Reuters logo
Fitch: Bank Ratings Likely to Withstand Worst Passporting Scenario
September 29, 2016 / 8:16 AM / a year ago

Fitch: Bank Ratings Likely to Withstand Worst Passporting Scenario

(The following statement was released by the rating agency) LONDON, September 29 (Fitch) A worst-case withdrawal of passporting rights in isolation is unlikely to be a ratings changer for major UK banks and international banks with large operations in the UK, says Fitch Ratings. However, it is difficult to predict how negotiations will play out for financial services passporting once the UK leaves the EU because there are many permutations. Major international banks are used to business restructuring. They have been focusing on resolution planning, and optimising operational and capital efficiency in the face of regulatory and business headwinds. But relocating businesses to other EU countries to preserve passporting rights would be costly and disruptive at a time when many banks, particularly in Europe, are struggling to make adequate returns. The Joint Committee of the European Supervisory Authorities' report this month published an aggregate return on equity (ROE) of 5.8% for EU banks as of 1Q16 and only three European global systemically important banks achieved an ROE in excess of 10% in 2015. Nonetheless, we believe the costs and disruption are likely to be manageable in the context of banks' overall credit profiles. The worst outcome is that UK-established financial services companies lose their ability to passport products and services into the EU. In this case, UK-domiciled banks with an international profile, such as HSBC, and subsidiaries of non-EU banks using the UK as a bridgehead into the EU, such as JPMorgan Chase, would assess the best strategy for their EU businesses. Banks headquartered in the eurozone with substantial operations in the UK may also need to make costly adaptations to their business models. Most banks that would need to transfer businesses out of the UK already have existing EU subsidiaries, which could be bolstered to handle increased volumes and operations. Deciding where to locate EU operations will depend on a broad range of factors, such as the location of existing legal entities, language requirements, staff expertise and cost, labour law flexibility, tax considerations, logistics and incentives offered by the different countries. Management would also consider the functions and headcount numbers required by national authorities to be granted appropriate licences when relocating. We expect relocations to be considered in the global context of moving back- and middle-office functions to cheaper locations. We believe the UK will fight hard to preserve the dominance of London as a financial centre and it may well be easier on EU and international banks using "inbound" passports to provide services in the UK than the EU authorities might be on UK firms using "outbound" passports. Recent data from the Financial Conduct Authority said 5,500 firms use outbound passports in respect of various EU financial services directives and about 8,000 firms use inbound passports. These numbers include firms other than banks, such as insurance companies and asset managers. UK firms may be able to benefit from third-party equivalence rules in respect of some services, but this would require European Commission sign-off. The UK's financial services legislation is consistent with the EU's and the UK should meet equivalence thresholds with respect to this legislation. Equivalence recognition would allow UK-based financial institutions to continue to operate in the EU. The privileges of equivalence are broadly similar to passporting rights, but they are unlikely to be as robust and not all banking services are eligible for equivalence rules. Relying on equivalence agreements is less desirable for firms because the EU could withdraw any equivalence decision it makes. As relevant EU legislation changes, there is a risk that the corresponding UK legislation could lose its "equivalent" designation unless the UK mimicked these changes. Contact: James Longsdon Managing Director, co-head EMEA Financial Institutions +44 203 530 1076 Fitch Ratings Limited 30 North Colonnade London E14 5GN Janine Dow Senior Analyst, Fitch Wire +44 20 3530 1464 Media Relations: Elaine Bailey, London, Tel: +44 203 530 1153, Email: The above article originally appeared as a post on the Fitch Wire credit market commentary page. The original article can be accessed at All opinions expressed are those of Fitch Ratings. ALL FITCH CREDIT RATINGS ARE SUBJECT TO CERTAIN LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS. PLEASE READ THESE LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS BY FOLLOWING THIS LINK: here. IN ADDITION, RATING DEFINITIONS AND THE TERMS OF USE OF SUCH RATINGS ARE AVAILABLE ON THE AGENCY'S PUBLIC WEB SITE AT WWW.FITCHRATINGS.COM. PUBLISHED RATINGS, CRITERIA, AND METHODOLOGIES ARE AVAILABLE FROM THIS SITE AT ALL TIMES. FITCH'S CODE OF CONDUCT, CONFIDENTIALITY, CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, AFFILIATE FIREWALL, COMPLIANCE, AND OTHER RELEVANT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES ARE ALSO AVAILABLE FROM THE CODE OF CONDUCT SECTION OF THIS SITE. FITCH MAY HAVE PROVIDED ANOTHER PERMISSIBLE SERVICE TO THE RATED ENTITY OR ITS RELATED THIRD PARTIES. DETAILS OF THIS SERVICE FOR RATINGS FOR WHICH THE LEAD ANALYST IS BASED IN AN EU-REGISTERED ENTITY CAN BE FOUND ON THE ENTITY SUMMARY PAGE FOR THIS ISSUER ON THE FITCH WEBSITE. Copyright © 2016 by Fitch Ratings, Inc., Fitch Ratings Ltd. and its subsidiaries. 33 Whitehall Street, NY, NY 10004. Telephone: 1-800-753-4824, (212) 908-0500. Fax: (212) 480-4435. Reproduction or retransmission in whole or in part is prohibited except by permission. All rights reserved. In issuing and maintaining its ratings and in making other reports (including forecast information), Fitch relies on factual information it receives from issuers and underwriters and from other sources Fitch believes to be credible. Fitch conducts a reasonable investigation of the factual information relied upon by it in accordance with its ratings methodology, and obtains reasonable verification of that information from independent sources, to the extent such sources are available for a given security or in a given jurisdiction. The manner of Fitch's factual investigation and the scope of the third-party verification it obtains will vary depending on the nature of the rated security and its issuer, the requirements and practices in the jurisdiction in which the rated security is offered and sold and/or the issuer is located, the availability and nature of relevant public information, access to the management of the issuer and its advisers, the availability of pre-existing third-party verifications such as audit reports, agreed-upon procedures letters, appraisals, actuarial reports, engineering reports, legal opinions and other reports provided by third parties, the availability of independent and competent third- party verification sources with respect to the particular security or in the particular jurisdiction of the issuer, and a variety of other factors. Users of Fitch's ratings and reports should understand that neither an enhanced factual investigation nor any third-party verification can ensure that all of the information Fitch relies on in connection with a rating or a report will be accurate and complete. Ultimately, the issuer and its advisers are responsible for the accuracy of the information they provide to Fitch and to the market in offering documents and other reports. In issuing its ratings and its reports, Fitch must rely on the work of experts, including independent auditors with respect to financial statements and attorneys with respect to legal and tax matters. Further, ratings and forecasts of financial and other information are inherently forward-looking and embody assumptions and predictions about future events that by their nature cannot be verified as facts. As a result, despite any verification of current facts, ratings and forecasts can be affected by future events or conditions that were not anticipated at the time a rating or forecast was issued or affirmed. The information in this report is provided "as is" without any representation or warranty of any kind, and Fitch does not represent or warrant that the report or any of its contents will meet any of the requirements of a recipient of the report. A Fitch rating is an opinion as to the creditworthiness of a security. This opinion and reports made by Fitch are based on established criteria and methodologies that Fitch is continuously evaluating and updating. Therefore, ratings and reports are the collective work product of Fitch and no individual, or group of individuals, is solely responsible for a rating or a report. The rating does not address the risk of loss due to risks other than credit risk, unless such risk is specifically mentioned. Fitch is not engaged in the offer or sale of any security. All Fitch reports have shared authorship. Individuals identified in a Fitch report were involved in, but are not solely responsible for, the opinions stated therein. The individuals are named for contact purposes only. A report providing a Fitch rating is neither a prospectus nor a substitute for the information assembled, verified and presented to investors by the issuer and its agents in connection with the sale of the securities. Ratings may be changed or withdrawn at any time for any reason in the sole discretion of Fitch. Fitch does not provide investment advice of any sort. Ratings are not a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. Ratings do not comment on the adequacy of market price, the suitability of any security for a particular investor, or the tax-exempt nature or taxability of payments made in respect to any security. Fitch receives fees from issuers, insurers, guarantors, other obligors, and underwriters for rating securities. Such fees generally vary from US$1,000 to US$750,000 (or the applicable currency equivalent) per issue. In certain cases, Fitch will rate all or a number of issues issued by a particular issuer, or insured or guaranteed by a particular insurer or guarantor, for a single annual fee. Such fees are expected to vary from US$10,000 to US$1,500,000 (or the applicable currency equivalent). The assignment, publication, or dissemination of a rating by Fitch shall not constitute a consent by Fitch to use its name as an expert in connection with any registration statement filed under the United States securities laws, the Financial Services and Markets Act of 2000 of the United Kingdom, or the securities laws of any particular jurisdiction. Due to the relative efficiency of electronic publishing and distribution, Fitch research may be available to electronic subscribers up to three days earlier than to print subscribers. For Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan and South Korea only: Fitch Australia Pty Ltd holds an Australian financial services license (AFS license no. 337123) which authorizes it to provide credit ratings to wholesale clients only. Credit ratings information published by Fitch is not intended to be used by persons who are retail clients within the meaning of the Corporations Act 2001

Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
0 : 0
  • narrow-browser-and-phone
  • medium-browser-and-portrait-tablet
  • landscape-tablet
  • medium-wide-browser
  • wide-browser-and-larger
  • medium-browser-and-landscape-tablet
  • medium-wide-browser-and-larger
  • above-phone
  • portrait-tablet-and-above
  • above-portrait-tablet
  • landscape-tablet-and-above
  • landscape-tablet-and-medium-wide-browser
  • portrait-tablet-and-below
  • landscape-tablet-and-below