Connect with us

Published

on

Depending on your point of view, Jeremy Hunt’s proposed reform of financial regulations represents a potentially significant boost to the competitiveness of the UK’s financial services sector or a potentially dangerous watering-down of rules put in place to prevent a re-run of the financial crisis.

The truth, as ever, is that it is probably somewhere in between.

The first thing to say is that it is absolutely vital for the sector to remain competitive. Financial services is something the UK does well – it is one of the country’s great strengths.

As the Treasury pointed out this morning, it employs some 2.3 million people – the majority outside London – and the sector generates 13% of the UK’s overall tax revenues, enough to pay for the police service and all of the country’s state schools.

And there is little disputing that the UK’s competitive edge has been blunted during the last decade.

Part of that, though, is not due to post-crisis regulations but because of Brexit. Some activities that were once carried out in the Square Mile, Canary Wharf and elsewhere in the UK are now carried out in other parts of continental Europe instead.

That has hurt the City. Amsterdam, for example, has overtaken London as Europe’s biggest centre in terms of volumes of shares traded.

More on Brexit

The move away from EU regulations

The government takes the view, though, that Brexit has provided an opportunity to make the UK’s financial services sector more competitive, in that the UK can now move away from some EU regulations.

A good example here is the EU-wide cap on banker bonuses – something that numerous City chieftains say has blunted the UK’s ability to attract international talent from competing locations such as New York, Singapore and Tokyo.

A woman crosses a canal in Amsterdam, the Netherlands on Saturday, Dec. 18, 2021.  Dutch government ministers are meeting Saturday to discuss advice from a panel of experts who are reportedly are advising a toughening of the partial lockdown that is already in place to combat COVID-19. (AP Photo/Peter Dejong)
Image:
Amsterdam, the Netherlands

The big US investment banks that dominate the City, such as JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Citi and Morgan Stanley, have on occasion struggled to relocate some of their better-paid people to London because of the cap. So, although it may look politically risky to do so during a cost of living crisis, it is a sensible move that is highly likely to generate more taxes for the Treasury.

Similarly uncontentious is a planned relaxation of the so-called ‘Solvency II’ rules, another EU-wide set of regulations, which determine how much capital insurance companies must keep on their balance sheets. The insurance industry has long argued that this forces companies to keep a lot of capital tied up unproductively.

Relaxing the rules will enable the industry to put billions of pounds worth of capital to more productive use, for example, in green infrastructure projects or social housing. Few people dispute this is anything other than a good idea.

Another reform likely to be universally welcomed by the industry is the sweeping away of the so-called PRIIPS (packaged retail and insurance-based investment products) rules. Investment companies have long argued that these inhibit the ability of fund managers and life companies to communicate effectively with their customers and even restrict customer choice.

Mixed responses

The fund management industry is also likely to welcome a divergence away from EU rules on how VAT is applied to the services it provides. This could see lighter taxation of asset management services in the UK than in the EU and would certainly make the sector more competitive.

There will also be widespread interest in a proposed consultation over whether the Financial Conduct Authority should be given regulatory oversight of bringing environmental, social and governance ratings providers. This is an area of investment of growing importance and yet the way ESG funds are rated is, at present, pretty incoherent.

Bringing the activity into the FCA’s purview could, potentially, give the UK leadership in a very important and increasingly lucrative activity.

So far, so good.

More contentious are plans to water down ‘ring fencing’ regulations put in place after the financial crisis.

These required banks with retail deposits of more than £25bn to ring fence them from their supposedly riskier investment banking operations – dubbed by the government of the day as so-called ‘casino banking’ operations.

The rules were seen at the time by many in the industry as being somewhat misguided on the basis that many of the UK lenders brought down by the financial crisis – HBOS, Northern Rock, Bradford & Bingley and Alliance & Leicester – had barely any investment banking operations.

Implementing them has been hugely expensive and lenders have argued that the rules risked “ossifying” the sector.

There is no doubt that, at the margins, they have also blunted consumer choice. Goldman Sachs, for example, famously had to close its highly successful savings business, Marcus, to new customers after it attracted deposits close to £25bn. So lifting the level at which retail deposits must be ring-fenced to £35billion will be welcomed in that quarter.

Challenger banks such as Santander UK, Virgin Money and TSB, all of which have little investment banking activities, are among those lenders seen as benefiting.

Protecting citizens from “banking Armageddon”

Yet the move will attract criticism from those who argue the rules were put in place for a reason and that watering them down will risk another crisis.

They include Sir Paul Tucker, former deputy governor of the Bank of England, who told the Financial Times earlier this year: “Ringfencing helps protect citizens from banking Armageddon.”

It is also worth noting that watering down the ring fencing rules does not appear something that the banks themselves has been calling for particularly strongly. It is not, after all, as if they will be able to recoup the considerable sums they have already spent putting ringfences in place.

Click to subscribe to The Ian King Business Podcast wherever you get your podcasts

Equally contentious are proposals to give regulators such as the Financial Conduct Authority and the Bank of England’s Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) a secondary objective of ensuring the UK’s financial services sector remains competitive alongside their primary objective of maintaining financial stability.

Sir John Vickers, who chaired the independent commission on banking that was set up after the financial crisis, wrote in the FT this week that the objective was either “pointless or dangerous”.

Senior industry figures have also raised an eyebrow over the move. Sir Howard Davies, chairman of NatWest, said earlier this year that he was “not keen” on the idea.

Pushback

More broadly, there may also be some scepticism over anything that sees the UK’s financial regulation move away from that of the EU.

The City was largely opposed to Brexit and, after it happened, the one thing it wanted more than anything else was a retention of the so-called ‘passport’ – enabling firms based in the UK to do business in the rest of the EU without having to go to financial regulators in each individual member state.

That was not delivered and has created in a great deal more bureaucracy for City firms as well as causing the relocation of some jobs from the UK to continental Europe.

The next best thing for the City would be so-called ‘equivalence’ – which would mean the EU and the UK’s financial regulations being broadly equivalent to the other side’s. The EU already has an existing arrangement with many other countries, such as the United States and Canada, and such a set-up with the UK would make it much easier for firms based here to do business in the bloc.

But critics of Mr Hunt‘s reforms argue that further movement away from the EU’s rules, as the chancellor envisages, would make it harder to secure the prize of an equivalence agreement.

Mr Hunt is almost certainly over-egging things when he likens these reforms to the ‘Big Bang’ changes made by Margaret Thatcher‘s government in 1986.

Big Bang was a genuine revolution in financial services that exposed the City to a blast of competition that, in short order, made the UK a global powerhouse in finance and which generated billions of pounds worth of wealth for the country.

The Edinburgh Reforms are likely to be far more marginal in their impact.

However, for those working in or running the financial services sector, the sentiment behind them will be welcomed.

Despite its importance in supporting millions of well-paid jobs, the sector has been more or less ignored by Conservative and Labour governments ever since the financial crisis.

Continue Reading

Business

At least 13 people may have taken their own lives linked to Post Office scandal, public inquiry finds

Published

on

By

At least 13 people may have taken their own lives linked to Post Office scandal, public inquiry finds

At least 13 people may have taken their own lives after being accused of wrongdoing based on evidence from the Horizon IT system that the Post Office and developers Fujitsu knew could be false, the public inquiry has found.

A further 59 people told the inquiry they considered ending their lives, 10 of whom tried on at least one occasion, while other postmasters and family members recount suffering from alcoholism and mental health disorders including anorexia and depression, family breakup, divorce, bankruptcy and personal abuse.

Follow latest on public inquiry into Post Office scandal

Writing in the first volume of the Post Office Horizon IT Inquiry report, chairman Sir Wyn Williams concludes that this enormous personal toll came despite senior employees at the Post Office knowing the Horizon IT system could produce accounts “which were illusory rather than real” even before it was rolled out to branches.

Sir Wyn said: “I am satisfied from the evidence that I have heard that a number of senior, and not so senior, employees of the Post Office knew or, at the very least, should have known that Legacy Horizon was capable of error… Yet, for all practical purposes, throughout the lifetime of Legacy Horizon, the Post Office maintained the fiction that its data was always accurate.”

Referring to the updated version of Horizon, known as Horizon Online, which also had “bugs errors and defects” that could create illusory accounts, he said: “I am satisfied that a number of employees of Fujitsu and the Post Office knew that this was so.”

The first volume of the report focuses on what Sir Wyn calls the “disastrous” impact of false accusations made against at least 1,000 postmasters, and the various redress schemes the Post Office and government has established since miscarriages of justice were identified and proven.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘It stole a lot from me’

Recommendations regarding the conduct of senior management of the Post Office, Fujitsu and ministers will come in a subsequent report, but Sir Wyn is clear that unjust and flawed prosecutions were knowingly pursued.

“All of these people are properly to be regarded as victims of wholly unacceptable behaviour perpetrated by a number of individuals employed by and/or associated with the Post Office and Fujitsu from time to time and by the Post Office and Fujitsu as institutions,” he says.

What are the inquiry’s recommendations?

Calling for urgent action from government and the Post Office to ensure “full and fair compensation”, he makes 19 recommendations including:

• Government and the Post Office to agree a definition of “full and fair” compensation to be used when agreeing payouts
• Ending “unnecessarily adversarial attitude” to initial offers that have depressed the value of payouts, ⁠and ensuring consistency across all four compensation schemes
• The creation of a standing body to administer financial redress to people wronged by public bodies
• Compensation to be extended to close family members of those affected who have suffered “serious negative consequences”
• The Post Office, Fujitsu and government agreeing a programme for “restorative justice”, a process that brings together those that have suffered harm with those that have caused it

Regarding the human impact of the Post Office’s pursuit of postmasters, including its use of unique powers of prosecution, Sir Wyn writes: “I do not think it is easy to exaggerate the trauma which persons are likely to suffer when they are the subject of criminal investigation, prosecution, conviction and sentence.”

He says that even the process of being interviewed under caution by Post Office investigators “will have been troubling at best and harrowing at worst”.

Read more:
Post Office inquiry lays bare heart-breaking legacy – analysis

‘Hostile and abusive behaviour’

The report finds that those wrongfully convicted were “subject to hostile and abusive behaviour” in their local communities, felt shame and embarrassment, with some feeling forced to move.

Detailing the impact on close family members of those prosecuted, Sir Wyn writes: “Wives, husbands, children and parents endured very significant suffering in the form of distress, worry and disruption to home life, in employment and education.

“In a number of cases, relationships with spouses broke down and ended in divorce or separation.

“In the most egregious cases, family members themselves suffered psychiatric illnesses or psychological problems and very significant financial losses… their suffering has been acute.”

The report includes 17 case studies of those affected by the scandal including some who have never spoken publicly before. They include Millie Castleton, daughter of Lee Castleton, one of the first postmasters prosecuted.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Three things you need to know about Post Office report

She told the inquiry how her family being “branded thieves and liars” affected her mental health, and contributed to a diagnosis of anorexia that forced her to drop out of university.

Her account concludes: “Even now as I go into my career, I still find it so incredibly hard to trust anyone, even subconsciously. I sabotage myself by not asking for help with anything.

“I’m trying hard to break this cycle but I’m 26 and am very conscious that I may never be able to fully commit to natural trust. But my family is still fighting. I’m still fighting, as are many hundreds involved in the Post Office trial.”

Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said the inquiry’s report “marks an important milestone for sub-postmasters and their families”.

He added that he was “committed to ensuring wronged sub-postmasters are given full, fair, and prompt redress”.

“The recommendations contained in Sir Wyn’s report require careful reflection, including on further action to complete the redress schemes,” Mr Reynolds said.

“Government will promptly respond to the recommendations in full in parliament.”

Continue Reading

Business

Public finances in ‘relatively vulnerable position.’, OBR warns

Published

on

By

Public finances in 'relatively vulnerable position.', OBR warns

The UK’s public finances are in a “relatively vulnerable position”, the government’s official forecaster has warned.

The Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) cited a drag from successive economic shocks, recent U-turns on spending cuts and higher-than-expected policy commitments.

It sounded alarm over the projected path for debt as a result, in its annual fiscal risks and sustainability report.

It saw total debt above 270% of gross domestic product (GDP) by the early 2070s – up from a current level of 96.5% – declaring that rising debts have led to “a substantial erosion of the UK’s capacity to respond to future shocks”.

Money latest: Amazon launches 24/7 grocery deliveries

The OBR’s report highlighted damage from the COVID pandemic and cost of living crisis that followed Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

But it raised fears that past and current government policies were further harming the sustainability of the public finances.

More from Money

The report said that the pension triple lock, for example, was now estimated to cost £15.5bn annually by 2029-30.

That was “around three times higher than initial expectations”, it said.

The lock, which rises each year in line with inflation, wage growth or 2.5% – whichever is higher – had risen by more than the 2.5% base in eight of the 13 years of operation to date, the report stated.

The watchdog said it reflected more volatile inflation than expected.

It also picked up on the latest government U-turns over planned welfare and winter fuel payment cuts in the face of rebellions by Labour MPs.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Welfare U-turn ‘has come at cost’

The decisions are expected to leave Chancellor Rachel Reeves facing a black hole of £6.75bn while weaker-than-expected economic growth could add a further £9bn to that sum in the run-up to the autumn budget, according to Sky News projections that see a void of around £20bn.

The OBR highlighted future risks from rising defence spending and the impact of climate change.

Public sector pay demands could also prove a drag, with resident doctors voting in favour of strikes over pay.

While ministers acknowledge damage to the public purse from the U-turns, Ms Reeves has repeatedly ruled out a new wave of borrowing to fund a spending spree.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Could the rich be taxed to fill black hole?

As such, the government has not ruled out the prospect of some form of wealth tax to help meet its commitments despite the top 1% of earners contributing almost a third of all income tax already – on top of other targeted taxes such as capital gains.

The report said: “Efforts to put the UK’s public finances on a more sustainable footing have met with only limited and temporary success in recent years in the aftermath of the shocks, debt has also continued to rise and borrowing remained elevated because governments have reversed plans to consolidate the public finances.

“Planned tax rises have been reversed, and, more significantly, planned spending reductions have been abandoned.”

Shadow chancellor Mel Stride said of the report: “The OBR’s report lays bare the damage: Britain now has the third-highest deficit and the fourth-highest debt burden in Europe, with borrowing costs among the highest in the developed world.

“Under Rachel Reeves’ economic mismanagement and Keir Starmer’s weak leadership, our public finances have become dangerously exposed – vulnerable to future shocks, welfare spending rising unsustainably, taxes rising to record highs and crippling levels of debt interest.

“Labour’s recklessness risks it all – your pension, your job, your home, your savings.”

A Number 10 spokesman said: “We recognise the realities set out in the OBR’s report and we’re taking the decisions needed to provide stability to the public finances.”

Continue Reading

Business

UK to miss deadline to agree steel and aluminium tariffs

Published

on

By

UK to miss deadline to agree steel and aluminium tariffs

The UK will miss the White House-imposed deadline to agree a trade deal on steel and aluminium this week, according to insiders from government and industry.

Donald Trump had insisted that unless Britain could finalise the details of its metals trade deal with the US by 9 July, he would raise the tariffs faced by steel and aluminium imports from the 25% the UK currently pays to the 50% paid by other countries. If it could seal the deal, those tariffs could drop to zero.

Money blog: 10 happiest and unhappiest professions for shift workers

However, despite weeks of negotiations and promises that the deal would be completed by the end of June, talks have foundered on two key issues. First, the US is insisting that only steel “melted and poured” in the UK (in other words, forged in blast furnaces or electric arc furnaces) can be included in the deal. However, one of Britain’s biggest steel exporters to the US, Tata Steel, is not melting and pouring its UK steel because of the closure of its blast furnaces.

Second, the US is wary of the fact that while the government has taken control of British Steel, which operates Britain’s last remaining blast furnaces in Scunthorpe, the company itself still legally has Chinese owners.

Government insiders have told businesses they still expect to have a deal done by the end of this month, and that they are confident the White House will not impose the 50% tariffs for the time being. They say one of the chief challenges they face is that the administration is so overwhelmed by attempts to negotiate with other countries that they lack the bandwidth to deal with the small print on Britain’s deal.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Inside the UK’s last blast furnaces

“As far as the Americans are concerned, the UK is already a done deal,” said one person close to the negotiations. The problem is that while a deal has been done on car and aerospace exports to the US, the metals element of the trade agreement is still some way from being signed. In the meantime, steel exports continue to incur tariffs – albeit lower than those imposed on other countries around the world.

Continue Reading

Trending