Financial Health Level of Financing Companies

To the Board of Directors of Financing Companies

Copy
CIRCULAR LETTER OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES AUTHORITY NUMBER 1 /SEOJK.05/2016 CONCERNING FINANCIAL HEALTH LEVEL OF FINANCING COMPANIES

In accordance with the mandate of Article 25 paragraph (3), Article 26 paragraph (4), Article 29 paragraph (7), Article 32 paragraph (6), Article 34 paragraph (3), and Article 35 paragraph (2) of Financial Services Authority Regulation Number 29/POJK.05/2014 concerning the Conduct of Business by Financing Companies (State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Year 2014 Number 364, Supplement to the State Gazette 5638), it is necessary to regulate implementation provisions regarding the financial health level for financing companies in this Circular Letter of the Financial Services Authority as follows:

I. GENERAL PROVISIONS

Financing Companies are business entities that conduct financing activities for the procurement of goods and/or services.
Financial Health Level is the result of assessing the condition of Financing Companies regarding capital risk, liquidity, assets, operations, and performance.
Financial Services Authority, hereinafter abbreviated as OJK, is an independent institution as referred to in the laws concerning the Financial Services Authority.

II. MEASUREMENT OF FINANCIAL HEALTH LEVEL

Financing Companies are required at all times to meet the Financial Health Level requirements with a minimum healthy condition.
The measurement of the Financial Health Level ratios as referred to in item 1 includes:
a. capital adequacy ratio; b. financing receivables quality;
c. profitability; and
d. liquidity.

III. PROCEDURES FOR CALCULATING THE CAPITAL ADEQUACY RATIO

Financing Companies are required to meet the capital adequacy ratio of at least 10% (ten percent).
The capital adequacy ratio of Financing Companies is the ratio of adjusted capital to adjusted assets.
Adjusted capital as referred to in item 2 is the sum of the following capital components:
a. for Financing Companies in the form of a limited liability company, the sum of:

adjusted equity consisting of:
a) paid-up capital; b) additional paid-up capital, namely the sum of:
(1) share premium/discount;
(2) equity issuance costs; and
(3) others in accordance with accounting standard principles; c) transaction differences of restructured entities under common control; d) retained earnings/deficit; e) 50% (fifty percent) of current year profit/loss after tax; f) treasury stock; and g) other equity components, namely the sum of:
(1) changes in revaluation surplus;
(2) exchange differences due to translating financial statements in foreign currencies; (3) gains and losses from re-measuring available-for-sale financial assets; (4) the effective portion of gains and losses of hedging financial instruments in cash flow hedging; and

(5) other equity components in accordance with accounting standard principles, with the consideration of deduction factors such as:
a) deferred tax calculations; b) goodwill; c) other intangible assets; and d) all equity investments in subsidiary companies;
2) subordinated loans of at most 50% (fifty percent) of paid-up capital meeting the following criteria:
a) with a minimum term of 5 (five) years; b) in the event of liquidation, the claim right applies last among all existing loans; and c) stipulated in the form of a notarial deed agreement between the Financing Company and the lender.

Example:

PT ABC Finance has paid-up capital of Rp100,000,000,000.00 and subordinated loans of Rp25,000,000,000.00. Therefore, the amount of subordinated loans that can be added in the adjusted equity calculation is Rp25,000,000,000.00.
PT XYZ Finance has paid-up capital of Rp100,000,000,000.00 and subordinated loans of Rp75,000,000,000.00. Therefore, the amount of subordinated loans that can be added in the adjusted equity calculation is at most 50% of Rp100,000,000,000.00 or Rp50,000,000,000.00.
b. for Financing Companies in the form of a cooperative legal entity, the sum of principal savings, mandatory savings, reserve funds, grants, and undistributed surplus.

Adjusted assets as referred to in item 2 are the Financing Company's assets multiplied by the asset risk weights as stated in Appendix I, which is an integral part of this Financial Services Authority Circular Letter.
In the calculation of adjusted assets, the basis for assessing the nominal value of financing receivables is the outstanding principal of financing (outstanding principal) minus the reserves that have been established. Outstanding principal of financing (outstanding principal) is the total claims minus:
a. unearned interest income; and b. other income and expenses related to financing transactions that are amortized.

IV. FINANCING RECEIVABLES QUALITY

Financing Companies are required to maintain financing receivables quality.
Financing receivables categorized as problematic financing receivables (non-performing financing) consist of financing receivables with less observant, doubtful, and impaired quality.
The value of financing receivables with the category of problematic financing receivables (non-performing financing) as referred to in item 2, after deducting the allowance for impairment of financing receivables, must be at most 5% (five percent) of total financing receivables.
The value of financing receivables as referred to in item 3 is calculated based on the outstanding principal of financing (outstanding principal), namely total claims minus:
a. unearned interest income; and b. other income and expenses related to financing transactions that are amortized.
The assessment of financing receivables quality is established as:
a. observant; b. special attention;
c. less observant;
d. doubtful; or e. impaired.
The assessment of financing receivables quality as referred to in item 5 is established based on the factor of the timeliness of principal and/or interest payments.
The assessment of financing receivables quality as referred to in item 5 is categorized as follows:
a. observant if there is no delay or there is a delay in principal and/or interest payments up to 30 (thirty) calendar days; b. special attention if there is a delay in principal and/or interest payments that has exceeded 30 (thirty) calendar days up to 90 (ninety) calendar days;
c. less observant if there is a delay in principal and/or interest payments that has exceeded 90 (ninety) calendar days up to 120 (one hundred twenty) calendar days;
d. doubtful if there is a delay in principal and/or interest payments that has exceeded 120 (one hundred twenty) calendar days up to 180 (one hundred eighty) calendar days; or e. impaired if there is a delay in principal and/or interest payments that has exceeded 180 (one hundred eighty) calendar days.
In addition to the factor of the timeliness of principal and/or interest payments as referred to in item 6, the assessment of financing receivables quality for investment financing and working capital financing with a financing value at the time of signing the agreement of Rp3,000,000,000.00 (three billion rupiah) or more, can also be established by considering the factors:
a. the debtor's ability to pay; b. the debtor's financial performance; and
c. the debtor's business prospects.
The assessment of the debtor's ability to pay as referred to in item 8 letter a includes the assessment of the following components:
a. the availability and accuracy of the debtor's financial information; b. the completeness of financing documentation;
c. compliance with the financing agreement;
d. the appropriateness of fund usage; and e. the fairness of the source of obligation payments.
The assessment of the debtor's financial performance as referred to in item 8 letter b includes the assessment of the following components:
a. profit acquisition; b. capital structure;
c. cash flow; and
d. sensitivity to market risks.
The assessment of the debtor's business prospects as referred to in item 8 letter c includes the following components:
a. business growth potential; b. market conditions and the debtor's position in competition;
c. management quality and labor issues;
d. support from the group or affiliates; and e. efforts made by the debtor to maintain the living environment.
The guidelines for assessing financing receivables quality as referred to in item 8, item 9, item 10, and item 11 are conducted based on the guidelines for assessing financing receivables quality as stated in Appendix II, which is an integral part of this Financial Services Authority Circular Letter.
The financing receivables quality assessment worksheets as referred to in item 8, item 9, item 10, and item 11 must be conducted using the assessment forms as stated in Appendix III, which is an integral part of this Financial Services Authority Circular Letter, and completed with supporting documents for the financing receivables quality assessment.
Financing Companies may conduct restructuring for debtors experiencing difficulties in paying principal and/or interest but still have the ability to pay and good business prospects.
The assessment of financing receivables quality for investment financing and working capital financing valued at Rp3,000,000,000.00 (three billion rupiah) or more that has been restructured as referred to in item 14 is subject to the following provisions:
a. at most equal to the financing receivables quality before financing restructuring, provided that the debtor has not met the obligation to pay principal and/or interest installments consecutively for 3 (three) periods according to the agreed time; b. may increase at most 1 (one) level from the financing quality before restructuring, after the debtor has met the obligation to pay principal and/or interest installments consecutively for 3 (three) periods as referred to in letter a;
c. the quality of restructured financing receivables can be established based on the assessment factors as referred to in item 8, in the event that the financing restructuring implementation is not supported by adequate analysis and documentation; and
d. based on the assessment factors as referred to in item 8:

after establishing the financing receivables quality as referred to in letter b; or
in the event that the debtor does not meet the conditions and/or payment obligations in the financing restructuring agreement, both during and after 3 (three) periods of payment obligations according to the agreed time.

The quality of additional financing receivables as part of the financing restructuring package as referred to in item 15 is established to be the same as the quality of the restructured financing receivables.
The assessment of financing receivables quality in the context of restructuring as referred to in item 15 must be accompanied and completed with supporting documents for the financing receivables quality assessment.
In the event of a difference between the financing receivables quality assessment by the Financing Company and the OJK, the financing receivables quality established by the OJK applies.
Financing Companies are required to adjust the financing receivables quality with the financing receivables quality assessment established by the OJK as referred to in item 18 in the reports submitted to the OJK.
The types of collateral that can be considered in the calculation of the allowance for impairment of financing receivables are as follows:
a. cash collateral consisting of:

bank deposits, security deposits, and/or gold;
Bank Indonesia Certificates, Sharia Bank Indonesia Certificates, Government Bonds, Sukuk, and/or other securities issued by the government or Bank Indonesia; and/or
government and foreign government guarantees included in the investment grade category;
b. securities listed on the stock exchange or securities included in the investment grade category from rating agencies recognized by the OJK;
c. motor vehicles, heavy equipment, and supplies;
d. warehouse receipts; e. machinery and/or electronics that are an integral part of land; f. machinery and/or electronics that are not an integral part of land; g. aircraft or sea vessels with a size above 20 (twenty) cubic meters; and h. land, houses, apartments, commercial houses, and office buildings.

Receivables that are the underlying transaction of factoring can be considered as a deduction in the calculation of the allowance for impairment of financing receivables.
Financing objects in finance lease or sale and lease back schemes can be considered as a deduction in the calculation of the allowance for impairment of financing receivables.
Cash collateral as referred to in item 20 letter a item 1) and item 2) must meet the following requirements:
a. can only be liquidated with the approval of the Financing Company (blocked and accompanied by a power of attorney); b. the blocking period is at least equal to the financing receivables term; and
c. has strong legal ties and is legally enforceable.
Cash collateral as referred to in item 20 letter a item 3) must meet the following requirements:
a. unconditional and irrevocable; b. can be liquidated at the latest 5 (five) working days since the claim is submitted, including partial liquidation to pay principal or interest installments arrears; and
c. has a minimum term equal to the financing term.
Collateral as referred to in item 20 is accompanied by valid legal documents.
Collateral as referred to in item 20 letter b, letter c, letter d, letter e, letter f, letter g, and letter h, must:
a. be tied in accordance with applicable laws and regulations to give preference rights to the Financing Company, including land rights, mortgages, fiduciary, or pawn; and b. be insured for the financing object with clauses that give the Financing Company the right to receive insurance payments in the event of claim payments and have an insurance coverage term at least equal to the financing term.
Insurance companies providing insurance coverage for collateral as referred to in item 26 letter b are required to meet the following requirements:
a. have a business license from the OJK; and b. are not subject to business activity restriction sanctions or business activity suspension from the OJK.
Receivables that can be considered as a deduction in the calculation of the allowance for impairment of financing receivables as referred to in item 22 must meet the requirements:
a. for factoring transactions with recourse (factoring with recourse), the factoring agreement must be tied with a notarial deed; or b. for factoring transactions without recourse (factoring without recourse) must be accompanied by a debtor's debt acknowledgment letter tied with a notarial deed.
The procedure for calculating the value of collateral as a deduction for the allowance for impairment of financing receivables is established as follows:
a. bank deposits, security deposits, Bank Indonesia Certificates, and Sharia Bank Indonesia Certificates are established at nominal value; b. gold is established at market value;
c. Government Bonds, Sukuk, and/or other securities issued by the government or Bank Indonesia are established at market value or, in the event there is no market value, established based on fair value;
d. securities listed on the stock exchange or securities included in the investment grade category from rating agencies recognized by the OJK are established at at most 50% (fifty percent) of the market value of the securities; e. government and foreign government guarantees included in the investment grade category are established at at most the value of the guarantee; f. land, houses, apartments, commercial houses, and office buildings are established at at most the value of independent appraisal, internal appraisal value, sales transaction value, or tax object sale value; g. aircraft, sea vessels, motor vehicles, heavy equipment, supplies, and warehouse receipts, machinery and/or electronics considered as an integral part of land, and machinery and/or electronics not considered as an integral part of land are established at at most:

100% (one hundred percent) of the value of independent appraisal, internal appraisal value, or sales transaction value, if:
a) independent appraisal or sales transaction is conducted within the last 12 (twelve) months; or b) internal appraisal is conducted within the last 6 (six) months;
80% (eighty percent) of the value of independent appraisal, internal appraisal value, or sales transaction value, if:
a) independent appraisal or sales transaction is conducted more than 12 (twelve) months but not exceeding 24 (twenty-four) months; or b) internal appraisal is conducted more than 6 (six) months but not exceeding 12 (twelve) months;
60% (sixty percent) of the value of independent appraisal, internal appraisal value, or sales transaction value, if:
a) independent appraisal or sales transaction is conducted more than 24 (twenty-four) months but not exceeding 36 (thirty-six) months; or b) internal appraisal is conducted more than 12 (twelve) months but not exceeding 18 (eighteen) months;
40% (forty percent) of the value of independent appraisal, internal appraisal value, or sales transaction value, if:
a) independent appraisal or sales transaction is conducted more than 36 (thirty-six) months but not exceeding 48 (forty-eight) months; or b) internal appraisal is conducted more than 18 (eighteen) months but not exceeding 24 (twenty-four) months;
20% (twenty percent) of the value of independent appraisal, internal appraisal value, or sales transaction value, if:
a) independent appraisal or sales transaction is conducted more than 48 (forty-eight) months but not exceeding 60 (sixty) months; or b) internal appraisal is conducted more than 24 (twenty-four) months but not exceeding 30 (thirty) months;
0% (zero percent) of the value of independent appraisal, internal appraisal value, or sales transaction value, if:
a) independent appraisal or sales transaction is conducted more than 60 (sixty) months; or b) internal appraisal is conducted more than 30 (thirty) months;

The value of receivables that are the underlying (underlying) transaction of factoring that can be considered as a deduction in the calculation of the allowance for impairment of financing receivables is established as:
a. for factoring transactions with recourse (factoring with recourse) at the value of the guaranteed receivables; or b. for factoring transactions without recourse (factoring without recourse) at the value of the debtor's debt acknowledgment.
The value of financing objects for finance lease or sale and lease back that can be considered as a deduction in the calculation of the allowance for impairment of financing receivables is established as:
a. 100% (one hundred percent) of the value of independent appraisal, internal appraisal value, or sales transaction value, if:

independent appraisal or sales transaction is conducted within the last 12 (twelve) months; or
internal appraisal is conducted within the last 6 (six) months;
b. 80% (eighty percent) of the value of independent appraisal, internal appraisal value, or sales transaction value, if:
independent appraisal or sales transaction is conducted more than 12 (twelve) months but not exceeding 24 (twenty-four) months; or
internal appraisal is conducted more than 6 (six) months but not exceeding 12 (twelve) months;
c. 60% (sixty percent) of the value of independent appraisal, internal appraisal value, or sales transaction value, if:
independent appraisal or sales transaction is conducted more than 24 (twenty-four) months but not exceeding 36 (thirty-six) months; or
internal appraisal is conducted more than 12 (twelve) months but not exceeding 18 (eighteen) months;
d. 40% (forty percent) of the value of independent appraisal, internal appraisal value, or sales transaction value, if:
independent appraisal or sales transaction is conducted more than 36 (thirty-six) months but not exceeding 48 (forty-eight) months; or
internal appraisal is conducted more than 18 (eighteen) months but not exceeding 24 (twenty-four) months;
e. 20% (twenty percent) of the value of independent appraisal, internal appraisal value, or sales transaction value, if:
independent appraisal or sales transaction is conducted more than 48 (forty-eight) months but not exceeding 60 (sixty) months; or
internal assessment is conducted more than 24 (twenty-four) months but does not exceed 30 (thirty) months;
f. 0% (zero percent) of the independent assessment value, internal assessment value, or sales and purchase transaction value, if:
independent assessment or sales and purchase transaction is conducted more than 60 (sixty) months; or
internal assessment is conducted more than 30 (thirty) months;

For financing receivables with a value of Rp3,000,000,000.00 (three billion rupiah) or more and having collateral as referred to in letter g of number 29 or being a financing lease object (finance lease) or sale and lease back object (sale and lease back) as referred to in number 31, the assessment of the collateral, or the financing lease object (finance lease) or sale and lease back object (sale and lease back) to be used as a deduction in the calculation of the loan loss provision reserve, must be conducted by an independent appraiser. In the event that there is no independent assessment, the Financing Company may use the sales and purchase transaction value as the basis for assessment, taking into account the provisions as referred to in letter g of number 29 and number 31.
For financing receivables with a value of less than Rp3,000,000,000.00 (three billion rupiah) and having collateral as referred to in letter g of number 29 or being a financing lease object (finance lease) or sale and lease back object (sale and lease back) as referred to in number 31, the assessment of the collateral, or the financing lease object (finance lease) or sale and lease back object (sale and lease back) to be used as a deduction in the calculation of the loan loss provision reserve may be conducted by an independent appraiser or internal assessment. In the event that there is no independent assessment or internal assessment, the Financing Company may use the sales and purchase transaction value as the basis for assessment, taking into account the provisions as referred to in letter g of number 29 and number 31.
In order to calculate the collateral value, the Financing Company must have and implement guidelines for determining the basis for assessing collateral or financing lease objects (finance lease) or sale and lease back objects (sale and lease back) as referred to in number 29 and number 31.
Financing Companies must conduct a re-assessment of the loan loss provision reserve calculation for financing receivables at least once every 6 (six) months for the positions in June and December.
OJK is authorized to conduct a re-calculation of the collateral value that has been deducted or matters that can reduce the provision in the calculation of the loan loss provision reserve for financing.
Financing Companies must notify debtors regarding the return of collateral or related documents no later than 1 (one) month from the date of settlement of the financing receivables.
The method for calculating the reserve is done by calculating the difference between the financing receivables balance and the collateral value, taking into account the reserve calculation percentage according to the quality of the financing receivables, with calculation examples as follows:
Example 1:
At the beginning of January 2016, debtor A received multi-purpose financing from PT ABC Finance with a nominal value of Rp70,000,000.00 with collateral in the form of motor vehicles with a sales and purchase transaction price of Rp100,000,000.00. At the end of June 2019, the remaining balance of financing receivables for debtor A was Rp50,000,000.00 and debtor A did not make payments for 9 months (bad quality). The company has never conducted a re-assessment of the value of the collateral mentioned. Based on the regulations, the basis for assessing the collateral used in the reserve calculation is 40% of the sales and purchase transaction value because the calculation date is 40 months from the sales and purchase transaction date. The collateral value that can be recognized as a deduction for reserves is Rp100,000,000.00 x 40% = Rp40,000,000.00. Thus, the financing receivables provision reserve is 100% x (receivables balance - collateral that can be considered) = 100% x (Rp50,000,000.00 - Rp40,000,000.00) = Rp10,000,000.00. Example 2:
At the beginning of January 2016, debtor A received multi-purpose financing from PT ABC Finance with a nominal value of Rp70,000,000.00 with collateral in the form of motor vehicles with a sales and purchase transaction price of Rp100,000,000.00. At the end of June 2019, the remaining balance of financing receivables for debtor A was Rp30,000,000.00 and debtor A did not make payments for 9 months (bad quality). The company has never conducted a re-assessment of the value of the collateral mentioned. Based on the regulations, the basis for assessing the collateral used in the reserve calculation is 40% of the sales and purchase transaction value because the calculation date is 40 months from the sales and purchase transaction date. The collateral value that can be recognized as a deduction for reserves is Rp100,000,000.00 x 40% = Rp40,000,000.00. However, because the financing receivables balance is larger than the collateral value, the collateral value that can be considered is maximally only equal to the financing receivables balance, which is Rp30,000,000.00. Thus, the financing receivables provision reserve is 100% x (receivables balance - collateral that can be considered) = 100% x (Rp30,000,000.00 - Rp30,000,000.00) = Rp0.00.

V. METHOD OF ASSESSMENT AGAINST PROFITABILITY FACTORS

Assessment of the Financing Company's ability to generate profit consists of several ratios, namely:
a. Return on Asset
The ratio used to measure the Financing Company's ability to generate profit from assets used to support the Financing Company's operations and capital. b. Return on Equity The ratio used to measure the Financing Company's ability to generate profit from equity.
c. Operational Expenses against Operational Income
The ratio used to measure the Financing Company's ability to measure the level of efficiency and the Financing Company's ability to carry out its operational activities. d. Net Interest Margin The ratio used to measure the Financing Company's ability to manage financing receivables to generate net interest income.
The calculation of profitability ratios is established as follows:
a. Return on Asset

Return on Asset is calculated from the comparison between profit or loss before tax against total assets.
For the calculation of profit or loss before tax, an annualized calculation is used. As an example, for the March report position, the calculation method is as follows:
(profit or loss before tax as of March/3) x 12.
Profit or loss before tax as of the reporting month is calculated based on the amount of income minus the amount of expenses before deducting the estimated income tax.
For the calculation of total assets, the average assets throughout the year are used. As an example, for the March report position, the calculation method is as follows:
(Sum of total assets from January to March)/3.

b. Return on Equity

Return on Equity is calculated from the comparison between net profit against equity.
For the calculation of net profit or loss, an annualized calculation is used. As an example, for the March report position, the calculation method is as follows:
(net profit or loss as of March/3) x 12.
Net profit or loss as of the reporting month is calculated based on the amount of income minus the amount of expenses after deducting the estimated income tax.
For the calculation of total equity, the average equity throughout the year is used. As an example, for the March report position, the calculation method is as follows:
(sum of total equity from January to March)/3.

c. Operational Expenses against Operational Income

Operational Expenses against Operational Income is calculated from the comparison between operational expenses against the Financing Company's operational income.
The details of operational income and expense accounts in the calculation of the operational expenses against operational income ratio refer to the OJK Circular Letter regarding monthly reports of Financing Companies.
In order to maintain the efficiency of Financing Company management, particularly regarding financing acquisition, incentive costs that can be provided by the Financing Company to third parties are limited based on a certain percentage of the income to be received related to financing. Income to be received related to financing consists of:
a) interest income before considering cost of fund; b) insurance income; c) administrative income; and d) commission income.
Third-party incentive costs related to financing acquisition per financing agreement are limited to 15% (fifteen percent) of the value of income related to financing, including third-party income tax.
Third-party incentive costs related to financing acquisition in total are limited to 20% (twenty percent) of the value of income related to financing, including third-party income tax.
Third-party incentive costs related to financing acquisition include all types of payments to third parties or third-party employees, including commissions, incentives, third-party travel costs, promotional costs together with third parties, for example, costs for purchasing additional motor vehicle accessories, promotional costs for vehicle delivery, and other expenditures related to financing acquisition paid to third parties.
Example of incentive cost limits based on financing disbursement per financing agreement, as regulated in number 5), namely:
a) PT XYZ Finance disburses motor vehicle financing to a debtor in one financing agreement with a price of Rp100,000,000.00. b) Through this financing disbursement, PT XYZ Finance receives the following income:
(1) interest income of Rp43,000,000.00;
(2) insurance discount of Rp15,000,000.00;
(3) administrative income of Rp1,000,000.00; and (4) commission income of Rp1,000,000.00. c) Thus, the third-party incentive costs related to financing acquisition that can be provided for the financing disbursement to the debtor are = (15% x (Rp43,000,000.00 + Rp15,000,000.00 + Rp1,000,000.00 + Rp1,000,000.00)) = Rp9,000,000.00. d) The total incentive costs have considered commissions, incentives, third-party income tax, and other expenditures related to financing acquisition paid to third parties.
Example of incentive cost limits based on total as regulated in number 6), namely:
a) Based on the Monthly Report of the Financing Company for January 2016, PT XYZ Finance has a profit and loss statement structure with details including:
(1) interest income of Rp80,000,000.00;
(2) insurance discount of Rp20,000,000.00;
(3) administrative income of Rp10,000,000.00; and (4) commission income of Rp10,000,000.00. b) Thus, the total third-party incentive costs related to financing acquisition that can be provided are = (20% x (Rp80,000,000.00 + Rp20,000,000.00 + Rp10,000,000.00 + Rp10,000,000.00)) = Rp24,000,000.00. c) The total incentive costs have considered commissions, incentives, third-party income tax, third-party travel costs, promotional costs together with third parties, and other expenditures related to financing acquisition paid to third parties. d. Net Interest Margin
Net Interest Margin is obtained from the comparison between net interest income against the average financing receivables. Net interest income is obtained from the result of subtracting interest income by interest expenses.
For the calculation of interest income, an annualized calculation is used. As an example, for the March report position, the calculation method is as follows:
(Interest Income as of March/3) x 12.
For the calculation of interest expenses, an annualized calculation is used. As an example, for the March report position, the calculation method is as follows:
(Interest Expenses as of March/3) x 12.
For the calculation of total financing receivables, the average financing receivables throughout the year are used. As an example, for the March report position, the calculation method is as follows:
(Sum of Total Financing Receivables from January to March)/3.

Assessment of the profitability factor is implemented with the following provisions:
a. Assessment of the Return on Asset ratio is as follows:

Value 1 if the Financing Company has a Return on Asset of 2% (two percent) or more.
Value 2 if the Financing Company has a Return on Asset from 1% (one percent) to less than 2% (two percent).
Value 3 if the Financing Company has a Return on Asset from 0% (zero percent) to less than 1% (one percent).
Value 4 if the Financing Company has a Return on Asset of less than 0% (zero percent).
b. Assessment of the Return on Equity factor is as follows:
Value 1 if the Financing Company has a Return on Equity of 6% (six percent) or more.
Value 2 if the Financing Company has a Return on Equity from 3% (three percent) to less than 6% (six percent).
Value 3 if the Financing Company has a Return on Equity from 0% (zero percent) to less than 3% (three percent).
Value 4 if the Financing Company has a Return on Equity of less than 0% (zero percent).
c. Assessment of the operational expenses against operational income ratio factor is as follows:
Value 1 if the Financing Company has an operational expenses against operational income ratio of less than 70% (seventy percent).
Value 2 if the Financing Company has an operational expenses against operational income ratio from 70% (seventy percent) to less than 80% (eighty percent).
Value 3 if the Financing Company has an operational expenses against operational income ratio from 80% (eighty percent) to less than 90% (ninety percent).
Value 4 if the Financing Company has an operational expenses against operational income ratio of 90% (ninety percent) or more.
d. Assessment of the Net Interest Margin factor is as follows:
Value 1 if the Financing Company has a Net Interest Margin ratio of 6% (six percent) or more.
Value 2 if the Financing Company has a Net Interest Margin ratio from 4% (four percent) to less than 6% (six percent).
Value 3 if the Financing Company has a Net Interest Margin ratio from 2% (two percent) to less than 4% (four percent).
Value 4 if the Financing Company has a Net Interest Margin ratio of less than 2% (two percent).
e. To determine the composite value of the profitability factor, the weighted average method of 4 profitability ratios is used, with each weight being 25% (twenty-five percent).

VI. METHOD OF ASSESSMENT OF LIQUIDITY

Assessment of the level of matching between current assets and current liabilities is established as:
a. Current Ratio
The ratio used to assess the Financing Company's ability to pay off its short-term obligations. The higher the current ratio, the higher the Financing Company's ability to pay off its short-term obligations. b. Cash Ratio The ratio used to assess the Financing Company's ability to pay obligations from cash and securities. The higher the cash ratio, the higher the Financing Company's ability to pay obligations from cash and securities. The Financing Company's securities components include checks, giro bills, and promissory notes.
The calculation of liquidity ratios is established as follows:
a. Current Ratio

Current Ratio is calculated from the value of current assets divided by the value of current liabilities.
The Financing Company's current assets consist of cash and cash equivalents, banks, derivative receivables, short-term investments in securities, financing receivables less than one year, prepaid expenses, and other receivables with a maturity of less than one year.
Current liabilities consist of obligations that can be paid immediately, derivative obligations, tax liabilities, loans maturing in less than 1 year, and other obligations maturing in less than 1 year.
b. Cash Ratio
Cash Ratio is calculated from the value of cash plus securities divided by current liabilities. The method for calculating current liabilities is the same as the method for calculating current liabilities in the current ratio.

Assessment of the liquidity factor is implemented with the following provisions:
a. Assessment of the current ratio is as follows:

Value 1 if the Financing Company has a current ratio of 150% (one hundred fifty percent) or more.
Value 2 if the Financing Company has a current ratio from 125% (one hundred twenty-five percent) to less than 150% (one hundred fifty percent).
Value 3 if the Financing Company has a current ratio from 100% (one hundred percent) to less than 125% (one hundred twenty-five percent).
Value 4 if the Financing Company has a current ratio of less than 100% (one hundred percent).
b. Assessment of the cash ratio is as follows:
Value 1 if the Financing Company has a cash ratio of 3% (three percent) or more.
Value 2 if the Financing Company has a cash ratio from 2% (two percent) to less than 3% (three percent).
Value 3 if the Financing Company has a cash ratio from 1% (one percent) to less than 2% (two percent).
Value 4 if the Financing Company has a cash ratio from 0% (zero percent) to less than 1% (one percent).
c. To determine the composite value of the liquidity factor, the weighted average method of 2 liquidity ratios is used, with each weight being 50% (fifty percent).

VII. METHOD OF MEASURING FINANCIAL HEALTH LEVEL
The assessment of the Financial Health Level of Financing Companies is conducted in several stages as follows:

Assessment stage and/or determination of the value of each ratio. Assessment of each ratio is conducted quantitatively for financial ratios with reference to the provisions as referred to in Roman numeral III, Roman numeral IV, Roman numeral V, and Roman numeral VI.
Stage of determining the value of each factor for capital adequacy ratio, financing receivables quality, profitability, and liquidity, which is established based on the following provisions:
a. Assessment of the capital adequacy ratio factor:

Value 1 if the Financing Company has a capital adequacy ratio of 15% (fifteen percent) or more;
Value 2 if the Financing Company has a capital adequacy ratio from 12.5% (twelve point five percent) to less than 15% (fifteen percent);
Value 3 if the Financing Company has a capital adequacy ratio from 10% (ten percent) to less than 12.5% (twelve point five percent); or
Value 4 if the Financing Company has a capital adequacy ratio of less than 10% (ten percent).
b. Assessment of the financing receivables quality ratio factor:
Value 1 if the Financing Company has a amount of problematic financing receivables (non performing financing) from 0% (zero percent) to less than 2% (two percent);
Value 2 if the Financing Company has a amount of problematic financing receivables (non performing financing) from 2% (two percent) to less than 3% (three percent);
Value 3 if the Financing Company has a amount of problematic financing receivables (non performing financing) from 3% (three percent) to less than 4% (four percent); or
Value 4 if the Financing Company has a amount of problematic financing receivables (non performing financing) of 4% (four percent) or more.
c. Assessment of the profitability factor:
Value 1 if the Financing Company has a composite value of the profitability factor from 1 (one) to less than 1.75 (one point seven five);
Value 2 if the Financing Company has a composite value of the profitability factor from 1.75 (one point seven five) to less than 2.5 (two point five);
Value 3 if the Financing Company has a composite value of the profitability factor from 2.5 (two point five) to less than 3.25 (three point two five); or
Value 4 if the Financing Company has a composite value of the profitability factor from 3.25 (three point two five) to 4 (four).
d. Assessment of the liquidity factor:
Value 1 if the Financing Company has a composite value of the liquidity factor from 1 (one) to less than 1.75 (one point seven five);
Value 2 if the Financing Company has a composite value of the liquidity factor from 1.75 (one point seven five) to less than 2.5 (two point five);
Value 3 if the Financing Company has a composite value of the liquidity factor from 2.5 (two point five) to less than 3.25 (three point two five); or
Value 4 if the Financing Company has a composite value of the liquidity factor from 3.25 (three point two five) to 4 (four).

Based on the value of each factor for capital adequacy ratio, financing receivables quality, profitability, and liquidity as referred to in number 2, the Financial Health Level value is subsequently determined through weighting of the factor ranking values as follows:
a. capital adequacy ratio, with a weight of 30% (thirty percent); b. asset quality, with a weight of 40% (forty percent);
c. profitability, with a weight of 20% (twenty percent); and
d. liquidity, with a weight of 10% (ten percent).
Based on the Financial Health Level value as regulated in item 3, the Financial Health Level is determined by considering the following criteria:
a. very healthy if the Financing Company has a Financial Health Level value from 1 (one) to less than 1.75 (one point seven five); b. healthy if the Financing Company has a Financial Health Level value from 1.75 (one point seven five) to less than 2.5 (two point five);
c. less healthy if the Financing Company has a Financial Health Level value from 2.5 (two point five) to less than 3.25 (three point two five); and
d. unhealthy if the Financing Company has a Financial Health Level from 3.25 (three point two five) to 4 (four).
The assessment of financial ratios by the Financing Company is documented in the work sheet format as stated in Appendix IV, which is an integral part of this OJK Letter.

VIII. VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION BY OJK

OJK may conduct verification and validation of the truthfulness and fairness of the data serving as the basis for calculating the measurement factors of the Financial Health Level compiled by the Financing Company.
In the event of a discrepancy between the Financial Health Level compiled by the Financing Company and the Financial Health Level resulting from OJK's verification and validation, the Financial Health Level determined by OJK shall apply.

IX. TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS
Collateral obtained by the Financing Company before the issuance of this OJK Letter is exempted from the provisions as referred to in Roman numeral IV item 23, item 24, item 25, item 26, item 27, and item 28.

X. CLOSING
The provisions in this OJK Letter shall take effect on July 1, 2016.

Established in Jakarta on February 23, 2016
EXECUTIVE HEAD OF INSURANCE, PENSION FUND,
FINANCING INSTITUTION, AND
OTHER FINANCIAL SERVICE INSTITUTIONS
FINANCIAL SERVICES AUTHORITY, signature
FIRDAUS DJAELANI

Copy in accordance with the original
Legal Director 1
Legal Department signature
Yuliana

APPENDIX I
LETTER OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES AUTHORITY
NUMBER 1 /SEOJK.05/2016
REGARDING
FINANCIAL HEALTH LEVEL OF FINANCING COMPANIES

ASSET RISK WEIGHTS
A. FINANCING ASSETS
No. Component Risk Weight
Receivables
With Credit Guarantee or Credit Insurance
Receivables
Without Credit Guarantee or Credit Insurance
(1) (2) (3)

Investment Financing in
the Healthy and Special Attention Categories a. Financial Leasing 25% 50% b. Sale and Leaseback 25% 50%
c. Factoring with recourse 25% 50%
d. Installment Purchase 25% 50% e. Project Financing 10% 20% f. Infrastructure Financing 10% 20%
Working Capital Financing in
the Healthy and Special Attention Categories a. Sale and Leaseback 25% 50% b. Factoring

With Recourse 25% 50%
Without Recourse 25% 50%
c. Business Capital Facility 25% 50%

Multi-Purpose Financing in
the Healthy and Special Attention Categories a. Financial Leasing 37.5% 75% b. Installment Purchase 37.5% 75%
Other Financing in
the Healthy and Special Attention Categories 50% 100%
Overdue Financing
a. Less Healthy 50% 100% b. Doubtful 62.5% 125%
c. Loss 75% 150%
B. NON-FINANCING ASSETS
No. Component Risk Weight
(1) (2)
Cash and Cash Equivalents 0%
Short-Term Investments in Securities
a. Securities Issued by the Government or Bank Indonesia 0% b. Securities Issued by Others than the Government or Bank Indonesia 75%
Equity Investments
a. Banks 50% b. Other Financial Service Companies 75%
c. Other Companies 100%
Other Assets 100%

Established in Jakarta on February 23, 2016
EXECUTIVE HEAD OF INSURANCE,
PENSION FUND,
FINANCING INSTITUTION, AND
OTHER FINANCIAL SERVICE INSTITUTIONS
FINANCIAL SERVICES AUTHORITY, signature
FIRDAUS DJAELANI

Copy in accordance with the original
Legal Director 1
Legal Department signature
Yuliana

APPENDIX II
LETTER OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES AUTHORITY
NUMBER 1 /SEOJK.05/2016
REGARDING
FINANCIAL HEALTH LEVEL OF FINANCING COMPANIES

GUIDELINES FOR ASSESSING THE QUALITY OF FINANCING RECEIVABLES

Special Quality | Less Healthy | Doubtful | Loss

Debtor's Payment Ability
Availability and accuracy of debtor's financial information

Debtor's relationship with
the Financing Company is good, Debtor always provides financial information regularly and accurately.
There is recent financial
report and analysis results.
Debtor's relationship with
the Financing Company is fair and Debtor always provides financial information regularly and still accurately.
There is recent financial
report and analysis results.
Debtor's relationship with
the Financing Company worsens and financial information cannot be trusted or there is no analysis results by the Financing Company on the financial/information reports provided by the Debtor.
Debtor's relationship with
the Financing Company further worsens and financial information is unavailable or cannot be trusted.
Debtor's relationship with
the Financing Company is very poor and financial information is unavailable or cannot be trusted.
Completeness of financing documentation
Financing documentation is
complete.
Financing documentation is
complete.
Financing documentation is
incomplete.
Financing documentation is
not complete.
No financing documentation
exists.
Compliance with financing agreement
No violation of financing
agreement.
Violation of financing
agreement that is not fundamental.
Violation of core
requirements.
Fundamental violation of
core requirements in the financing agreement.
Very fundamental violation
of core requirements in the financing agreement.
Appropriateness of fund usage
Fund usage is in accordance
with the financing proposal.
The amount and type of
facility are given in accordance with needs.
Financing extension is in
accordance with the analysis of the Debtor's needs.
Fund usage is less in
accordance with the financing proposal, but the amount is not material.
The amount and type of
facility are given larger than needs, but the amount is not material.
Financing extension is less
in accordance with the analysis of the Debtor's needs.
Fund usage is less in
accordance with the financing proposal, with an amount that is fairly material.
The amount and type of
facility are given larger than needs with a fairly material amount.
Financing extension is not
in accordance with the analysis of the Debtor's needs (financing extension to hide financial difficulties).
Fund usage is less in
accordance with the financing proposal, with a material amount.
The amount and type of
facility are given larger than needs with a material amount.
Financing extension is not
in accordance with the analysis of the Debtor's needs (financing extension to hide financial difficulties), with a fairly material deviation.
Most fund usage is not in
accordance with the financing proposal.
The amount and type of
facility are given larger than needs with a very material amount.
Financing extension without
analysis of the Debtor's needs.
Fairness of payment source for obligations
Payment source can be clearly
identified and agreed upon by the Financing Company and Debtor.
Payment source is in
accordance with the structure/type of financing.
Repayment scheme is fair
(including the provision of a grace period).
Foreign currency income is
sufficient to support the repayment of foreign currency financing.
Payment source can be
identified and agreed upon by the Financing Company and Debtor.
Payment source is less in
accordance with the structure/type of financing.
Repayment scheme is less
fair (including the provision of a grace period).
Foreign currency income is
less sufficient to support the repayment of foreign currency financing.
Payment originates from a
source other than agreed.
Payment source is less in
accordance with the structure/type of financing fairly materially.
Repayment scheme is less
fair and there is a provision of a grace period not in accordance with the type of financing.
Foreign currency income is
less sufficient to support the repayment of foreign currency financing, fairly materially.
Payment source is unknown,
while the agreed source is no longer possible. Payment source is less in accordance with the structure/type of financing materially.
Repayment scheme is less
fair and there is a provision of a grace period not in accordance with the type of financing with a fairly long duration.
Foreign currency income is
not sufficient to support the repayment of foreign currency financing materially.
No payment source is possible.
Payment source is not in accordance with the structure/type of financing.
Repayment scheme is unfair
and there is a provision of a grace period not in accordance with the type of financing with a long duration.
No foreign currency income
to support the repayment of foreign currency financing.

Debtor's Financial
Performance
Profitability

High and stable profitability.
Profitability is fair but has
potential to decline.
Low profitability.
Very small or negative
profit.
Operational losses are funded
by asset sales.
Experiencing large losses.
Debtor is unable to meet all
obligations and business activities cannot be sustained.
Capital Structure
Strong capitalization.
Capitalization is fair and
owners have the ability to provide additional capital if needed.
Debt-to-equity ratio is fairly
high.
Debt-to-equity ratio is high.
Debt-to-equity ratio is very
high.
Cash Flow
Strong liquidity and working
capital.
Cash flow analysis shows
that the Debtor can meet principal and interest payment obligations without support from additional funding sources.
Liquidity and working capital
are generally good.
Cash flow analysis shows
that although the Debtor can meet principal and interest payment obligations, there are indications of certain issues that if not addressed will affect future payments.
Liquidity is weak and working
capital is limited.
Cash flow analysis shows
that the Debtor can only pay interest and part of the principal.
Liquidity is very low.
Cash flow analysis shows
inability to pay principal and interest.
Liquidity difficulties.
Cash flow analysis shows
that the Debtor is unable to cover production costs.
Additional new loans are
used to meet maturing obligations.
Additional new loans are
used to meet maturing obligations, materially.
Sensitivity to
Market Risk
The amount of portfolio
sensitive to changes in foreign exchange rates and interest rates is relatively small or has been hedged well.
Some portfolio is sensitive
to changes in foreign exchange rates and interest rates but is still controlled.
Business activities are
affected by changes in foreign exchange rates and interest rates.
Business activities are
threatened by changes in foreign exchange rates and interest rates.
Business activities are
threatened by fluctuations in foreign exchange rates and interest rates.

Debtor's Business
Prospects
Potential for
Business Growth

Business activities have
good growth potential.
Business activities have
limited growth potential.
Business activities show
very limited or no growth potential.
Business activities are
declining.
Business sustainability is very
doubtful and difficult to recover.
There is a high possibility
that business activities will cease.
Market Conditions and
Debtor's Position in
Competition
Stable market and not
affected by changes in economic conditions.
Limited competition, including
a strong position in the market.
Operating at optimum capacity.
Fair market position, not
much affected by changes in economic conditions.
Market share is comparable
to competitors.
Operating at nearly optimum
capacity.
Market is affected by
changes in economic conditions.
Market position is fair but
has many competitors, but can recover if implementing new business strategies.
Market is heavily affected by
changes in economic conditions.
Business competition is very
tight and company operations experience serious problems.
Loss of market in line with
declining economic conditions.
Operations are not continuous.
Management Quality and
Labor Issues
Very good management.
Adequate workforce and
never recorded to have experienced disputes or labor strikes.
Good management.
Workforce is generally
adequate, has experienced labor disputes/strikes that have been resolved well but there is still a possibility of recurrence.
Fair management.
Overstaffed and there are
labor disputes/strikes with a fairly material impact on the Debtor's business activities.
Inexperienced management.
Overstaffed in fairly large
numbers so as to cause uneasiness and there are labor disputes/strikes with a fairly material impact on the Debtor's business activities.
Very weak management.
Overstaffed in large numbers
so as to cause uneasiness and there are labor disputes/strikes with a material impact on the Debtor's business activities.
Support from group or
affiliates.
Affiliate or group companies
are stable and supportive of the business.
Affiliate or group companies
are stable and do not have a burdensome impact on the Debtor.
Relationships with affiliate or
group companies begin to have a burdensome impact on the Debtor.
Affiliate or group companies
have already had a burdensome impact on the Debtor.
Affiliate companies are very
detrimental to the Debtor.
Efforts made by the Debtor
to maintain the environment
(for large-scale Debtors with significant environmental impact).
Environmental management
efforts are good and achieve results at least in accordance with minimum requirements as regulated in applicable laws and regulations.
Environmental management
efforts are less good and have not reached minimum requirements as regulated in applicable laws and regulations, with fairly material deviations.
The company has not
implemented significant environmental management efforts or has implemented environmental management but has not reached the minimum requirements as regulated in applicable laws and regulations, with material deviations.
The company has not
implemented significant environmental management efforts or has implemented environmental management but has not reached the minimum requirements as regulated in applicable laws and regulations, and has the possibility of being sued in court.

Established in Jakarta on February 23, 2016
EXECUTIVE HEAD OF INSURANCE,
PENSION FUND, FINANCING
INSTITUTION, AND OTHER
FINANCIAL SERVICE INSTITUTIONS
FINANCIAL SERVICES AUTHORITY, signature
FIRDAUS DJAELANI

Copy in accordance with the original
Legal Director 1
Legal Department signature
Yuliana

APPENDIX III
LETTER OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES AUTHORITY
NUMBER 1 /SEOJK.05/2016
REGARDING
FINANCIAL HEALTH LEVEL OF FINANCING COMPANIES

WORK SHEET FOR ASSESSING THE QUALITY OF FINANCING RECEIVABLES

No. Component Assessment Condition* Quality
I. Debtor's Payment Ability

availability and accuracy of debtor's
financial information
completeness of financing documentation
compliance with financing agreement
appropriateness of fund usage
fairness of payment source for obligations
II. Debtor's Financial Performance
profitability
capital structure
cash flow
sensitivity to market risk
III. Debtor's Business Prospects
potential for business growth
market conditions and debtor's position
in competition
management quality and labor issues
support from group or affiliates
efforts made by the debtor to maintain
the environment
FINANCING RECEIVABLE QUALITY*
*) Condition is filled with the debtor's condition based on the assessment of the financing receivable quality components based on Appendix II, which is an integral part of this OJK Letter. *) Quality is filled with the quality (Healthy/Special Attention/Less Healthy/Doubtful/Loss) considering the debtor's condition with reference to Appendix II, which is an integral part of this OJK Letter. *) Financing receivable quality is filled with the debtor's financing receivable quality (Healthy/Special Attention/Less Healthy/Doubtful/Loss) considering the quality of each assessment component as a whole.

Established in Jakarta on February 23, 2016
EXECUTIVE HEAD OF INSURANCE,
PENSION FUND,
FINANCING INSTITUTION, AND
OTHER FINANCIAL SERVICE INSTITUTIONS
FINANCIAL SERVICES AUTHORITY, signature
FIRDAUS DJAELANI

Copy in accordance with the original
Legal Director 1
Legal Department signature
Yuliana

APPENDIX IV
LETTER OF THE FINANCIAL SERVICES AUTHORITY
NUMBER 1 /SEOJK.05/2016
REGARDING
FINANCIAL HEALTH LEVEL OF FINANCING COMPANIES

I. FINANCING ASSETS
Financing Receivables Value
Adjusted Asset Risk Weight
Financing Receivables Value
Adjusted Asset Risk Weight

Investment Financing in
the Healthy and Special Attention Categories a. Financial Leasing 25.0% 0 50% 0 b. Sale and Leaseback 25.0% 0 50% 0
c. Factoring with recourse 25.0% 0 50% 0
d. Installment Purchase 25.0% 0 50% 0 e. Project Financing 10.0% 0 20% 0 f. Infrastructure Financing 10.0% 0 20% 0
Working Capital Financing in
the Healthy and Special Attention Categories a. Sale and Leaseback 25.0% 0 50% 0 b. Factoring

With Recourse 25.0% 0 50% 0
Without Recourse 25.0% 0 50% 0
c. Business Capital Facility 25.0% 0 50% 0

Multi-Purpose Financing in
the Healthy and Special Attention Categories a. Financial Leasing 37.5% 0 75% 0 b. Installment Purchase 37.5% 0 75% 0
Other Financing 50.0% 0 100% 0
Overdue Financing
a. Less Healthy 50.0% 0 100% 0 b. Doubtful 62.5% 0 125% 0
c. Loss 75.0% 0 150% 0
Total 0
II. NON-FINANCING ASSETS
No. Component Financing Receivables Value
Adjusted Asset Risk Weight
Cash and Cash Equivalents 0% 0
Short-Term Investments in Securities 75% 0
Equity Investments:
a. Banks 50% 0 b. Other Financial Service Companies 75% 0
c. Other Companies 100% 0
Other Assets 100% 0
Total 0 0
Total Adjusted Assets 0

WORK SHEET - CALCULATION OF ADJUSTED ASSETS
No. Component
Financing Receivables With Credit Guarantee or Credit Insurance Financing Receivables Without Credit Guarantee or Credit Insurance

Data Required:
Adjusted Capital =
Adjusted Assets = IDR 0
Ratio Formula Calculation Result Value
= Adjusted Capital = IDR 0 = #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Adjusted Assets IDR 0

WORK SHEET - MEASUREMENT OF CAPITAL RATIO FACTOR

Capital Ratio

Data Required:
Problematic Financing Receivables =
Total Financing Receivables =
Ratio Formula Calculation Result Value
= Problematic Financing Receivables = IDR 0 = #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
Total Financing Receivables IDR 0 1. Financing Receivable Quality Ratio

WORK SHEET - MEASUREMENT OF FINANCING RECEIVABLE QUALITY FACTOR

Data Required:
Profit (Loss) Before Tax
Annualized =
Net Profit (Loss) =
Total Assets =
Total Equity =
Operating Expenses =
Operating Income =
Interest Income
Annualized =
Interest Expenses
Annualized =
Average Financing Receivables =
COMPONENT Formula Calculation Result Value
= Profit (Loss) Before Tax Annualized = IDR 0 = Total Assets IDR 0 = Net Profit (Loss) = IDR 0 = Total Equity IDR 0 = Operating Expenses = IDR 0 = Operating Income IDR 0 = Net Interest Income = IDR 0 = Average Financing Receivables IDR 0 Composite Value of Profitability Factor #DIV/0!
4. Net Interest Margin #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
2. Return on Equity #DIV/0! #DIV/0!
3. Operating Expenses to
Operating Income Ratio
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0!
#DIV/0! 1. Return on Asset #DIV/0!

WORK SHEET - MEASUREMENT OF PROFITABILITY FACTOR

Data Required:
Current Assets =
Current Liabilities =
Cash + Securities =
COMPONENT Formula Calculation Result Value
= Current Assets = IDR 0 =
Current Liabilities IDR 0
= Cash + Securities = IDR 0 =
Current Liabilities IDR 0
Composite Value of Liquidity Factor #DIV/0!
2. Cash Ratio #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

WORK SHEET - MEASUREMENT OF LIQUIDITY FACTOR

Current Ratio #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

Factor Value

Capital Ratio #DIV/0!
Financing Receivable Quality #DIV/0!
Profitability #DIV/0!
Liquidity #DIV/0!
Financial Health Level Value #DIV/0!
Financial Health Level #DIV/0!

Established in Jakarta on February 23, 2016
EXECUTIVE HEAD OF INSURANCE,
PENSION FUND,
FINANCING INSTITUTION, AND
OTHER FINANCIAL SERVICE INSTITUTIONS
FINANCIAL SERVICES AUTHORITY, signature
FIRDAUS DJAELANI

WORK SHEET - MEASUREMENT OF HEALTH LEVEL
Copy in accordance with the original
Legal Director 1
Legal Department signature
Yuliana

Financial Health Level of Financing Companies

Lineage: In force