3. The person who wants to manufacture the product needs an equipment to do it but
not the ownership of an equipment. The concept of lease financing says ‘ Eat the
mangoes rather than counting the trees.’
4. Lease financing denotes procurement of
assets through lease.
The subject of leasing falls in the
category of finance.
Leasing has grown as a big industry in
USA and UK and spread to other countries
in the present century.
In India, the concept was pioneered in
1973.
It is a commercial arrangement whereby
the equipment owner conveys to the
equipment user the right to use the
equipment in return for a rental.
5. • “Lease is a contract whereby the owner of an
asset (lessor) grants to another party (lessee)
the exclusive right to use the asset usually for
an agreed period of time in return for the
payment of the rent.”
6. A lease financing is a contract
whereby the owner of an asset grant to
another party the exclusive right to use
the asset usually for an agreed period of
time in return for the payment of rent.
The rentals are pre-determined and
payable at fixed interval of time.
A lease is an agreement allowing one
party to use another property, plant, or
equipment for a stated period of time in
exchange for consideration.
7. Essential elements/Features of leasing
Parties to
the
contract
Ownership
separate
from user
Asset
Lease
rentals
Terms of
contract
Termination
of lease
contract
8. Essential elements
• 1. Parties to the contract: there are essentially two parties in a
contract of lease financing i.e. the owner (lessor) and the user of
the asset (lessee). Lessor as well as lessees may be
individuals, partnerships or joint stock companies etc.
• 2. Asset: The subject matter of the lease is the asset. The asset may
be anything i.e. an automobile, factory or a building. The asset
must, however, be of lessee’s choice suitable for his business needs.
• 3. terms of contract: the term of the lease is the period for which
the agreement of lease remains in operation. Every lease should
have a definite period, otherwise it will be legally inoperative. The
lease period may sometimes stretch over the entire economic life
of the asset (finance lease) or a period shorter than the useful life
of the asset (operating lease)
9. 4. ownership separate from the user: during the lease
tenure, ownership of the asset vests with the lessor and its
use is allowed to the lessee. On the expiry of the lease
tenure, the asset reverts to the lessor.
5. Lease rentals: the consideration which the lessee pays to
the lessor for the lease transaction is the lease rental.
6. termination of lease contract: at the end of the lease
period, the contract may be terminated by any of the modes:
• The lease is renewed.
• The asset reverts to the lessor.
• The asset reverts to the lessor and the lessor sells it to the
third party.
• The lessor sells the asset to the lessee.
11. Financial lease
• The lessor transfers to the lessee substantially all the risks
and rewards incidental to the ownership of the asset.
• It involves the payment of rentals over an obligatory noncancellable lease period.
• In such leases, the lessor is only the financier and is usually
not interested in the assets.
• It is a long term non-cancellable lease.
• It ensures the lessor for amortisation of entire cost of
investment plus the expected return on the capital outlay
during the term of the lease.
• Types of assets included under such lease are
lands, building, heavy machinery etc.
12. Operating lease
• It is one which is not a financial lease.
• It is a short term cancellable lease.
• In this, the lessor does not transfer all the risk and rewards
incidental to the ownership of the asset and the cost of the
asset is not fully amortised during the primary lease period.
So under this type of lease, contract lease period is always
less than economic life of the asset.
• The lessor provides services attached to the leased asset
such as maintenance, repair and technical advice.
• It is also known as service lease. Operating lease is
primarily used for computers, office equipments, trucks etc.
14. Single investor lease
• There are only two parties to the lease
transaction, the lessor and the lessee.
15. • Arrangement for assets of huge capital outlay.
• It is a 3 sided arrangement.
• Lesser borrows a part of purchase cost of the asset from the
third party i.e. lender.
• The lender is paid off from the lease rentals directly by the
lessee and surplus cash after meeting the claims of the lendor
goes to the lessor.
• Lessor acquires the asset with maximum contribution upto 50%
and rest is financed by lenders.
17. in this, the lessee is already the owner of the
asset. He, under the lease agreement, sells the
asset to the buyer.
The buyer leases back the same asset to the
owner (now the lessee) in consideration of lease
rentals.
under the sale and lease back, the lessee not only
retains the use of the assets but also gets funds
from the sale of the assets to the lessor.
19. Domestic lease
• A lease transaction is classified as domestic if
all the parties to the agreement are domiciled
in the same country.
20. International lease
If the parties to the lease transaction are domiciled in the
different countries, it is known as international lease.
International
lease
Import lease
Export lease
21. • Import lease: the lessor and the lessee are
domiciled in the same country but the
equipment supplier is located in a different
country.
Cross-border lease: when the lessor and the
lessee are domiciled in different countries, the
lease is classified as cross border lease. The
domicile of supplier is immaterial.
Cox (2006), “Happy companies have robust growth in revenues, strong balance-sheets, and healthy profits that reflect genuine business success, not phony bookkeeping. And they share other important traits as well. They abide by high ethical standards, which is a key to their solid success. They don't obstruct the flow of information to shareholders, but rather view the shareholder as the ultimate owner and the ultimate boss. They choose directors on the strength of their abilities, character, and capacity for independent judgment. And their internal controls work well, so that the company's executives can take immediate corrective action when something goes wrong.” Undoubtedly, a lot of stress has been given on maintaining high ethical standards, thinking beyond the business, observing transparency for shareholders, bringing independent judgement and accountability from directors as well as management. This is how corporate governance has been defined since long, with the literature consistently boosting the fact that it actually leads to hike in revenues and business success. Better corporate governance is likely to improve the performance of firms, through more efficient management, better asset allocation, better labour practices etc (Claessens, 2006). Good corporate governance has positive effects on a firm (Lynall et al., 2003).
Cox (2006), “Happy companies have robust growth in revenues, strong balance-sheets, and healthy profits that reflect genuine business success, not phony bookkeeping. And they share other important traits as well. They abide by high ethical standards, which is a key to their solid success. They don't obstruct the flow of information to shareholders, but rather view the shareholder as the ultimate owner and the ultimate boss. They choose directors on the strength of their abilities, character, and capacity for independent judgment. And their internal controls work well, so that the company's executives can take immediate corrective action when something goes wrong.” Undoubtedly, a lot of stress has been given on maintaining high ethical standards, thinking beyond the business, observing transparency for shareholders, bringing independent judgement and accountability from directors as well as management. This is how corporate governance has been defined since long, with the literature consistently boosting the fact that it actually leads to hike in revenues and business success. Better corporate governance is likely to improve the performance of firms, through more efficient management, better asset allocation, better labour practices etc (Claessens, 2006). Good corporate governance has positive effects on a firm (Lynall et al., 2003).
Cox (2006), “Happy companies have robust growth in revenues, strong balance-sheets, and healthy profits that reflect genuine business success, not phony bookkeeping. And they share other important traits as well. They abide by high ethical standards, which is a key to their solid success. They don't obstruct the flow of information to shareholders, but rather view the shareholder as the ultimate owner and the ultimate boss. They choose directors on the strength of their abilities, character, and capacity for independent judgment. And their internal controls work well, so that the company's executives can take immediate corrective action when something goes wrong.” Undoubtedly, a lot of stress has been given on maintaining high ethical standards, thinking beyond the business, observing transparency for shareholders, bringing independent judgement and accountability from directors as well as management. This is how corporate governance has been defined since long, with the literature consistently boosting the fact that it actually leads to hike in revenues and business success. Better corporate governance is likely to improve the performance of firms, through more efficient management, better asset allocation, better labour practices etc (Claessens, 2006). Good corporate governance has positive effects on a firm (Lynall et al., 2003).
Cox (2006), “Happy companies have robust growth in revenues, strong balance-sheets, and healthy profits that reflect genuine business success, not phony bookkeeping. And they share other important traits as well. They abide by high ethical standards, which is a key to their solid success. They don't obstruct the flow of information to shareholders, but rather view the shareholder as the ultimate owner and the ultimate boss. They choose directors on the strength of their abilities, character, and capacity for independent judgment. And their internal controls work well, so that the company's executives can take immediate corrective action when something goes wrong.” Undoubtedly, a lot of stress has been given on maintaining high ethical standards, thinking beyond the business, observing transparency for shareholders, bringing independent judgement and accountability from directors as well as management. This is how corporate governance has been defined since long, with the literature consistently boosting the fact that it actually leads to hike in revenues and business success. Better corporate governance is likely to improve the performance of firms, through more efficient management, better asset allocation, better labour practices etc (Claessens, 2006). Good corporate governance has positive effects on a firm (Lynall et al., 2003).
Cox (2006), “Happy companies have robust growth in revenues, strong balance-sheets, and healthy profits that reflect genuine business success, not phony bookkeeping. And they share other important traits as well. They abide by high ethical standards, which is a key to their solid success. They don't obstruct the flow of information to shareholders, but rather view the shareholder as the ultimate owner and the ultimate boss. They choose directors on the strength of their abilities, character, and capacity for independent judgment. And their internal controls work well, so that the company's executives can take immediate corrective action when something goes wrong.” Undoubtedly, a lot of stress has been given on maintaining high ethical standards, thinking beyond the business, observing transparency for shareholders, bringing independent judgement and accountability from directors as well as management. This is how corporate governance has been defined since long, with the literature consistently boosting the fact that it actually leads to hike in revenues and business success. Better corporate governance is likely to improve the performance of firms, through more efficient management, better asset allocation, better labour practices etc (Claessens, 2006). Good corporate governance has positive effects on a firm (Lynall et al., 2003).
Cox (2006), “Happy companies have robust growth in revenues, strong balance-sheets, and healthy profits that reflect genuine business success, not phony bookkeeping. And they share other important traits as well. They abide by high ethical standards, which is a key to their solid success. They don't obstruct the flow of information to shareholders, but rather view the shareholder as the ultimate owner and the ultimate boss. They choose directors on the strength of their abilities, character, and capacity for independent judgment. And their internal controls work well, so that the company's executives can take immediate corrective action when something goes wrong.” Undoubtedly, a lot of stress has been given on maintaining high ethical standards, thinking beyond the business, observing transparency for shareholders, bringing independent judgement and accountability from directors as well as management. This is how corporate governance has been defined since long, with the literature consistently boosting the fact that it actually leads to hike in revenues and business success. Better corporate governance is likely to improve the performance of firms, through more efficient management, better asset allocation, better labour practices etc (Claessens, 2006). Good corporate governance has positive effects on a firm (Lynall et al., 2003).
Cox (2006), “Happy companies have robust growth in revenues, strong balance-sheets, and healthy profits that reflect genuine business success, not phony bookkeeping. And they share other important traits as well. They abide by high ethical standards, which is a key to their solid success. They don't obstruct the flow of information to shareholders, but rather view the shareholder as the ultimate owner and the ultimate boss. They choose directors on the strength of their abilities, character, and capacity for independent judgment. And their internal controls work well, so that the company's executives can take immediate corrective action when something goes wrong.” Undoubtedly, a lot of stress has been given on maintaining high ethical standards, thinking beyond the business, observing transparency for shareholders, bringing independent judgement and accountability from directors as well as management. This is how corporate governance has been defined since long, with the literature consistently boosting the fact that it actually leads to hike in revenues and business success. Better corporate governance is likely to improve the performance of firms, through more efficient management, better asset allocation, better labour practices etc (Claessens, 2006). Good corporate governance has positive effects on a firm (Lynall et al., 2003).
Cox (2006), “Happy companies have robust growth in revenues, strong balance-sheets, and healthy profits that reflect genuine business success, not phony bookkeeping. And they share other important traits as well. They abide by high ethical standards, which is a key to their solid success. They don't obstruct the flow of information to shareholders, but rather view the shareholder as the ultimate owner and the ultimate boss. They choose directors on the strength of their abilities, character, and capacity for independent judgment. And their internal controls work well, so that the company's executives can take immediate corrective action when something goes wrong.” Undoubtedly, a lot of stress has been given on maintaining high ethical standards, thinking beyond the business, observing transparency for shareholders, bringing independent judgement and accountability from directors as well as management. This is how corporate governance has been defined since long, with the literature consistently boosting the fact that it actually leads to hike in revenues and business success. Better corporate governance is likely to improve the performance of firms, through more efficient management, better asset allocation, better labour practices etc (Claessens, 2006). Good corporate governance has positive effects on a firm (Lynall et al., 2003).
Cox (2006), “Happy companies have robust growth in revenues, strong balance-sheets, and healthy profits that reflect genuine business success, not phony bookkeeping. And they share other important traits as well. They abide by high ethical standards, which is a key to their solid success. They don't obstruct the flow of information to shareholders, but rather view the shareholder as the ultimate owner and the ultimate boss. They choose directors on the strength of their abilities, character, and capacity for independent judgment. And their internal controls work well, so that the company's executives can take immediate corrective action when something goes wrong.” Undoubtedly, a lot of stress has been given on maintaining high ethical standards, thinking beyond the business, observing transparency for shareholders, bringing independent judgement and accountability from directors as well as management. This is how corporate governance has been defined since long, with the literature consistently boosting the fact that it actually leads to hike in revenues and business success. Better corporate governance is likely to improve the performance of firms, through more efficient management, better asset allocation, better labour practices etc (Claessens, 2006). Good corporate governance has positive effects on a firm (Lynall et al., 2003).
Cox (2006), “Happy companies have robust growth in revenues, strong balance-sheets, and healthy profits that reflect genuine business success, not phony bookkeeping. And they share other important traits as well. They abide by high ethical standards, which is a key to their solid success. They don't obstruct the flow of information to shareholders, but rather view the shareholder as the ultimate owner and the ultimate boss. They choose directors on the strength of their abilities, character, and capacity for independent judgment. And their internal controls work well, so that the company's executives can take immediate corrective action when something goes wrong.” Undoubtedly, a lot of stress has been given on maintaining high ethical standards, thinking beyond the business, observing transparency for shareholders, bringing independent judgement and accountability from directors as well as management. This is how corporate governance has been defined since long, with the literature consistently boosting the fact that it actually leads to hike in revenues and business success. Better corporate governance is likely to improve the performance of firms, through more efficient management, better asset allocation, better labour practices etc (Claessens, 2006). Good corporate governance has positive effects on a firm (Lynall et al., 2003).