Katılım bankacılığı ihracat finansmanında selem ve istisna yöntemlerinin kullanımı ve karşılaştırmalı analizi

Abstract

Günümüzde faizsiz bankalar müşterilerini sevk öncesi ihracat finansman imkânlarından faydalandırmak için pek az imkâna sahiplerdir. Konvansiyonel bankalar sevk öncesi ihracat finansmanını faizli kredilerle rahatlıkla gerçekleştirebildikleri halde faizsiz bankalar ihracatçılara sadece selem ve istisna akitleri yoluyla finansman sağlayabilirler. Bu akit türlerinin sevk öncesi ihracat finansmanında hangi şartlar altında kullanılabileceği ve bu akitlerin faizsiz bankalara yükleyebileceği riskler bu makalede araştırılmıştır. Ayrıca bu iki akit türü akreditifli işlemlerle birleştirilerek, faizsiz bankacılık için sevk öncesi ihracat finansmanına bir örnek model de makale içerisinde sunulmuştur.

The purpose of writing the article is to compare the salam and istisna’ contracts used by participation banks in pre-shipment export financing and to help these banks determine which of the contracts they should prefer according to the situation and conditions. Today, interest-free banks have little opportunity to benefit their customers from pre-shipment export financing opportunities. While conventional banks can easily realize pre-shipment export financing with interest-bearing loans, interest-free banks can only provide financing to exporters through salam and istisna’ contracts so that they can purchase goods that have not yet been produced through financing. The conditions under which these methods can be used in pre-shipment export financing and the risks that these contracts may impose on interestfree banks are investigated in the article. In addition, a sample model for preshipment export financing for interest-free banking, by combining these two contract types with letter of credit transactions, is presented in the article. The findings are as follows: If the export subject is a standard good to be produced, the salam contract should be selected, and if it is a non-standard product to be manufactured, the istisna’ contract should be selected. Participation banks must make the payment in advance in the salam contract. In the istisna’ contract, it can make the payment in cash or as it is delivered to the exporter after the production takes place. The bank should prefer the salam contract in producer/supplier financing, and the istisna’ contract in producer financing. In the istisna’ contract, the customer or the manufacturer can cancel the contract if the production has not started yet or by giving prior notice. If the bank does not want to take this risk, it should prefer the salam contract. The delivery time can be changed in the istisna’ contract. When the bank has to comply with the terms in the letter of credit, it should prefer the salam contract.