We discussed recently here in Financial Regulation Matters that Edward Bramson, the activist investor attempting to change the direction within the British bank Barclays, was attempting to have his fellow shareholders approve his ascension to the Board of the Bank on account of wanting to stem the continued development of the investment arm of the bank. In this post, we will look at what happened and assess the latest news which shines a light on his reasoning. As was widely expected, Bramson lost his bid to join the Board . Only 13% of the votes cast were for Bramson’s resolution although, as stated above, this was widely expected. Whilst there was an unexpected development in the AGM – 30% of shareholders voted against its remuneration report – the focus on Bramson is important. The Guardian reports how opinion was split concerning Bramson’s motives, with some investors agreeing that there was a need to ‘ wake this board of directors up ’, but others stating that ‘bear in m

Today’s post focuses on the HS2 rail system that is being developed in the UK, with the aim of linking some its major cities together more than ever before. We have discussed the HS2 project before here in Financial Regulation Matters, with a guest post from Teny Kuti here and an earlier post here . However, whilst the title of the post suggests that the impact of the project continues to ‘grow’, it is this concept of ‘growth’ that is the focus of the post – the environmental damage of the project is continuing to develop at an alarming pace and as recent news suggests, this project will leave a lasting mark on the British environment. This will lead us to question whether there is anything that can outrank money and its creation, as the project continues to demonstrate everything that is negative about that concept. Speaking in October last year, a spokesperson for the HS2 Ltd Company, which is government-owned, stated that ‘ we’re designing a railway that will reshape the eco

In 2016, a number of new rules regarding the auditing of large financial institutions within Europe were established. The regulations had a number of aims and we will discuss them in today’s post, but one of the major aims was to ensure further transparency when it came to the auditing of PIEs, or ‘Public-Interest Entities’. Interestingly, this designation allows the EU to capture financial institutions that hail from outside of the EU, and in today’s news the first test of those regulations was passed when Goldman Sachs announced that its new auditor from 2021, in complying with the rotational elements of the regulation, would be Mazars, marking the Bank’s first move outside the so-called ‘Big Four’ auditors in its history. The regulations that came into force in 2016 have a number of aims including: ensuring further transparency; providing statutory auditors with a strong mandate to be independent; develop a more dynamic audit market; and to improve the supervision of auditor

We have examined Barclays on a number of occasions here in Financial Regulation Matters , with a number of posts focusing on the Bank’s dealings with Qatar at the height of the Crisis. The approach taken by Barclays – to deal with Qatar for emergency funding during the height of the Crisis rather than seek Governmental support – has been the subject of a number of investigations since and has brought a number of regulatory bodies into the picture. In today’s post we will examine the interconnecting dynamic that exists between a number of British regulators and the economic, political, and societal factors that affect their ability to effectively regulate. We will not revisit the developments between Barclays and Qatar in any great detail here, as it has been covered before in the blog and by the business media . Rather, we will focus on developments detailed in today’s business press that suggest that the Bank of England, via its Prudential Regulation Authority body, argued to pr

In February Kraft Heinz announced that the Securities and Exchange Commission was opening an investigation into its accounting practices. In this post, we will examine the potential scope and ramifications of that investigation as, although Kraft Heinz have not found any irregularities internally, there are a number of associated organisations who will potentially be embroiled in the scandal if it is found to exist. We have discussed Kraft Heinz as a company before here in Financial Regulation Matters, mostly on account of its failed attempt to take over Unilever in 2017. Whilst the subpoena was announced in February of this year, it was actually received in October and the subpoena related to the firm’s ‘accounting policies, procedures, and internal controls’. The company then, in February, took a $15.4 billion impairment charge, or a ‘writedown’, and that is now believed to be something the SEC are also investigating. The company stated that the writedown reflected ‘lower margin

In February of last year we looked at Scope Ratings , a new entrant to the credit rating marketplace, on the back of an article by this author in European Company Law . Since that date, there have been a number of positive developments for Scope so in today’s short post we will be updated on those developments. Scope Ratings is a German-based rating outfit that has ambitions to challenge the hegemony of the Big Three – S&P, Moody’s, and Fitch Ratings. So far, since its inception in 2011, it is certainly not backing away from the challenge. Currently, the firm is Europe’s largest Credit Rating Agency (European-based, at least), and employs more than 200 staff across seven offices (Berlin, Frankfurt, London, Madrid, Milan, Oslo, and Paris). Recent successes, especially within the Structured Finance department, recently saw Guillaume Jolivet appointed to the agency’s Board, which founder Florian Schoeller suggested is an ideal fit as he is ‘ ideally positioned to help the grou

We have examined the potential reconfiguration at Barclays before in Financial Regulation Matters , and in today’s post we will pick up on some comments made in today’s business media ahead of Barclays’ AGM on Thursday. The focus and speculation surrounds that of Edward Bramson, a so-called activist investor who many believe is aiming to cause substantial change within the massive bank. In this post we will look at Bramson more closely, and then discuss a concept that is being advanced as a ‘norm’ but which calls into question the very nature of the marketplace. Edward Bramson has held many positions as one might expect of a serious investor, but it is through his investment vehicle Sherborne and Company that he is making headlines at the moment. Through that vehicle he has amassed a 5.5% stake in the bank and it is being reported across the business media that, tomorrow (Thursday), he will ask shareholders to elect him to the Board of the bank. His stated reason for this is