India's IPO market eyes $2.4 billion in offerings in July as confidence rebounds
That amount would mark the strongest month since December and would follow a robust $2 billion raised in June, though most of that was raised by one company, HDB Financial Services.
Education loan provider Credila Financial Services, National Securities Depository Ltd (NSDL), surveillance firm Aditya Infotech and power-transmission-goods maker M&B Engineering are conducting roadshows and are expected to go public this month, bankers said.
They spoke on condition of anonymity as the companies have yet to make the timing of their IPOs and other details public. The companies did not respond to Reuters requests for comment.
India's IPO market had its best-ever year in 2024, with $20.5 billion raised, second only to the U.S., riding high on money inflows from domestic investors who have become wealthier on growth in the world's fifth-largest economy and were optimistic about more economic growth.
This year was widely expected to be another record year but U.S. President Donald Trump's trade war, tensions with Pakistan and in the Middle East took much wind out of those IPO sails. South Korean conglomerate LG Electronics' (066570.KS), opens new tab India unit (LGEL.NS), opens new tab and other companies ended up delaying their capital raising plans.
Things now look to be getting back on track, particularly with the Nifty 50 (.NSEI), opens new tab and Sensex (.BSESN), opens new tab having regained lost ground to trade about 3% off from their peaks.
"The IPO market has come back.... The absence of most of the negatives is driving the market more than anything else," said Suraj Krishnaswamy, the managing director of investment banking at Axis Capital.
So far this year, India continues to the world's No. 2 IPO market with $5.86 billion raised, accounting for the 12% of total proceeds globally, LSEG data shows.
The largest offering this month is likely to be Credila, which has said it is seeking $584 million.
NSDL, India's largest stock depository, is looking to raise $400 million, according to a banker.
NSDL received its regulatory nod for a listing as far back as September but market sentiment trended lower not long after on concerns about slower growth for the economy and corporate profits.
Details about the two firms' valuations and IPO dates could be announced soon, bankers said.
Other major offerings in the pipeline are LG Electronics India's $1.8 billion IPO, and issues from JSW Cement and defence equipment maker SMPP worth around $470 million each, they added.
JSW's offering could come in late July or early August, according to one banker. The timing of the other two was less clear.
According to PRIME Database, there are 143 Indian IPOs being planned worth a potential $26 billion. Of those, 73 have been approved by regulators.
"We expect the upcoming months to be the best for Indian IPO market as compared to what we have seen so far this year," Bhavesh Shah, the managing director and head of investment banking at Equirus.
Others, however, were more cautious in their optimism, saying that participation from high net worth individuals and ordinary retail investors is unlikely to be as strong as it was last year.
"Investors have become far more selective and are now much more mindful about where they see higher potential for returns," said Umesh Agrawal, fund manager at 360 ONE Asset.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
19 minutes ago
- Reuters
US-India trade talks scheduled for August called off, source says
Aug 16 (Reuters) - A planned visit by U.S. trade negotiators to New Delhi from August 25-29 has been called off, a source said, delaying talks on a proposed trade agreement and dashing hopes of relief from additional U.S. tariffs on Indian goods from August 27. The current round of negotiations for the proposed bilateral trade agreement is now likely to be deferred to another date that has yet to be decided, the source with direct knowledge of the matter said. The U.S. embassy in New Delhi said it has no additional information on the trade and tariff talks, which are being handled by the United States Trade Representative (USTR). India's trade ministry did not immediately reply to a Reuters email seeking comments. Earlier this month, U.S. President Donald Trump imposed an additional 25% tariff on Indian goods, citing New Delhi's continued imports of Russian oil in a move that sharply escalated tensions between the two nations. The new import tax, which will come into effect from August 27, will raise duties on some Indian exports to as high as 50% - among the highest levied on any U.S. trading partner. Trade talks between New Delhi and Washington collapsed after five rounds of negotiations over disagreement on opening India's vast farm and dairy sectors and stopping Russian oil purchases. India's Foreign Ministry has said the country is being unfairly singled out for buying Russian oil while the United States and European Union continue to purchase goods from Russia.
The Guardian
19 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Trump hiked tariffs on US imports. Now he's looking at exports – sparking fears of ‘dangerous precedent'
Apple CEO Tim Cook visited the White House bearing an unusual gift. 'This box was made in California,' Cook reassured his audience in the Oval Office this month, as he took off the lid. Inside was a glass plaque, engraved for its recipient, and a slab for the plaque to sit on. 'The base was made in Utah, and is 24-karat gold,' said Cook. Donald Trump appeared genuinely touched by the gift. But the plaque wasn't Cook's only offering: Apple announced that day it would invest another $100bn in US manufacturing. The timing appeared to work well for Apple. That day, Trump said Apple would be among the companies that would be exempt from a new US tariff on imported computer chips. The Art of the Deal looms large in the White House, where Trump is brokering agreements with powerful tech companies – in the midst of his trade war – that are reminiscent of the real estate transactions that launched him into fame. But in recent days, this dealmaking has entered uncharted waters. Two days after Cook and Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang had a closed-door meeting with Trump at the White House. The president later announced Nvidia, along with its rival Advanced Micro Devices (AMD), will be allowed to sell certain artificial intelligence chips to Chinese companies – so long as they share 15% of their revenue with the US government. It was a dramatic about-face from Trump, who initially blocked the chips' exports in April. And it swiftly prompted suggestions that Nvidia was buying its way out of simmering tensions between Washington and Beijing. Trade experts say such a deal, where a company essentially pays the US government to export a good, could destabilize trading relations. Martin Chorzempa, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, said that it creates 'the perception that export controls are up for sale'. 'If you create the perception that licenses, which are supposed to be determined on pure national security grounds, are up for sale, you potentially open up room for there to be this wave of lobbying for all sorts of really, dangerous, sensitive technologies,' Chorzempa said. 'I think that's a very dangerous precedent to set.' Though the White House announced the deal, it technically hasn't been rolled out yet, likely because of legal complications. The White House is calling the deal a 'revenue-sharing' agreement, but critics point out that it could also be considered a tax on exports, which may not be legal under US laws or the constitution. The 'legality' of the deal was 'still being ironed out by the Department of Commerce', White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters this week. Nvidia and AMD's AI chips are at the heart of the technological arms race between the US and China. Nvidia, which became the first publicly traded company to reach a $4tn valuation last month, creates the essential processing chips that are used to run and develop AI. The US government has played a role in this arms race over the last several years, setting regulations on what AI chips and manufacturing equipment can be sent to China. If China has less computing power, the country will be slower to develop AI, giving a clear advantage to the US. But despite the restrictions, China has been catching up, raising questions on how US policy should move forward. 'They haven't held them back as far as the advocates had hoped. The US has an enormous computing advantage over China, but their best models are only a few months behind our best models,' Chorzempa said. For US policymakers, 'the question they've had to grapple with is: Where do you draw the line?' The AI chips Nvidia and AMD can now sell to China aren't considered high-end. While they can be used for inference on trained models, they aren't powerful enough to train new AI models. When announcing the deal with Nvidia and AMD, Trump said the chip is 'an old chip that China already possesses … under a different label'. This is where a major debate on AI policy comes in. Those who take a hardline stance on the US's relationship with China say that allowing Chinese companies to purchase even an 'old chip' could still help the country get an advantage over the US. Others would say a restriction on such chips wouldn't be meaningful, and could even be counterproductive. To balance these two sides, the Trump administration is asking companies to pay up in order to export to China – a solution that people on both sides of the AI debate say is a precarious one. 'Export controls are a frontline defense in protecting our national security, and we should not set a precedent that incentivizes the government to grant licenses to sell China technology that will enhance AI capabilities,' said John Moolenaar, a Republican US representative from Michigan, in a statement. But Trump's gut-reaction to dealmaking seems focused on the wallet. On Wednesday, US treasury secretary Scott Bessent praised the arrangement and suggested it could be extended to other industries over time. 'I think that right now this is unique, but now that we have the model and the beta test, why not expand it?' he told Bloomberg. Julia Powles, executive director of the Institute for Technology, Law and Policy at the University of California, Los Angeles, said the deal opens up questions of whether similar pressure can be applied to other tech companies. 'What other quid pro quo might be asked in the future? The quid pro quo that would be of great concern to the [tech] sector is anything that reduces their reputation for privacy and security,' Powles said. 'That's thinking of government like a transactional operator, not like an institution with rules about when, how and for what it can extract taxes, levies and subsidies.' But that seems to be how the White House runs now. When explaining to the press how he made the deal, Trump said he told Huang: 'I want 20% if I'm going to approve this for you'. 'For the country, for our country. I don't want it myself,' the president added. 'And he said, 'Would you make it 15?' So we negotiated a little deal.'
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
How Spain put up wealth taxes - without chasing away the billionaires
With its green curtain of hanging gardens, the Planeta building is one of Barcelona's most recognisable office blocks. Earlier this summer, it was acquired as part of a Monopoly board spending spree by Spain's richest man, the Zara fashion label founder Amancio Ortega. Through his Pontegadea family office, which invests his personal wealth, Ortega has also just snapped up the five-star Hotel Banke in Paris, an apartment building in Florida, and a half-share in the operator of Teesport in the north-east of England, adding to a property portfolio already worth €20bn. Why the rush? Ortega is poised to receive a record dividend of €3.1bn (£2.7bn) this year from his shares in Zara's parent group, Inditex. He is reportedly racing to spend the windfall, which would otherwise be subject to wealth taxes. Sources close to Pontegadea told the Guardian it was not investing to avoid tax, but following its mandate 'to create wealth from the original assets, maintain it, make it grow, and consolidate it over generations'. It invests all dividends from Inditex 'and any other income from its own economic activities every year, no matter the amount', they said. Whatever the reason, the Ortega property portfolio has grown rapidly in recent years, making his family office one of Europe's biggest real estate owners. As chancellors around Europe cast about for ways to repair the damage to public finances caused by successive global shocks, there is a growing clamour for more effective ways to tax the largest private fortunes. Spain is one of only three European countries (along with Switzerland and Norway) to still collect wealth taxes, and policymakers are looking to Madrid for lessons in what works – and what doesn't. In the UK, the former Labour leader Neil Kinnock and the party's former shadow chancellor Anneliese Dodds have joined those calling for Rachel Reeves to introduce a wealth tax when she sets out her budget in the autumn. As the chancellor looks at the options, which could also include changes to inheritance tax, members of her own party are pushing for a debate in parliament about introducing a 2% annual levy on those with assets over £10m, which they say could raise £24bn. In France, a similar proposal aimed squarely at the ultra-rich with assets of more than €100m was approved by the lower house but was rejected by the senate. Wealth taxes are designed to take a percentage of a person's assets each year. Once fairly common, they have gradually fallen out of use, replaced by levies that bite when money changes hands, for example, through dividend payments, inheritance and sales of shares or property. Spain's wealth tax dates to 1978, a year that marked the transition to democracy from dictatorship under Franco. Regional governments receive the revenues collected by the levy, a system that worked well until, after a brief pause during the financial crisis, it was brought back in 2011. On its return, Madrid's conservative administration responded by discounting the rate to zero. The move benefited the high-earning footballers at Real Madrid, attracted new residents from other regions, and incomers from Venezuela and other Latin American countries, boosting property prices. In 2022, the conservative-run region of Andalucía in the south, announced that it, too, would cut the rate to zero. In a play on the Spanish term for tax haven, paraíso fiscal, Madrid's regional leader posted on X: 'Andalucíans: welcome to paradise.' Then Galicia, in the north-west, where Ortega is resident for wealth tax, joined the fray by offering a 50% discount. A source of income that had been providing hundreds of millions of euros a year to support local services, including healthcare, was under threat. The battle to save it became a tussle between the socialist-led central government, headed by Pedro Sánchez, and conservative-run autonomous regional governments. At the end of December 2022, Sánchez took action, with the solidarity tax on large fortunes. Initially for two years, to help with public spending after the pandemic, it has now been rolled over until the regional financing is revised, which is not likely to happen soon. It was designed in such a way that whatever revenue was forfeited by the regions would be collected centrally. The rate starts at 1.7% for those with net wealth of €3m, rising to 3.5% for fortunes over €10m. It is payable on worldwide assets. There are allowances: the first €700,000 is exempted, as is €300,000 for the main residence. A cap to help the asset rich and cash poor means that combined income and wealth taxes cannot exceed 60% of income. Numbers shared with the Guardian by the Ministerio de Hacienda (the Spanish Treasury) show that in the first year, 2023, the regions collected €1.25bn, and the central government €630m; a total of €1.88bn. In 2024, the regions took the logical step of keeping the income for themselves. The total take rose to €2bn. 'The solidarity tax is not a tool to collect revenues for central government, it is a way of forcing regions to collect more,' says Dirk Foremny, associate professor of economics at the University of Barcelona. In that respect, it has worked perfectly. As a revenue raiser, it is limited. The approach from Madrid has been light touch, though the rules could be changed to raise more. The sums collected are on a par with inheritance tax – already heavily discounted by the regions – which raises about €3bn a year. By contrast, income taxes bring in €130bn. But Foremny says the solidarity tax has a social value. 'This tax is a tool to achieve a more equitable distribution of wealth across individuals. There are good arguments why we don't want to have a very large concentration of wealth in the hands of very few. Wealth is correlated with political influence and power.' He points to the US and its billionaire tech barons as a warning of what can happen when the scales tip too far. What is clear is that, two years on, a predicted exodus of the rich, trumpeted in endless alarmist headlines, has not materialised. Forbes counted 26 Spanish billionaires in 2021. This year, it lists 34, with a combined net worth comfortably over $200bn. 'The big fortunes mostly stayed put, filed protective appeals, and hired better structuring teams,' says Marc Debois, the founder of FO-Next, which advises family offices. 'A handful decamped to Lisbon or Dubai or any other location; enough for newspaper headlines, not enough for a flight.' Could the billionaires be made to pay more? Experts point to a big exemption: the one for 'family companies'. Originally designed to encourage small- to medium-sized businesses, these structures are also being used by the very biggest fortunes to manage their assets. There are restrictions. A taxpayer must demonstrate that assets are being used for economic activity, that is, a trade or business. Cash and shares held simply for investment purposes are taxable. Real estate that earns rents is not. If the family exemption is abolished, Debois says the billionaires won't necessarily decamp. They are more likely to lawyer up, reduce profits by leveraging (taking on debt), and create holding companies in low-tax jurisdictions such as Luxembourg. 'Some money already half‑abroad would finish the move,' he says.' The bigger issue is tens of thousands of mid‑sized family firms rely on the same rule; torching it is politically radioactive.' Estimates by Julio López Laborda, a professor of public economics at the University of Zaragoza, suggest that 80% of the assets of the richest 1% are not subject to the wealth tax. He says the family company exemption could represent a loss to the Treasury of about €2bn, while the cap on tax as a proportion of income, mentioned above, could account for another €2.5bn uncollected. Susana Ruiz, tax justice policy lead at Oxfam, which is working with López Laborda on a forthcoming report about wealth taxes, says: 'We could be raising at least two to three times more than we are at the moment.' Cutting public services in order to fund tax breaks, or simply balance the books, can create a doom loop, because it reduces the quality of provision, undermining the consensus on which taxation depends. In Madrid, declines in healthcare provision fuelled resentment among working people and created a sense that private provision was more efficient, says Ruiz. She believes the solidarity tax has helped rebuild confidence. 'There is a lot of citizen support behind it. It helps in the perception that the system is fair.' So far, there is no sign that it has affected growth. Spain was the world's fastest-expanding major advanced economy last year, outpacing even the US, with GDP up 3.2%. By contrast, growth in the UK and France last year barely scraped above 1%. On the balconies of the Planeta building, and in the country at large, the green shoots are alive and well.
