The US government has assured depositors that they will be able to access all of their money quickly following the historic failure of Silicon Valley Bank.
Regulators had worked all weekend to try to find a buyer for the California-based bank – which has become the second-largest bank failure in history – but efforts appeared to have been unsuccessful on Sunday.
The US Treasury says all deposits in SVB are safe, though, as it sought to reassure customers of America’s 16th largest bank, as well as the financial markets.
The chancellor says the sale will provide security to UK customers, including tech firms the government was keen to protect from the bank’s demise.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:53
‘SVB rescue necessary to protect UK tech’
But despite the HSBC deal in the UK, and the US government’s moves to reassure people about SVB, the financial bleeding has continued to spread.
New York-based Signature Bank has also failed and was being seized on Sunday with more than $110bn (£90.8bn) in assets – becoming the third-largest bank failure in US history.
Asian markets were jittery as trading kicked off on Monday.
Japan’s benchmark Nikkei 225 fell 1.6% in morning trading, while Australia’s S&P/ASX 200 lost 0.3%.
Advertisement
South Korea’s Kospi sank 0.4% but Hong Kong’s Hang Seng rose 1.4% and the Shanghai Composite increased 0.3%.
In a bid to instil confidence in the banking system, the Treasury Department, Federal Reserve and Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) said on Sunday that all Silicon Valley Bank clients in the US would be protected and be able to access their money.
US authorities also announced steps so that the bank’s customers are protected, preventing additional bank runs.
“This step will ensure that the US banking system continues to perform its vital roles of protecting deposits and providing access to credit to households and businesses in a manner that promotes strong and sustainable economic growth,” the agencies said in a joint statement.
It means that depositors at Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank, including those whose holdings exceed the $250,000 (£206,602) insurance limit, can access their funds today.
‘More banks will likely fail’
But some experts are warning that the move by the US authorities could spark a banking crisis by encouraging bad investor behaviour.
By guaranteeing that depositors would lose no money, authorities are raising the question of moral hazard – the removal of people’s incentive to guard against financial risk.
“This is a bailout and a major change of the way in which the US system was built and its incentives,” said Nicolas Veron, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington.
“The cost will be passed on to everyone who uses banking services. If all bank deposits are now insured, why do you need banks?”
However, others defended the strong action.
Billionaire hedge fund manager Bill Ackman tweeted that if authorities had not intervened, “we would have had a 1930s bank run continuing first thing Monday causing enormous economic damage and hardship to millions”.
He added: “More banks will likely fail despite the intervention, but we now have a clear roadmap for how the gov’t will manage them.”
Supporters of the action to guarantee deposits say taxpayers have been protected from funding the measures, unlike the bank rescues during the 2008 financial crisis.
Elsewhere, another beleaguered bank, First Republic Bank, announced it had bolstered its financial health by gaining access to funding from the Fed and JPMorgan Chase.
Rachel Reeves will pledge to “stand up for Britain’s national interest” as she heads to Washington DC amid hopes of a UK/US trade deal.
The chancellor will fly to the US capital for her spring meetings of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the first of which began on Sunday.
During her three-day visit, Ms Reeves is set to hold meetings with G7, G20 and IMF counterparts about the changing global economy and is expected to make the case for open trade.
The chancellor will also hold her first in-person meeting with her US counterpart, treasury secretary Scott Bessent, about striking a new trade agreement, which the UK hopes will take the sting out of Mr Trump’s tariffs.
In addition to the 10% levy on all goods imported to America from the UK, Mr Trump enacted a 25% levy on car imports.
Ms Reeves will also be hoping to encourage fellow European finance ministers to increase their defence spending and discuss the best ways to support Ukraine in its war against Russia.
Speaking ahead of her visit, Ms Reeves said: “The world has changed, and we are in a new era of global trade. I am in no doubt that the imposition of tariffs will have a profound impact on the global economy and the economy at home.
“This changing world is unsettling for families who are worried about the cost of living and businesses concerned about what tariffs will mean for them. But our task as a government is not to be knocked off course or to take rash action which risks undermining people’s security.
“Instead, we must rise to meet the moment and I will always act to defend British interests as part of our plan for change.
“We need a world economy that provides stability and fairness for businesses wanting to invest and trade, more trade and global partnerships between nations with shared interests, and security for working people who want to get on with their lives.”
There will be much to chew over at the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) spring meetings this week.
Central bankers and finance ministers will descend on Washington for its latest bi-annual gathering, a place where politicians and academics converge, all of them trying to make sense of what’s going on in the global economy.
Everything and nothing has changed since they last met in October – one man continues to dominate the agenda.
Six months ago, delegates were wondering if Donald Trump could win the election and what that might mean for tax and tariffs: How far would he push it? Would his policy match his rhetoric?
Image: Donald Trump. Pic: Reuters
This time round, expect iterations of the same questions: Will the US president risk plunging the world’s largest economy into recession?
Yes, he put on a bombastic display on his so-called “Liberation Day”, but will he now row back? Have the markets effectively checked him?
Behind the scenes, finance ministers from around the world will be practising their powers of persuasion, each jostling for meetings with their US counterparts to negotiate a reduction in Trump’s tariffs.
That includes Chancellor Rachel Reeves, who is still holding out hope for a trade deal with the US – although she is not alone in that.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
13:27
Could Trump make a deal with UK?
Are we heading for a recession?
The IMF’s economists have already made up their minds about Trump’s potential for damage.
Last week, they warned about the growing risks to financial stability after a period of turbulence in the financial markets, induced by Trump’s decision to ratchet up US protectionism to its highest level in a century.
By the middle of this week the organisation will publish its World Economic Outlook, in which it will downgrade global growth but stop short of predicting a full-blown recession.
Others are less optimistic.
Kristalina Georgieva, the IMF’s managing director, said last week: “Our new growth projections will include notable markdowns, but not recession. We will also see markups to the inflation forecasts for some countries.”
She acknowledged the world was undergoing a “reboot of the global trading system,” comparing trade tensions to “a pot that was bubbling for a long time and is now boiling over”.
She went on: “To a large extent, what we see is the result of an erosion of trust – trust in the international system, and trust between countries.”
Image: IMF managing director Kristalina Georgieva. Pic: Reuters
Don’t poke the bear
It was a carefully calibrated response. Georgieva did not lay the blame at the US’s door and stopped short of calling on the Trump administration to stop or water down its aggressive tariffs policy.
That might have been a choice. To the frustration of politicians past and present, the IMF does not usually shy away from making its opinions known.
Last year it warned Jeremy Hunt against cutting taxes, and back in 2022 it openly criticised the Liz Truss government’s plans, warning tax cuts would fuel inflation and inequality.
Taking such a candid approach with Trump invites risks. His administration is already weighing up whether to withdraw from global institutions, including the IMF and the World Bank.
The US is the largest shareholder in both, and its departure could be devastating for two organisations that have been pillars of the world economic order since the end of the Second World War.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Here in the UK, Andrew Bailey has already raised concerns about the prospect of global fragmentation.
It is “very important that we don’t have a fragmentation of the world economy,” the Bank of England’s governor said.
“A big part of that is that we have support and engagement in the multilateral institutions, institutions like the IMF, the World Bank, that support the operation of the world economy. That’s really important.”
The Trump administration might take a different view when its review of intergovernmental organisations is complete.
That is the main tension running through this year’s spring meetings.
How much the IMF will say and how much we will have to read between the lines, remains to be seen.
DHL Express is suspending some shipments to the US as Donald Trump’s new tariff regime takes effect.
From 21 April, shipments worth more than $800 (£603) to US consumers from “any origin” will be temporarily suspended.
New rules that came into effect at the start of April made such shipments subject to increased customs checks.
“This change has caused a surge in formal customs clearances, which we are handling around the clock,” said the parcel delivery service.
Shipments going from business to business worth more than $800 aren’t affected by the suspension, but DHL warned they may also face delays.
Shipments under $800 to either businesses or consumers are not impacted, but one British cycle manufacturer suggested its US customers may need to split orders over $800 into “smaller shipments” to avoid the red tape.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:07
Trump: Tariffs are making US ‘rich’
Trump targeting ‘deceptive’ practices
From May, shipments from China and Hong Kong that are worth less than $800 “will be subject to all applicable duties”, according to the White House.
“President Trump is targeting deceptive shipping practices by Chinese-based shippers, many of whom hide illicit substances, including synthetic opioids, in low-value packages,” it said in a statement.
Until now, deliveries worth less than $800 didn’t incur any duties, which allowed low-cost companies Chinese like Shein and Temu to make inroads in the US.
Both have warned their prices will now rise because of the rule changes, starting on 25 April.