Preparing for a Bank Meeting: What Lenders Expect to See (2026)
Preparing for a bank meeting comes down to evidencing three things: where the company stands today, where it is heading, and what happens if it turns out otherwise. Lenders expect annual accounts for the last two to three years, current interim figures, a plan covering the financing term including liquidity, and a debt service capacity calculation. What decides the meeting is less the completeness of the folder than whether you can name the assumption behind every figure. That is how a bank distinguishes a managed business from a hoped-for result.
What the bank must ask for, and what it wants anyway
Part of the requirement is statutory. Under § 18 (1) of the German Banking Act (KWG), a credit institution may only grant a loan exceeding 1,500,000 euros or 10 percent of its own core capital if it obtains disclosure of the borrower’s economic circumstances, in particular through presentation of the annual financial statements. For ongoing credit relationships, that disclosure must be repeated at least annually and assessed by the bank in a traceable manner.
Below that threshold the provision falls away, but the requirement does not: banks request the same documents under their own risk management and for internal rating purposes. For a mid-sized company it makes almost no practical difference whether the request originates in § 18 KWG or in the lender’s credit policy.
The document checklist
| Category | Specifically | Why the bank wants it |
|---|---|---|
| History | Annual accounts for the last 2 to 3 years, with notes for corporations | Starting point for rating and trend assessment |
| Current position | Latest monthly management accounts and trial balance, with prior-year comparison | Shows whether the trend matches the last set of accounts |
| Forward view | Planned P&L, balance sheet and liquidity plan across the financing term | The loan is serviced out of future surpluses |
| Serviceability | Debt service capacity calculation including existing loans | The core metric of the credit decision |
| Liabilities | Schedule of all loans, amortisation plans, leases, collateral | A complete picture of existing debt service |
| The project | Description of the investment, quotes, expected effect | Connects the financing to the business purpose |
| Structure | Shareholder structure, management, succession plans where relevant | Assessment of dependencies and continuity |
The third row is where mid-sized companies most often stall. History and current figures come out of the accounting system anyway. A forward view that connects P&L, balance sheet and liquidity has to be actively produced, and without a controlling function the tooling for it is usually missing.
The four questions it comes down to
However extensive the documents, the conversation converges on four questions:
- What produces your earnings? Not “we are planning 8 percent growth”, but what volume at what price to which customer group. A growth assumption without a driver is, to a lender, an assertion.
- Can you carry the debt service? The bank expects your own calculation here, not merely a willingness to accept theirs. How it is constructed is covered in the article on debt service capacity.
- What happens in the bad case? A company presenting a single scenario does not look optimistic, it looks unprepared. Two or three variants with named triggers are the expected format.
- Where does liquidity come from in the meantime? The gap between investment and effect is the critical one, and it can only be answered with a liquidity plan that follows from the earnings plan.
Why the bank asks how you got there
“How did you arrive at this number?” is not suspicion, it is method. It separates two cases: a plan whose assumptions are named and therefore testable, and one where the figure is the output of a wish. For the lender the first case is better even when the number is worse, because a named assumption can be discussed.
In practice this means the plan should show which drivers produce each material line item, and a change should be demonstrable on the spot. Driver-based planning makes that possible, whereas an organically grown set of spreadsheets usually shows the result without the route to it.
The context is tighter than in previous years. Between January and April 2026, German courts registered 8,551 filed business insolvencies according to the Federal Statistical Office, 6.7 percent more than in the same period the year before, at an insolvency rate of 24.1 cases per 10,000 companies. Credit decision-makers scrutinise more closely in that environment, and the quality of the forward view becomes the differentiator.
What to bring without being asked
- An explained variance. If last year came in below plan, the prepared explanation beats the spontaneous one. Banks do not expect a flawless history; they expect a company that knows its variances.
- Your own debt service calculation. It signals that you understand the lender’s assessment logic.
- Two or three scenarios with triggers. Not best and worst case as a percentage overlay, but “customer X reduces by 20 percent” or “material prices up 8 percent”.
- A plan for what you would do if a scenario materialises. For limited-liability entities, examining countermeasures is part of management’s duties under § 1 StaRUG in any case.
Outlook
Credit assessment is trending towards more data connectivity and more frequent updates. For companies, that implies less an obligation to produce bigger document packs than an ability to present current figures without effort. A company whose plan is connected to its bookkeeping can answer a mid-year query with an updated forecast rather than a reference to the next set of accounts. That shifts the position in the conversation more than any wording in the cover letter.
Frequently asked questions
At what loan size do I have to disclose my figures?
Disclosure becomes legally mandatory for the bank above 1,500,000 euros or 10 percent of its core capital under § 18 (1) KWG. Independently of that, banks request the documents in practically all cases, because they need them for internal rating.
How far into the future does the plan have to reach?
As a rule of thumb, across the term of the financing, and at minimum the current plus the following fiscal year. For long-term investment loans, lenders expect a multi-year view, though the level of detail may taper in later years.
Is a planned P&L enough, or does the bank need a planned balance sheet?
A planned P&L alone is insufficient for assessing debt service capacity, because the liquidity effect cannot be derived from it. What is expected is the connection between planned P&L, balance sheet and liquidity plan.
What if we have no controlling function?
That is the norm in smaller mid-sized companies and not a disqualifier. History and interim figures come from the accounting system, often via the tax advisory firm. The forward view has to be added, and tools now exist for exactly that, building on existing bookkeeping data without an implementation project.
Should you show the bank a worst case?
Yes. Withholding risks that the bank will find in its own analysis costs credibility. A named risk with a prepared countermeasure has the opposite effect: it reads as evidence of management.