| |
 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Economy Forum » AMERICA Should Follow The Brits & BREAK UP BIG... |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| God'sLittleAnus... |
 Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 5:42 am |
|
|
|
Guest
|
But too many in Congress have "vested" interests!
------------------------
"British break up several bailed-out banks"
"Some want U.S. to follow suit to increase financial competition"
By Anthony Faiola
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, November 3, 2009 9:18 AM
LONDON -- The British government announced Tuesday that it will break
up parts of major financial institutions bailed out by taxpayers,
highlighting a growing divide across the Atlantic over how to deal
with the massive banks that were partially nationalized during the
height of the financial crisis.
The British government -- spurred on by European regulators -- is
forcing the Royal Bank of Scotland, Lloyds Banking Group and Northern
Rock to sell off parts of their operations. The Europeans are calling
for more and smaller banks to increase competition and eliminate the
threat posed by banks so large that they must be rescued by taxpayers,
no matter how they conducted their business, in order to avoid
damaging the global financial system.
The move to downsize some of Britain's largest banks comes as U.S.
politicians are debating whether American banks should also be
required to shrink. The Obama administration has maintained that large
banks should be preserved because they play an important role in the
economy and that taxpayers instead should be protected by creating a
new system for liquidating large banks that run into problems. But
Britain's decision already is being cited by a growing chorus of
experts, including prominent bankers and economists, who want the
United States to pursue a similar approach.
"We still need to see exactly which parts the [British] banks will
need to sell off to judge whether the goal of having smaller banks is
really achieved," said Richard Portes, an economics professor at the
London Business School. "But there are lessons here for the United
States. The supposed economies of scale of massive financial
institutions are outweighed by the difficulties in controlling risk
inside them."
The changes amount to a massive restructuring of the British financial
system, among the hardest hit by the global crisis, that could result
in what the government has described as the creation of three new
commercial banks. The Royal Bank of Scotland -- now 70 percent owned
by British taxpayers -- announced Tuesday that it would sell off 318
branches in England and Wales, as well as sell its NatWest brand in
Scotland, RBS Insurance, and Global Merchant Services, a credit card
payment business, as a result of regulator demands. The sell-offs
would pave the way for tens of billions of dollars more in previously
announced cash injections from the governments.
Demands that more state aid be tied to downsizing appeared to be
emanating most strongly from Brussels, where the European Commission
has been pressing the British to shrink its massive banks. In a
related move, RBS also announced plans Monday to trim 3,700 jobs, or
14 percent of its workforce, across the United Kingdom.
Lloyds, now 43 percent owned by British taxpayers, said it will sell
at least 600 branches, including its TSB brand in Britain, the
Cheltenham & Gloucester mortgage company and an online financial
business, Intelligent Finance. The company avoided more massive sell-
offs through a deal to raise billions of dollars in private financing,
reducing its reliance on the government for fresh capital.
As part of the deals, both Lloyds and RBS agreed not to pay out any
cash bonuses to staff earning over 39,000 pounds, or $65,500, in 2009.
On Sunday, Britain's chancellor of the exchequer (the equivalent of
Treasury secretary), Alistair Darling, told the BBC that Northern Rock
-- a British mortgage giant that became one of the first victims of
the financial crisis -- would be split in two parts by the end of the
year.
The banks' assets would be sold only to new entrants to the British
banking market to ensure more competition. Among the potential bidders
here are a major supermarket chain and billionaire Richard Branson,
founder of the Virgin group. Darling told the BBC that the sell-offs
would not amount to "a fire sale," adding that sales of some assets
could take several years to ensure that taxpayers get a good return on
their investments in the banks. "We need a safer, more competitive
banking system," Darling said.
In recent weeks, European regulators have also forced other banks
bailed out by European governments -- most notable ING in the
Netherlands -- to sell off parts of their operations.
Britain and the United States developed similar banking systems over
the past two decades, both encouraging the evolution of giant firms
that sought to offer a range of financial services, from savings
accounts to trading in derivatives. But in the wake of last fall's
financial crisis, Britain has moved much more quickly and dramatically
to reform its financial system. Its decision to invest directly in its
largest banks to help them weather the crisis set a precedent for the
U.S. bailout that followed.
Proponents of downsizing now are pushing the Obama administration to
follow Britain's example again.
One of President Obama's top outside economic advisers, former Fed
chairman Paul A. Volcker, has proposed a renewed separation between
commercial banking and investment banking. The Glass-Steagall Act,
which forced banks to choose between those businesses, was imposed
during the Great Depression but largely repealed in 1999.
Other prominent financial experts want the government to limit the
size of commercial banks -- for example, through penalties that would
give smaller banks a competitive advantage. Investors are already
offering large banks much better borrowing rates than their smaller
rivals because they believe U.S. regulators won't let the big firms
fail.
The three largest U.S. banks, Bank of America, J.P. Morgan Chase and
Wells Fargo, together control about a third of the nation's deposits
and are the dominant providers of financial products including
mortgage loans and credit cards. All three companies also play major
roles on Wall Street, investing and helping companies raise money.
Proponents of downsizing argue that such behemoths can take outsize
risks, knowing the government must catch them if they fall.
The Obama administration has pushed the most troubled large bank,
Citigroup, to sell operations to improve its financial prospects, but
it has declined to place similar pressure on healthier banks, arguing
in part that the government is ill-suited to make management
decisions.
The British plan announced Tuesday did not appear to involve RBS's
U.S. retail banking subsidiary, Citizens Bank, which ranks as the
nation's 10th-largest retail bank, with about $100 billion in
deposits.
[Staff writers Binyamin Appelbaum and David Cho in Washington
contributed to this report.]
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/03/AR2009110300352.html?hpid=topnews |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Mon Nov 23, 2009 7:59 am
|
|