Don’t expect Britain’s first hedge fund premiership to be smooth or enjoyable | Ed Conway

Published

3 years ago

October 24, 2022

admin

Rishi Sunak is not just our first British Asian prime minister, our first Hindu PM.

He is not just the youngest prime minister of the modern era. He is also the youngest since the Napoleonic wars and the first millennial PM.

Just as intriguingly, and possibly even more consequentially, he is Britain’s first hedge fund prime minister too.

Before he was a politician, Mr Sunak worked in finance, both at Goldman Sachs and Chris Hohn’s hedge fund – The Children’s Investment Fund Management. His time in the sector was relatively short, but it nonetheless makes for a CV quite unlike almost every other resident of 10 Downing Street.

Rishi Sunak wins race to be prime minister – live updates

Markets shaped him. And now, at the very point when the rise and fall of certain benchmarks are influencing British politics more than in any era since at least the early 1990s, we have a prime minister who takes those markets unusually seriously.

Markets helped him through the door. For, in the end, what did for Liz Truss was the extraordinary response to her mini-budget, which contributed to a dramatic leap in interest rates on both government debt and mortgages. That in turn triggered a crisis in the gilt markets which underlie Britain’s financial system.

And markets have welcomed him. The news that Boris Johnson was pulling out of the leadership race was followed by a sudden rise in the value of the pound. When trading opened in government bonds this morning, they very quickly rallied. The implied interest rate on these bonds dropped sharply.

And since these markets are the foundations of the rest of the financial system, that had an instant effect on prices elsewhere. After the mini-budget, traders were expecting Bank of England interest rates to rise to well above 6% next year; this morning the expected peak dropped below 5% for the first time since that fiscal event.

At this stage you are doubtless wondering: why on earth does any of this matter? Why are we paying so much attention to the markets? Why (as some might put it) is Britain allowing the whims of the globalist elite – the “Davos consensus” – to shape its policy? Whatever happened to democracy?

And, frankly, you have a point. A democratic country’s policies should be shaped by politicians elected by its people. That’s part of the unwritten social contract that binds us.

But the reality – depressing as it might be – is that the ability of those politicians to act is circumscribed by markets. They can, to give you a straightforward example, only borrow to the extent that investors around the world are willing to lend them money.

Markets matter not because they are right or wrong (that’s not how it works) but because that’s where the money is. And Britain, a country with enormous “twin deficits” on its current account and government account, is more reliant than pretty much any other developed economy on borrowing from those markets. This is just the way it is – ask anyone who worked at Goldman Sachs.

And that logic is worth keeping in mind as Britain’s first hedge fund prime minister takes office and begins to shape policy. Our ability to do what we want to do as a country is dependent on persuading the millions of investors around the world, taking second-by-second decisions on where to put their money, that we are on the right course. Other prime ministers (certainly the last couple) tried to ignore that; it’s unlikely that a “hedge fund prime minister” would.

However, the economic challenges that face Mr Sunak go well beyond the tick-tick-tick of a gilt chart. He enters Number 10 with the UK economy quite plausibly in recession. Energy costs remain at unprecedented highs (even though the wholesale cost of gas has fallen sharply).

So too do food prices and the costs of all sorts of household sundries. Further shocks from the Ukraine war seem highly likely. And on top of this, households will have to contend, in the coming year or so, with a very sharp increase in mortgage costs. Even the slight improvement in those interest rates since Mr Sunak became the odds-on favourite for PM does little to change that.

In short, even in a best-case scenario for the markets, the coming months for the UK economy are likely to feel grim, with households squeezed at every corner – more than they have been for decades. One can argue the toss over who bears the most responsibility for this – whether that’s the Tory party, central banks or, yes, markets. But that’s what we’re heading for.

Mr Sunak spent most of his time as chancellor doling out money during the pandemic. Normally in a recession, governments tend to “loosen fiscal policy” – which is to say, dole out more money.

But that brings us back to markets. Will those investors be relaxed about Britain borrowing more in the coming years? Will they be assured enough by the hedge fund credentials of the PM to give Britain the benefit of the doubt? Will Mr Sunak want to take that risk?

The past few weeks have been an astonishing ride in politics. We are now off the Truss rollercoaster. The Sunak journey might feel different; it might not have the same twists and turns; but don’t expect it to be especially smooth or enjoyable either.

Business

Bank shares take fright as budget tax hike is floated

Published

12 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

14 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

20 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.