British Banks Learn To Coexist With Rules Of Post-Crisis

London – British Banks Learn To Coexist With Rules Of Post-Crisis; Barclays is planning to leave many of his businesses, including the unit Barkley for credit cards and loans, international companies, outside the scope of the process of “fencing” in order to diversify risk in its investment.

Barclays Bank is planning to leave many of his businesses, including the unit Barkley for credit cards and loans, international companies, outside the scope of the process of “fencing” in order to diversify risk in its investment.

Barclays

Barclays Bank

British banks learn how to live with the fencing process. They are still complaining of the cost of the process, but most of the top executives at five major banks believe that they now have viable to dissect their business strategies.

In the reforms proposed for the first time Sir John Vickers four years before that, which has become a regulatory main response of the United Kingdom of the financial crisis framework, should the banks, which have more than 25 billion pounds of deposits can take your work for consumers for the most dangerous investment banking business.

The aim of al-Qaeda – which he described as a senior executive as a “seismic material” – is to protect the taxpayers from having to rescue a bank again, so by making sure that it is kept vital services, such as retail deposits or payments system operations, separate from risks elsewhere in the financial sector.

He plans to focus some of the local banks, such as Lloyds Banking Group and Royal Bank of Scotland, to mobilize what it can within the fence, which is working on its construction on deposits and consumer divisions.

On the other end, Barclays is planning to leave many of his businesses, including the unit Barkley for credit cards and loans, international companies, outside the fence in order to diversify risk in the big investment bank. It also plans to Santander Bank of Spain building a “narrow wall”, with the presence of many of the bank’s corporate clients in the United Kingdom outside the fence.

They range cost estimates of 1.5 billion pounds at the “HSBC”, which is among the most banks affected by the global Onmozjh diverse in the business, to “a few hundreds of millions of pounds” at Lloyds – which is believed widely that he had a mission simpler because 97 per cent of its assets will be inside the fence. It is noteworthy that land banks are exempt from the procedure.

And finally turned the mood among professionals money from a sense of danger on a large scale to an atmosphere of quiet confidence that they can adapt. Pending the publication of the final rules, some banks began to lose patience. The “HSBC” at one stage threatening to separate retail operations in the United Kingdom because of fears of facing troubles in control of the independent directors. But he finally renamed the unit as the “HSBC UK” and gave up on the idea of ​​separation.

In the next month, prudent regulatory authority within the Bank of England plans to announce more details on how to implement the process of fencing. It is likely that a lot is determined by how to interpret Andrew Bailey, head of the Organization authority of the law.

There are three main areas in which the bank is pushing for greater access to space. First, many of them demanding more flexibility in governance.

In a consultation paper last year, the prudent regulatory authority said that half the members of the Board of Management fenced banks should be independent, as well as Chairman of the Board.

But Lloyds Bank and Royal Bank of Scotland argue that because their units involved in fencing operations, representing 97 and 80 per cent of the total of their assets, respectively, should be allowed to participate in a joint council with the main holding company. Other banks and also want the flexibility to have a single financial manager, or the chairman of the risks supervised on both sides of the fence.

Some banks say they will suffer in order to find enough of the non-executive directors appropriately qualified, who meet regulatory approval requirements. He says one of the senior executives: “there is simply not enough people in the United Kingdom to fill all these new boards that want us to set up, especially to a whole generation of bankers it was eliminated because of the crisis.”

Second, banks eagerly awaiting regulatory authority prudential rules on capital requirements, both at the group level as well as for an entity that is Tsoerh. The government has already said that the entities participating in the fencing process should acquire additional stocks of capital up almost 3 per cent of the assets of the bank, according to the relative weight of risk. Some financial experts that this bank could force a narrow fencing – such as Bank Barkliz- to collect more shares, because the large real estate loan book at the bank will be punished under the leverage ratio, which measures the total assets versus core capital property rights.

In any case, a person familiar with the plan say Barclays could be the funding mechanism for the balance of his being walled by the inclusion of lending to companies in the United Kingdom and wealth management activities along with real estate loan book.

Finally, some banks want more clarity about how to organize its vital services – such as IT, accounting, human resources and IT systems – to ensure its survival is working even if one side of the fence collapsed.

Amid all this change, some of them are worried of disruption among customers. Says Bill Michael, head of financial services in Europe with the “KPMG”: “I really think that this shows the banks of the United Kingdom of a disadvantage. The problem will be if you start to tell customers that they can not rid the financial derivatives transactions outside Europe. What will think? If I were a customer, you would go to a large foreign bank was not affected by the process of fencing. ”

And pressed banks to prudential regulatory authority in order to provide the final rules relating to the process of fencing, which is expected to be issued until the end of 2016 at least.

While banks have been strongly protesting against the plans, the feeling now is that there is a need for clarity on how to interpret the power of the law.

Said a senior banker: “There is pressure on the organization to play a role in the specified time. People will have to raise the question of timing.”

Another banker said: “Whenever we get the rules at the earliest, the better.” He added a third banker: “We can not wait.”

It is expected that the prudent regulatory authority conducted two more rounds of consultations. If not issued final rules until 2017, then it will not have the rest of the appointment in 2019, only two years.

Until those rules are issued, the bank is able to claim exemptions – in areas such as whether there is a need to separate the original boards and separate assets of the entities, or on which side of the fence should be some financial products are located.

Barclays intends to put the main joint structure in the process of fencing in front of his council this month.

Admin
error: Content is protected !!