The Italian Unlikely to Pay Market - May 2018 - www.pwc.com/it

 
The Italian Unlikely to Pay Market - May 2018 - www.pwc.com/it
May 2018

The Italian Unlikely
to Pay Market

                       www.pwc.com/it
The Italian Unlikely to Pay Market - May 2018 - www.pwc.com/it
The Italian Unlikely to Pay Market - May 2018 - www.pwc.com/it
Contacts
Pier Paolo Masenza                    Fedele Pascuzzi
Financial Services Deals Leader       Business Recovery Services Leader
M: +39 348 2505003                    M: +39 348 9999560
pierpaolo.masenza@pwc.com             fedele.pascuzzi@pwc.com

Vito Ruscigno                         Alessandro Biondi
Co-Head of NPL                        Co-Head of NPL
M: +39 348 2709820                    UTP Specialist & Special Situations
vito.ruscigno@pwc.com                 M: +39 348 1565448
                                      alessandro.biondi@pwc.com

Salvatore Lombardo
Business Recovery Services Partner
UTP Specialist & Special Situations
M: +39 348 1505332
salvatore.lombardo@pwc.com
The Italian Unlikely to Pay Market - May 2018 - www.pwc.com/it
Contents

 The Unlikely to Pay segment – The market in 2017 and our view on 2018                                                                       05

 Foreword | The market in 2017 and our view on 2018                                                                                          06

 1.     Asset Quality and Unlikely to Pay key figures                                                                                        08
 2.     Unlikely to Pay distribution – Top 10 Italian banks                                                                                  09
 3.     UtP ratio on NPE – Breakdown of Top 10 Italian banks                                                                                 10
 4.     Unlikely to Pay coverage ratio - Top 10 Italian banks                                                                                11
 5.     Unlikely to Pay inflows and outflows from 2015 to 2017 – Top 10 Italian banks                                                        12
 6.     Restructured loans trend within the Italian banking system                                                                           13
 7.     The UtP is a complicated asset class thus requiring several alernative
        management solutions                                                                                                                 14
 8.     UtP performance from 2015 to 2017 – collections and returns to performing                                                            15
 9.     Will the Regulators’ requirements for proactive management of NPE be a game
        changer for UtP?                                                                                                                     17
 10.    What should banks do to tackle the UtP challenge? The answer is “proactive
        management”                                                                                                                          18
 11.    Which strategic options are available to fix the UtP issue?                                                                          19
 12.    ECB Guidance on forbearance measures                                                                                                 20
 13.    Forbearance measures’ trend from 2015 to 2017                                                                                        21
 14.    Servicing of UtP as new market opportunity                                                                                           22
 15.    UtP portfolios and single names transactions in 2017                                                                                 23
 16.    Investor’s equity injection/underwriting of senior debt                                                                              24
 17.    View on 2018 - strategic drivers will lead the banks’ decisions on their UtP
        management                                                                                                                           25
 Appendix                                                                                                                                    26

Disclaimer: PwC analysis are based on FY15, FY16, FY17 banks’ financial statements (tab. A.1.6, A.1.7 and A.1.8) and Data Provider dataset

4 | The Italian Unlikely to Pay market | Is now the momentum?
The Italian Unlikely to Pay Market - May 2018 - www.pwc.com/it
The Unlikely to Pay segment

                              PwC | 5
The Italian Unlikely to Pay Market - May 2018 - www.pwc.com/it
Foreword | The market in 2017 and our view on 2018

  Last year, our report on the Italian Unlikely to Pay          Between these two sub-categories UtP include all the
  (UtP) market was entitled “Ready to tackle the                exposures involved in some kind of restructuring
  challenge?” to underline the potential momentum of            measures. Moreover, UtP are different depending on
  the Italian banks to address the issue of their non           borrower’s characteristics, such as industry, size,
  performing exposures classified as UtP.                       vintage (how long the exposure is classified as UtP),
                                                                available guarantees and collaterals (secured vs.
  One year later we can say that 2017 witnessed few             unsecured). Each of the above characteristic may
  and limited movements in the UtP market. As a                 lead to different management and deleveraging
  matter of fact, the Italian banks are still working on        strategies.
  the implementation of best practices in the
  management of their NPE (UtP included) and                    Will the Regulators’ requirements for proactive
  furthermore are still lingering and pondering on how          management of NPE be a game changer for UtP?
  to best structure and effectively implement disposal          ECB guidelines, whose application in Italy will be
  plans of their UtP exposures (sales of UtP, net of            extended across the board, even to the less significant
  several bailouts, were limited in terms of numbers of         banks, the calendar provisioning (within the ECB
  transactions and in EUR volumes in 2017).                     Addendum) providing for higher and faster
                                                                provisioning for NPE, and the application of IFRS9
  UtP is a major issue for the Italian banking system           from 1 January 2018, all represent some of the
  for several reasons. The NPE figures at the end of            extensive measures required by the Regulators. We
  2017 still show a huge amount of UtP (€94bn of GBV)           believe that these recent requirements mandated by
  in the books of the banks. By the end of 2017 the UtP         the European Regulators will undoubtedly drive the
  reached and even surpassed the levels of bad loans in         Italian banks’ management of the current stock, next
  terms of NBV (€66bn vs €64bn respectively). Since             wave of NPE and the UtP deleveraging plans as well.
  the Italian UtP exposures are concentrated within a
  few top banks we believe that these players will pave         If the aforementioned assumption is true, which
  the way for the identification and execution of               management and deleverage strategies will the
  differentiated structured deleveraging strategies for         Italian banks execute in 2018? Depending on their
  the entire system.                                            strategic drivers, the Italian banks could pursue one
                                                                or more of the potential strategic options which
  Alongside their massive gross and net figures                 would be aimed at deleveraging their UtP. Capital
  accounted for in the banks financial statements, the          requirements and short/medium-term plans of
  UtP feature a massive stock of loans (circa 50%)              reducing their NPE ratio could lead to massive UtP
  which do not successfully emerge from their status            sale opportunities (single names and/or small
  and remain as UtP year after year. UtP is by                  portfolios). Industrial capabilities’ self-assessment
  definition a category of borrowers in temporary               along with identification of potential upside coming
  financial difficulties that the banks should manage in        from the proper restructuring of the UtP could even
  order to move them back into the performing                   lead the banks to internal management or external
  category. The Bank of Italy reported that 62% of the          management (through specialised servicers) of the
  restructuring agreements (which comprise most of              UtP.
  the UtP exposures), after four years, are still in place
  and did not result in a positive or conclusive                We also see in the market a rising interest in
  outcome.                                                      structuring and executing securitization operations
                                                                with UTP as underlying assets that could introduce a
  When considering this class of exposure, it is critical       disruptive and innovative solution in facing the
  to note that UtP is a complicated asset class requiring       Italian UtP issue.
  several alternative management solutions.
                                                                We believe that 2018 is definitively the right moment
  The UtP category may typically include borrowers              for the Italian banks to firmly and decisively
  featuring overdue instalments (similar to Past Due            progress on their path to tackle the UtP challenge.
  exposures) on the one hand, and on the other hand,
  borrowers whose critical financial situation could
  easily lead to the status of bad loans.

6 | The Italian Unlikely to Pay market | Is now the momentum?
The Italian Unlikely to Pay Market - May 2018 - www.pwc.com/it
PwC | 7
The Italian Unlikely to Pay Market - May 2018 - www.pwc.com/it
1        Asset Quality and Unlikely to Pay key figures

                                                                                                    341
                                                                                        326               324
                                                                                                    14
                                                                                         12                7
                                                                              283
                                                                              18                                  264
                                                                                                    127   117         5
                                                                237                     131
                                                                 21
                                                  194                         109                                     94
                                                  13
                                       157                       91
                      132              12         74
                      16
                                       66
        85                                                                                          200   200              NBV
                      57                                                                184
         9                                                                    156                                 165      64bn
        33                                                      125
                                                  107
                                       78
                      59
        42

      2008           2009          2010          2011           2012         2013       2014       2015   2016    2017

                                         Bad Loans (€ bn)       Unlikely to Pay (€bn)    Past Due (€bn)

 Source: Bank of Italy Report – «Condizioni e rischiosità del credito» updated Dec17

                37%                                                    5.5%                                     30%

(*) Calculated as arithmetic average

8 | The Italian Unlikely to Pay market | Is now the momentum?
The Italian Unlikely to Pay Market - May 2018 - www.pwc.com/it
2       Unlikely to Pay distribution – Top 10 Italian
        banks

At the end of 2017 the overall UtP exposure is highly                            Despite the declining trend, UtP stock is an issue to be
concentrated within the Top 10 Italian banks (80% of                             tackled promptly: 37% of the NPE of the Top 10 Italian
the total UtP exposure vs 76% in 2016); when                                     banks are UtP as at 31Dec17, with several banks (4 out of
considering only the Top 3 Italian banks, such                                   10) featuring gross UtP ratio on NPE over 40%.
percentage is 53% (51% in 2016).

The UtP exposure declining trend, started in 2015 (-3%
from FY 2014 to FY 2015), continued in 2016 and 2017
(-8% and -20% YoY respectively).

                                                                                                                                     20%
                                                                                                                                               94
€ Bn                                                                                                                                 18.4
                                                                                                             2%           0.5%
                                                                                                    2%                     0.5
                                                                                     4%                      1.8
                                                                         4%                         2.0
                      53%                                                            3.3
                                                            6%           4.0                          -11% Vs. PY-8% Vs. PY
                                                                                            +1% Vs. PY
                                                            5.2                  -17% Vs. PY
                                               10%                   NA Vs. PY
                                                9.0     +1% Vs. PY
                                   12%      -22% Vs. PY
                                   11.6
                       19%      -24% Vs. PY
                       17.9                                                                Carige                  3.1       3%

                    -10% Vs. PY                                                            Creval                  2.2       2%

                                                                                           ICCREA**                1.2       1%
           22%
           20.3                                                                            Banca IFIS              0.7      0.7%
       -17% Vs. PY
                                                                                           C.R. Bolzano            0.4      0.4%

                                                                                           Others                  10.5     11%

        Unicredit     Intesa       MPS        Banco         UBI        BNL**       BPER      Cariparma      BP           Credem     Others    Total
                     Sanpaolo                  BPM                                                        Sondrio

          40%         34%         26%          39%         41%         30%          32%         40%         42%           35%       Gross UtP/ NPE

          11%         12%         37%          20%         13%         19%          20%         11%         15%            5%       Gross NPE Ratio

(*) The list of Top 10 Italian banks is based on the Gross Book Value of Total Exposure as at 31Dec16 (source: ABI)
(**) BNL exposure as at 31Dic16 (to date their financial statement as at 31Dec17 is not available); ICCREA exposure as at 30Jun17
Source: PwC analysis of banks’ financial statements as at 31Dec17

                                                                                                                                             PwC | 9
3        UtP Ratio on NPE – Breakdown of Top 10
         Italian banks

Despite the gross UtP exposure declining trend over the period 2015 / 2017
(CAGR of -14%), their weight on the NPE of the Top 10 Italian banks
remains significant (37%).

NPE breakdown from 2015 to 2017 by bank
Unicredit                                          Intesa Sanpaolo                                   MPS

      3%                                                  2%           1%                                  6%           2%           1%
                   2%
                                                                                    1%
     32%                                                 36%                                                            33%          26%
                  32%            3%                                   34%                                 37%
                                                                                   34%
                                40%
     64%          66%                                    62%         65%                                  57%           64%          73%
                                                                                   65%
                                57%

     2015         2016          2017                     2015        2016          2017                   2015         2016          2017

Banco BPM*                                         UBI                                               BNL

       1%           1%                                    2%           1%           1%                     2%           1%
                                  0%
                   44%                                   46%                                              36%           30%
      47%                        39%                                  41%          41%

                                                                                                          62%           68%
      51%          55%           61%                     52%          58%          58%

      2015         2016          2017                    2015        2016          2017                   2015         2016          2017

 BPER                                               Cariparma                                        BP Sondrio

       2%            1%           1%                      2%           2%           1%                                  8%            4%
                                                                                                          11%
      35%           36%          32%                     45%          40%          40%                                  45%          42%
                                                                                                          43%

      62%           63%          68%                     53%          58%          58%                                  47%          54%
                                                                                                          45%

      2015          2016         2017                    2015         2016         2017                   2015         2016          2017
 Credem
                                                            Past Due                                  Gross UtP CAGR 2015-2017

       5%            3%           3%                        Unlikely To Pay
      32%           36%          35%
                                                            Bad Loans
      64%           61%          62%                   (*) Ratios of Banco BPM in FY 2015 and 2016 (pre-merger) were calculated as sum of the
                                                       figures of Banco Popolare and BPM (merged together in Banco BMP from 1 January 2017)
                                                       Source: PwC analysis of banks’ financial statements as at 31Dec17 and 31Dec16
      2015          2016         2017

10 | The Italian Unlikely to Pay market | Is now the momentum?
4                                   Unlikely to Pay coverage ratio - Top 10
                                    Italian banks

UtP Coverage ratios vs. Gross UtP ratios
Top 10 Italian Banks featured general higher provisions of UtP                               Ratios of Banco BPM* showed a reduction of the
in 2017 vs 2016, resulting in higher coverage ratios (avg. 30.4%                             gross UtP ratio (7.6% in 2017 vs 9.5% in 2016) as well
in 2017).                                                                                    as UtP coverage (27.3% in 2017 vs 28.0% in 2016).
                                                                                             Likewise, UBI dropped its Gross UtP ratio from 5.9%
In particular UniCredit and Intesa Sanpaolo, both below the                                  to 5.3% and UtP Coverage from 23.3% to 22.9%.
average Gross UtP ratio (4.3% and 4.1% respectively),
increased their UtP provisions reaching UtP coverage equal to
43.2% (UniCredit) and 27.9% (Intesa Sanpaolo) at the end of
2017.
MPS, third bank in terms of UtP exposures, showed gross UtP
ratio (9.5%) lower than in 2016 (11.5%) with an average UtP
coverage of 40.6% in 2017 compared to 40.3% in 2016. The                                                                 Bubble size: Unlikely to Pay
former is due to the recognition of bad loans previously                                                                 gross exposure 2017
classified as UtP.
                                                                                                                         Bubble size: Unlikely to Pay
                                                                                                                         gross exposure 2016
                                   50%
                                                                                                                         YoY shift (FY16-FY17)

                                   45%                              UCG

                                                                                                                     MPS
 UtP Coverage Ratio (31/12/2017)

                                   40%

                                                                         BNL
                                   35%
                                          Avg. Top 10
                                          (30.4%)                                      BP Sondrio
                                   30%
                                                                  ISP                                    Banco
                                                                                                         BPM*
                                   25%

                                   20%                                     UBI          BPER
                                                             Cariparma

                                   15%
                                              Credem                     Avg. Top 10
                                                                         (5.5%)
                                   10%
                                         1%             3%     5%                7%                 9%           11%             13%

                                                                         Gross UtP Ratio (31/12/2017)

(*) Ratios of Banco BPM in FY 2016 were calculated as sum of the figures of Banco Popolare and BPM
Source: PwC analysis of banks’ financial statements as at 31Dec17 and 31Dec16

                                                                                                                                              PwC | 11
5       Unlikely to Pay inflows and outflows from 2015
        to 2017 – Top 10 Italian banks

In 2017, total outflows of the Top 10 Italian banks                                             In particular, UtP gauged a firm decline of inflows
remained stable at around €44bn, despite lower outflows                                         from performing loans over the last 2-year period: 16%
to bad loans: 21% in 2016 vs 16% in 2017*.                                                      in 2016 vs 14% in 2017*.

The inflows in 2017 decreased from €33bn to €30bn, mainly                                      UtP which remained UtP during 2017 amounted to
due to the lower inflows from performing and past due                                          €44.5bn (i.e. 50% out of €89bn), proving how the main
exposures*.                                                                                    issue for the Italian UtP lies mainly in their massive
                                                                                               stock and a management not yet able to target
                         UtP In/Outflow                                                        deleverage solutions.
    % flows =
                      Initial UtP exposure

                                                                   Inflows
€ Bn                          Outflows                               33
                                (43)                                                                                                                   Inflows
                                                                                                                    Outflows                             30
                                                                                                                      (44)

           99      (5%)
                             (13%)
                                                                                   9%           89      (7%)
                                        (21%)                                                                     (13%)
                                                                        8%
                                                                                                                                                                       15%           75
                                                            16%                                                              (16%)

                                                 (4%)                                                                                                       5%
                                                                                                                                      (14%)      14%

                                                                      56%
                                                                   Remain UtP                                                                               50%
                                                                                                                                                         Remain UtP
           (1)

          UTP        To     Collected   To bad    Others    From     From other    Other       UTP        To     Collected   To bad    Others    From     From other    Other       UTP
        Exposure performing              loans   outflows performing    NPL       inflows    Exposure performing              loans   outflows performing    NPL       inflows    Exposure
       31.12.2015                                                                           31.12.2016                                                                           31.12.2017

 (*) Inflows and outflows in 2017 for BNL were estimated equal to the flows occurred in 2016
 Source: PwC analysis of banks’ financial statements as at 31Dec17 and 31Dec16

12 | The Italian Unlikely to Pay market | Is now the momentum?
6        Restructured loans trend within the Italian
         banking system

         5,8%                      6,7%                      7,2%                                          According to Bank of Italy, after 4
                                                                                       10,4%               years:
                                                                                                           • 62.2% of the restructuring
                                                                                                              agreements (which qualify most
                                                                                                              of the UtP exposures) are still in
                                                                                       29,7%                  place
                                                                                                           • 22.5% of the restructuring
                                                                                                              agreements resulted in
                                                             58,9%                                            liquidation/bankruptcy
                                   71,2%                                                                      procedures)
         81,4%                                                                                             • 10.4% of the restructuring
                                                                                                              agreements resulted in a
                                                                                       32,5%                  positive and conclusive outcome

                                                                                                           Financial stability
                                                             17,2%
                                                                                                           Same procedure
                                   10,8%                                               22,5%               Other restructuring procedure

         8,2%                                                13,8%                                         Liquidation/ Bankruptcy
                                   9,4%
        3,2%                                                                                               Extinction/ Incorporation
         1,3%                     1,9%                        2,8%                      4,9%
     After 1 year             After 2 years              After 3 years             After 4 years

(*) This trend is related to the years from 2010 to 2014 (restructuring processes begun in 2010). By «Restructured exposures» Bank of Italy refers to
exposures subject to the following procedures according to the Italian Bankruptcy Law:
- «Concordati preventivi»
- «Accordi di ristrutturazione»
- «Piani di risanamento»
- «Accordi stragiudiziali»
Source: Bank of Italy – «Questioni di Economia e Finanza» (No. 311, March 2016)

                                                                                                                                                PwC | 13
7 The UtP is a complicated asset class thus requiring
  several alernative management solutions

Not all UtP exposures are equal. According to Bank of Italy         Moreover, UtP are different depending on borrower’s
criteria, the UtP are classified as such according to the           characteristics, such as industry, size, vintage (from how
judgment of the banks about the debtor’s unlikelihood to            long the exposure is classified as UtP), available guarantees
fulfil its credit obligations.                                      and collaterals (secured vs. unsecured).

As a result UtP category may include on one end borrowers           Each of these features must lead to a specific management
featuring overdue instalments (similar to Past Due                  strategy for the UtP. Therefore, the punctual comprehension
exposures) and on the opposite end borrowers whose critical         of the UtP characteristics is essential for their proper and
financial situation could lead easily to the status of bad loans.   effective management by the Italian banks.

Between these two sub-categories UtP include all the
exposures involved in some kind of restructuring measures.
                                                                            Type of borrower

                                                        Industry           Size              “Vintage”            Collateral

                            UtP                              ✔              ✔                    ✔                     ✔
                         “Overdue”

                      UtP “under
                    restructuring”
Type of UtP

                (Recovery plans ex art.
                67 & art. 182bis Italian                     ✔              ✔                    ✔                     ✔
                Bankruptcy Law, other
                     restructuring
                      procedures)

                   “Non performing”
                         UtP                                 ✔              ✔                    ✔                     ✔
                   (Almost bad loans)

14 | The Italian Unlikely to Pay market | Is now the momentum?
8       UtP performance from 2015 to 2017 - collections
        and returns to performing

For the Top 10 Italian banks, the portion of UtP                            For the Top 10 Italian banks, the collections of UtP
returned to performing increased from 2015 (4.0%) to                        increased over the period 2015-2017 from 9.1% to
2017 (5.1%).                                                                9.8%.

A similar trend for the cure rate was confirmed even for the                In general, Top 10 banks outerformed the overall
Italian banking market (3.7% in 2015 v.s. 3.9% in 2016).                    market in 2015 and 2016, both in cure rates and
                                                                            collections.

                                    UtP Exit to performing + Collections
  Recovery rate (%) =
                                        UtP Initial exposure + Inflows

                                                                                                                    15,0%
                                                                    13,9%
                    13,2%

                                                                    13,3%
                    12,4%
                                                             9,8%                                            9,8%
             9,1%                                                                  9,4%
                                   8,7%

                                                                                                      5,1%
     4,0%                                             4,1%                  3,9%
                            3,7%

                    2015                                             2016                                           2017*
        Top 10                 Market                    Top 10                Market                     Top 10

                            % to Performing (Top 10)         % Collected (Top 10)              % to Performing (Market)
                            % Collected (Market)             Recovery Rate (Top 10)            Recovery Rate (Market)

(*) Figures for 2017 do not include returns to performing and collections for BNL
Sources: PwC analysis of banks’ financial statements as at 31Dec17, 31Dec16 and 31Dec15, and of data provided by ABI «Associazione Bancaria
Italiana»
                                                                                                                                       PwC | 15
16 | The Italian Unlikely to Pay market | Is now the momentum?
9 Will the Regulators’ requirements for proactive
  management of NPE be a game changer for UtP?

                         •   ECB’s NPEs Guidance (March 2017)
                         •   Calendar Provisioning (Addendum ECB): “Prudential
                             provisioning backstop” equal to 100% after 7 years of vintage for
  ECB & Bank of Italy        secured NPE, 2 years of vintage for unsecured NPE
                         •   Bank of Italy extended ECB Guidance also to Less Significant
                             Institutions (LSI)

                         •   Action Plan, aimed at involving EU Institutions (including European
                             Commission) into the adoption of best practices for the management
  European Authorities       of the NPE stock
                         •   EBA Guidance about NPE’s appropriate classification and
                             sustainable management, and about forborne exposures

                         •   “GACS” is aimed at increasing liquidity in the market by facilitating
                             leverage on portfolio disposals
                         •   EU Directive about credit servicers and purchasers and about
  Lawmakers                  collateral recovery plans
                         •   EU Regulation “Anacredit” for the collection of granular data on
                             EU banks’ credit exposures

                         •   Entered into force in 1 January 2018, IFRS 9 introduces an “early
                             warning and forward looking approach” to credit impairment
  Accounting Standards       testing methodology, resulting in the classification of certain portions
  (IFRS 9)                   of the current portfolio in loans’ higher risk categories
                         •   Banks will be required to accrue provisions based on expected
                             losses and not only upon the occurrence of specific events

                                                                                                  PwC | 17
10 What should banks do to tackle the UtP
   challenge? The answer is “proactive
   management”

          Carry on portfolio segmentations for

  1
          (i) a better understanding of the asset quality of their UtP
          (ii) a proper portfolio classification
          (iii) a preliminary identification of management
          strategies

          Assess borrowers’ performance throughout the

  2
          analysis of financial statements, intermediate reports,
          Business Plan, Budget and any further financial
          documentation about the borrowers’ performance and
          details of their financial position

          Regularly monitor the Central Credit Register to be

  3       informed on the total exposure to the system and
          relevant movements (overdraft withdrew or decrease,
          bad loan classification)

                                                                                    Operational risks

  4       Use early warning indicators: from internal
          (companies and individuals) and external sources
                                                                         (risks concerning the operational structure
                                                                                      of the borrowers)

                                                                                       Market risks

  5
          Produce and regularly update an overall rating on
                                                                         (external variables such as those regarding
          borrowers’ risk based upon info gathered from several
                                                                           the environment where the borrowers
          sources                                                                         operate)

          Implement improved NPE operating model:

 6        dedicated workout units, procedures for classification
          and segmentation, tailor made management strategies on
          a single name basis
                                                                                       Financial risks
                                                                         (financial soundness of the borrowers and /
                                                                           or relevant customers and / or suppliers)

18 | The Italian Unlikely to Pay market | Is now the momentum?
11 Which strategic options are available to fix the
UtP issue?

The strategic options identified through the on going due   Sale of UtP could be even executed through portfolios
diligence carried out by the bank on the borrower’s case    transactions which require preliminary strategic
could result in the return of the loan in the performing    segmentation to maximize loans’ value for the banks.
category through the implementation of internal
                                                            Otherwise, banks may decide to outsource the
forbearance measures or in the sale of the loan or in the
                                                            management on NPE (such as UtP) to a specialised
classification of the exposure as bad loans (thus
                                                            credit servicer.
requiring the prompt liquidation of the borrower’s asset
through judicial procedures)

                                                                               Servicing
•   Forbearance measures:                                                      • New opportunities of value
    − Grace period/Payment                                                       creation
       moratorium                                                              • New market opportunities
    − Extension of maturity/term
                                                                               • Mandatory will be the transition
    − Debt consolidation                                                         from past due management to a
    − New credit facilities                                                      proactive management of the UtP
    − Recovery plan by Italian                                                   (e.g. new credit facilities)
       Bankruptcy Law (e.g. art. 67 &                                          • Part of the industrial
       182 bis)                                                                  management required by ECB
•   Segmenting by industry/
    type of UtP (overdue/                            UtPs’                     • Best practices’ implementation
    restructured/ defaulted)                     adding value
                                                   strategy
                                                                              Investor’s equity
Loan sale                                                                     injection/ underwriting of
• True sale/securitisation                                                    senior debt
• Single names’ sale on a best offer                                          •   Industrial partner to revamp and
  basis (opportunistic criteria)                                                  establish the underlying
                                                                                  borrower’s business (long term
• Single names’ sale based on a
                                                                                  approach)
  structured plan (strategic
  criteria)                                                                   •   Financial partner to inject cash
• Sale of UtP portfolios                                                          within a strategic exit plan
                                                                                  (short/medium term approach)

                                                                                                              PwC | 19
12 ECB Guidance on forbearance measures
           Internal management

 The ECB guidance emphasizes that the main objective of                           In particular, on the basis of the type of difficulty of the
 forbearance measures is to allow debtors to exit their non-                      debtor, either short- or long-term forbearance measures
 performing status or to prevent performing borrowers from                        (or a combination of the two) maximizing recoveries shall
 reaching a non-performing status.                                                be identified, by granting, simultaneously, the
                                                                                  sustainability of the adopted measures (e.g. debt service
 Therefore, the guidance actively addresses the theme, by                         capacity).
 guiding banks in the identification of the optimal balance of
 forbearance measures aimed at granting the exit from short-
 and long-term difficulty status of the debtor.

 Main forbearance measures* – Application examples

                                 Adoption of short-term measures                                    Adoption of long-term measures
        Area of
     intervention            Financial difficulty                    Measure                   Financial difficulty              Measure

                            • Temporary financial            • Temporary payment of                                      • Permanent
                                                                                              • Excessively high
       Interest               difficulty of minor entity       interest only (no capital
                                                                                                interest rates for the
                                                                                                                           reduction of interest
                              to be overcome within            reimbursement)                                              rates
                                                                                                debtor
                              24 months

                                                             • Temporary
                            • Temporary financial                                             • Misalignment between     • Rescheduling of
                                                               reduction of
    Instalments               difficulty of moderate
                                                               instalment amount
                                                                                                repayment plan and         amortization plan (e.g.
                              entity to be overcome                                             reimbursement capacity     partial, bullet, step-up)
                                                             • Full interest payment
                              within 24 months                                                  of the debtor

                            • Temporary financial            • “Grace period” for the
                              difficulty of moderate/
                                                                                              • Excessively high         • Extension of debt
      Maturity                                                 payment of interests
                                                                                                instalments for the        maturity
                              serious entity to be             and capital
                                                                                                debtor
                              overcome within 24 mo.

                                                                                              • Permanent difficulty     • Voluntary disposal
     Collateral                                                                                 and good level of          of collateral by the
                                                                                                collateralization          debtor

                                                                                         In particular cases it is possible to adopt new
(*) In addition to debt forgiveness and/or arrears capitalisation options              credit facilities or debt consolidation measures

20 | The Italian Unlikely to Pay market | Is now the momentum?
13 Forbearance measures’ trend from 2015 to 2017
                 Internal management

                                                                                       Forbearance       Forborne UtP exposures
                                                                                         Ratio =              Total UtP exposures

140
          128        128        129        127        125        123
                                                                            120
120                                                                                    117    116

          32%        32%                                                                              104
                                37%                                                                              99
100                                        40%
                                                      41%        42%                                                     94
                                                                            47%
                                                                                       48%    48%
80                                                                                                    50%
                                                                                                                51%
                                                                                                                        51%

60

          68%        68%
40                              63%        60%        59%        58%
                                                                            53%        52%    52%
                                                                                                      50%       49%     49%
20

  -
         Q1-15      Q2-15      Q3-15      Q4-15      Q1-16      Q2-16      Q3-16      Q4-16   Q1-17   Q2-17     Q3-17   Q4-17

                                                 No Forbearance           Forbearance

      Source: Bank of Italy Report – «Condizioni e rischiosità del credito» updated Dec17

                                                                                                                                    PwC | 21
14 Servicing of UtP as a new market opportunity
          Servicing

                                                                   Conditions to be satisfied by the
                                                                 Servicers for the management of UtP

The UtP servicing could increase
significantly over the next four years
along with the volumes of NPE
outsourced by banks and investors to
external specialised servicers.

                   % of NPE stock
               outsourced to specialists
                                           >40%
                                          10-20%
                             2x             UtP
              20%
          5-10% UtP

             2017                          2021E

        Banks NPE management outsourcing

22 | The Italian Unlikely to Pay market | Is now the momentum?
15 UtP portfolios and single names transactions
   in 2017
        Loan sale

                                                  Seller                           Buyer                  € mln

                                      Veneto Banca, Banca Popolare
                                                                                     SGA                   9.000
                                               di Vicenza

                                                                            Quaestio Capital SGR
                                       Banca Marche, Etruria, Chieti                                       2.200*
     Banks’                                                                  + Credito Fondiario
     bailouts                                                          Quaestio Capital SGR (mezzanine)
                                           CRC – Carim – Carismi                                           2.800*
                                                                                + FIDT (junior)

                                                                            Quaestio Capital SGR
                                                   Carife                                                  376*
                                                                             + Credito Fondiario

                                                  CreVal                      Credito Fondiario             104

                                           CRC – Carim – Carismi             Algebris Investments           286

                                                  CreVal                     Algebris Investments          245**

                                              Commerzbank                    Fortress Inv. Group           234*

     Other
                                                  CreVal                          Cerberus                  105
     transactions

                                       Hypo Alpe Adria Bank S.p.A.            Bain Capital Credit           750*

                                              UniCredit S.p.A.                 Stinger SPV Srl              35

                                                  CreVal                        Hoist Finance               24

                                              UniCredit S.p.A.               DeVar Claims SPV Srl           na

(*) Mixed portfolio of UtP and Bad Loans
(**) Transaction closed in Q1, 2018
                                                                                                                  PwC | 23
16 Investor’s equity injection/underwriting of
   senior debt
         Investors’ equity injections

                  Deal                                            Type of                   Derecognition for the
               structure                                         investor                         banks

  Buyout of single-named UtP aimed
       at revamping the business
                                                       Private Equity Funds (distressed     Banks can derecognise the loan
  throughout debt consolidation and
                                                           value investing in equity)            through a true sale
    proactive management of target
               company

                                                     Acquirers of asset-backed securities
                                                                                             Banks cannot derecognize the
   Synthetic securitisation of non-                   (including the banks originators
                                                                                              loan if hold the credit risk
  performing exposures, potentially                  underwriting the SPV notes) along
                                                                                            through the junior notes of the
         secured by GACS                              with investors with different risk
                                                                                                          SPV
                                                                    profile

  Acquisition of target company with
      debtor-in-possession (DIP)
                                                                                            Banks can derecognise the loan
       financing to realise new                         Private Debt Funds investing in
                                                                                            and replace it with shares of the
  investments. Often the investment                          distressed companies
                                                                                               investment vehicle/ fund
    vehicle/ fund is participated by
              selling banks

  Creation of an all-equity SPV, fully
  provided with cash; merger of the
  SPV with target bank; use of SPV’s
                                                     SPAC (Special Purpose Acquisition      Banks can derecognise the loan
   raised cash to underwrite senior
                                                                Company)                         through a true sale
       debt/ equity of distressed
    companies with the purpose of
           business recovery

24 | The Italian Unlikely to Pay market | Is now the momentum?
17 View on 2018 - Strategic drivers will lead the
   banks’ decisions on their UtP management

As discussed above, there are four different possibilities          The decision of retaining or selling UtP portfolios/ single
of managing UtP exposures. These options imply the                  names (and, if retained, the choice between internal and
true sale (derecognition) or the active management of               external management) will be driven by several strategic
UtP exposures.                                                      drivers, entailing regulatory requirements, accounting
                                                                    principles, banks’ industrial capability and expertise,
In turn, active management could be either implemented              long term vision of their NPE management.
by the bank itself or a servicer.

                                                                                               Active management
               Sale                                    Type of UtP
                                                                                              Internal          Servicer

       Strategic drivers                                                                        Strategic drivers

    Capital requirements                                                                     Portfolio features
                                                             “Overdue”                       (borrower size, industry,
                                                                UtP                          “vintage” in bank’s
                                                                                             balance-sheet, presence of
    Financial Statements                                                                     guarantees, revolving vs.
    overhaul following UtP                                                                   non-revolving etc.)
    derecognition
                                                       “Restructured”
                                                            UtPs                             Bank’s expertise in
                                                   (e.g. recovery plans ex                   managing restructuring
    Regulators’ influence                           art. 67 & art. 182bis                    processes
    (ECB, Bank of Italy, EBA)                       Italian Bankruptcy
                                                          Law, other
                                                        restructuring
    Presence/absence of                                                                      Bank’s industrial capacity
                                                         procedures)
    upside opportunities for                                                                 in proactively managing
    the bank (following the                                                                  massive stocks of UtP
    restructuring measures)
                                                     «Non performing»                        Regulators’ influence
    Bank’s long-term strategic                             UtPs                              (ECB, Bank of Italy, EBA)
    objectives about their                           (almost bad loans)
    NPE management

                                                                                                                        PwC | 25
Appendix

26 | The Italian Unlikely to Pay market | Is now the momentum?
How will the IFRS9 affect UtP?

The transition to IFRS 9 (from IAS 39) will be critical as    As a result, specific instruments as well as right
banks will be required to accrue provisions based on          structure and skilled people to proactively monitor
expected losses and not only upon the occurrence of           borrowers’ performances will be required.
specific events (e.g. “impairment tests”). Banks will be
asked to adopt a “forward looking” approach and as such
to anticipate losses at the first signals of deterioration.

               Loans classification                                       Impairment methodology

New classification criteria will lead to 3 new classes         •   New impairment criteria, based on the “expected
of loans associated with bank’s business model (“Hold              loss” and “forward looking“ approach, will
To Collect”, “Hold To Collect and Sale”, “Held For                 result in certain portions of the current portfolio
Trading”). The need to properly classify their exposures           classified in loans’ higher risk categories (e.g. from
will require the bank to review and strategically refine           performing to UtP/bad loans)
their business model associated to the loans’
management:                                                    •   Higher impairment (by collective and analytical
                                                                   provisioning) will result through the “forward
•   On the one hand, for the “portfolio to hold”, banks            looking” approach which will move up losses to be
    should strenghten the internal credit                          incurred over the loans’ lifetime
    monitoring functions in terms of expertise as well
    as of renovated tools of credit risk measurement           •   Need to foresee the lifetime losses will require the
    (e.g. KPI, index, advanced CRM solutions)                      banks to implement proactive actions to preliminarly
                                                                   assess borrowers’ likelihood to pay their debts along
•   On the other hand, for the “portfolio to sell”, banks          with avoiding further danger rate from performing to
    should implement specialised units in charge of the            UtP and bad loans
    structuring and execution of loans’ sale
    transactions (e.g. data preparation and
    remediation, securitisation)

                                                                                                                   PwC | 27
Non Performing Exposures classifications

The commonly used term non-performing loans (“NPL”)                    In Italy, banks are also required to distinguish among
is based on different definitions across Europe.                       different classes of NPE: (i) Bad Loans, (ii) Unlikely to
To overcome problems, EBA has issued a common                          Pay and (iii) Past Due; the sum of these 3 categories
definition of Non-Performing Exposures (“NPE”) which                   corresponds to the Non-Performing Exposures referred
is used for supervisory reporting purposes.                            to in the EBA ITS.

The exposures are classified as Unlikely to Pay in light of            The range of signals and issues may be very wide and
the unlikelihood that relevant debtors will fulfil their               differs case by case but a common feature is that each of
credit obligations.                                                    them is recoverable and/ or is manageable if tackled
The unlikelihood judgement is made by the Bank based                   properly and timely. Time is of essence.
on a varied spectrum of signals and issues.

Old                                           New                      Definition of risk category

                                                                       •     Exposure to any borrower whose loans are not included in other
                                                                 NPE
                                                                             categories and who, at the date of the balance sheet closure, have
                                                                             Past Due amounts or unauthorized overdrawn positions of more
                                                                             than 90 days.
                                                                       •     A sub-segment is now represented by the Forborne Non-
                                                                             Performing Exposures (“FNPE”), credits granted to a counterparty
                                                                             in financial difficulty and which are not classified as Bad Loans and
                                                                             have been subject to the modification of the terms and conditions
                                                                             of the contract or refinancing.

                                                                        •    The classification of loans in this category is the result of
                                              Unlikely to Pay                the              of the bank about the debtors’ unlikelihood
                                              Inadempienze                   to fulfil its credit obligations. This category substitutes
                                              probabili                      the old sub- standard loans (“Incagli”) and restructured
                                                                             loans (“Crediti Ristrutturati”).

                                              Including FNPE *          •    A sub-segment of the Unlikely to Pay is now
                                                                             represented by the FNPE.

                                                                        •     Exposure to a borrower in a position of insolvency (not
                                                                              necessarily recognised by a Court) or a substantially similar
                                                                              situation, irrespective of the presence of any collateral. Same as
                                                                              previous classification of Bad Loans or “Sofferenze”.
                                                                        •     A sub-segment of the Bad Loans is now represented by the FNPE.

                                                                           FNPE may become a Forborne Performing Exposure if:
                                                                           •  12 months have passed from last allowance
(*)FNPE: Forborne Non-Performing Exposures                                 •  No past due from last allowance occurred
Source: EBA, EBA/ITS/2013/03/rev1 24/7/2014

28 | The Italian Unlikely to Pay market | Is now the momentum?
UtP inflows and outflows from 2014 to 2016 – Top 10
Italian banks (€ mln)
Outflows and inflows | Unicredit

                                               Outflows                                      Inflows
                                               (13,526)                                       9,337

      24,529           (7%)
                                       (16%)
                                                                                                            16%         20,339
                                                        (12%)

                                                                     (20%)                     7%
                                                                                 15%

 UTP Exposure To performing          Collected      To bad loans     Others      From     From Past Due Other inflows UTP Exposure
  31.12.2016                                                        outflows   performing                              31.12.2017

 Outflows and inflows | Intesa Sanpaolo

                                               Outflows                                      Inflows
                                                (8,599)                                       6,557

      19,986           (9%)
                                       (13%)                                                                12%         17,944
                                                        (14%)                                  8%
                                                                                 13%
                                                                     (7%)

 UTP Exposure To performing          Collected      To bad loans     Others      From     From Past Due Other inflows UTP Exposure
  31.12.2016                                                        outflows   performing                              31.12.2017

Source: PwC analysis of banks’ financial statements as at 31Dec17

                                                                                                                          PwC | 29
Outflows and inflows | MPS

                                              Outflows                                                Inflows
                                               (6,268)                                                2,625

     15,248           (3%)
                                       (9%)
                                                       (23%)

                                                                                                                  4%          11,605
                                                                                                        3%
                                                                                         10%
                                                                        (5%)

UTP Exposure To performing          Collected      To bad loans        Others          From     From Past Due Other inflows UTP Exposure
 31.12.2016                                                           outflows       performing                              31.12.2017

Outflows and inflows | Banco BPM*

                                              Outflows                                                Inflows
                                               (6,179)                                                 3,938

     11,476            (5%)
                                      (10%)
                                                       (12%)
                                                                                                                  21%          8,985
                                                                        (27%)

                                                                                         13%            1%

UTP Exposure To performing          Collected      To bad loans        Others          From     From Past Due Other inflows UTP Exposure
 31.12.2016                                                           outflows       performing                              31.12.2017
(*) Figures of Banco BPM in FY 2016 were calculated as sum of the figures of Banco Popolare and BPM
Source: PwC analysis of banks’ financial statements as at 31Dec17

30 | The Italian Unlikely to Pay market | Is now the momentum?
Outflows and inflows | UBI

                                              Outflows                                       Inflows
                                               (3,781)                                        3,808

     5,147            (7%)                                                                                  45%          5,174
                                      (21%)

                                                       (22%)

                                                                                               7%
                                                                     (24%)       23%

UTP Exposure To performing          Collected      To bad loans      Others      From     From Past Due Other inflows UTP Exposure
 31.12.2016                                                         outflows   performing                              31.12.2017

Outflows and inflows | BNL**

                                              Outflows                                       Inflows
                                               (1,889)                                        1,186

     4,674            (8%)
                                       (5%)
                                                       (25%)                                                4%           3,971
                                                                                               5%
                                                                                 17%

                                                                     (2%)

UTP Exposure To performing          Collected      To bad loans      Others      From     From Past Due Other inflows UTP Exposure
 31.12.2015                                                         outflows   performing                              31.12.2016

(**) BNL UtP exposure at 31Dec16
Source: PwC analysis of banks’ financial statements as at 31Dec17

                                                                                                                          PwC | 31
Outflows and inflows | BPER

                                              Outflows                                       Inflows
                                               (1,872)                                        1,214

     3,977            (11%)

                                      (18%)
                                                                                                            12%          3,318

                                                       (16%)                     16%           3%

                                                                     (2%)

UTP Exposure To performing          Collected      To bad loans      Others      From     From Past Due Other inflows UTP Exposure
 31.12.2016                                                         outflows   performing                              31.12.2017

Outflows and inflows | Cariparma

                                              Outflows                                       Inflows
                                               (984)                                           998

     2,023            (6%)                                                                                  30%          2,037
                                       (8%)
                                                       (20%)

                                                                                               5%
                                                                     (14%)       14%

UTP Exposure To performing          Collected      To bad loans      Others      From     From Past Due Other inflows UTP Exposure
 31.12.2016                                                         outflows   performing                              31.12.2017

Source: PwC analysis of banks’ financial statements as at 31Dec17

32 | The Italian Unlikely to Pay market | Is now the momentum?
Outflows and inflows | Banca Popolare di Sondrio

                                               Outflows                                       Inflows
                                                (786)                                          568

     1.988             (7%)
                                       (7%)
                                                       (18%)                                                 9%           1.769
                                                                                                7%
                                                                                  13%
                                                                      (7%)

        -                -                -               -             -           -            -            -             -
UTP Exposure To performing          Collected      To bad loans      Others       From    From Past Due Other inflows UTP Exposure
 31.12.2016                                                         outflows   performing                              31.12.2017

Outflows and inflows | Credem

                                              Outflows                                       Inflows
                                               (264)                                           225

       504            (4%)
                                      (31%)
                                                                                                            20%           465

                                                                                               3%
                                                                                 22%
                                                       (15%)

                                                                     (3%)

UTP Exposure To performing          Collected      To bad loans      Others      From     From Past Due Other inflows UTP Exposure
 31.12.2016                                                         outflows   performing                              31.12.2017

Source: PwC analysis of banks’ financial statements as at 31Dec17

                                                                                                                          PwC | 33
34 | The Italian Unlikely to Pay market | Is now the momentum?
Outflows - Top 10 Italian banks

From UtP to Performing in 2017 *

                                                                           11%

                 9%
    7%                                                              8%
                                                       7%                                     7%                  7%
                                                                                    6%

                                           5%
                                                                                                        4%
                              3%

 Unicredit     Intesa        MPS         Banco         UBI          BNL*   BPER   Cariparma BP Sondrio Credem   Average
              Sanpaolo                    BPM                                                                    2017

From UtP to Collected in 2017 *

                                                                                                        31%

                                                       21%
                                                                           18%
   16%
                13%                                                                                               13%
                                          10%
                              9%
                                                                                     8%        7%
                                                                     5%

 Unicredit     Intesa        MPS         Banco         UBI          BNL*   BPER   Cariparma BP Sondrio Credem   Average
              Sanpaolo                    BPM                                                                    2017

(*) Figures for BNL refer to 2016
Source: PwC analysis of banks’ financial statements as at 31Dec17

                                                                                                                        PwC | 35
From UtP to Bad Loans in 2017 *

                                                                    25%
                               23%
                                                         22%
                                                                                     20%
                                                                                              18%
                                                                            16%                                   16%
                                                                                                        15%
                  14%
      12%                                   12%

   Unicredit     Intesa        MPS         Banco         UBI        BNL*   BPER   Cariparma BP Sondrio Credem   Average
                Sanpaolo                    BPM                                                                  2017

Remained UtP in 2017 *

                              59%                                   60%                       60%
                  57%
                                                                           53%      51%                          50%
                                                                                                       48%
     45%                                   44%

                                                        27%

  Unicredit     Intesa        MPS         Banco          UBI        BNL*   BPER   Cariparma BP Sondrio Credem   Average
               Sanpaolo                    BPM                                                                   2017

(*) Figures for BNL refer to 2016
Source: PwC analysis of banks’ financial statements as at 31Dec17

36 | The Italian Unlikely to Pay market | Is now the momentum?
PwC | 37
Portfolio Advisory                                    Group
 Austria                                Greece                              Serbia                               North America
 Jens Roennberg                         Thanassis Panopoulos                Marko Fabris                         Mitchell Roschelle
 +49 699 585 2226                       +30 210 687 4628                    +38 111 330 2137                     +1 646 471 8070
 jens.roennberg@at.pwc.com              Thanassis.panopoulos@gr.pwc.com     marko.fabris@rs.pwc.com              mitchell.m.roschelle@pwc.com
 Bernhard Engel
                                        Hungary                             Spain                                Asia Pacific
 +43 150 188 1160
                                        Csaba Polacsek                      Jaime Bergaz                         Ted Osborn
 bernhard.engel@at.pwc.com
                                        +36 14 619 751                      +34 915 684 589                      +85 222 892 299
                                        csaba.polacsek@hu.pwc.com           jaime.bergaz@es.pwc.com              t.osborn@hk.pwc.com
 Bulgaria
 Bojidar Neytchev                                                           Guillermo Barquin
                                        Ireland                                                                  Chiara Lombardi
 +35 929 355 288                                                            +34 915 685 773
                                        David Tynan                                                              +65 6236 3703
 bojidar.neytchev@bg.pwc.com                                                guillermo.barquin.orbea@es.pwc.com
                                        +353 1792 6582                                                           chiara.m.lombardi@sg.pwc.com
                                        david.tynan@ie.pwc.com              Pablo Martinez-Pina
 CEE
                                                                            +34 915 684 370                      James Dilley
 Petr Smutny
                                        Italy                               pablo.martinez-pina@es.pwc.com       +85 222 892 497
 +42 025 115 1215
                                        Pierpaolo Masenza                                                        james.ha.dilley@hk.pwc.com
 petr.smutny@cz.pwc.com                                                     Richard Garey
                                        +39 065 7025 2483
                                                                            +34 915 684 156
 Edward Macnamara                       pierpaolo.masenza@it.pwc.com                                             Huong Dao Thi Thien
                                                                            richard.garey@es.pwc.com
 +42 731 635 089                                                                                                 dao.thi.thien.huong@vn.pwc.com
 edward.x.macnamara@ro.pwc.com          Fedele Pascuzzi
                                                                            Sweden
                                        +39 0 28064 6323                                                         Lee Chui Sum
                                                                            Per Storbacka
 Croatia                                fedele.pascuzzi@it.pwc.com                                               +60(3) 2173 1188
                                                                            +46 855 533 132
 Sinisa Dusic                                                                                                    chui.sum.lee@my.pwc.com
                                                                            per.storbacka@se.pwc.com
 +38 516 328 844                        Vito Ruscigno
 sinisa.dusic@hr.pwc.com                +39 02 8064 6333                                                         Michael Fung
                                                                            Turkey
                                        vito.ruscigno@it.pwc.com                                                 michael.fung@au.pwc.com
                                                                            Serkan Tamur
 Cyprus
                                                                            +90 212 376 5312
 Stelios Constantinou                   Alessandro Biondi                                                        Masaya Koto
                                                                            serkan.tarmur@tr.pwc.com
 +35 725 555 190                        +39 02 778 5213                                                          +81 906 512 4999
 stelios.constantinou@cy.pwc.com        alessandro.biondi@it.pwc.com        Kadir Köse                           masaya.kato@pwc.com
                                                                            +90 212 355 5323
 Czech Republic and Slovakia            The Netherlands                     kadir.kose@tr.pwc.com                Latin America
 Petr Smutny                            Peter Wolterman                                                          Nico Malagamba
 +42 025 115 1215                       +31 887 925 080                     Ukraine                              +55 119 9976 4250
 petr.smutny@cz.pwc.com                 peter.wolterman@nl.pwc.com          Oleg Tymkiv                          nicolas.malagamba@br.pwc.com
                                                                            +38 044 4906 773
 Denmark                                Wilbert van den Heuvel              oleg.tymkiv@ua.pwc.com               Middle East
 Bent Jørgensen                         +31 887 923 816                                                          Matthew Wilde
 +45 39 459 259                         wilbert.van.den.heuvel@nl.pwc.com   United Kingdom                       +971 4 304 3984
 bent.jorgensen@dk.pwc.com                                                  Richard Thompson                     matthew.wilde@ae.pwc.com
                                        Jessica Lombardo                    +44 20 7213 1185
 France                                 +31 887 925 060                     richard.c.thompson@pwc.com
 Hervé Demoy                            jessica.lombardo@nl.pwc.com
                                                                            Robert Boulding
 +33 156 577 099
                                                                            +44 20 7804 5236
 herve.demoy@fr.pwc.com                 Norway
                                                                            robert.boulding@pwc.com
                                        Lars Johansson
 Germany                                +47 48 161 792                      Ben May
 Christopher Sur                        lars.x.johansson@no.pwc.com         +44 20 7212 3664
 +49 699 585 2651                                                           ben.may@pwc.com
 christopher.sur@de.pwc.com             Poland
                                                                            Panos Mizios
                                        Pawel Dzurak
                                                                            +44 20 7804 7963
 Thomas Veith                           +48 227 464 697
                                                                            panagiotis.mizios@pwc.com
 +49 699 585 5905                       pawel.dzurak@pl.pwc.com
 thomas.veith@de.pwc.com                                                    Christina Zarifi
                                        Portugal                            +44 20 7213 2045
 Jörg Jünger                            Antonio Rodrigues                   christina.zarifi@pwc.com
 +49 699 585 2707                       +35 121 359 9181
                                                                            Natasha Firman
 joerg.juenger@de.pwc.com               antonio.rodrigues@pt.pwc.com
                                                                            +44 20 7212 3453
                                                                            natasha.firman@pwc.com

38 | The Italian Unlikely to Pay market | Is now the momentum?
www.pwc.com/it

© 2018 PricewaterhouseCoopers Advisory SpA. All rights reserved. PwC refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers Advisory SpA and may sometimes refer to the PwC network.
Each member firm is a separate legal entity. Please see www.pwc.com/structure for further details. This content is for general information purposes only, and should not be
used as a substitute for consultation with professional advisors.
You can also read
NEXT SLIDES ... Cancel