Miksi minusta norppa ei nouse vaikka järki voisi niin sanoa. Oletan että Pankkia ei haluta pitää turva satamana. Eikä kasvu yhtiönä. Yhtiön ei anneta olla vapaasti hengittävä. Eli joku jaruttaa tekemistä.
Pankki sektori on alla regulaation. Muistamme hyvin vielä että euroopassa kielsimme pankkeja maksamasta osinkoja. Aika moista. Mitä vielä voidaan kieltää tai ottaa pois tai muutoin vaikuttaa alaan.
Euroopassa ei mene vahvasti. Yleisesti ottaen. Valtiot ovat ennätys veloissa?. Pankkien ei anneta kaatua. valtiot vahvasti osallistumassa. Yhtiöt ovat vähän omassa kuplassaan valtion kohtelussa.
En itse norpasta vuoden korkeinta hintaa mielellään maksaisi näiden ajatusten vuoksi. Riski että yhtiöitä ohjataan tarvittaessa voimakkaasti. Liialliset voitot estetään mahdollisesti jollain vaikka sitten jollain po verotuksella?
Pidä tai osta. hyvää tekemistä mutta ei tämä kuuhun lennä.
Kansainvälinen talousjulkaisu Global Finance on valinnut Nordean Suomen parhaaksi Private Banking -palveluiden tarjoajaksi toista vuotta peräkkäin. Nordea voitti saman palkinnon myös Ruotsissa, Norjassa ja Tanskassa.
“Olemme kiitollisia siitä, että Private Banking -palvelumme arvioitiin jälleen Suomen parhaaksi. Asiakkaiden luottamus varainhoitoa kohtaan punnitaan erityisesti tällaisessa haastavassa taloustilanteessa. Olemme koko henkilöstömme voimin panostaneet paljon siihen, että tarjoamme asiakkaillemme aktiivista keskustelukumppanuutta sekä ajankohtaista markkinatietoa eri kanavia hyödyntäen”, sanoo Nordean Suomen Private Banking -toiminnoista vastaava johtaja Rizvan Samaletdin.
Epävarmojen näkymien vuoksi Ruotsin keskuspankki komentaa pankkeja suitsimaan osingonmaksuja ja omien osakkeiden ostoja. Ans kattoo ovatko nämä rajoitukset palaamassa ja tuleeko myös EKP:ltä samansuuntaista ukaasia.
To add a bit (political) context to this: at the same time as Riksbanken communicates this, Sweden’s extra tax on banks will increase by 20% as of next year.
Talk about hypocrisy; the central banks adds limits to (potential extra) dividends and buybacks, but extra tax increases are fine. The extra tax is by and large allocated to extra defense spending in Sweden (even though this is not stated).
Who loses: shareholders. Outcome: banks will remain uninvestable for some investors, which will result in that the valuation of banks will suffer.
Would that affect foreign investors too? Ie. lower yield from Nordea due to lower yield from Nordea Sweden operations? Or is it specific to Swedish investors?
As far as I have understood all banks regardless of nationality need to pay extra bank tax on their operations in Sweden if they are of a certain size. And Nordea is definitely big enough to fall into that category bank.
So one could argue that a Finnish bank finances defense spending in Sweden
Too add a bit more colour: This extra tax was introduced by the social democrats in Sweden (Denmark also has one called Arne tax, goes to finance early retirees, also introduced by the social democrats).
Now that Sweden has a new Government with Moderaterna (like Kokoomus) decided to keep the extra tax, even though they were against it beforehand. Similar story in Denmark (Venstre) (Kokoomus) was also against the Arne tax. But now they have accepted it and wont remove it anymore if they form the next Goverment in Denmark.
The reaction by the banks in Sweden has been rather vocal. Normally banks do not complain because of potential bad PR (nobody likes banks). The most vocal has been Swedbank (with a lot of ties to social democrats) and SEB (Wallenbergs bank). Handelsbanken never complain anything officially (always diplomatic), whereas Nordea has also been rather quiet. SEB has even said that they wont introduce proper interest on savings accounts, and have also added a small fee to normal loans.
The Arne tax in Denmark also covers insurance institutions, but as far as I know it only applies to Danish domiciled companies.
Finanssiala, or Finance Finland as it is called in English is the organisation that is lobbying for Finnish banks, insurence companies etc. For further information see (available in English too)
They just published a political survey to Finnish political decision makers. One of the questions was:
“In Finland, there should not be national taxes on financial companies that could weaken competitiveness and raise costs”
26 percent fully agreed with this statement and 46 percent somewhat agreed.
“There was no overwhelming support for tightening the separate taxation of the financial sector from any party - supporters of the center were the most strongly opposed to separate taxation. 65 percent of the Social Democrats did not support separate national taxes for the financial sector.” @916
Nobody but Juurikki. Juurikki loves small cute Finnish banks.
Unfortunately Nordea is not one of them. Still Juurikki owns a tiny little part of Nordea and wishes it all the best. But this news makes Juurikki wonder if it’s time to say goodbye to Scandinavian banks and concentrate to Finnish banks only.
No hurry. Let’s find out more about this issue. How long a time have there been extra taxes for banks in Sweden, Denmark, Norway? Maybe Nordea can live with it?
The proposed tax rate is 0.05% (0.06% from 2023) imposed on the gross debt linked to Swedish operations. Hence, a group with a gross debt of SEK 150 billion would have a total tax liability of SEK 75 million for 2022, while a group with gross debt of SEK 149 billion would not have any tax liability.
You are of course right (and I should have put the bank tax in context).
For example in Q3 SEB paid bank tax of 296 Million SEK on a total operating income of 16 551 Million SEK. And for Nordea the tax also has minimal effects. (Banks in Sweden also pay a resolution fee (for SEB in Q3 was 277 Million SEK).
My underlying point was the symbolism in that Riksbanken puts additional ‘handcuffs’ on banks due to an expected downturn, (especially related to commerical real estate companies), which Riksbanken has helped created with its expansive monetary policy (negative interest yields + bond buying).
This is something I as an bankinvestor have a hard time accepting since I view that every big bank CEO in Nordics would not jeopardize its capital buffers with unsustainable big dividends. Stefan Ingves (chair) of Riksbanken is the last person to tell how CEOs should run their banks and navigate this mess he in the first place created.
