A Safekeeping Receipt is not in itself a technical term in the financial world, so it has no fixed customary or defined meaning in the financial sphere we as Sapphire capital Network populate.

It seems to possibly describe 2 seperate situations:

a. A negotiable, bank-issued certificate representing ownership of stock securities by an investor. An international depository receipt, or IDR, is the non-US equivalent of an American Depository Receipt. These instruments have been used since the 1970's to facilitate international trading in securities. The securities backing the receipt remain in the custody of the issuing bank or a correspondent bank. It usually descibes the securities in their screen features, includes specific terms and conditions as they relay to the bank responsibily and carry a compliance reference number which does allow a direct screening. They, the depositary receipts, are securities.

b. A negotiable or non-negotiable bank-issued certificate representing the holding or ownership of an asset, such as art, precious metal, jewelry, mining rights, specific certified rights, everything a bank can hold. In a negotiable form typically issued for cash value market assets, in a no negotiable form for documentary purpose issued without a value assignement, the bank usually certifies what they hold, the terms and conditions of the holding and for whom they are holding, which insurance is covering risks and their own liability towards the beneficiary.

Under above a. the depositary receipts are not usually a problem as long as they are issued for exchange traded securities, however they do not allow the creation of derivatives easily, so you can not strip the securities, use them for seperate call and put structures and can create legal compliance problems in regards of origin if they are the result of a pool facility. The problem starts when they are created for the representation of non-exchange traded securities. You have to look into the basic details of such securities, their handling restrictions and details, possible tax and trade related problems in regards of the relation between the related country and yours and so on. Since the work has to be done anyway, the depositary receipt seems to us a waste of money and time. If you look at the depositary receipt of a bulk portfolio of secondary bank obligations in a private placement structure which may be linked to a specific project, the whole process can create even more problems than a direct approach.

Depository receipts in relation to the case a. so far made only sense to us in very restricted circumstances where we would not engage in the country for any services.

In regards of the variation b.) the safe keeping receipt is actually a sort of a bank asset escrow where the bank certifies to hold the asset either for the owner or if negotiable for the owner of the certificate. The problem is here as well that the value of the asset and it modus of transfer does establish the value. Since the bank will refer to a third party for the evaluation and normally includes an insurance such certificate is not "clean". So if you go through the hazzle there you can do it without the bank as well, but cheaper and faster.

For securitization it may make sense to follow such a procedure but even then there are cheaper and easier ways around the paper related problem.

In addition in some countries there are legal problems in regrds of transfer, holding and escrow as well as trust facilities which are normally established.

Given this, frankly a safekeeping receipt in my view is not worth the hazzle.