The FT is on form today. It reports that Josef Ackermann, chief executive of Deutsche Bank, has said that banks needed to find ways of making complex structured products, such as mortgage securities, far more transparent to combat a widespread loss of investor confidence in complex finance. I agree.

I also note that the FT reports that:

UBS, one of the biggest casualties of the US subprime crisis, faces an additional blow to its profitability after a decision to wind down its traditional Switzerland-based private banking business for rich US clients.

The move by the world's biggest wealth manager follows a reassessment of the risks and rewards from an activity that has drawn increasing attention from US regulators concerned about marketing efforts in the US by offshore bankers.

Excellent. But then consider this. The FT says that in 2006, private banking accounted for SFr5.8bn ($5.3bn) of UBS total pre-tax profit of SFr14.4bn. And it adds:

About 60 private bankers in Zurich, Geneva and Lugano are affected. A few might transfer to UBS Swiss Financial Advisers, a Zurich subsidiary created specially to meet US regulatory requirements, but not enjoying Swiss banking secrecy on securities transactions.

Does that really mean these people earn $88 million dollars of profit each? Surely not, but what is clear is that the margins are high.

So why pull out. UBS Said:

This strategic alignment brings our services closer to the clients, streamlines operations and enhances our ability to ensure compliance with applicable laws and regulations.

That's PR guff: I read it as the heat is getting too great to remain in the kitchen. Put another way: tax fiddling is no longer compatible with being legal, and they're getting to realise it.

A swallow or two do not make a summer but times, they are a-changing.