Posts by: Alexandra Keenan

Financial Measures Recently Introduced as a Result of COVID-19

Posted on

 

Background and Context

On March 9 and 10, The Financial Policy Committee (“FPC“) met to discuss developments since its meeting on October 2, 2019 and the consequences of Covid-19.

Questions have arisen as to how the government, individuals and businesses can respond to the potentially devastating economic effects resulting from the expanding spread of the Covid-19 and the social lockdowns that are being implemented. In the summary and record of these meetings (available here), it is stated that:

“the FPC has taken action to respond to the financial stability risks associated with the economic disruption resulting from Covid‑19. These actions, taken in concert with actions taken by the Bank, the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) and the Prudential Regulation Committee (PRC), have sought to reduce pressure on banks to restrict the provision of financial services, including the supply of credit and support for market functioning, and ensure that the financial system can be a source of strength for the real economy during this challenging period.”

The actions referred to above include the Bank of England’s (“BoE“) new Term Funding Scheme and the Covid Corporate Financing Facility.

Term Funding Scheme (“TFSME”)

Objective

This scheme was announced by HMRC on March 11 and seeks to ensure that the benefit of the cut in the bank rate is passed on to the economy. It aims to increase the availability of funding for banks which, in turn, will increase the amount available for lending, especially to small and medium sized enterprises.

By offering four-year funding at (or close to) the BoE’s bank rate, the TFSME seeks to “incentivize banks to provide credit to businesses and households to bridge through a period of economic disruption and provide additional incentives for banks to support lending to SMEs that typically bear the brunt of contractions in the supply of credit during periods of heightened risk aversion and economic downturn.”

Interest charged by the BoE will be equal to the bank rate plus a Scheme Fee, which is determined at the end of December 2020 based on the total net lending.

Eligibility

To qualify, the banks and building societies in question must be participants in the BoE Sterling Monetary Framework and signed up to access the Discount Window Facility. Further information on these tools is available here.

Participants will be able to make drawdowns during the Drawdown Period which will run from April 27, 2020 to April 30, 2021 and are to provide Net Lending Data in a form specified by the BoE on a quarterly basis.

Further information from the BoE is available here.

Covid Corporate Financing Facility (“CCFF”)

The CCFF aims to provide additional help to firms “to bridge through Covid‑19 related disruption to their cash flows.” It is to operate for 12 months and may continue as long as is required in order to help alleviate cash flow pressures.

Form of Assistance

Information made available by the BoE (here) explains that this is to take place by way of the purchase of short term debt in the form of commercial paper – an unsecured debt instrument issued by the company in question.

The commercial paper will be purchased under this facility (by the BoE through Covid Corporate Financing Facility Ltd) with the following characteristics:

  1. maturity of one week to twelve months;
  2. a credit rating of A-3 / P-3 / F-3 / R3 from at least one of Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s, Fitch and DBRS Morningstar as at March 1 2020 (where available); and
  3. issued directly into Euroclear and/or Clearstream,

Eligible Companies

It is explained by the BoE that to qualify under this facility, companies should be UK incorporated (including those with foreign-incorporated parents and with a genuine business in the UK), have significant employment in the UK or have their headquarters in the UK, although the BoE will also have regard to the amount of revenue generated in the UK and the number of customers based in the UK.

Importantly, and in addition to the above, companies wishing to benefit from the CCFF must demonstrate that it was in sound financial health immediately prior to the shock arrival of Covid-19. The BoE explains that the easiest way to demonstrate this is to have or acquire a rating which is either a short-term rating of A3/P3/F3/R3 or above, or a long-term rating of BBB-/Baa3/BBB- or above by at least one of the major credit ratings agencies.

Where the company does not have a credit rating, its bank should contact one of the major agencies to seek an assessment of credit quality. This should then be shared with the BoE and HM Treasury.

The names of issuers and securities purchased or eligible will not be made public.

Legislative Changes and Regulated Activities

With regards to the implementation of this facility, the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Exemption) (Amendment) Order 2020 was published on 20 March 2020. This amends the list contained in Part 1 of the Schedule to the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Exemption) Order 2001 such that Covid Corporate Financing Facility Ltd is exempt from the general prohibition contained in section 19 of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (which prohibits the performance of regulated activities in the UK unless carried out by an authorized or exempt person).

The EU’s Whistleblowing Directive

Posted on

 

On November 26, Directive (EU) 2019/1937 of the European Parliament (EP) and of the Council of October 23 (the “Directive“) on the protection of persons who report breaches of Union law was published in the Official Journal.

Background

In light of recent information scandals including Cambridge Analytica, the Panama Papers and Luxleaks, the European Commission (EC) sought to introduce a unified measure granting protection to persons who report breaches of Union Law. These scandals have highlighted how crucial whislteblowers can be in uncovering unlawful activities, and the European Union (EU) has introduced the Directive to strengthen the enforcement of Union law and protect the freedom of expression of the whistleblower when interviewed on this topic, as explained by Maria Mollica, the EU Commission’s Policy Officer. While various Member States have addressed whistleblower protection in their own national legislation, the protection is often restricted to specific areas and thus the Directive attempts to unify and harmonize the approach taken by all Member States.

The Directive

Protection is afforded to whistleblowers to the extent they fall within the definition of “reporting person,” a natural person who reports or publicly discloses information on breaches acquired in the context of his or her work-related activities (Article 5(7)). In turn, this disclosure extents to information “including reasonable suspicions, about actual or potential breaches, which occurred or are very likely to occur in the organization in which the reporting person works or has worked or in another organization with which the reporting person is or was in contact through his or her work, and about attempts to conceal such breaches.” “Breaches” refers to any act or omission that is unlawful and relate to the Union or defeat the object or purpose of the rules in the Union (Article 5(1) and (2)).

It applies to businesses which employ at least 50 employees and they are required to implement internal channels to facilitate the reporting.

In terms of its scope, the Council of the European Union (EUCO) explains in a press release that “the new rules will cover areas such as public procurement, financial services, prevention of money laundering, public health, etc. For legal certainty, a list of all EU legislative instruments covered is included in an annex to the directive.” Further, regarding the protection awarded to reporting persons, it is stated that “the rules introduces safeguards to protect whistle-blowers from retaliation, such as being suspended, demoted and intimidated. Those assisting whistle-blowers, such as colleagues and relatives, are also protected. The directive also includes a list of support measures which will be put in place for whistleblowers.”

Next Steps

On November 26, the directive was published in the Official Journal and it will enter into force on December 16. Member States then have two years from that date to implement its terms and transpose its requirements into national legislation. Press Release. Legislative Text.

The Position on Equivalence Post Brexit

Posted on

 

Context and Background

On October 22, the House of Commons European Scrutiny Committee (the Committee) published its first report of session 2019/20 (the Report). In section 10, this includes consideration of the UK’s access to the EU financial services markets after Brexit and, more specifically, the European Commission’s recent review of the EU law on equivalence.

The notion of equivalence, and its importance in this context, was explained by the European Commission in a Press Release dated July 29 where it stated that:

“EU equivalence has become a significant tool in recent years, fostering integration of global financial markets and cooperation with third-country authorities. The EU assesses the overall policy context and to what extent the regulatory regimes of a given third country achieves the same outcomes as its own rules. A positive equivalence decision, which is a unilateral measure by the Commission, allows EU authorities to rely on third-country rules and supervision, allowing market participants from third countries who are active in the EU to comply with only one set of rules.”

However, the Report notes that, in light of Brexit, the financial industry of the UK will face a number of hurdles in relation to the provision of services to EU based customers. It is explained that the “current, automatic right of market access for banks, insurers and investment firms based on their UK-issued licence (known as ‘passporting’) will automatically fall away when EU law ceases to apply to and in the UK.”

Consequences

Where these rights fall away and, to the extent EU law ceases to apply in the UK, UK firms and business providing these services will have to comply with local regulations to access any of the EU’s national markets. Alternatively, the UK will need to apply for equivalence. Concerning the European Commission’s recent review of the use of equivalency, the Report notes on the one hand that “the EU would be wary of granting the UK equivalence in the most economically-important sectors (especially investment services) without safeguards that it will not substantially diverge from EU regulations.” On the other, however, it is stated that by not seeking equivalency, the UK runs the risk of seeing economic activity shift from the UK to the EU if UK firms are no longer able to provide services to their EU customers.

Equivalency is and has been addressed in the Political Declarations as annexed to the Withdrawal Agreements. Boris Johnson has indicated that parts of this document are to be renegotiated and it remains to be seen, whether equivalency is one of these points.

In the Report, the Committee asks the Economic Secretary to clarify, by October 31, if the government is seeking any changes to the sections of the political declaration related to financial services. He is also asked to confirm if the government is considering seeking equivalence under EU law post-Brexit and, if so, which specific pieces of EU legislation the equivalence is being prioritized under. In anticipation of the response, the Committee cleared the Commission’s equivalence review from scrutiny. Report. Press Release.

New Rules on European Crowdfunding

Posted on

 

European Parliament’s Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee (“ECON“) published a press release announcing that it has voted to adopt a draft report on the European Commission’s legislative proposal for a Regulation on European crowdfunding service providers (“ECSPs“) (2018/0048 (COD)). READ MORE →

FCA and Changes to Rules of Pension Transfer Advice

Posted on

In June 2017, the Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA“) proposed to make changes to the rules on advice relating to transfers from defined benefit schemes to defined contribution schemes along with a consultation paper with further suggested changes. On October 4, the results of this consultation and the final rules were published.

Further changes it had initially suggested were that advisers were to have the same qualifications as investment advisers and a potential ban on charging on a contingent basis. This change, where advisers are only paid where the client acts on the advice, was suggested out of fear its continued use would result in ‘potential harm to consumers’.

Although the final policy published last week did take forward most of the proposals from the consultation, banning contingent charging was not one of them. Responses to this suggestion were ‘polarised’ and concerns surrounded the impact this would have on the availability of advice in the future.

The initial suggestion was in response to a number of instances of poor advice which seemed to correlate with instances of contingent pricing. The evidence however is that ‘contingent charging is a complex area’ and that it ‘does not show that contingent charging is the main driver of poor outcomes’.

The FCA’s Executive Director of Strategy and Competition expects the interventions to ‘improve the quality of advice which will help reduce the number of complaints against advisory firms’.

CMA Toughens Action Against Lloyds Bank – PPI

Posted on

 

Lloyds bank has committed repeated breaches of the Payment Protection Insurance Market Investigation Order 2011 (the “Order“) by failing to inform customers that they have a policy, how much it costs and that they have the right to cancel or change providers. Under the Order, customers are meant to receive this information annually.

Breaches by Lloyds Bank had been reported to the Competition and Markets Authority (“CMA“) and discussed in 2017, with suggestions as to how the lender could prevent this from reoccurring. The latest reports, however, highlight that it failed to send PPI reports to over 14,000 customers since 2012 and had provided wrong information on premiums.

The lender has been issued with legal directions by the CMA to carry out monthly checks, provide more detailed information on its compliance, report breaches within 14 days and organise a review of its compliance systems each year by an independent body.

Although these directions can be enforced by a court, the CMA does not have the authority to impose monetary penalties for this kind of breach.