Bank tax, bonuses and unintended consequences

I was a little surprised to see the UK conservatives support a global bank tax. In any event the amount of the bonus at JP Morgan Chase caught my attention, so I took a look at their capital base. With tier 1 capital of $133 bn, the bonuses represent a significant 7% of capital.

Ironically, the international tax will produce the unintended consequence of reducing capital even more., within the limitations of Basle. It is hard to see how a tax would improve governance and capital retention.

Osborne to push for global bank levy

George Osborne, shadow chancellor, said that it was “unacceptable” for banks to be paying large cash bonuses when they should be defending themselves against future disaster. On Friday, JPMorgan Chase, the US bank, kicked off the latest bank reporting season by announcing that it would pay $9.3bn (£5.7bn) in bonuses this year.

"Anders Borg, Swedish finance minister, told the FT that the Americans “have taken a lot of interest” in his country’s stability levy, suggesting some international convergence on the need to insure against the risky behaviour of banks.

2 thoughts on “Bank tax, bonuses and unintended consequences

  1. Isn’t the bonus tax work by taking a portion off the overall bonus pool before it is distributed? Why would it further reduce capital?

Comments are closed.