The Chief Executive of Northern Rock sent a note to all his staff yesterday afternoon saying:
I am delighted to tell you that the Chancellor has just announced that all deposits with Northern Rock are fully underwritten by the Government and Bank of England with immediate effect.
The Chancellor's statement makes it clear beyond any doubt that all savings in Northern Rock are safe and secure.
Consequently anybody who is in a queue outside a branch, or who is trying to get access to an online account, can be fully reassured there is no case for concern whatsoever.
Bloody Hurrah!
Note that last comment. This is the cry of an anguished man let off the hook by government.
In effect the Chancellor has now given all bank customers a guarantee that just about whatever their bank does their money is safe. Much of the risk has gone out of banking as a result and has been assumed by the State.
Risk transfer always has a price. I suggest that in this case a charge can be created for the risk the State is taking on. I'd suggest that it is an extra 10% corporation tax to be paid by any bank offering deposit taking services in the UK.
Fair, don't you think?
How much extra will the state get? Well, between them HSBC, RBS, Barclays, HBOS and Lloyds TSB declared current UK tax liabilities of £6.5 billion in 2006. This was at 30%.
At 40% they'd have paid £8.7 billion.
That's an extra £2.2 billion they'd have paid.
Chicken feed compared to the deposits on which they now have no risk.
PS 19.9.07 This blog is covered by the Guardian here.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Richard, I am disappointed with you – surely you should now be advocating nationalisation?
I’m quite happy with appropriate private public partnerships
I confess few conform to that standard right now
Richard
Perhaps it might be interesting to explore the effectiveness of regulation in the financial markets? Some might claim that current regulation is effective only in wasting trees.
As a former Associate of the Chartered Institute of Bankers (now the Institute of Financial Services), an Assistant Vice President and Foreign Exchange Manager of the London Branch of an American Bank dealing in Foreign Exchange and Eurodollar Interbank Deposits in the 1970s – I entirely agree with your proposal.
[…] I agree. I’ve already swuggested the means to do so: it’s an extra 10% tax charge. […]
[…] said it before, and I’ll say it again: banks should pay an extra 10% corporation tax for the risk they impose on […]
[…] have been arguing since 2007 that UK banks should pay 10% more in tax than other companies. I argued at that time that this was the fee they owed for the state taking […]
[…] have been arguing since 2007 that UK banks should pay 10% more in tax than other companies. I argued at that time that this was the fee they owed for the state taking […]
[…] up guys. Some of us have been calling for this since […]