Business

Five charts that explain why water bills are about to go up

Published

4 months ago

December 16, 2024

admin

This is a crucial week for the water industry.

Regulator Ofwat will on Thursday give its “final determination” on how much bills will rise over the next five years.

Before then, Britain’s largest company Thames Water hopes to win court approval for a £3bn bridging loan to stop it running out of cash in the spring.

Together they amount to the greatest test of the water system, the only fully privatised network in the world.

To understand how we got here, and what might happen next, it pays to go back to the beginning.

In 1989, 10 state-owned regional water and sewage companies in England and Wales were sold off by Margaret Thatcher’s government, raising £7bn for the Treasury. The companies were sold debt-free but never intended to stay that way.

The rationale was that the private sector could raise the billions required to upgrade the Victorian sewage network, and fund it from customer bills, so the state didn’t have to.

So borrowing was always part of the plan and, as of this year, the companies have accrued £70bn of net debt, at a ratio to equity (gearing) of around 85%.

In water the problem with debt is not the total, but whether the companies can afford to service it, and what they did with the money.

The answer to the first question varies by operator, but water companies have poured billions into infrastructure and other investments. Adjusted for inflation, investment has run at between £4bn and a record £9bn last year, a total of £210bn in today’s prices, spending that has reduced leakage and improved water quality on some measures.

But it has not been enough to meet public expectation of basic services, of sewage control, or to the challenges of climate change and a growing population. To pick one example, the UK has not built a new reservoir since 1992.

At the same time, the companies’ shareholders have extracted dividends of £83bn (as calculated from Ofwat figures by the University of Greenwich and adjusted for inflation).

But like debt, dividends are a deliberate feature of the privatised system. Investors in any industry need to make a return.

Water UK, the companies’ trade body, says that since 2020, when the regulator began paying closer attention to payouts, dividends have averaged 2.7%.

The level of dividends and executive bonuses have become harder to defend with the emergence of the water industry’s dirty secret; sewage outflows.

These occur when the pipes shared by sewage and rainwater become inundated and, as a failsafe, are deliberately discharged into waterways through storm overflows to prevent sewage backing up into homes and businesses.

For decades the full extent of their use was unknown, with industry, regulators and the public in the dark because of the absence of monitoring. That has changed in the last decade, with full monitoring of almost 15,000 overflows in England revealing more than 460,000 sewage outflows in 2023.

Public outrage has pushed the issue up the political agenda, increasing the pressure on companies.

The water industry can point to some success in improving water quality since privatisation, with a reduction in levels of phosphorus and ammonia and 85% of bathing water classified as “good” or “excellent” by the Environment Agency.

But none of those are in rivers, where wild swimming, and the public activism that comes with it, is a recent phenomenon. And as public expectations for water quality rise, so do costs.

The challenge for the industry is that the cost of addressing the mess – whether physical, financial or of their own making – has just got more expensive.

Water was once a haven for long-term investors who enjoyed reliable returns from monopoly providers of an essential resource. For many years, water enjoyed a “halo effect” with cheaper borrowing costs than other industries.

This chart shows yields for water industry bonds, effectively the interest rate on their debt, compared to an index of other UK corporate bonds. While borrowing costs for everyone increased following the global inflation spike in early 2022, water remained cheaper.

In July 2023, after the full scale of the crisis at Thames Water emerged, the lines crossed over and water debt became more expensive. Water now has a premium attached, growing to almost a full percentage point by the end of this year.

And it is not just Thames. Ratings agencies have downgraded several water companies, damaging confidence in the entire sector. All companies face higher costs for borrowing, from the publicly listed Severn Trent, to distressed Thames, trying to secure terms on a £3bn bridging loan at an eye-watering 9.75%.

To meet these rising costs of capital water companies are now arguing that Ofwat should not only let them raise customer bills, but that investors need a greater return to commit money to the sector.

Luke Hickmore, investment director at abrdn, part of the Thames Water creditors’ group, said: “Water companies are facing a significantly higher cost of funding at the same time as seeing a growing need for infrastructure investment to maintain water and sewage systems.

“Investors have placed a risk premium on the entire industry because of uncertainty over whether the regulatory framework can support this increased investment need, and this drop in confidence has accelerated since Ofwat’s Draft Determination in July.

“Weaker companies with higher debt have suffered more, right at the time when many of them are looking for additional capital to meet the needs of customers and environment for the next five years and beyond.

“This financial strain and deteriorating investor support means higher cost of borrowing, which eventually feeds through to customer bills.”

All of which means your water bill is about to go up, though how much depends on where you live, and unlike other privatised utilities you can’t switch.

In July, Ofwat said bills could rise by an average of 21% to fund £88bn of spending, but the water companies are now asking for 40% to cover an investment of £107bn.

Wherever Ofwat draws its line this will be the most significant bill hike since privatisation. For decades the regulator and politicians were focused on affordability, leaving bills lower in real terms today than they were a decade ago.

But it is clearer than a chalk stream that this approach stored up trouble, and whether you blame poor management, corporate greed, slack regulation, political indifference, or the principle of privatisation itself, the industry faces a critical moment.

Business

Trump trade war escalation sparks global market sell-off

Published

11 hours ago

April 3, 2025

admin

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.

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%.

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.

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.”

Business

British businesses issue warning over ‘deeply troubling’ Trump tariffs

Published

11 hours ago

April 3, 2025

admin

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.

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.

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.

Business

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

Published

11 hours ago

April 3, 2025

admin

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.

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%.

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?

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.