Bank
of England mulls negative interest rates
Deputy
Governor floats plan that could mean new charges for customers
26
February, 2013
People
across Britain could see their savings hit or face new charges on
their current accounts after a senior official at the Bank of England
proposed the “extraordinary” measure of imposing negative
interest rates on banks.
Deputy
Governor Paul Tucker said the idea of charging high street banks to
store money centrally, rather than paying them interest, should be
explored as a way of easing the flow of credit to the stagnant
economy.
“I
hope we will think about whether there are constraints to setting
negative interest rates,” he told MPs on the Treasury Select
Committee. Although such a move has been discussed by the Bank of
England in the past, Mr Tucker’s comments are the strongest
indication yet that it is under serious consideration.
It
is hoped that the prospect of negative interest rates would encourage
banks to lend more - but analysts warned that it would dent banks’
profitability and that the sector would probably respond by cutting
interest rates on savings accounts, or even introducing current
account charges.
“It’s
very clear this would be expected to bring downward pressure on the
rates savers can expect, pushing them down towards zero,” said
Malcolm Barr of JP Morgan.
It
is thought that the banks would seek to make a profit by lending the
funds out to companies and households. The Swedish central bank
imposed negative interest rates in 2009 with this goal in mind.
But
any move that further eroded the returns of savers, even indirectly,
would face a backlash. Savings rates paid by high street banks have
fallen to record lows since the Bank slashed its main policy rate to
0.5 per cent in March 2009 to support the freefalling economy. The
average rate on an easy access savings account today stands at around
2 per cent - less than the annual inflation rate of 2.7 per cent.
Savers
have also complained of being squeezed indirectly by the Bank’s
Funding for Lending Scheme, which has provided high street banks with
new sources of cheap funding, removing the pressure on them to
compete for deposits by offering attractive rates.
Another
concern is that the Bank’s £375bn Quantitative Easing scheme has
pushed down the value of annuities - although the Bank has pointed
out that the money printing programme has also bolstered the value of
pension pots by boosting share prices, leaving people, ultimately, no
worse off.
Despite
floating the idea of negative interest rates, Mr Tucker was careful
to stress that no decision had been made. “It would be an
extraordinary thing to do and it needs to be thought through
carefully,” he said. Mr Tucker, who was an unsuccessful candidate
to succeed Sir Mervyn King as the next Governor in July, added:
“[It’s] not something anyone should clutch on to as the answer to
the universe.”
Mr
Tucker’s idea was described as a “panic measure” by Ros
Altmann, an expert on pensions. “Interest rates are already
negative for savers,” she said. “It’s hard to see why this
would make a hoot of difference to lending when rates at 0.5 per cent
haven’t.”
Andrew
Sentence, a former member of the Monetary Policy Committee, said the
Bank was still looking for monetary policy to deliver things that it
was simply unable to achieve. “When you look at these options –
just as we’re discovering with the Funding for Lending Scheme –
you run into other problems, particularly for savers.”.
Samuel
Tombs of Capital Economics said there were better ways for the Bank
to boost lending, such as enhancing the generosity of the Funding for
Lending Scheme.
However,
not all financial analysts were dismissive of Mr Tucker’s idea.
“Negative interest rates will increase the pressure to lend and the
mortgage market would be a major beneficiary of any such action,”
said Ray Boulger of independent mortgage advisers John Charcol.
Last
year the International Monetary Policy Committee proposed the Bank
should look at taking its main policy rate below 0.5 per cent in
order to boost the economy. But monetary policymakers rejected this
idea, arguing that it would damage the profitability of building
societies.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.