2 thoughts on “ICB Interim Report – the wrong answer to the wrong question”

  1. Posted 11/04/2011 at 10:19 | Permalink

    Very good points and their approach runs directly counter to the other objective of creating competition. Disappointing that, despite a big speech from Vickers, there was no proper mention of the tax bias against equity capital. I think that the best argument for subsidiarisation is probably only for those banks that cannot demonstrate how they can be wound up – in other words, subsidiarisation is to assist the process of winding up and not to prevent the failure of one or other bit of the bank.

  2. Posted 11/04/2011 at 12:10 | Permalink

    It’s a shame the Commission didn’t give more attention to the problems created by deposit insurance and how it could be phased out. Unfortunately EU legislation now mandates retail deposit insurance, which is further evidence of policy going in the wrong direction.

Comments are closed.