Connect with us

Published

on

Goldman Sachs is removing a cap on bonuses for London-based staff, paving the way for it to resume making multimillion pound payouts to its best-performing traders and dealmakers.

Sky News can exclusively reveal that the Wall Street banking giant notified its UK employees on Thursday that it had decided to abolish the existing pay ratio imposed under European Union rules and which the government recently decided to scrap.

Money latest: Seven tips for getting an upgrade on a plane

In a video message to staff, Richard Gnodde, chief executive of Goldman Sachs International, which comprises its operations outside the US, said it had decided to bring its remuneration policy in Britain in line with its operations elsewhere in the world.

“We are a global firm and to the extent possible we adopt a consistent global approach across everything we do,” Mr Gnodde said in the message, which has been relayed to Sky News.

“The bonus cap rules were an important factor preventing us from being consistent in the area of compensation.”

He added that the shift would “mean lower fixed pay, but a higher proportion of discretionary compensation”, adding that it “also reflects the prudential objective of our regulators”.

More on Banking

The removal of the cap means several hundred UK-based Goldman staff will now be eligible for variable pay worth up to 25 times their base salaries, according to insiders.

As a consequence, allowances which were introduced to help those employees deal with the cap will begin to be reduced from 1 July, Mr Gnodde told employees.

People close to the bank insisted, however, that the revised approach would not necessarily mean senior employees being paid more, but that they could now be appropriately rewarded for exceptional performance and that the move would allow Goldman more flexibility to manage its fixed cost base.

Goldman is among the first major investment banks to signal its intention to pursue a revised approach to remuneration in the wake of the cap’s abolition by UK regulators last October.

Under it, firms were prohibited from paying their material risk-takers – or most senior staff – more than twice their fixed pay in bonuses.

Some banks used the mechanism of a fixed-pay allowance in addition to employees’ base salaries to give them more flexibility to pay larger bonuses.

While Goldman’s move may draw controversy, the EU bonus cap drew criticism from many influential figures in finance over many years, including from Andrew Bailey, the Bank of England governor, who said in 2014 that it was “the wrong policy [and] the debate around it is misguided”.

During his ill-fated stint as chancellor, Kwasi Kwarteng moved to scrap the EU bonus cap, saying it would boost the international competitiveness of Britain’s financial services sector.

UK regulators agreed that scrapping the cap would aid financial stability by enabling firms to reduce pay faster during downturns or in scenarios where they needed to conserve capital.

Mr Gnodde has publicly endorsed the removal of the cap, saying in 2020 that doing so would “put the UK on the same footing, aside from the EU, with every other major financial centre”.

“Removing that ratio makes London a more attractive place for sure,” he said at the time.

“If I move a senior person between New York and London I am driving up the fixed cost of our operations. If that rule doesn’t exist, I don’t have to think about that.”

While Goldman is among the first to notify its employees about its amended stance on bonuses for UK staff, many of its peers, including bosses at lenders such as Deutsche Bank and Santander have also criticised the cap.

At its annual meeting on Friday, HSBC is expected to win shareholder approval to remove the two-to-one pay ratio.

Other firms are also understood to be reviewing their UK compensation practices in light of the cap’s abolition.

Many industry executives have argued that the cap actually encouraged greater risk-taking because it put smaller sums of money at risk for senior bankers.

Insiders also pointed out that because the bonus cap does not impose a limit on overall remuneration, it had placed upward pressure on salaries and allowances not linked to longer-term performance, and which could not be reduced or clawed back if failure or previous misconduct had subsequently emerged.

Responding to an enquiry from Sky News, a spokesman for Goldman said: “This approach gives us greater flexibility to manage fixed costs through the cycle and pay for performance.

“It brings the UK closer to the practice in other global financial centres, to support the UK as an attractive venue for talent.”

Goldman has often been in the vanguard of responding to changing public policy in relation to bankers’ pay.

Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp

Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News

Tap here

In 2010, it imposed a £1m pay ceiling on its UK staff after the then Labour government introduced a one-off tax on bank bonuses in response to the public outcry over the financial crisis.

Goldman’s decision to remove the two-to-one ratio comes as UK regulators also consult on the length of deferral periods for variable pay for senior bankers.

Mr Gnodde told staff on Thursday that Goldman would continue to lobby for closer global alignment on deferral periods, which would mean reducing the current UK duration from seven years.

Continue Reading

Business

Trump trade war escalation sparks global market sell-off

Published

on

By

Trump trade war escalation sparks global market sell-off

Donald Trump’s trade war escalation has sparked a global sell-off, with US stock markets seeing the biggest declines in a hit to values estimated above $2trn.

Tech and retail shares were among those worst hit when Wall Street opened for business, following on from a flight from risk across both Asia and Europe earlier in the day.

Analysis by the investment platform AJ Bell put the value of the peak losses among major indices at $2.2trn (£1.7trn).

The tech-focused Nasdaq Composite was down 5.8%, the S&P 500 by 4.3% and the Dow Jones Industrial Average by just under 4% at the height of the declines. It left all three on course for their worst one-day losses since at least September 2022 though the sell-off later eased back slightly.

Trump latest: UK considers tariff retaliation

Analysts said the focus in the US was largely on the impact that the expanded tariff regime will have on the domestic economy but also effects on global sales given widespread anger abroad among the more than 180 nations and territories hit by reciprocal tariffs on Mr Trump‘s self-styled “liberation day”.

They are set to take effect next week, with tariffs on all car, steel and aluminium imports already in effect.

Price rises are a certainty in the world’s largest economy as the president’s additional tariffs kick in, with those charges expected to be passed on down supply chains to the end user.

The White House believes its tariffs regime will force employers to build factories and hire workers in the US to escape the charges.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

The latest numbers on tariffs

Economists warn the additional costs will add upward pressure to US inflation and potentially choke demand and hiring, ricking a slide towards recession.

Apple was among the biggest losers in cash terms in Thursday’s trading as its shares fell by almost 9%, leaving it on track for its worst daily performance since the start of the COVID pandemic.

Concerns among shareholders were said to include the prospects for US price hikes when its products are shipped to the US from Asia.

Other losers included Tesla, down by almost 6% and Nvidia down by more than 6%.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

PM: It’s ‘a new era’ for trade and economy

Many retail stocks including those for Target and Footlocker lost more than 10% of their respective market values.

The European Union is expected to retaliate in a bid to put pressure on the US to back down.

The prospect of a tit-for-tat trade war saw the CAC 40 in France and German DAX fall by more than 3.4% and 3% respectively.

The FTSE 100, which is internationally focused, was 1.6% lower by the close – a three-month low.

Financial stocks were worst hit with Asia-focused Standard Chartered bank enduring the worst fall in percentage terms of 13%, followed closely by its larger rival HSBC.

Among the stocks seeing big declines were those for big energy as oil Brent crude costs fell back by 6% to $70 due to expectations a trade war will hurt demand.

The more domestically relevant FTSE 250 was 2.2% lower.

A weakening dollar saw the pound briefly hit a six-month high against the US currency at $1.32.

There was a rush for safe haven gold earlier in the day as a new record high was struck though it was later trading down.

Sean Sun, portfolio manager at Thornburg Investment Management, said of the state of play: “Markets may actually be underreacting, especially if these rates turn out to be final, given the potential knock-on effects to global consumption and trade.”

He warned there was a big risk of escalation ahead through countermeasures against the US.

Read more:
Trump tariff saga far from over
‘Liberation Day’ explained
What Sky correspondents make of Trump’s tariffs

Sandra Ebner, senior economist at Union Investment, said: “We assume that the tariffs will not remain in place in the
announced range, but will instead be a starting point for further negotiations.

“Trump has set a maximum demand from which the level of tariffs should decrease”.

She added: “Since the measures would not affect all regions and sectors equally, there will be winners and losers as in 2018 – although the losers are more likely to be in the EU than in North America.

“To protect companies in Europe from the effects of tariffs, the EU should not respond with high counter-tariffs. In any case, their impact in the US is not likely to be significant. It would be more efficient to provide targeted support to EU companies in the form of investment and stimulus.”

Continue Reading

Business

British businesses issue warning over ‘deeply troubling’ Trump tariffs

Published

on

By

British businesses issue warning over 'deeply troubling' Trump tariffs

British companies and business groups have expressed alarm over President Donald Trump’s 10% tariff on UK goods entering the US – but cautioned against retaliatory measures.

It comes as Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds launched a consultation with firms on taxes the UK could implement in response to the new levies.

Money blog: Pension top-up deadline days away

A 400-page list of 8,000 US goods that could be targeted by UK tariffs has been published, including items like whiskey and jeans.

On so-called “Liberation Day”, Mr Trump announced UK goods entering the US will be subject to a 10% tax while cars will be slapped with a 25% levy.

The government’s handling of tariff negotiations with the US to date has been praised by representative and industry bodies as being “cool” and “calm” – and they urged ministers to continue that approach by not retaliating.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

The latest numbers on tariffs

Business lobby group the CBI (Confederation of British Industry) said: “Retaliation will only add to supply chain disruption, slow down investment, and stoke volatility in prices”.

Industry body the British Retail Consortium (BRC) also cautioned: “Retaliatory tariffs should only be a last resort”.

‘Deeply troubling’

While a major category of exports, in the form of services – like finance and information technology (IT) – has been exempted from the tariffs, the impact on UK business is expected to be significant.

Mr Trump’s announcement was described as “deeply troubling for businesses” by the CBI’s chief executive Rain Newton-Smith.

Read more:
US tariffs spark global market sell-off

Do Trump’s numbers add up?
Island home only to penguins hit by tariffs

The Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) also said the tariffs were “a major blow” to small and medium companies (SMEs), as 59% of small UK exporters sell to the US. It called for emergency government aid to help those affected.

“Tariffs will cause untold damage to small businesses trying to trade their way into profit while the domestic economy remains flat,” the FSB’s policy chair Tina McKenzie said. “The fallout will stifle growth” and “hurt opportunities”, she added.

Companies will need to adapt and overcome, the British Export Association said, but added: “Unfortunately adaptation will come at a cost that not all businesses will be able to bear.”

Watch dealer and component seller Darren Townend told Sky News the 10% hit would be “painful” as “people will buy less”.

“I am a fan of Trump, but this is nuts,” he said. “I expect some bad months ahead.”

Industry body Make UK said the 25% tariffs on cars, steel and aluminium would in particular be devastating for UK manufacturing.

Cars hard hit

Carmakers are among the biggest losers from the world trade order reshuffle.

Auto industry body the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) said the taxes were “deeply disappointing and potentially damaging measure”.

“These tariff costs cannot be absorbed by manufacturers”, SMMT chief executive Mike Hawes said. “UK producers may have to review output in the face of constrained demand”.

The new taxes on cars took effect on Thursday morning, while the measures impacting car parts are due to come in on 3 May.

Continue Reading

Business

Trump trade war: The blunt calculation that should have spared UK from reciprocal tariffs

Published

on

By

Trump trade war: The blunt calculation that should have spared UK from reciprocal tariffs

Economists immediately started scratching their heads when Donald Trump raised his tariffs placard in the Rose Garden on Wednesday. 

On that list he detailed the rate the US believes it is being charged by each country, along with its response: A reciprocal tariff at half that rate.

So, take China for example. Donald Trump said his team had run the numbers and the world’s second-largest economy was implementing an effective tariff of 67% on US imports. The US is responding with 34%.

Trump latest: UK considers tariff retaliation

How did he come up with that 67%? This is where things get a bit murky. The US claims it studied its trading relationship with individual countries, examining non-tariff barriers as well as tariff barriers. That includes, for example, regulations that make it difficult for US exporters.

However, the actual methodology appears to be far cruder. Instead of responding to individual countries’ trade barriers, Trump is attacking those enjoying large trade surpluses with the US.

A formula released by the US trade representative laid this bare. It took the US’s trade deficit in goods with each country and divided that by imports from that country. That figure was then divided by two.

More on Donald Trump

So, in the case of China, which has a trade surplus of $295bn on total US exports of $438bn, that gives a ratio of 68%. The US divided that by two, giving a reciprocal tariff of 34%.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

PM will ‘fight’ for deal with US

This is a blunt measure which targets big importers to the US, irrespective of the trade barriers they have erected. This is all part of Donald Trump’s efforts to shrink the country’s deficit – although it’s US consumers who will end up paying the price.

But what about the small number of countries where the US has a trade surplus? Shouldn’t they actually be benefiting from all of this?

Read more:
Trump tariff saga far from over
‘Liberation Day’ explained
What Sky correspondents make of Trump’s tariffs

That includes the UK, with whom the US has a surplus (by its own calculations) of $12bn. By its own reciprocal tariff formula, the UK should be benefitting from a “negative tariff” of 9%.

Instead, it has been hit by a 10% baseline tariff. Number 10 may be breathing a sigh of relief – the US could, after all, have gone after us for our 20% VAT rate on imports, which it takes issue with – but, by Trump’s own measure, we haven’t got off as lightly as we should have.

Continue Reading

Trending