Discover your dream Career
For Recruiters

Editor's take: Toothless regulators won't bite bonuses

It's down to regulators to reform the bonus system. And given regulators are powerless to intervene, reform looks as likely as a small village in Hampshire becoming the financial centre of the UK.

Regulators are certainly making scary noises. From Mervyn King's anti-bonus diatribe, to Sir Callum McCarthy's call for banks to emphasise long-term performance, snarls and grunts about bonuses have been emanating from the regulatory corner for several months.

However, individual regulators are powerless to make a difference. Mervyn and Sir Callum can gnash all they like, but unless other regulators chomp alongside them, banks will simply resituate themselves in localities amenable to their need to intermittently rain cash on top performers.

If regulators are to force bonus reform, they will therefore need to do so globally. But there is no global financial services regulator. And given three large hurdles barring its conception, birth of such a mega-regulator looks unlikely.

The first hurdle is legislation. A global regulator would mean combining existing local regulations. "That would be extremely difficult, if not impossible," says Chris Rexworthy, former head of the wholesale firms division at the FSA.

The second is consensus. The US is already having problems building consensus between the Treasury, the President and Congress on the intricacies of a subprime rescue package. Reaching agreement on global financial services regulation would be the equivalent of throwing another 109 stakeholders into the mix.

The third is regulatory protectionism. "Individual country regulators are much too protective of their own patch to allow for a global regulator," says John Tattershall, chairman of the financial services regulatory practice at PricewaterhouseCoopers. "At the end of the day, failure of a local bank will always be blamed on the local authorities, which makes it difficult for them to cede control."

In the absence of a global regulator, the world must make do with guidance from the likes of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, the International Organisation of Securities Commissions (IOSCO), and the Financial Stability Forum. But without global enforcement, one country's interpretation of their guidance is likely to differ from another's - as demonstrated by variations in the implementation of MiFID and Basel II.

With regulators unable to enforce bonus reform, the responsibility is passed to banks. But individual banks have no interest in implementing a system that could mean them losing staff to others or to hedge funds.

For this reason, bonuses look safe. But banks and bankers cannot afford to be too complacent. Extreme times call for extreme solutions: in World War II, the Bank of England was evacuated to Hurstbourne Priors, a small village not far from Andover in Hampshire.

author-card-avatar
AUTHORSarah Butcher Global Editor
  • du
    dun bankin
    13 May 2008

    Not sure any of you have got the point here. It's not THE WAGE which is the problem. Create value, earn as much as you like, fine. Package up bundles of crap, sell them to each other, mince around diffidently, earn a huge bonus, not fine. Waste of someone's money. And space.And source of economic instability to boot.

  • Fi
    Final Jane
    13 May 2008

    Got you lot going a bit though, didn't I?!

  • Ev
    Even more Thicko Jane
    13 May 2008

    Sorry darlings in general and Tammy in particular, no I don't 'understand simply concept about the economic'. For which I think I can be forgiven. I kinda like Egor on this one. In a good world, bankers make money, regulators protect the little guy, nobody dives into a bucket of blood with their eyes closed (like they all just did). This is where the regulator issue comes in - as Anon goes on to say, 'regulators set the framework in which banks work'. My whole point is that they didn't, they won't and they can't. It's nonsense to say that regulators have any clout over the health or stability of the banking environment. They're toothless. Hence the article title. Bonuses are a complete side-issue.

  • Ta
    Tammy
    13 May 2008

    To Jane, From your answered to the above question, I am guessing you do not work in the banking envirnoment. If you cannot understand simply concept about the economic, GOD HELP US!
    What don't you understand? It is so straight forward - not rocket science.

  • Eg
    Egor
    13 May 2008

    Why all the screaming about bonuses? Firstly, 40% of all that cash goes to support health care, schools, and the like in form of taxes. Secondly, you have to find some ways to attract the top people - if some idiot regulator did actually find a way to cap bonuses that'd simply mean an explosion in other kinds of perks, that'd be even more expensive to shareholders because they'd be indirect.

    The market should set the wages, the regulators should monitor the banks for solvency, make sure the small depositors are protected through some kind of insurance - and let the banks fail (I'm talking about you, Northern Rock) if they gamble badly.

Sign up to Morning Coffee!

Coffee mug

The essential daily roundup of news and analysis read by everyone from senior bankers and traders to new recruits.

Sign up to Morning Coffee!

Coffee mug

The essential daily roundup of news and analysis read by everyone from senior bankers and traders to new recruits.