Connect with us

Published

on

China has, as expected, hit back at Donald Trump’s imposition of a 10% tariff on its exports to the United States.

Beijing has slapped levies of between 10-15% on a range of energy products that imports from the US.

But what has surprised observers – particularly when Mr Trump kicked off the trade war over the weekend – has been the president’s comparatively lenient treatment of China and, moreover, Beijing’s calm response.

While America’s two closest neighbours, Canada and Mexico, were hit with 25% tariffs (falling to 10% for Canadian energy exports) – since put on ice – China was merely hit with a 10% levy.

Money blog: Now we know why Guinness tastes worse in Britain

That struck many observers as curious since China is regarded as a bigger trade adversary by the US than Mexico and Canada, with the latter traditionally seen as a close friend to the US, particularly through the pair’s involvement in the ‘Five Eyes’ security alliance along with Australia, New Zealand and the UK.

The big question raised by this is what motivated Mr Trump to do this.

More from Money

The thinking is that the president was trying to bring China to the negotiating table and that, by initially hitting a close ally like Canada harder, he was trying to send a message to China’s leaders as to what they might face further down the line.

That impression was reinforced by Mr Trump’s overnight description of his 10% tariff on China as an “opening salvo”.

Why is China so calm?

That is not the only curiosity concerning this affair.

The other is the relatively calm response from Beijing. While Canada immediately responded with retaliatory measures and Mexico indicated that it would, China merely murmured in the first instance about taking “necessary countermeasures” and indicated that it would raise a complaint about the US with the World Trade Organisation.

Since then, Beijing has of course hit back with tariffs of its own on US energy imports, as well as launching an antitrust investigation into Google and adding the parent company of Tommy Hilfiger and Calvin Klein on a blacklist of “unreliable entities”.

That gives Chinese president Xi Jinping something to take back off the table if, as expected, he speaks to Mr Trump in coming days as the pair seek to de-escalate this row.

But it all feels relatively restrained and raises the question of why China has responded in this way.

There is certainly a view in Beijing that, with Mr Trump’s first moves, China got off rather lightly compared with the Canadians and Mexicans.

That sanguine response may also indicate that Beijing knows it has other weapons it can deploy other than retaliatory measures.

Cards in China’s back pocket

For a start, China owns $769bn worth of US Treasury bonds. Dumping some of those aggressively – while hurting the Chinese – would push up America’s implied borrowing costs.

Alternatively, Beijing could allow its currency, the renminbi, to weaken on the foreign exchange markets, just as it did during Mr Trump’s first term of office.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Trump tariffs: What is America’s trade position?

Either way, Mr Trump’s latest measures are unlikely to change the way Chinese businesses operate, particularly the country’s manufacturers.

They have become accustomed over several years, dating back to Mr Trump’s first term, to aggression from the US. They have adapted the way they do business accordingly, for example by shipping a lot of their exports to the US via third countries, most notably Vietnam.

Chinese businesses relieved

Even Chinese companies specifically targeted by Mr Trump – the e-commerce giants Temu and Shein – may not be too badly affected.

They were both singled out as the president closed the so-called “de minimis” loophole, dating back to 1938, which allows goods worth less than $800 to be sent directly to US consumers without incurring import duties or rigorous customs inspections.

Read more:
What’s going on with Trump and tariffs?
How UK finds itself in a strong position to avoid Trump tariffs

This has been a constant thorn in the side of US retailers and its removal helps explain why, for example, shares of Walmart were on Monday spared the spanking meted out to other US stocks.

Yet Shein and Temu are said to be taking the news calmly.

They may even be calculating that this is a short-term squall that will soon blow over – or calculating that, such is the enormity of their buying power and supply chains, they can simply ship inventory elsewhere in the meantime or even just warehouse it.

It is also worth noting that Shein, having been banned by India in 2020, has just begun selling in the country again.

Overall, then, Chinese businesses have reacted with relief to what has happened. They know it could have been worse.

It explains why, even though the Chinese economy is presently misfiring, the authorities in Beijing have reacted relatively calmly to what Mr Trump has done.

Continue Reading

Business

City veteran Kheraj in contention to chair banking giant HSBC

Published

on

By

City veteran Kheraj in contention to chair banking giant HSBC

Naguib Kheraj, the City veteran, has been shortlisted to become the next chairman of HSBC Holdings, Europe’s biggest bank.

Sky News can reveal that Mr Kheraj, a former Barclays finance chief, is among a small number of contenders currently being considered to replace Sir Mark Tucker.

HSBC, which has a market capitalisation of £165.4bn, has been conducting a search for Sir Mark’s successor since the start of the year.

Money latest: How Gen Z investors are making their way in property

In June, Sky News revealed that the former McKinsey boss Kevin Sneader was among the candidates being considered to lead the bank, although it was unclear this weekend whether he remained in the process.

Mr Kheraj would, in many respects, be seen as a solid choice for the job.

He is familiar with HSBC’s core markets in Asia, having spent several years on the board of Standard Chartered, the FTSE-100 bank, latterly as deputy chairman.

He also possesses extensive experience as a chairman, having led the privately held pensions insurer Rothesay Life, while he now chairs Petershill Partners, the London-listed private equity investment group backed by Goldman Sachs.

Mr Kheraj’s other interests have included acting as an adviser to the Aga Khan Development Board and The Wellcome Trust, as well as the Financial Services Authority.

He spent 12 years at Barclays, holding board roles for much of that time, before he went on to become chief executive of JP Morgan Cazenove, the London-based investment bank.

HSBC’s shares have soared over the last year, rising by close to 50%, despite the headwinds posed by President Donald Trump’s sweeping global tariffs regime.

In June, the bank said that Sir Mark would be replaced on an interim basis by Brendan Nelson, one of its existing board members, while it continued the search for a permanent successor.

Ann Godbehere, HSBC’s senior independent director, said at the time: “The nomination and corporate governance committee continues to make progress on the succession process for the next HSBC group chair.

“Our focus is on securing the best candidate to lead the board and wider group over the next phase of our growth and development.”

Sky News revealed late last year that MWM, the headhunter founded by Anna Mann, a prominent figure in the executive search sector, was advising HSBC on the process.

Since then, at least one other firm has been drafted in to work on the mandate.

Read more from Sky News
Explainer: How the US war is targeting you
Controversial ferry boss to quit
More than 500 jobs cut at carmaker

Sir Mark, who has chaired HSBC since 2017, steps down at the end of next month to become non-executive chair of AIA, the Asian insurer he used to run.

He will continue to advise HSBC’s board during the hunt for his long-term successor.

As a financial behemoth with deep ties to both China and the US, HSBC is deeply exposed to escalating trade and diplomatic tensions between the two countries.

When he was appointed, Mr Tucker became the first outsider to take the post in the bank’s 152-year history – which has a big presence on the high street thanks to its acquisition of the Midland Bank in 1992.

He oversaw a rapid change of leadership, appointing bank veteran John Flint to replace Stuart Gulliver as chief executive.

The transition did not work out, however, with Mr Tucker deciding to sack Mr Flint after just 18 months.

He was replaced on an interim basis by Noel Quinn in the summer of 2018, with that change becoming permanent in April 2020.

Mr Quinn spent a further four years in the post before deciding to step down, and in July 2024 he was succeeded by Georges Elhedery, a long-serving executive in HSBC’s markets unit, and more recently the bank’s chief financial officer.

The new chief’s first big move in the top job was to unveil a sweeping reorganisation of HSBC that sees it reshaped into eastern markets and western markets businesses.

He also decided to merge its commercial and investment banking operations into a single division.

The restructuring, which Mr Elhedery said would “result in a simpler, more dynamic, and agile organisation” has drawn a mixed reaction from analysts, although it has not interrupted a strong run for the stock.

During Sir Mark’s tenure, HSBC has also continued to exit non-core markets, selling operations in countries such as Canada and France as it has sharpened its focus on its Asian businesses.

On Friday, HSBC’s London-listed shares closed at 946.7p.

HSBC has been contacted for comment.

Continue Reading

Business

Bank shares take fright as budget tax hike is floated

Published

on

By

Bank shares take fright as budget tax hike is floated

Shares in UK banks have fallen sharply on the back of a report which urges the chancellor to place their profits in her sights at the coming budget.

As Rachel Reeves stares down a growing deficit – estimated at between £20bn-£40bn heading into the autumn – the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) said there was an opportunity for a windfall by closing a loophole.

It recommended a new levy on the interest UK lenders receive from the Bank of England, amounting to £22bn a year, on reserves held as a result of the Bank’s historic quantitative easing, or bond-buying, programme.

Money latest: Ryanair changes cabin bag sizing

It was first introduced at the height of the financial crisis, in 2009.

The left-leaning think-tank said the money received by banks amounted to a subsidy and suggested £8bn could be taken from them annually to pay for public services.

It argued that the loss-making scheme – a consequence of rising interest rates since 2021 – had left taxpayers footing the bill unfairly as the Treasury has to cover any loss.

More on Rachel Reeves

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Why taxes might go up

The Bank recently estimated the total hit would amount to £115bn over the course of its lifetime.

The publication of the report coincided with a story in the Financial Times which spoke of growing fears within the banking sector that it was firmly in the chancellor’s sights.

Her first budget, in late October last year, put businesses on the hook for the bulk of its tax-raising measures.

Ms Reeves is under pressure to find more money from somewhere as she has ruled out breaking her own fiscal rules to help secure the cash she needs through heightened borrowing.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Is Labour plotting a ‘wealth tax’?

Other measures understood to be under consideration include a wealth tax, new property tax and a shake-up that could lead to a replacement for council tax.

Analysts at Exane told clients in a note: “In the last couple of years, the chancellor has been protective of the banks and has avoided raising taxes.

“However, public finances may require additional cash and pressures for a bank tax from within the Labour party seem to be rising,” it concluded.

The investor flight saw shares in Lloyds and NatWest plunge by more than 5%. Those for Barclays were more than 4% lower at one stage.

A spokesperson for the Treasury said the best way to strengthen public finances was to speed up economic growth.

“Changes to tax and spend policy are not the only ways of doing this, as seen with our planning reforms,” they added.

Continue Reading

Business

Controversial P&O Ferries boss Hebblethwaite to quit

Published

on

By

Controversial P&O Ferries boss Hebblethwaite to quit

The man dubbed “Britain’s most hated boss” for his controversial policy of sacking hundreds of seafarers and replacing them with cheaper agency staff is to quit.

Sky News can exclusively reveal that Peter Hebblethwaite, the chief executive of P&O Ferries, is leaving the company.

Sources said he had decided to resign for personal reasons.

Money latest: The exact time to book train ticket at bargain price

Mr Hebblethwaite joined the ranks of Britain’s most notorious corporate figures in 2022 when P&O Ferries – a subsidiary of the giant Dubai-based ports operator DP World – said it was sacking 800 staff with immediate effect – some of whom learned their fate via a video message.

The policy, which Mr Hebblethwaite defended to MPs during subsequent select committee hearings, erupted into a national scandal, prompting changes in the law to give workers greater protection.

Under the new legislation, the government plans to tighten collective redundancy requirements for operators of foreign vessels.

More from Money

In a statement issued in response to a request from Sky News, a P&O Ferries spokesperson said: “Peter Hebblethwaite has communicated his intention to resign from his position as chief executive officer to dedicate more time to family matters.

Peter Hebblethwaite gives evidence to a committee of MPs in 2022. Pic: PA
Image:
Peter Hebblethwaite gives evidence to a committee of MPs in 2022. Pic: PA

“P&O Ferries extends its gratitude to Peter Hebblethwaite for his contributions as CEO over the past four years.

“During his tenure the company navigated the challenges of the COVID-19 pandemic, initiated a path towards financial stability, and introduced the world’s first large double-ended hybrid ferries on the Dover-Calais route, thereby enhancing sustainability.

“We extend our best wishes to him for his future endeavours.”

A source close to the company said it anticipated making an announcement on Mr Hebblethwaite’s successor in the near term.

A former executive at J Sainsbury, Greene King and Alliance Unichem, Mr Hebblethwaite joined P&O Ferries in 2019, before taking over as chief executive in November 2021.

Insiders claimed on Friday that he had “transformed” the business following the bitter blows dealt to its finances by the COVID-19 pandemic and – to some degree – by the impact of Britain’s exit from the European Union.

A union protest is shown at the height of the mass sackings  row in 2022
Image:
A union protest is shown at the height of the mass sackings row in 2022

P&O Ferries carries 4.5 million passengers annually on routes between the UK and continental European ports including Calais and Rotterdam.

It also operates a route between Northern Ireland and Scotland, and is a major freight carrier.

The company’s losses soared during the pandemic, with DP World – its sole shareholder – supporting it through hundreds of millions of pounds in loans.

Its most recent accounts, which were significantly delayed, showed a significant reduction in losses in 2023 to just over £90m.

The reduction from the previous year’s figure of almost £250m was partly attributed to cost reduction exercises.

The accounts also showed that Mr Hebblethwaite received a pay package of £683,000, including a bonus of £183,000.

“I reflected on accepting that payment, but ultimately I did decide to accept it,” he told MPs.

“I do recognise it is not a decision that everybody would have made.”

The row over his pay was especially acute because of his admission that P&O Ferries’ lowest-paid seafarers received hourly pay of just £4.87.

Mr Hebblethwaite had argued since the mass sackings of 2022 that the company would have gone bust without the drastic cost-cutting that it entailed.

The company insisted at the time that those affected by the redundancies had been offered “enhanced” packages to leave.

Last October, the then transport secretary, Louise Haigh, said: “The mass sacking by P&O Ferries was a national scandal which can never be allowed to happen again,” adding that measures to protect seafarers from “rogue employers” would prevent a repetition.

“This issue has been ignored for over 2 years, but this new government is moving fast and bringing forward measures within 100 days,” Ms Haigh added.

“We are closing the legal loophole that P&O Ferries exploited when they sacked almost 800 dedicated seafarers and replaced them with low-paid agency workers and we are requiring operators to pay the equivalent of National Minimum Wage in UK waters.

“Make no mistake – this is good for workers and good for business.”

The minister’s description of P&O Ferries as “rogue”, and suggestion that consumers should boycott the company, sparked a row which threatened to overshadow the government’s International Investment Summit last October.

Sky News’s business and economics correspondent, Paul Kelso, revealed that DP World had withdrawn from participating in the event, and paused a £1bn investment announcement.

The company relented after Sir Keir Starmer publicly distanced the government from Ms Haigh’s characterisation of DP World.

Continue Reading

Trending