What on earth is happening in UK markets and why is the Bank of England struggling to address it?

Published

3 years ago

October 12, 2022

admin

This is starting to look a little… unnerving.

This morning the Bank of England tweaked its emergency intervention into the government bond (gilts) market for a second successive day.

The details are somewhat arcane: yesterday it doubled the amount it was offering to buy each day; today it said it would widen the stock of assets it is offering to buy. But what matters more is the big picture.

The government bond market is – in the UK and elsewhere – best thought of as the bedrock of the financial system.

The government borrows lots of money each year at very long durations and these bonds are bought by all sorts of investors to secure a low but (usually) reliable income over a long period of time.

Compared to other sorts of assets – such as the shares issued by companies or for that matter cryptocurrencies – government bonds are boring. Or at least, they’re supposed to be boring.

They don’t move all that much each day and the yield they offer – the interest rate implied by their prices – is typically much lower than most other asset classes.

But recently the UK bond market (we call them gilts as a matter of tradition, short for gilt-edged securities, because in their earliest embodiment they were pieces of paper with golden edges) has been anything but boring.

In the wake of the mini-budget, the yield on gilts of various different durations leapt higher – much higher. The price of the gilts fell dramatically. That, ultimately, was what the Bank of England was originally responding to a couple of weeks ago.

But to understand what a tricky position it’s in, you need to zoom out even further. For while it’s tempting to blame everything on the government and its mini-budget, it’s fairer to see this as the straw that broke the market’s back. For there are three intersecting issues at play here.

The end of the low interest rate era

The first is that we are in the midst of a seismic economic moment.

For the past decade and a bit, we (here in the UK but also in the US, Eurozone and throughout most of the world) have become used to interest rates being incredibly low.

More than low, they were effectively negative, because in the wake of the financial crisis central banks around the world pumped trillions of dollars into the financial plumbing.

They mostly did so (in this case the method really matters) by buying up vast quantities of government debt. The Bank of England became the single biggest owner of UK gilts, at one point owning roughly a third of the UK’s national debt.

It was an emergency measure designed to prevent a catastrophic rerun of the Great Depression, but the medicine has proven incredibly difficult to wean ourselves off.

A few years ago, when the US Federal Reserve thought out loud about reversing quantitative easing (QE) – as the bond-buying programme is called – it triggered such a panic in bond markets that it immediately thought twice about it.

Since then, it and other central banks like the Bank of England have been as careful as possible not to frighten these markets. They have managed to end QE and, in the case of the Fed, have begun to reverse it. This is a very, very big deal.

Think about it for a moment.

All of a sudden, the world’s biggest buyers of arguably the world’s most important asset class have become big sellers of them.

In the UK, the Bank of England was due to begin its own reversal of QE round about now.

Tensions were, even before the government’s ham-fisted fiscal statement, about as high as they get in this normally-dull corner of financial markets.

Click to subscribe to the Sky News Daily wherever you get your podcasts

Reliance on complex derivatives

The second issue (and this is something only a few financial analysts and residents of the bonds market fully appreciated up until a few weeks ago) is that the era of low interest rates had also driven investors into all sorts of strange strategies in an effort to make a return.

Most notably, some pension funds had begun to rely on complex derivatives to keep earning a decent return each year while complying with regulations.

These so-called Liability Driven Investment strategies were well-suited for the nine-times-out-of-ten when the gilts market was boring. But as interest rates began to rise this year – partly because inflation was rising and central banks were beginning to raise interest rates and reverse QE; partly because investors twigged that the next prime minister seemed quite keen on borrowing more – these strategies began to run into trouble.

They were feeling the strain even before Friday 23 September.

Hard to think of a worse moment for an uncosted fiscal plan

But that brings us to the third of the issues here: the mini-budget.

The government bond market was already, as we’ve established, in a sensitive position.

Markets were, as one adviser to the Truss team warned them, febrile. It is hard to think of many worse moments for a new, untried and untrusted government to introduce uncosted fiscal plans. Yet that is what Kwasi Kwarteng did in his mini-budget.

The problem wasn’t really any single specific policy, but the combination.

It wasn’t about the sums (or lack thereof) but a dramatic loss of credibility for the government.

All of a sudden, the UK, which is anyway very reliant on external funding from overseas investors, seemed to surrender the benefit of the doubt.

Traders began to pull money from the UK, pushing the pound lower and forcing interest rates in the bond market higher (after all, if people are reluctant to lend to you, you have to offer them a higher rate to persuade them).

The new Chancellor seems genuinely to have been completely taken unawares by the reaction to his plan.

Yet the reality is that it so happened (in fiscal terms at least) to be about the worst possible pitch at the worst possible time. And it pushed up interest rates on government debt dramatically.

Wave of defaults could lead to a total breakdown of system

As I say, this was far from the only thing going on in markets.

On top of all the above, there were and are question marks about whether the Bank of England is acting fast enough to clamp down on inflation.

But these questions, and many others, were effectively swamped by the catastrophic surge in interest rates following the mini-budget.

Catastrophic because the increase in rates was so sharp it threatened the very functioning of the gilts market – this bedrock of the financial system.

And for those liability-driven investors in the pensions sector, it threatened to cause a wave of defaults which could, the Bank of England feared, lead to a total breakdown of the system within days or even hours.

This fear of what it called a “run dynamic” – a kind of wholesale equivalent to what we saw with Northern Rock, where a firesale of assets causes values to spiral ever downwards – sparked it into action.

It intervened the Wednesday after the mini-budget, offering to buy £65bn worth of the longer-dated gilts most affected. The intervention, it said, was taken to prevent the financial system from coming to harm.

But the method of intervention was quite significant.

After all, wasn’t buying bonds (with printed money) precisely what the Bank had been doing for the past decade or so through its QE programme?

Well in one sense… yes. The Bank insisted this was different: that this was not about injecting cash into the economy to get it moving but to deal forensically with a specific issue gumming up the markets. Financial stability, not monetary policy.

Even so, the paradox is still hard to escape. All of a sudden the Bank has gone from promising to sell a bucket load of bonds to promising to buy them.

Market reaction

The initial market reaction was overwhelmingly encouraging: the pound rose and interest rates on government bonds fell.

It was precisely what the Bank would have wanted – and most encouragingly it seemed to be driven not by the amount of cash the Bank was putting in (actually surprisingly few investors took up its offer to buy bonds), but sentiment.

The vicious circle precipitated by the mini-budget seemed to be turning around.

But in the past few days of trading, things have unravelled again.

The pound has fallen; the yields on bonds have risen, back more or less to where they were shortly before the Bank intervened a couple of weeks ago. It is unnerving.

And this brings us back to where we started. The Bank has bolstered its intervention a couple of times but it hasn’t brought yields down all that much – indeed, quite the contrary.

As of this lunchtime Tuesday the yields on long-dated UK government bonds were even higher than they were 24 hours earlier.

Why? One obvious issue is that the Bank’s intervention is strictly time-limited. It is due to expire at the end of this week. That raises a few other questions. First, will the pension funds reliant on those liability driven investments have untangled themselves by then? No-one is entirely sure. For a sense of how worried investors are about this, just look at what happened to the pound tonight after the Bank’s governor, Andrew Bailey, insisted the emergency programme will indeed end on Friday. It plummeted off a cliff-edge, instantly losing almost two cents against the dollar.

Second, will the government have become more credible in the market’s eyes by then? Almost certainly not. Aside from anything else, it isn’t due to present its plans for dealing with the public finances until the end of this month.

Third, what does all this mean for monetary policy and the end of QE? If we are to take them at their word, after ending this scheme the Bank will shortly begin the process of selling off bonds all over again.

So, one day they’re gearing up to be a massive seller; the next a massive buyer; the next a massive seller all over again.

Little matter that the stated reasons for the bond buying/selling are different. From the market’s perspective, no one is quite sure where they stand anymore.

In this final sense, the UK has unwittingly turned itself into a kind of laboratory for the epoch we’re in right now.

Everyone was expecting bumps in the road as the era of easy monetary policy came to an end.

It seems we are currently experiencing some of those bumps. And it just so happened that, thanks in large part to its new government, the UK found itself careering towards those bumps rather than braking before hitting them.

Business

Bank shares take fright as budget tax hike is floated

Published

10 hours ago

August 29, 2025

admin

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.

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.

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.

Business

Controversial P&O Ferries boss Hebblethwaite to quit

Published

12 hours ago

August 29, 2025

admin

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.

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.

“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.

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.

Business

How the US trade war is now targeting you from today

Published

18 hours ago

August 29, 2025

admin

How the US trade war is now targeting you from today

Donald Trump has cancelled a loophole from today that had allowed consumers and businesses to be spared duties for sending low-value goods to the United States.

The so-called de minimis exemption had applied across the world before Trump 2.0 but the president has taken action – and the UK may soon follow suit – as part of his trade war.

The relief had allowed goods worth less than $800 (£595) to enter the US duty-free since 2016.

But now, low-cost packages face the same tariff rate as other, more expensive, goods.

The reasons for the latest bout of protectionism are numerous and the ramifications are country and purpose specific.

What is changing?

It was no accident that China was the first destination to be slapped with this rule change.

The duty exemption on low-value Chinese goods was ended in May as US retailers, in fact those across the Western world, complained bitterly that they were being undercut by cheap clothing, accessories and household goods shipped by the likes of Shein and Temu.

From today, Mr Trump is expanding the end of the de minimis rule to the rest of the world.

Why is Trump doing this?

The president is not acting purely to protect US businesses.

More duties mean more money for his tariff treasure chest, bolstering the goodies already pouring in from his base and reciprocal tariffs imposed on trading partners globally this year.

The Trump administration has also called out “deceptive shipping practices, illegal material and duty circumvention”.

It also believes many parcels claiming to contain low-value goods have been used to fuel the country’s supplies of fentanyl, with the importation of the illegal drug being used by the president as a reason for his wider trade war against allies including Canada.

How will it apply?

Under the new rules, only letters and personal gifts worth less than $100 (£74) will still be free of import duties.

Charges will depend on the tariff regime facing the country from where the goods are sent.

Fox example, a parcel containing products worth $600 would raise $180 in extra duties when sent from a country facing a 30% tariff rate.

It has sparked chaos in many countries, with postal services in places including Japan, Germany and Australia refusing to accept many items for delivery to the US until the practicalities of the new regime become clearer.

What about the UK?

All goods not meeting the £74 exemption criteria now face a 10% charge because that is the baseline tariff the US has slapped on imports from the UK.

We were spared, if you remember, higher reciprocal tariffs under the so-called “trade deal”.

How will the process work?

All shipping and delivery companies will be wading through the changes, with the big international operators such as DHL, FedEx and the like all promising to navigate the challenge.

Royal Mail said on Thursday that it would be the first international postal service to have a dedicated operation.

It said consumers could use its new postal delivery duties paid (PDDP) services both online and at Post Offices.

But it explained that business customers faced different restrictions to individuals.

Businesses would be charged a handling fee per parcel to cover additional costs and duties would be calculated based on where items were originally manufactured.

While business account customers could be handed an invoice for the duties, it explained that consumers would have to pay at the point of buying postage.

No customs declaration would be required, it concluded, for personal correspondence.

Is the US alone in doing this?

The answer is no, but it remains a fairly widespread relief globally.

The European Union, for example, removed de minimis breaks back in 2021, making all e-commerce imports to the bloc subject to VAT.

It is also now planning to introduce a fee of €2 on goods worth €150 or less to cover the costs of customs processing.

Should the UK do the same?

The UK has been under pressure for many years to follow suit and drop its own £135 duty-free threshold as retailers battle the cheap e-commerce competition from China we mentioned earlier.

A review was announced by the chancellor in April.

Sky News revealed in July how the total declared trade value of de minimis imports into the UK in the 2024-25 financial year was £5.9bn – a 53% increase on the previous 12-month period.

Any rise in revenue would be welcomed, not only by UK retailers, but by Rachel Reeves too as she looks to fill a renewed black hole in the public finances.