UBS will take over Credit Suisse in a deal aimed at stemming what was fast becoming a global crisis of confidence.
Credit Suisse, the 167-year-old embattled lender had been brought to the brink of financial calamity last week, despite securing a $54bn (£44bn) credit line from Switzerland’s central bank.
The credit line was agreed upon in a move aimed at reassuring markets and depositors, but it failed to stem a rush of customer withdrawal, prompting a request from the Swiss government for the rival UBS to consider a takeover.
That takeover was announced on Sunday evening – UBS will pay 3bn Swiss francs (£2.6bn) to acquire Credit Suisse, it has agreed to assume up to 5bn francs (£4.4bn) in losses, and 100bn Swiss francs (£88.5bn) in liquidity assistance will be available to both banks.
The deal is expected to be closed by the end of this year.
Colm Kelleher, chairman of UBS Group, said the agreement “represents enormous opportunities”.
He also said that his bank’s long-term aim would be to downsize Credit Suisse’s investment banking business and align it with the “conservative risk culture” of UBS.
More from Business
Axel Lehmann, chairman of Credit Suisse, described the day as “historic, sad and very challenging” for his bank and the global market.
‘The best available outcome’
Advertisement
Mr Lehmann said: “Given recent extraordinary and unprecedented circumstances, the announced merger represents the best available outcome.
“This has been an extremely challenging time for Credit Suisse and while the team has worked tirelessly to address many significant legacy issues and execute on its new strategy, we are forced to reach a solution today that provides a durable outcome.”
‘Exceptional situation’
In a statement, the Swiss central bank and other officials said that the agreement represented “a solution…to secure financial stability and protect the Swiss economy in this exceptional situation”.
It is also hoped that UBS’s takeover of its old rival will avoid the contagion of the kind seen in the financial crisis of 2008.
This is a significant deal but huge risks continue to lurk in the global financial system
This combination brings together not only Switzerland’s two biggest banks but two of the most significant financial institutions in the world.
There was reference during the press conference to discussions with Jeremy Hunt, the British chancellor.
That underlines the crucial nature of this deal as governments and financial regulators around the world race to contain the banking sector’s biggest crisis of the last 15 years.
This was always a deal that the Swiss government had resisted. It had been speculated so many times over the last decade, but the Swiss government had always wanted to maintain two national banking champions.
But let’s be clear – all the parties involved in this deal have effectively been strong-armed into it by the crisis of confidence which has erupted at Credit Suisse, and which has been fomenting for some time.
UBS has been effectively strong-armed into doing this deal by the Swiss government, and Credit Suisse has been forced to accept it – there won’t be a shareholder vote on the transaction.
The only alternative to this deal happening was going to be when financial markets opened on Monday in Asia and then in Europe, some form of nationalisation or resolution of Credit Suisse which would have deepened the sense of crisis in the industry.
This government-orchestrated rescue does avert the collapse of a major global bank but while it might be tempting to believe this draws a line under this banking crisis, remember that a week ago HSBC stepped in to buy the British arm of Silicon Valley Bank for £1 after its American parent collapsed, and a number of other mid-sized US banks have been forced to seek emergency support in the last 10 days.
All of this is a sobering reminder that as interest rates risk sharply to combat global inflationary pressures, huge risks continue to lurk in the global financial system.
Central banks insist systems are resilient
The news was welcomed by central banks in the US, Europe and in the UK.
All three insisted that banking systems within their jurisdiction are strong and resilient.
The Bank of England said: “We have been engaging closely with international counterparts throughout the preparations for today’s announcements and will continue to support their implementation.
“The UK banking system is well capitalised and funded, and remains safe and sound.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:41
Credit Suisse rescue: What now for the UK’s banks?
A deal likely to ripple through global markets
Credit Suisse is one of the world’s largest wealth managers and is also one of 30 banks ranked as systemically important, meaning the deal is likely to ripple through global markets on Monday.
It is also one of the largest investment banking employers in the City of London, employing around 5,000 people.
In a memo to employees on Sunday, Credit Suisse said there would be no immediate impact on clients or day-to-day working operations, adding that branches and global offices would remain open.
It comes after a difficult few weeks for the banking sector, with the collapse of US lenders Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank.
The UK branch of SVB was rescued by HSBC for £1, but a number of other mid-sized American lenders have also been forced to seek emergency funding.
English water companies have collectively been given the lowest environmental rating by the Environment Agency (EA) since records began.
Companies were ranked on a scale of one to four stars. Out of a maximum score of 36 stars for all nine companies, the firms together scored 19, the lowest since the EA began monitoring.
The only utility to receive the highest four-star rank was Severn Trent, the agency said in its annual performance assessment.
The number of serious incidents, in which “significant” environmental harm was caused, increased by 60% last year compared to 2023.
Just three companies were responsible for the vast majority of incidents.
Thames Water – the country’s biggest supplier – Southern Water and Yorkshire Water were responsible for 81% of all incidents.
More on Thames Water
Related Topics:
Only two firms out of nine – Northumbrian Water and Wessex Water – recorded no serious incidents.
More monitoring, inspections and data have meant that knowledge of pollution in English waterways is now greater than ever. In turn, the amount of reporting has been greater.
Other factors driving the figures are underinvestment and poor maintenance of infrastructure, as well as wet and stormy weather.
Firms have again been called on by the Environment Agency to “urgently” improve their performance. There had previously been a trend of improvement since records began in 2011, but the latest figures indicated a “dip”.
In addition to pollution incidents, companies were assessed on self-reporting and compliance with permits.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:32
Is Thames Water a step closer to nationalisation?
A separate report by water regulator Ofwat published on Thursday showed “mixed” performance with improvements in sewer flooding and pipe leakage, but only two companies reported a reduction in pollution incidents over five years.
Regulation of the sector has been criticised in a once-in-a-generation review of the water industry by career civil servant Sir Jon Cunliffe. In the wake of it, the government says Ofwat is to be retired.
Pressure has mounted on utilities across the UK as the public has sought action on poor water quality and rising bills.
An autistic man who was told he could no longer stack shelves at Waitrose when he asked to be paid has been offered a job by Asda.
Tom Boyd, 28, began volunteering unpaid at the branch of WaitroseinCheadle Hulme, Greater Manchester, in 2021, supported by a care worker, to develop skills for the workplace on a further education course he was taking.
The work gave him a sense of “purpose and belonging”, his mother, Frances Boyd, told the BBC.
When she asked in July if he could be paid for a few hours every week, however, the supermarket’s head office told him he had to stop and could not return to the shop.
Ms Boyd said they felt “deeply let down” by the decision as he had taken great pride in his work, which included putting out stock and tidying the shelves.
“If I went in and saw him, he was smiling, and it gave him independence, a sense of purpose and belonging,” she said.
“He gave over 600 hours of his time purely because he wanted to belong, contribute, and make a difference…
More on Asda
Related Topics:
“He deserved better. He deserved kindness, respect and the chance for all his hard work to mean something.”
Mr Boyd has now been offered two paid five-hour shifts each week by Asda.
“It’s overwhelming and they are flexible to say if at any time he is struggling they are fine,” his mother said.
Welcoming the news on X, Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham said he hoped it would lead to more employers accepting a neurodivergent code of best practice he has launched.
An Asda spokesperson said that when the store heard about Mr Boyd’s desire to find meaningful work they knew he would be a “fantastic fit” and were delighted to offer him a role.
“We know that finding meaningful work can be especially challenging for individuals with learning disabilities or difficulties,” they said.
“Asda has a Supported Internship Programme and partnership with DFN Project SEARCH, through which we have welcomed over 30 talented new colleagues into roles across our stores. We have seen the positive impact this has for the individuals who join and for our colleagues and customers too.”
A Waitrose spokesperson said they “care deeply” about helping people into the workplace who might not otherwise be given a chance and that the chain is currently investigating what happened to Mr Boyd.
“We’d like to welcome Tom back, in paid employment, and are seeking support from his family and the charity to do so. We hope to see him back with us very soon,” they added.
US sanctions against Russia’s two largest energy companies, the state-owned Rosneft and privately held Lukoil, are perhaps the most significant economic measures imposed by the West since the invasion of Ukraine.
If fully implemented, they have the potential to significantly choke off the flow of fossil fuel revenue that funds Russia’s war machine, but their power lies not in directly denying Russia access to the tankers, ports and refineries that make the oil trade turn, but the US financial system that greases the wheels.
Ever since the invasion, the Russian government has proved masterful at evading sanctions, aided and abetted by allies of economic convenience and an oil industry with decades of experience.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:58
New US sanctions on Russia: What do we know?
While the West, principally the EU, has largely turned off the taps and stopped buying Russian oil, China, India and Turkey became the largest consumers, with a shadow fleet of tankers ensuring exports continued to flow.
Data from the Centre for Research into Energy and Clean Air (CREA) shows that while fossil fuel revenues have fallen from more than €1bn a day before the war, they have remained above €600m since the start of 2023, only dipping towards €500m in the last month.
None of that oil has been heading for the US, but these sanctions will directly impact the ability of the Russian companies, and anyone doing business with them, to operate within America’s financial orbit.
According to the order from the US Office for Foreign Asset Control, the sanctions block all assets of the two companies, their subsidiaries and a number of named individuals, as well as preventing US citizens or financial institutions from doing business with them.
It also threatens foreign financial institutions that “facilitate transactions… involving Russia’s military-industrial base” with direct or secondary sanctions.
Image: Vladimir Putin chairs a meeting in Moscow.
Pic: Sputnik/Reuters
In practice, the measures should prevent the two companies from accessing not just dollars, but trading markets, insurance and other services with any financial connection to the US.
Taken in harness with similar steps announced by the UK earlier this month, analysts believe they can have a genuinely chilling effect on the market for Russian oil and gas.
Russia’s customers for oil in China, India and Turkey will also be affected, with the largest companies, state-owned and private, expected to be unwilling to take the risk of engaging directly with sanctioned entities.
Indian companies are already reported to be “recalibrating” their imports following the announcement, which came just a week after Donald Trump announced an additional 25% import tariff on Indian goods as punishment for the country’s reliance on Russian oil.
That does not mean that Russian oil and gas exports will cease. There are other unsanctioned Russian energy companies that can still trade, and ever since the first barrel of oil was tapped, the industry has proved adept at evading sanctions intended to interrupt its flow from one country or another.
Any significant increase in the oil price beyond the 5% seen in the aftermath of the announcement could also put pressure on the White House, which is at least as sensitive to fuel prices at home as it is to foreign wars.
But analysts Kpler expect the sanctions to cause “an immediate, short-term hiatus in Russian crude exports, as it will take time for sellers to reorganise and rebuild their trading systems to circumvent restrictions and ease buyers’ concerns”.
And Russian gas will, for now, continue to flow into Europe, where distaste for Vladimir Putin‘s imperial ambitions has not killed the appetite for his fuel. While the EU has this week imposed sanctions on liquified natural gas (LNG), they will not be fully enforced until 2027.