As Financial Regulation Matters ends its first year, this post will review some of the main themes that have emerged (or persisted) over the last year. With nearly 200 posts since starting in February, it will be too much to review each post, but assessing the themes that have been discussed throughout the year will be useful; in what is a turbulent era politically and socially, understanding the role that financial regulation plays in that arena, and how that arena affects the development of financial regulation, is of interest. With that in mind, we will look at some of the main stories that have been discussed in Financial Regulation Matters from within a few specific areas: fraud and corruption; industry developments; social and political developments; and lastly developments for financial regulators. Fraud and Corruption As the world (particularly the Western World) comes to terms with the devastating Financial Crisis and its ensuing effects, fraud and corruption has

On quite a few occasions here in Financial Regulation Matters , we have looked at the issue of corruption; that subject has taken across a number of industries, ranging from automobiles , tobacco , aerospace , and technology . In today’s post, the focus turns to the Oil and Gas Industry with news coming earlier in the month from Italy that one of the ‘ biggest corporate bribery trials in history ’ will start in 2019. So, we shall look at some of the details of the forthcoming case and assess it against a backdrop of legal action which is, on a global scale, looking to take the fight to corporate corruption. It was announced on the 20 th of December that industry-leading corporate giants Royal Dutch Shell and Eni would have to face trial in 2019, in Milan, to face allegations of corporate bribery in relation to a Nigerian oil-field . The trial is to focus on payments made by the companies in 2011, with the allegation being that the payments constituted bribes to secure a Nigeria

In this very short post, the focus will be on the difficulties being faced at the moment by the famous ‘Toys-R-Us’ brand, founded almost 70 years ago in the United States. Founded in 1948 by Charles Lazarus , the company would go on to be a huge success, essentially coming to be synonymous with the children’s toys market; the company has since gone on to establish itself in countries all around the world, and today’s post will focus on its U.K. operations, which began in 1985 , and the troubles facing the company as a whole. It was reported earlier today that rather than demonstrate the continuance of this success, the British arm of the Toys R Us Company is facing the prospect of going into administration – the process whereby an administrator takes charge and attempts to rescue the company as a going concern. This negative development will, according to reports, put more than 3,000 British jobs at risk , with the prospect of administration drawing ever closer after an attempt

The final post today looks at the company behind the massive HS2 infrastructure project that will see some of the U.K.’s largest cities connected by a new high-speed railway system. We have looked fleetingly at the project before when we focused on the travails of Carillion, just one of the firms tasked with seeing this large-scale project realised. However, whilst Carillion is experiencing a period of difficulty at the moment, the HS2 Company itself has this week been thrust into the limelight because of its organisational structure, and its compensation to key individuals. So, in this post, we will look at the developing story and assess the development of this integral project. High Speed Two, or HS2, is the name given to the large-scale infrastructure project that aims to connect Britain’s largest Cities by way of modern high-speed rail links and is coordinated by the HS2 Ltd Company that is funded by grant-in-aid from the Government. The project will see eight different c

This short post reacts to the news today that banks and building societies are being enlisted by the British Government to check the immigration status of millions of people and take the appropriate action – essentially putting banks on the front-line in the push to reduce the levels of people living in this country without the appropriate leave to do so. The obvious question to be raised by this move is whether the banking system is the appropriate vehicle to meet this objective, and what may be the connotations for it doing so. It was declared in the Autumn ( via the Immigration Act 2016 ) that banks and building societies would be given a list by the anti-fraud organisation Cifas that contained the details of people who are officially liable to be removed or deported from the U.K., or who have absconded from immigration control , with the Home Office stating that the new system would be ‘ fair but firm ’. The design of the new system would be that banks (and building societie

In the first of a number of posts today, this post looks at some of the noises emanating from the financial elite within the U.K., particularly with regards to Brexit. It should come as no surprise that the decision to leave the E.U. has caused anxiety amongst business leaders within the City, and recent political developments have not made a positive impact in that regard. So, in this post, we shall look at some of the concerns that are being raised, and the impact that certain developments may have upon the City, and also the British society moreover; ultimately, the question developing is how the secession will play out in terms of finding a balance between the decision of the (very slight) majority of the electorate, and business within the U.K. The first development that needs to be examined is the political manoeuvrings that took place last week when, in Parliament, the Government saw its attempt to ‘ promise to give assurances ’ on a Parliamentary consultation over the fi

In this third and final post of the day, we will take a brief look at a proposal being advanced today by the Labour Party, which attempts to convey their commitment to redistributing wealth across the U.K. rather than its current concentration in the South-East of the Country. This review will only be brief because, given the political landscape, it is all that it can be at the time of writing; however, whilst the suggested aim to redistribute the economic dynamic across the Country is hardly surprising given the stated aims and objectives of Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party, in reality the question this suggestion raises is two-fold: is the Party operating on any solid basis of reality, and then do they recognise the reality of the problems i.e. their root causes, or are they focusing on and subsequently adding to the façade that serves to preserve the current power structure? Surely, as recent and historical evidence suggests, anything other than a ‘root and branch’ redevelopment will

In the second post today, the focus will be on the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) and its navigation of particularly choppy political waters. We have looked at the SFO on a number of occasions and in May this year we looked at how the Prime Minister was seemingly zeroing in on the SFO in the accumulation of what is an almost-relentless campaign to dismantle the agency. However, in news today, it appears that the new anti-corruption strategy developed by the Home Secretary – Amber Rudd – seeks to incorporate the SFO with the National Crime Agency (NCA) and not replace it, as had been suggested previously. However, what can the SFO make of this latest development? We have discussed the SFO on a number of occasions, with most references being to victories that the agency has scored, particularly in reference to the large Deferred Prosecution Agreement arranged with Rolls-Royce . The SFO has a number of other ‘ victories ’ to its name (e shall not revisit the discussion of whether DPAs

In the first of three brief posts today, in order to stay abreast of a busy day in the financial arena, we will begin by looking at news that is coming out of the Department of Justice in the U.S. The news, that the DoJ is changing course on its agreement put in place to deter further transgressions by the multinational bank, is excellent news for the bank but, perhaps, sends a message about the pro-business sentiments that are emerging all the time under the Trump Administration. On two specific occasions here in Financial Regulation Matters , we have looked at HSBC in particular with reference to their almost infamous track record when it comes to financial crime, particularly money laundering. It is no secret that the large multinational bank has been involved in some particularly damaging news stories, including having to pay a £1.9 billion fine to U.S. authorities in 2012 for ‘ exposing the U.S. financial system to money laundering, drug (and) terrorist financing risks ’ an

Today’s post acts as a small review of two specific news pieces that broke today concerning two financial regulators in the U.K. Whilst one would have had to have been quick to spot these stories, with both falling down the list of financial news stories rather quickly, each has particularly strong knock-on effects, but for differing reasons. So, in this post, a little more detail will be added as both of those stories represent the latest iterations of themes that have formed the basis of a number of posts here in Financial Regulation Matters . The first story is concerned with the infamous report conducted by the FCA regarding the actions of RBS and its ‘Global Restructuring Group’ (GRG). We have covered this issue on a number of occasions, and heard most recently that whilst the FCA has been busy investigating and punishing a number of firms of their failures, firms like BrightHouse and Equifax, their hesitancy to take any serious action against RBS has garnered plenty of jus

In today’s post we will turn our attention to the role of the Investor in the global financial dynamic, as although we spend plenty of time here in Financial Regulation Matters looking at the iniquities of the marketplace via the actions of banks, rating agencies, governmental agencies and financial regulators, the role of the investor is just as important, if not more so. Whilst an assessment like this is always valid, this post is reacting specifically to a report last week that investors are returning to the products that brought the world to its knees in 2007/8, all for increased returns. So, in this post, this issue will be assessed because, on a number of occasions here we have spoken about the potential rise of the ‘responsible investor’ since the Crisis; perhaps we should be more careful with such discussions in the future. The role of the investor in relation to the causation of the Financial Crisis is no secret, with a number of analyses choosing to focus upon it spec