应收账款贴现-Receivables discounting

定义：This technique is described in the standard definitions as follows:
应收款贴现是应收款购买的一种形式，可灵活适用，其中货物和服务的卖方以折扣价向融资提供人出售单个或多个应收款（以未结发票表示）。
“Receivables discounting is a form of receivables purchase, flexibly applied, in which sellers of goods and services sell individual or multiple receivables (represented by outstanding invoices) to a finance provider at a discount.”(GSCFF, 2016, p28)

任何应收账款可购买的基本要素
The fundamentals of any receivables purchase facility are that the receivable:
1.exists; 存在
2.can be clearly identified and validated;可以清楚地识别和验证
3.is assignable; and 可转让的
4.is enforceable against the debtor in that debtor’s jurisdiction.
在债务人的法域内可对债务人强制执行。

特点:应收账款贴现解决方案的主要特点是它不是贷款，而是购买通过转让或质押的应收款
The main feature of a receivables discounting solution is that it is not a loan but the purchase of a receivable through an assignment or pledge of that receivable.

典型客户-Typical clients
该方案通常提供给希望从资产负债表中移除贸易应收账款的大型公司，并避免将预付款归类为银行债务（即从资产负债表上取下融资）。
The facility is generally offered to major corporates looking to remove the trade receivable from their balance sheet and avoid having the advance classified as bank debt (ie taking the financing off balance sheet).

这意味着公司将要求该方案未向其买家披露，并在真实销售的基础上构建，没有或有限的追索权。它们还将按应收账款面值的100%预付款。
This means that the corporates will require that the facility is undisclosed to their buyers and structured on a true‑sale basis with no or limited recourse back to them. They will also push for an advance based on 100 per cent of the face value of the receivable.

然而，实现所需的会计处理由卖方的审计师自行决定，虽然融资提供人可以构建贷款以履行他们和买方认为将符合资产负债表外解决方案标准的内容，但不能保证。
Achieving the desired accounting treatment is, however, at the discretion of the seller’s auditor and, while the finance provider can structure the facility to fulfil what they and the buyer believe will meet the criteria for an off‑balance‑sheet solution, it cannot be guaranteed.

更高的复杂性Greater complexity
这种类型的安排通常相当复杂，因为大公司可能希望在多个司法管辖区构建一个方案，涉及其自己的海外子公司作为应收款的卖方，买方也在多个国家。这将需要各法域进行高水平的法律和监管尽职调查，以确保应收款在其管辖范围内存在、可以转让和能够对债务人强制执行。
It is common for this type of arrangement to be fairly complex as the major corporate may wish to structure a facility over multiple jurisdictions, involving its own overseas subsidiaries as sellers of the receivable with buyers that are also in multiple countries. This will entail a high level of legal and regulatory due diligence across the jurisdictions to ensure that the receivable exists, can be assigned and can be enforced against the debtor in their jurisdiction.

资产负债表外处理并不总是一个关键要求，特别是对于次级投资级或中型公司。融资提供人可能愿意在实际销售的基础上构建融资，但出于信用风险目的，将要求应收款披露给有关公司的买受人。在这种情况下，应收款的清收可由融资提供人承担，也可由出卖人作为融资提供人的代理人进行。
Off‑balance‑sheet treatment is not always a key requirement, especially with sub‑investment grade or medium‑sized companies. The finance provider may be willing to structure a facility on a true‑sale basis but, for credit risk purposes, will require that the receivable is disclosed to the buyers of the company concerned. In such cases, the collection of the receivable may be undertaken by the finance provider or by the seller as agent for the finance provider.

对卖家的好处Benefits to sellers
对于面临全球竞争加剧、市场审查和资本充足性监管压力的大型企业来说，应收账款贴现计划提供了一种替代方法，可以为企业财务主管提供比传统银行融资更具成本效益的解决方案。
For major corporates that face the pressures of increased global competition, market scrutiny and capital adequacy regulation, receivables discounting programmes offer an alternative approach that can provide the corporate treasurer with a more cost‑effective solution than is possible with more traditional bank funding.
许多应收账款贴现计划现在都得到了以技术为主导的平台的支持，这些平台允许在设施内更好地查看和共享数据以及自动计算可用性。因此，交易控制和抵押品管理已成为一个更加易于管理的过程。
Many of the receivables discounting programmes are now supported by technology‑led platforms that allow for the greater visibility and sharing of data and automated calculation of availability within the facility. As a result, transactional control and collateral management has become a more manageable process.