Tag: banks

This is Martin Wolf’s response* to Andrew G Haldane’s “Control rights (and wrongs)” Wincott Annual Memorial Lecture, on October 24, 2011

In this lecture, Andy Haldane, executive director for financial stability at the Bank of England, provides a compelling account of the development of western – above all British banking – over the past two centuries. He demonstrates the consequences of a progressive divorce between who controls the banks – shareholders and managers – and who bears most of the risks – society at large and, in particular, taxpayers.

Mr Haldane shows that each step along this road to ruin seemed reasonable, even inescapable. Yet the journey has ended up with over-leveraged behemoths that are too big to fail and, increasingly, too big to save.

Between one and a half and two centuries ago, it was common for equity to account for half of a bank’s funding and liquid securities to account for as much as 30 per cent of its assets. Financial sector assets accounted for less than 50 per cent of UK gross domestic product and the largest banks had assets of less than 5 per cent of GDP.

According to a FT article last week, Lloyds’ bank has a target return on equity of 14.5 per cent. Banks like to argue that this is the level of return on equity they need to earn, in order to gain funding from the markets. Naturally, remuneration is linked to achieving such objectives. The question, however, is whether such objectives make any sense. The brief answer is: no.

Forget banks, for the moment. What would you say if someone offered you an investment with a promised real return of close to 15 per cent? You might say: “How much can I buy?” Alternatively, you might say: “What is the catch?” Sensible people must take the latter view. If you thought that you were being offered a reliable real return at such an exalted level, you would buy as much as you could. This must be particularly true now when real returns on the bonds of relatively safe governments are close to zero.

So what is the catch? The obvious answer has to be that the real return in question is extremely risky, because it is volatile and offers a significant chance of total wipe-out.

Martin Wolf Exchange

Economic issues

About this blog About Martin Blog guide
On this blog, I will open the discussion of a topic that I am thinking about. My aim will be to elicit views of readers. I will give my own response to the question I have raised, before posting the next issue for discussion.

Martin aims to publish a post twice a week.
Martin Wolf is chief economics commentator at the Financial Times, London. He was awarded the CBE (Commander of the British Empire) in 2000 “for services to financial journalism”. Mr Wolf is an honorary fellow of Nuffield College and of Corpus Christi College, Oxford. He is also an honorary professor at the University of Nottingham. He has been a forum fellow at the annual meeting of the World Economic Forum in Davos since 1999 and a member of its International Media Council since 2006.

Martin was made a Doctor of Letters, honoris causa, by Nottingham University in July 2006 and a Doctor of Science (Economics) of London University, honoris causa, by the London School of Economics in December 2006. He was joint winner of the 2009 award for columns in “giant newspapers” at the 15th annual Best in Business Journalism competition of The Society of American Business Editors and Writers and won the 32nd Ischia International Journalism Prize in 2012. Martin's most recent publications are Why Globalization Works and Fixing Global Finance.
To comment, please register for free with FT.com and read our policy on submitting comments.

All posts are published in UK time.

Contact martin.wolf@ft.com.

See the full list of FT blogs.

Elsewhere on ft.com

Money Supply

News, data and opinions on central banks around the world

Gavyn Davies

Gavyn Davies blogs on macroeconomics and the financial markets

Archive

« AprMay 2012
M T W T F S S
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031